- ispcp - lists.icann.org

Apologies and rescheduling of our ISPCP call
by Mark McFaddden June 11, 2009

June 11, 2009

I want to apologize for not having the ISPCP call today as planned. I also apologize if there was any inconvenience caused by not having the call. Is there a chance that we can reschedule the call for Monday? Monday, 15 June 2009 9am Chicago time 10am East Coast US time 11am Buenos Aires 3pm London 4pm Paris mark Mark McFadden, Secretariat ISPCP Constituency, ICANN secretariat(a)ispcp.info Y! IM: mcfadden AIM: McElmside Tw: McElmside Bkite: mcfadden Fb: Mark McFadden

3 2

IANA Requirements for Authoritative Name Servers
by Mark McFaddden June 9, 2009

June 9, 2009

>From ICANN: ICANN has published a revised procedure, entitled "Technical requirements for authoritative name servers", on the IANA website. http://www.iana.org/procedures/nameserver-requirements.html When a domain operator within an IANA-managed zone (such as a top-level domain operator) wishes to change their authoritative name server delegation details, ICANN performs technical checks against the proposed servers. These tests are designed to check minimal conformance with technical standards to ensure the domain will function correctly. The previous technical conformance criteria available on the IANA website were published in 2001, and did not comprehensively reflect current practice. Recognising the need for better documentation, staff also felt that the intent of the checks could be better fulfilled by implementing improved evaluation techniques. ICANN published the current set of tests performed and solicited public feedback on those tests. Useful contributions were received from many parties, both through the public comment period, and through subsequent discussions at operator forums. This feedback, particularly from the top-level domain operator community, formed the basis of the revised requirements. In the procedures, the technical checks performed are advisory. If the domain operator does not meet all the criteria, if they can show Internet stability is not harmed then the technical changes can still be accepted. Mark McFadden, Secretariat ISPCP Constituency, ICANN secretariat(a)ispcp.info Y! IM: mcfadden AIM: McElmside Tw: McElmside Bkite: mcfadden Fb: Mark McFadden

1 0

ICANN Response on the NOI
by Mark McFaddden June 9, 2009

June 9, 2009

In case you haven't seen it, here is the ICANN Response on the NOI: http://www.icann.org/correspondence/dengate-to-alexander-08jun09-en.pdf Mark McFadden, Secretariat ISPCP Constituency, ICANN secretariat(a)ispcp.info Y! IM: mcfadden AIM: McElmside Tw: McElmside Bkite: mcfadden Fb: Mark McFadden

1 0

Comments on travel funding for ICANN meetings
by Greg Ruth April 24, 2009

April 24, 2009

All, I have thrown together the attached draft position of the ISPCP on ICANN travel funding. Please look it over and modify it as necessary to reflect the views of the constituency. It is just a starting point. Greg

3 3

Reminder: Next ISPCP Constituency Call
by Mark McFaddden April 23, 2009

April 23, 2009

All: The next ISPCP Constituency Conference call will be on: Tuesday, 12 May 2009 at 1330 UTC. 15:30 Central European Time 14:30 London 10:30 Buenos Aires, Rio 9:30 Washington DC, Boston 8:30 Madison, Minneapolis An agenda and details for the conference call will be distributed later. Mark Mark McFadden, Secretariat ISPCP Constituency, ICANN secretariat(a)ispcp.info

3 2

FW: Requesting Your Feedback on the FY10 Operating Plan and Budget
by Tony Holmes April 19, 2009

April 19, 2009

Dear ISPCP member Please see the request below from Kevin Wilson for feedback on the Operating Plan and Budget and in particular the bulleted list of questions in the email. Could you please send comments to me by Monday 27th April AT THE LATEST. I will then compile a formal response from the ISPCP based on your input. Additionally personal input is also welcomed by ICANN. Thank You. Tony _____ From: Kevin Wilson [mailto:kevin.wilson@icann.org] Sent: 18 April 2009 02:07 To: Kevin Wilson; AVRI(a)ACM.ORG; cgomes(a)verisign.com; philip.sheppard(a)aim.be; zahid(a)jamilandjamil.com; icann(a)rodenbaugh.com; tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com; Metalitz, Steven; robin(a)ipjustice.org; Jon Nevett (jnevett(a)networksolutions.com) dmaher(a)pir.org; Louie(a)equinox.com; adiel(a)afrinic.net; junsec(a)wide.ad.jp; Janis Karklins; Steve Crocker; langdonorr(a)gmail.com; cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au; Chris Disspain; Suzanne Woolf Cc: Donna Austin; Denise Michel; Nick Ashton-Hart; Liz Gasster; Olof Nordling; Bart Boswinkel; Dave Piscitello; John L. Crain; Tim Cole; Craig Schwartz; Gabriella Schittek; Glen de Saint Géry; Matthias Langenegger; Doug Brent Subject: Requesting Your Feedback on the FY10 Operating Plan and Budget Dear council, committee, and constituency leaders: A quick note to thank those of you who have held meetings and conference calls on the ICANN FY10 Operating Plan and Budget. We remain available to host more calls with those who would like to discuss and/or provide more feedback. I also want to encourage your members to post comments individually or representing your group to the public comment page: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#op-budget-fy2010. Close date: April 30. Questions we hope to obtain feedback on are: Is the approach to meetings scaling with the ICANN communitys size and diversity, and work style over time? Should ICANN take action in FY10 to reduce or redirect the substantial expense both directly by ICANN and indirectly by participants in three meetings around the world? As ICANN grows to support application processing for the new gTLD program, what is the best way to staff (hire vs. outsource) and what are the appropriate geographic locations for this effort? How does the community want to explicitly prioritize work such that the costs to support additional work dont just grow? How can ICANN better report on and measure the effectiveness of many activities such as outreach and policy development, so as to allow these areas to be tuned/improved? What other ideas does the community have for prioritization or cost reduction consistent with the Strategic Plan goals? In addition, we want to encourage formal public comments on travel policy/procedures: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#travel-support-2010. Close date: April 24. Comments for both of these matters will be synthesized into the draft FY10 Operating Plan and Budget to be posted by 17th of May. Your participation is greatly appreciated. Best regards, Kevin Wilson CFO ICANN Kevin.wilson(a)icann.org

1 0

Brief notes and actions from ISPCP constituency conference call 15th April 2009
by Tony Holmes April 17, 2009

April 17, 2009

To all ISPCP members Below are the draft notes from yesterday's conference call. Comments are welcome for the next 7 days, following which the final version will be placed on the ISPCP web site. Please note the date for the next call - 11th May 2009 Regards Tony ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ISPCP Conference call held 15th April 2009-04-16 1. Update from GNSO Reform Working Groups Update on progress provided by ISPCP reps to the OSC, PPSC, GOT, PDPT teams. ISPCP representation on these committees does not currently align with the planned arrangements discussed at the ISPCP Constituency meeting in Mexico City. Details shown on the relevant Wiki sites are also out of alignment. Action: - Tony Holmes & Wolf-Ulrich Knoben to provide an updated participation list covering ISPCP participation and circulate to all members for comment and ratification. - Final agreed participation list to be forwarded to the GNSO secretariat with a request to update Wiki information. Concern expressed over the rate of progress within working groups and the need for improved coordination. It appears that having everything completed in order to seat the new GNSO Council at the Sydney meeting remains an unachievable target. A brief discussion took place over a paper recently received as an input from Ron Andruff to the OSC Ops team for their meeting later that day which proposed a set of high level operating principles. It was agreed the ISPCP reps should request more time to discuss this internally and no decision should be taken during today's meeting 2. ISPCP, BC & IP notification to the Board on GNSO Reform Attention was drawn to the background and formation of a Resolution (below) that had been passed to the Board expressing concern over lack of progress made within the Non-Commercial Stakeholder group covering requirements placed upon them during the discussions over a compromised solution on GNSO Reform. -------------------------------------------- Whereas the entire GNSO restructuring compromise of July 2008 was contingent on the replacement of the existing NCUC with a Non-Commercial and Individuals Stakeholder Group with the breadth, comprehensiveness and representativeness of the other three SGs; Whereas the creation of a Non-Commercial and Individuals Stakeholder Group with 6 seats on Council (a 100% increase from historic levels) was also contingent on a deep involvement from the at-large organisation in order to benefit from the years of work in building up the ALSs and RALOs as a credible way to solicit the input of individuals into GNSO policy making; Whereas none of the above has yet occurred; Whereas the BC, IPC and ISPCPs intentionally sacrificed 3 of their current 9 seats to make room for this broader non-commercial group and for the involvement of individuals via the at-large organisation in the belief that individuals and commercial users would share a commonality of purpose; The undersigned on behalf of their Constituencies request the Board: 1. To suspend the current timetable for GNSO structural reform until this change is seen to have taken place in the Non-Commercial & Individuals Stakeholder Group; 2. To direct staff to draw up by-law changes to reinstate 9 seats for the proposed Commercial Stakeholders Group and 3 seats for the Non-Commercial & Individuals Stakeholder Group should there be no positive development by 30 April 2009. For the BC, its Officers: Philip Sheppard Mike Rodenbaugh Zahid Jamil For the IPC: Steve Metalitz - President For the ISPCP: Tony Holmes - Chairman 3. New GNSO Constituencies Attention was drawn to the recent posting proposing a new Consumers Constituency, see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-15apr09-en.htm Whilst not directly commenting on this proposal, the ISPCP remain concerned over an approach that enables new Constituencies to be created and dropped in a random fashion and the ability of individual's to form loose coalitions of like minds that have the potential to destabilise representation within stakeholder groups. 4. Formal communication between Constituencies and the Board Attention was drawn to information recently supplied by the GNSO policy staff showing examples that align with the temporary Board communication process which the Board set up in Cairo to formally submit Constituency resolutions to the Board. The aim is ensure timely and effective delivery of the message to all Board members and posting on their formal Board lists. The Board is still working on finalizing a long-term process for effectively delivering and circulating communications from community leaders and the public to the Board. 5. ICANN Board Review Wolf-Ulrich Knoben presented the initial input he had circulated to the ISPCP list and Jaime Wagner the comments he had submitted. Consensus was achieved on the point that the number of Board members shouldn't be reduced, but not on remuneration for Board members. Action: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben to produce draft ISPCP input and circulate for comment. 6. Date of next call The next ISPCP call will take place on Monday 11th May at 13.30 UTC.

2 1

Advice Requested regarding Constituency Day
by Tony Holmes April 16, 2009

April 16, 2009

All As we ran out of time before we could discuss this issue during yesterday's conference call, I would appreciate your comments on the questions raised in the email below by 24th April. Thank You Tony _____ From: Tony Holmes [mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com] Sent: 15 April 2009 10:44 To: ispcp(a)icann.org Subject: Additions to the conference call agendaAdvise Requested regarding Constituency Day Dear ISPCP members Please see the request below. This needs to be added to the agenda for the conference call today. One other addition for agenda is the ISPCP response on Board Reform Regards Tony _____ Dear All, REMINDER: Would you please provide a response for the cross constituency meeting and please send your input to Diane Schroeder by 27 April. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen To the Supporting Organisations and Advisory Committees: The Board is interested in your views on the best ways for the Board and Supporting Organizations & Advisory Committees to interact at the ICANN international meetings. As the community grows and the issues become more complex, it has become a greater challenge to find a way to effectively and efficiently organise this interaction. In particular, the Board would like to come to a shared understanding of what Constituency Day should be, with a view to trying out different ways of interaction during the Constituency Day at next ICANN international meeting in Sydney.. At present the Constituency Day is organised as follows: the Board is divided up and a number of members are assigned to various constituencies for different amounts of time depending on the constituency. The idea behind this approach was to give the Board members an opportunity to listen to some of the constituency business, not just rely on the question and answer time with the Board. To prepare for the visit by the Board members, each constituency is asked to provide a list of topics that they would like to discuss with the Board. Some constituencies are better at providing this than others. Board Members are assigned to constituencies other than the one with which they are most familiar. In addition, the CEO and the Chair visit all constituencies. At the end of the day, after all the visits, the Board comes together and exchanges the views they have heard from the various groups. To assist in the discussion about the future of Constituency Day, the Board would like your thoughts on the following specific questions, by the end of April. 1. What is the goal of having the Board meet with a Supporting Organization, Constituency, or Advisory Committee during the ICANN meeting? 2. What is the best communication method between the Board and a Supporting Organization, Constituency or Advisory Committee during the ICANN meeting? 3. How much time is needed for effective communication with the Board? 4. Who of the Board should come to such meetings - the CEO & the Chair? A representative group of board members? All Board members? Thank you for your help in this process. Diane Schroeder Director of Board Support ICANN 4676 Admiralty Way, Ste. 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 +1-310-301-5827 (direct office) +1-310-823-9358 (main phone) +1-310-823-8649 (fax) +1-562-644-2524 (mobile) ------ End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Additions to the conference call agendaAdvise Requested regarding Constituency Day
by Tony Holmes April 15, 2009

April 15, 2009

Dear ISPCP members Please see the request below. This needs to be added to the agenda for the conference call today. One other addition for agenda is the ISPCP response on Board Reform Regards Tony _____ Dear All, REMINDER: Would you please provide a response for the cross constituency meeting and please send your input to Diane Schroeder by 27 April. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Glen To the Supporting Organisations and Advisory Committees: The Board is interested in your views on the best ways for the Board and Supporting Organizations & Advisory Committees to interact at the ICANN international meetings. As the community grows and the issues become more complex, it has become a greater challenge to find a way to effectively and efficiently organise this interaction. In particular, the Board would like to come to a shared understanding of what Constituency Day should be, with a view to trying out different ways of interaction during the Constituency Day at next ICANN international meeting in Sydney.. At present the Constituency Day is organised as follows: the Board is divided up and a number of members are assigned to various constituencies for different amounts of time depending on the constituency. The idea behind this approach was to give the Board members an opportunity to listen to some of the constituency business, not just rely on the question and answer time with the Board. To prepare for the visit by the Board members, each constituency is asked to provide a list of topics that they would like to discuss with the Board. Some constituencies are better at providing this than others. Board Members are assigned to constituencies other than the one with which they are most familiar. In addition, the CEO and the Chair visit all constituencies. At the end of the day, after all the visits, the Board comes together and exchanges the views they have heard from the various groups. To assist in the discussion about the future of Constituency Day, the Board would like your thoughts on the following specific questions, by the end of April. 1. What is the goal of having the Board meet with a Supporting Organization, Constituency, or Advisory Committee during the ICANN meeting? 2. What is the best communication method between the Board and a Supporting Organization, Constituency or Advisory Committee during the ICANN meeting? 3. How much time is needed for effective communication with the Board? 4. Who of the Board should come to such meetings - the CEO & the Chair? A representative group of board members? All Board members? Thank you for your help in this process. Diane Schroeder Director of Board Support ICANN 4676 Admiralty Way, Ste. 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 +1-310-301-5827 (direct office) +1-310-823-9358 (main phone) +1-310-823-8649 (fax) +1-562-644-2524 (mobile) ------ End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Formal communication with the ICANN Board
by Tony Holmes April 15, 2009

April 15, 2009

Dear ISPCP members Attached for information are examples that align with the temporary Board communication process which the Board set up in Cairo to formally submit Constituency resolutions to the Board. The aim is ensure timely and effective delivery of the message to all Board members and posting on their formal Board lists. The Board is still working on finalizing a long-term process for effectively delivering and circulating communications from community leaders and the public to the Board. We will briefly discuss this during today's conference call as all members need to be aware of the process. Unless we adhere to this, key messages from the Constituency are unlikely to get through. Regards Tony

1 0