Dear Councilors, In keeping with the proxy vote procedures, all councilors who were absent from the meeting today, Thursday 7 May 2009 are invited to send the GNSO secretariat <gnso.secretariat@icann.org> a request for a ballot. Councilors noted as absent: Adrian Kinderis, Philip Sheppard, Tony Holmes, Mary Wong, Olga Cavalli and Greg Ruth. You will then be sent a ballot with an option to vote, YES, NO or ABSTAIN. The current bylaws require a reason for abstaining on a policy recommendation, so please indicate your reason for abstaining. The Chair requested that this process should be completed within 72 hours of the meeting which ended at 16:10 UTC on Thursday 7 May 2009. Completed ballots are due NLT 16:10 UTC, Sunday, 10 May 2009. (12:10 EDT, 13:10 Buenos Aires, 17:10 London, 18:10 Brussels/Geneva, 00:10 HongKong, 02:10 Melbourne Monday 11 May 2009) Proposed Motion on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Motion by: Avri Doria Seconded by: Chuck Gomes Whereas on 05 December 2008, the GNSO received an Issues Report on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery (PEDNR); Whereas on 29 January 2009 the GNSO Council decided to form a Drafting Team (DT) to consider the form of policy development action in regard to PEDNR; Whereas a DT has formed and its members have discussed and reviewed the issues documented in the Issues Report; Whereas the DT has concluded that although some further information gathering may be needed, it should be done under the auspices of a PDP; Whereas staff has suggested and the DT concurs that the issue of registrar transfer during the RGP might be better handled during the IRTP Part C PDP. The GNSO Council RESOLVES To initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP) to address the issues identified in the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Issues Report. The charter for this PDP should instruct the Working Group: (i) that it should consider recommendations for best practices as well as or instead of recommendations for Consensus Policy; (ii) that to inform its work it should pursue the availability of further information from ICANN compliance staff to understand how current RAA provisions and consensus policies regarding deletion, auto-renewal, and recovery of domain names during the RGP are enforced; and (iii) that it should specifically consider the following questions: . Whether adequate opportunity exists for registrants to redeem their expired domain names; . Whether expiration-related provisions in typical registration agreements are clear and conspicuous enough; . Whether adequate notice exists to alert registrants of upcoming expirations; . Whether additional measures need to be implemented to indicate that once a domain name enters the Auto-Renew Grace Period, it has expired (e.g., hold status, a notice on the site with a link to information on how to renew, or other options to be determined). . Whether to allow the transfer of a domain name during the RGP. The GNSO Council further resolves that the issue of logistics of possible registrar transfer during the RGP shall be incorporated into the charter of the IRTP Part C charter. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org