- ispcp - lists.icann.org

EXPLANATION: WSIS Draft Resolution
by Mark McFadden Jan. 4, 2005

Jan. 4, 2005

All: In another message to the ISPCP list you will find a message with the subject line; PROPOSED TEXT: WSIS Draft Resolution This is the revised version of the text I sent you after the Cape Town ICANN meetings. Our constituency is being asked to sign on to this resolution. The ISPCP Executive Committee recommends that we sign on to the resolution and will do so unless objections are raised by close-of-business on Friday of this week. If you have any questions about the text, please contact me. Otherwise comments and suggestions about ISPCP actions should be forwarded to the list so that all may benefit. Mark Mark McFadden Secretariat - Internet Service Provider and Connectivity Provider Constituency gNSO - ICANN mcf(a)uwm.edu

1 0

Proposed WSIS Workshop Planning Group Draft Resolution
by Mark McFadden Dec. 8, 2004

Dec. 8, 2004

WSIS Workshop Planning Group Draft Resolution 12-5-04 Version 1.0 Whereas: 1. ICANN is a bottom up, consensus based, participatory global organization, responsible for coordinating the unique identifiers of the Internet. In particular, ICANN is responsible for ensuring the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems, such as the domain names, IP Addresses, protocol and parameters, the Internet root server system and those policies that are related to the unique identifiers. 2. At ICANN's creation, the community recognized the importance of a unique forum to address these issues, and has supported the continuing evolution of ICANN as the unique forum for coordinating the unique identifiers of the Internet and related policy. 3. As the Internet evolves, so does the need for the participation of an ever growing and diverse set of stakeholders, with a particular emphasis on the participation of stakeholders from developing countries. 4. With this expanding participation, ICANN will continue to evolve and mature in its role in coordinating the Internet's unique identifiers, and in increasing awareness and understanding of its role in advancing the Internet.. Recognizing : 5. Internet Governance has emerged as an important issue in many fora, most especially through the WSIS process. 6. That no single entity or organization possesses the expertise nor broad participation to undertake addressing all aspects of Internet Governance in isolation. 7. ICANN provides the opportunity for participation by diverse stakeholders associated with, and interested in, its activities and mission related to coordination of the unique identifiers of the Internet. 8. That many of ICANN stakeholders who are involved in ICANN's work are also involved in the broader set of initiatives and organizations already engaged in discussing or addressing Internet Governance. RESOLVED THAT 9. We endorse the ICANN model of a private public partnership-- involving the broadest set of stakeholders: civil society, non governmental organizations, commercial and individual users, suppliers, and governments-- responsible for coordinating the unique identifiers of the Internet and related policies. We support the continuing internationalization of ICANN. 10. We call on those who seek change in the present stakeholder driven model for coordination of the technical management of the Internet's unique identifiers to fully participate in ICANN's process and activities, and work with ICANN's stakeholders to address their concerns within the ICANN process. 11. We call on the ICANN Board, all ICANN stakeholders and staff to participate in the Working Group on Internet Governance and in the World Summit on the Information Society to advance broad support for the public private, stakeholder-driven model for coordination of the Internet's unique identifiers. 12. We urge the ICANN board, ICANN stakeholders and staff to support the growing awareness and understanding of what ICANN does, while recognizing the need for collaboration, cooperation, coordination, and coexistence with other organizations and entities who are engaged in the larger issues and activities related to Internet Governance. 13. We support the collaboration and cooperation within the ICANN community of regional Internet registries, ccTLD managers, non-commercial and business organizations, individual Internet users , the broad technical community, root server operators and governments and support activities that increase understanding of ICANN's work and focus as the forum for coordinating the unique identifiers of the Internet and related policy.. 14. We support improved communications and collaboration within all members of the ICANN community for increasing understanding and participation in ICANN, in particular from developing countries.

1 0

RE: [ispcp] ISPCP Comments on the ICANN Strategic Plan
by Mansourkia, Magnolia Dec. 4, 2004

Dec. 4, 2004

Hi guys. How are the meetings going? I think what you've come up with below is great and have nothing further to add. Also, I'm curious-any further discussions from registries re the alleged filtering of newer TLDs? Cheers, Maggie -----Original Message----- From: owner-ispcp(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark McFadden Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:39 AM To: ispcp(a)icann.org Cc: ispcp-activities(a)icann.org Subject: [ispcp] ISPCP Comments on the ICANN Strategic Plan The ISPCP would like to make the following remarks in support of the strategic plan and raise a few issues. Whilst the strategic plan is seen as a welcome step forward, we have concerns that the proposals still lack measurable objectives and detailed timelines.  The Strategic Plan is unclear as to whether the relationship between ICANN and the Root Server Operators will be formalized to the extent of a contractual relationship. The ISPCP supports the formalization of relationships with the Root Server Operators. The precise nature of that relationship is a matter that we reserve comment upon. Whatever that relationship ends up being, those providing Root Server functionality must be accountable to ICANN.  We support the five key suggestions for IANA including: improving IANA request tracking and responsiveness; providing more reliable operating capacity; doing better reporting from IANA on operations issues; making root zone management professional; and, making root servers themselves more robust. We especially support the move towed project management orientation for request tracking and crucial IANA transactions.  We believe that the reference made to the ASO Community “building global consensus policy governing IP addresses” is not supported by the demise of an independent ASO and the assertion of global address policy development by the RIR CEOs through the NRO.  The ISPCP welcomes the appointment of the ombudsman and the role in helping to educate consumers – a task, which in the past, has often been left to ISPs.  We are also glad to see more emphasis placed on compliance so that policy work developed within the gNSO becomes more meaningful.  It is essential that all ICANN activities result from a bottom-up process and the PDP process needs to be flexible and tailored to meet the demands of individual policy opportunities.  We seek more information with regard to the proposed regional meetings: whether they will be focused on outreach and education activities, or part of the formal policy development process. If the latter, then the ISPCP questions how this will be integrated into the discussions necessary at full, global ICANN meetings.  Whilst we have commented on some of the issues raised by the ISPCP consideration of the strategic plan it is apparent that far more discussion and consultation is required. Therefore, the ISPCP requests that the ICANN Board of Directors acknowledge this requirement and seek to address it in a manner that meets with the full acceptance of the ICANN community.  The ISPCP also notes with dismay that the Supporting Organizations were not consulted prior to the public dissemination of the document. While the intent may be to craft a plan for operation and management of ICANN, it is clear that the plan has far-reaching consequences for ICANN’s delivery of services and thus, its policy. This process needs to change so that Supporting Organizations have a meaningful way to have input at an earlier stage in the plan development. Mark McFadden ispcp-activities(a)mcfaddencentral.com Secretariat ISPCP Constituency, ICANN

3 3

ISPCP Comments on the ICANN Strategic Plan
by Mark McFadden Dec. 2, 2004

Dec. 2, 2004

The ISPCP would like to make the following remarks in support of the strategic plan and raise a few issues. Whilst the strategic plan is seen as a welcome step forward, we have concerns that the proposals still lack measurable objectives and detailed timelines.  The Strategic Plan is unclear as to whether the relationship between ICANN and the Root Server Operators will be formalized to the extent of a contractual relationship. The ISPCP supports the formalization of relationships with the Root Server Operators. The precise nature of that relationship is a matter that we reserve comment upon. Whatever that relationship ends up being, those providing Root Server functionality must be accountable to ICANN.  We support the five key suggestions for IANA including: improving IANA request tracking and responsiveness; providing more reliable operating capacity; doing better reporting from IANA on operations issues; making root zone management professional; and, making root servers themselves more robust. We especially support the move towed project management orientation for request tracking and crucial IANA transactions.  We believe that the reference made to the ASO Community “building global consensus policy governing IP addresses” is not supported by the demise of an independent ASO and the assertion of global address policy development by the RIR CEOs through the NRO.  The ISPCP welcomes the appointment of the ombudsman and the role in helping to educate consumers – a task, which in the past, has often been left to ISPs.  We are also glad to see more emphasis placed on compliance so that policy work developed within the gNSO becomes more meaningful.  It is essential that all ICANN activities result from a bottom-up process and the PDP process needs to be flexible and tailored to meet the demands of individual policy opportunities.  We seek more information with regard to the proposed regional meetings: whether they will be focused on outreach and education activities, or part of the formal policy development process. If the latter, then the ISPCP questions how this will be integrated into the discussions necessary at full, global ICANN meetings.  Whilst we have commented on some of the issues raised by the ISPCP consideration of the strategic plan it is apparent that far more discussion and consultation is required. Therefore, the ISPCP requests that the ICANN Board of Directors acknowledge this requirement and seek to address it in a manner that meets with the full acceptance of the ICANN community.  The ISPCP also notes with dismay that the Supporting Organizations were not consulted prior to the public dissemination of the document. While the intent may be to craft a plan for operation and management of ICANN, it is clear that the plan has far-reaching consequences for ICANN’s delivery of services and thus, its policy. This process needs to change so that Supporting Organizations have a meaningful way to have input at an earlier stage in the plan development. Mark McFadden ispcp-activities(a)mcfaddencentral.com Secretariat ISPCP Constituency, ICANN

1 0

Draft Agenda for the ISPCP meeting Cape Town
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com Nov. 22, 2004

Nov. 22, 2004

Here is the draft agenda for the ISPCP meeting to be held in Cape Town on Thursday 2nd December from 14.30 to 16.30. Agenda. 1. ICANN Strategic Plan 2. The introduction of new sTLDs 3. Publicity guidelines for new gTLDs 4. WSIS related activities 5. Progress on WHOIS 6. Update on .net 7. Election of officers 8. AoB If you have any additional items to add, please notify the Secretariat.

1 0

FW: [council] A workshop to discuss solutions to the contention problem amongst registrars when domain names are made available for registration by a gTLD registry
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com Nov. 18, 2004

Nov. 18, 2004

Dear Constituency member All those attending the ICANN meeting in Cape Town should be aware of the workshop (details below) organised by the Registrar Constituency. Regards Tony Tony Holmes BT Group Phone +44 1732 475517 Fax: +44 1689 850104 Mobile +44 7710 005459 -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: 18 November 2004 05:05 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] A workshop to discuss solutions to the contention problem amongst registrars when domain names are made available for registration by a gTLD registry As a follow up, I believe the plan is to present the outcomes of the workshop during the GNSO public forum. Note the workshop is not making decisions, but is attempting to identify possible solutions that have sufficient support for further work on the details. Regards, Bruce > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org > [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin > Sent: Wednesday, 17 November 2004 11:37 PM > To: council(a)gnso.icann.org > Subject: [council] A workshop to discuss solutions to the > contention problem amongst registrars when domain names are > made available for registration by a gTLD registry > > Hello All, > > For information, the registrars constituency with the support > of ICANN is holding a workshop in Cape Town to discuss > solutions to the problem of contention for domain names made > available by a gTLD registry (i.e., > the deleted names or batch pool market). Council members may wish to > inform their constituencies of this workshop, and each > constituency may choose to nominate a person to ICANN to > attend the workshop. > > See below. > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > > > > From: > http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg02511.html > > Registrar Constituency Workshop: Announcement and Call for Papers > > Workshop Purpose > > Jointly sponsored by the Registrar Constituency and ICANN to > develop solutions to the contention for domain names made > available by a gTLD registry (i.e., the deleted names or > batch pool market). > > Date: 1 Dec 2004, two hours in duration, precise time to be announced. > > Location: ICANN Meeting, Cape Town, South Africa, room to be > announced. > > Due date for papers: 24 Nov 2004 > > Overview > > When a domain name is cancelled, the registry releases the > domain name for re-registration following a redemption grace > period and a notice period of pending delete. In many cases > there is more than one entity that wishes to re-register the > domain. The time at which a particular domain name will be > available for re-registration is known to registrars. This > causes contention at the registry, with many registrars > sending add commands to seek to register the name at the same > time. This process is an inefficient use of both registry and > registrar resources. > This problem has been most noticeable for the com/net > registry due to its large volume of names, but may equally > apply to other registries as the number of names under > management grows. > > The purpose of the workshop is to receive industry input on > possible long-term solutions to the contention problem. This > discussion is also timely because the contention problem also > applies at the time a new TLD is created, and a new set of > domain names becomes available for registration. Therefore, > the workshop results and ensuing steps will become part of > the process for introducing new TLDs. > > The workshop will not discuss the various mechanisms > introduced by some registrars for re-allocating registered > domain names after expiry to different registrants, and the > workshop will not discuss the proposed WLS service. Although > these mechanisms may limit the number of names that are made > available for re-registration, domain names will still be > released by the registry for re-registration, and thus the > contention problem will still exist. > > Agenda > > The agenda will consist of short presentations (10 minutes > each) from those wishing to present a proposal, followed by > discussion, with the aim to identify via straw poll the most > favored solution for further work. The workshop will be run > in the style of IETF meetings where written proposals are > discussed prior to converging on a particular solution. > > All those wishing to present MUST submit a paper in advance > (not later than 24 Nov 2004). All submitted papers will be > published in advance so that workshop participants may read > the papers in advance and consider questions in advance. > > Details > > The meeting will be co-chaired by the Registrar Constituency > and ICANN. > Representatives from other constituencies may be invited; the > list of invitees is being determined. > > Papers should be submitted to Registrar Constituency Chair > Bhavin Turakhia [bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx] and ICANN Chief > Registrar Liaison Tim Cole [cole@xxxxxxxxx]. Questions should > be addressed to those individuals. > > The meeting will probably occur the afternoon of 1 December, > the precise time depending upon room availability. The time > will be settled within the next several days. > >

1 0

ISPCP response to ICANN budget proposal
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 20, 2004

July 20, 2004

Dear ISPCP Colleagues Below is an amended draft response to the proposed ICANN budget. The amendments represent the changes that were discussed when the draft statement was presented at the Constituency meeting in KL earlier this week. If the Constituency is going to respond its essential we do so quickly. On that basis could I ask you to raise any concerns within the next 24 hours so that this statement can be passed to the Board prior to their meeting this Friday. Thank You Regards Tony ----------------------------------------- ISPCP response on the ICANN BUDGET Proposal 2004-2005 The proposed budget represents a crucial milestone for ICANN. Our constituency believes that budget priorities for 2004-2005 is an important step beyond the evolution and reform of recent years. This budget represents a first opportunity to implement the foundation of a new ICANN: one firmly in support of those who provide services on the Internet, use the Internet, and those who make the Internet possible. The ISPCP suggests that at the earliest possible moment ICANN must publish a comprehensive strategic plan that provides the vision for the organisation. Only then will the budget truly become a way to implement ICANN goals. Our constituency believes that although well intentioned the current budget is less of a strategic document and more of a response to a series of individual requests and concerns from various constituencies that ICANN serves. We would suggest that in this budget cycle there is a need to adopt a more focused strategic approach, rather than limit ICANN to a series of tactical responses to individual issues and requests. Most importantly, we believe that some prioritisation of the requirements of constituents must be clearly set out. ICANN is not in a position to meet every demand its constituencies would like within the 2004-2005 period. It is proposed that a strategic approach to planning and prioritisation of services should take place immediately after the Kuala Lumpur meeting. This should be underpinned with set goals and milestones against which performance can be judged. Without such an approach that facilitates measurable performance, the acceptance of subsequent budget proposals will undoubtedly prove even more challenging. One particular concern our Constituency would like to raise is over the percentage of the organisation budget that relates to legal services and defences. Litigation has already limited ICANNs ability to make good on strategic themes and services. Recognising that some of this is not within ICANNs control, we still hold the view the Organisation is overly restricted by the size of its legal budget. The ISPCP would also like to make a suggestion regarding the IANA budget. We believe that IANA is a foundation stone of ICANN and the Internet. What we would like to see is a segregated funding model for IANA where the organisation was funded solely by its immediate constituents. We think the doubling of IANA expenditures and staff is not in keeping with the level of additional support that other parts of ICANN receive. We have no doubt that IANA constituents feel strongly about the quality, timeliness and service of this crucial organisation. However one way to ensure that IANA is purely customer focused is to let the IANAs constituents and customers help plan for IANA activities and help fund their priorities. We believe that this should be segregated from the rest of ICANNs overall budget. It is also our view that a fresh approach to public policy development must be implemented. It is essential that the budget must adequately and wholly fund significant staff resources for the development of naming and addressing policy. We believe that staff roles in the policy development process need to be reformulated from a convenor/mediator role to an innovator/analytical/developer role. The budget should support this evolution and ensure that significant staff resources, training and travel support are available to those who perform this crucial task. The current budget makes a well-intentioned effort to achieve geographical dispersal of staff and offices. We do not believe this should be a significant priority of the organisation at this stage. The organisation, in absence of an articulated vision and strategy, should concentrate on the consolidation of services provided to constituents, development of relevant policy for those constituents, and co-ordinated activity and improved communication within ICANN. Geographical dispersal issues can be tackled later providing ICANN is delivering its key goals. Finally, our constituency is concerned about the long term, strategic funding of ICANNs activities. In particular, we do not believe that ICANN should rely upon the expansion of the names space as the crucial mechanism for long-term fiscal support. We believe that the names space will never blossom into a rich source of long-term funding for the organisation. The current experience of existing names leads us to that conclusion as does the limited collection of second round proposals for additions to the names space. With regard to the issue of alternative sources of revenue it is the view of the ISPCP that it remains imperative that funding requirements do not jeopardise the neutrality of ICANN as an organisation. We suggest that expanding the role of private companies in the ICANN funding model needs to be left to future years when ICANN has firmly established its position and the implications of any such change can be examined more closely.

1 0

ISPCP MEETING agenda - 19TH JULY
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 13, 2004

July 13, 2004

Dear ISPCP Constituents The draft agenda for the meeting on the 19th July follows. ------------------------ ISPCP Meeting Agenda Kuala Lumpur Monday 19th July >From 15:00 - 16:45 1. Introductions 2. Report on WHOIS Task Force 3. Report of .org status - preparation of ISPCP Statement on this issue 4. ICANN Budget - Discussion on ISPCP proposed position 5. UDRP - Update 6. ICANN Nominating Committee - Report from ISPCP representative (Antonio Tavares) 7. Preparation of ISPCP position on WSIS 8. Issues arising from Cross Constituency meeting/ presentations on applications for new sTLDs 9 AoB

1 0

FW: Invitation to WSIS Workshop in KL
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 13, 2004

July 13, 2004

Dear ISPCP Colleagues Attached is an invite to the WSIS workshop that will take place at KL next week. This issue will also be discussed at the ISPCP meeting on Monday 19th July. Regards Tony <mailto:michel@icann.org> ===================== Your constituency members are invited to participate in the "Workshop on the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS): Issues of Relevance to ICANN and Next Steps" scheduled for Tuesday, 20 July 2004 from 08:30 - 10:00 in the Shangri-La Hotel's Grand Ballroom, Kuala Lumpur. All individuals interested in the Internet and management and coordination of the domain name system (DNS) are encouraged to attend the Workshop, which will provide information on the United Nation's WSIS process and issues of direct impact to ICANN. Proposed output and next steps for ICANN constituencies/stakeholders regarding WSIS and technical coordination and management of the DNS also will be discussed. "WSIS" is a process in which governments are attempting to address a broad range of international legal, regulatory, economic, and policy issues related to the Internet. During this process, some governments proposed that an intergovernmental organization be responsible for "Internet governance," a phrase that remains undefined and some consider to include and/or mean the administration and coordination of the DNS. The objectives of the Workshop are to: 1. Inform ICANN stakeholders and the broader community about activities, initial outcomes, and upcoming events related to WSIS and ICANN; 2. Foster a dialogue and mutual understanding of positions of different stakeholders on WSIS as it relates to ICANN and other issues of interest; and 3. Enhance stakeholder participation in WSIS as it relates to ICANN's activities. Included below is the Workshop agenda. Additional meeting information is posted at http://www.icann.org/meetings/kualalumpur/. We would appreciate it if you would post and distribute this invitation to your constituency members. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, The WSIS Workshop Planning Group: Vittorio Bertola, At-Large Advisory Committee Izumi Aizu, At-Large Advisory Committee Marilyn Cade, Business Constituency David Fares, BusinessConstituency/USCIB Tony Holmes, Internet Service & Connectivity Providers Elana Broitman, Registrars Jeff Neuman, Registries Peter Dengate Thrush, InternetNZ Theresa Swinehart, ICANN Denise Michel, ICANN Workshop on the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS): Issues of Relevance to ICANN and Next Steps 20 July 2004, 08:30 - 10:00 Grand Ballroom, Shangri-La Hotel, Kuala Lumpur Organized by the WSIS Workshop Planning Group Agenda 08:30 Opening Remarks/ WSIS Overview by Paul Twomey, ICANN President & CEO v Remarks on the UN Internet Governance Working Group and how it relates to ICANN, by Marcus Kumar, Working Group Secretariat v Remarks on UNICT Task Force Internet Governance activities/objectives by UNICT Task Force member v Audience discussion/statements/questions (including available statements by constituencies, stakeholders and interest groups) v Remarks/Audience Discussion on output/next steps for ICANN constituencies/stakeholders regarding WSIS and ICANN 10:00 Close

1 0

RE: Conference call - today!
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com July 7, 2004

July 7, 2004

All New dial in number for the call at 16.30 BST: +44 208 813 3300 PIN13754498# Tony > -----Original Message----- > From: Holmes,AR,Tony,XGH3 HOLMESAR R > Sent: 07 July 2004 16:09 > To: 'ispcp(a)dnso.org' > Subject: RE: Conference call - today! > > All > There appears to be a problem with the conference bridge - > apologies. > > The call will be delayed 30 mins I will confirm call-in details. > > Watch this space! > Tony > -----Original Message----- > From: Holmes,AR,Tony,XGH3 HOLMESAR R > Sent: 07 July 2004 07:47 > To: 'ispcp(a)dnso.org' > Subject: Conference call - today! > Importance: High > > Dear ISPCP Colleagues > There will be a conference call today to discuss the agenda for > this months ISPCP Constituency meeting at KL. > Apologies for the short notice, scheduling this was not easy. > > Details as below: > Time 16.00 BST (11.00 EST, 12.00 Buenos Aires, 17.00 CET) > > Number to Dial +44 1473 782106 > PIN: 349951# > > If you have any problem dialling in please call my mobile > number: +44 7710 005459 > > Regards > Tony

2 1