Dear Colleagues For those new, and some of us "old" councilors, there has been mention before of an existing pending request for an Issues Report on a topic that I believe is quite close to the one that Ross is proposing. A search of the minutes refreshed my memory and turned up the following relevant information/background [see below insert from minutes/with citation]. I suggest that those of us now exchanging views on this topic on the Council list, consider whether this existing/pending Issues Report will fulfill the need now being discussed, or if some fine tuning is needed to modify this resolution and update it. We wouldn't want to do two issues reports on the same topic and we should incorporate, or make a conscious decision to still have it pending, while we address the topic differently. If that is the will of Council. One thought about this resolution, as I reread it: in the second WHERAS, I suspect that the word in the MP3 recording was "accreditation", not "accredited", but that it was missed when this was proofed. :-) Yet, the meaning is quite clear. Ross, as the initial originator of the newest topic, can we build on this, incorporate it, etc.? Marilyn Cade --------------------------------------------------------- http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-13jan05.htm Item 7: Contention for domain names at gtld registries - motion to initiate an issues report Draft resolution Whereas the high demand amongst registrars on behalf of their registrants to register specific domain names that become available for re-registration at the registry has lead to unforeseen strains on the ability of registries and registrars to manage their business efficiently, Whereas this affects the service level that registrars can provide to their customers and the meaning of ICANN accredited as it applies to registrars, Council resolves, to request the ICANN staff manager to write an issues report (as specified in annex A to the ICANN by-laws) on the "Problems caused by contention for domain names made available by a gTLD registry ", so that Council can subsequently decide if a policy development process would be appropriate. Philip Sheppard spoke to the resolution which arose out of a discussion in Cape Town regarding the problem of of the volume of automated requests for expiring domain names from registrar to registry and requested further study through an issues report from the ICANN Staff Manager so that Council could then decide whether a policy development process should be initiated. Ken Stubbs commented that the issues report should clarify the reason for the demand. Barbara Roseman reported that the staff recognized that the issue would require effort from several ICNAN staff members with specific areas of expertise Kurt Pritz commented that in order to respond to the resolution, ICANN would like to go back and look at the complaints received, and solicit input from the registries and registrars on the topic, then provide a briefing to the Council based on an analysis of various data bases to ascertain whether there should be an issues report. Bruce Tonkin clarified that an Issues Report asked General Counsel to decide whether there were any policy issues but it did not go as far as saying what specific agreements and contractual issues were affected and proposed that there should be further clarification on contents and expectations of issues report in general. Philip Sheppard, seconded by Maureen Cubberley proposed the amended draft resolution: Whereas the high demand amongst registrars to register specific domain names that become available for re-registration at the registry has lead to unforeseen impact and strains on the registration infrastructure of gTLD registries and registrars. Whereas this affects the service level that registrars can provide to their customers and the meaning of ICANN accredited as it applies to registrars, Council resolves, to request the ICANN staff manager to write an issues report (as specified in annex A to the ICANN by-laws) on the "Problems caused by contention for domain names made available by a gTLD registry ", so that Council can subsequently decide if a policy development process would be appropriate Bruce Tonkin called for a nominated vote. 19 votes in favour, 5 proxy votes in favour, 3 no votes. (Kiyoshi Tsuru and Alick Wilson with the proxy for Demi Getschko had dropped off the call and did not vote) The motion carried. Decision 4: Whereas the high demand amongst registrars to register specific domain names that become available for re-registration at the registry has lead to unforeseen impact and strains on the registration infrastructure of gTLD registries and registrars. Whereas this affects the service level that registrars can provide to their customers and the meaning of ICANN accredited as it applies to registrars, Council resolves, to request the ICANN staff manager to write an issues report (as specified in annex A to the ICANN by-laws) on the "Problems caused by contention for domain names made available by a gTLD registry ", so that Council can subsequently decide if a policy development process would be appropriate