- ispcp - lists.icann.org

Council meeting; ISPCP call
by KnobenW＠telekom.de May 11, 2012

May 11, 2012

All, short summary of yesterday's GNSO council meeting: - Motion on "best practices" (Zahid Jamil, BC) was deferred - protection of IOC/RC: no consensus whether and how the WT may continue working, at least for 2nd level protection mechanism; draft letter to the GAC re working results and status still under discussion - future public board meeting format: cost savings + effectiveness vs transparency; it may be an agenda item for the Public Forum in Prague - JAS: as staff is "using" (parts of) the JAS WG for support re the implementation of the various JAS recommendation the JAS mandate was discussed in this respect - ICANN academy: Stéphane will be representing the GNSO on the ICANN academy WG. Please find the MP3 recording of the GNSO Council teleconference, held on Thursday, 10 May, 2012 at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20120510-en.mp3 on page http://gnso.icann.org/calendar#may<http://gnso.icann.org/calendar> Since I'm not sure whether I can participate (fully or in parts) in the ISPCP call next Tuesday I'd like to forward 2 messages to you where input is asked for: 1. ICANN public board meeting format, see letter from Steve Crocker: Folks (Staff, SO and AC chairs, and Board), I want to follow up on the announcement that we're wrapping up the ICANN meeting on Thursday evening. We got a lot of feedback expressing concern, some of which will be allayed with more information. Below is a draft of a blog entry I'd like to post as soon as it's been properly coordinated. Please take a look and let me know if there are flaws or missing pieces. (And if you know of someone I should have included in this coordination cycle, pass this on and also let me know.) If I can get the relevant information re the SO and AC reports, I'll add it in. Also, please let me know if there are indeed major resolutions in the works that deserve to be dealt with in a public Board meeting. If so, we will need to schedule a public Board meeting and I'll need to adjust the wording of this blog posting. Thanks, Steve ================================================================================================================================================== On April 30 I announced we will wrap up the ICANN meeting on Thursday evening and not use Friday. (Some groups may choose to use Friday for their own meetings; that's fine.) We have received multiple inputs asking for clarification or suggesting this change has some adverse consequences. The announcement was a bit light on details. I wanted to get the decision out so everyone could adjust their travel plans. Now I want to say a bit more about the changes. In the past, we had three parts to the program on Friday morning -- reports from the Board committees, reports from the chairs of the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, and a formal Board meeting. Attendance during all parts of the morning have been very light. There really has not been much actual utility for the community. Also every day of meeting time is expensive, not just to ICANN but also to the community. Like many people, I had been noticing that Friday mornings were not well attended, and it was clear it was time to make a change. Let me now go into a few details, and I will close with a promise that if the changes we're making for Prague are not in the best interests of everyone, we will continue to evolve the schedule. With respect to our Board meetings, the large majority of the resolutions we approve are the regular pieces of business that are known well in advance. The Board approves these resolutions without fanfare. The substantive work is done via the Supporting Organizations or via staff work, and the work is posted. Once in while there are Board actions that have some controversy or drama. The XXX decision in San Francisco and the decision in Singapore to move forward with the gTLD program are the two recent examples that come to mind. For matters of this import, we will hold a public Board meeting. In Singapore, we did this at the beginning of the week. This was a big improvement and really helped set a positive tone for the entire week. I think this is a good pattern, and I'm inclined to follow this when it's needed. I don't know how often we'll have to do this; I suspect it will be less than half the time. A closely related aspect of this change is we will no longer be rushing through resolutions based on committee work or inputs during the week. We need to take some time to develop the proper documentation. So, instead of trying to cap the week off with resolutions passed on the basis of the week's work, we will report on what's come up during the week, what happened between the last ICANN meeting and this one, and what we plan to do following this ICANN meeting. This is in accordance with the recommendations of the Accountability and Transparency Review Team, and is consistent with the changes we made some time ago to provide more thorough documentation in the form of a rationale for each resolution. These changes will have the benefit of providing time for careful and considered work on each resolution and better documentation for transparency and accountability. Our vice chair, Bruce Tonkin, observes: An example of this approach was on the topic of Conflicts of Interest in Dakar in October 2011. The Board listened to the community during the week, and then in the public session on conflicts Board members gave some feedback to the community on specific measures that would be taken with respect to new gTLDs. After careful review by the legal team and review by Board members, the Board held a meeting on 8 Dec 2011 and passed a resolution on management conflicts for new gTLDs. The Board also passed other resolutions that resulted from the discussion in Dakar. We have made some related changes in the coordination of Board resolutions and the scheduling of Board meetings. I will report on these changes in a separate posting. We recognize the community wants to see the Board in action and have the opportunity to interact with the Board. Toward this end, we are making two additional changes. In the opening session on Monday morning, I will include a summary of what has taken place since the last meeting, and on Thursday afternoon the Board will report on what it has heard during the week. The Board will continue to engage eagerly in the public sessions, listening closely to the comments from the community and responding to questions. At the beginning of this blog I mentioned the reports from the SO and AC chairs and the reports from the Board committees. We are still working out the arrangements for these and I will report separately on the details. The SOs and ACs are the lifeblood of ICANN, and we want to make sure they have greater, not lesser visibility. Finally, as I noted above, we are working hard to be both more effective and more efficient. If we need to continue to evolve this process, we will. Thank you. Steve Crocker Chair, ICANN Board of Directors 2. ICANN academy WG, draft ideas: Message 1 to the WG: There should be no discussions on a possible curriculum until there has first been discussion (and consensus among the different community reps in the WG) on whether the academy itself should be created. GNSO sub-message to message 1: The GNSO Council agrees the concept of an academy to help newcomers get to grips with the ICANN world is a good idea. But there needs to be clear guidelines on finance, budget and implementation. Message 2 to the WG: Once it has been determined that the concept of an academy is one that should be pushed forward, is willing to provide background material and support in helping academy attendees understand the intricacies of the GNSO and welcomes any suggestions from the WG on what type of material is needed. Your feedback is welcome. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

1 0

distribution of root servers to internet-users, worldwide
by Mike O'Connor May 9, 2012

May 9, 2012

hi all, this seems like especially interesting reading for those of us who are based outside North America and Europe. it would be helpful to go a little deeper than this analysis and get a better feel for things like latency and congestion. it would also be interesting to understand some of the deeper/historical rate-of-change rates (for example change in users vs change in root-servers over time). http://royal.pingdom.com/2012/05/07/the-very-uneven-distribution-of-dns-roo… Internet users per DNS root server site Asia -- 20,335,982 Africa -- 8,742,203 Middle East -- 8,557,888 South America -- 8,426,945 Europe -- 4,957,660 North America -- 3,750,804 Oceania -- 1,407,497 World average -- 7,557,446 mikey - - - - - - - - - phone 651-647-6109 fax 866-280-2356 web http://www.haven2.com handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)

2 1

ICANN announcement -- 2091 applications in TAS system as of now
by Mike O'Connor May 8, 2012

May 8, 2012

hi all, there's a really interesting factoid in this announcement from ICANN. they had 2091 applications for new gTLDs as of when the application system was taken offline. which implies a LOT more new gTLDs are coming than i ever imagined. if they batch them in groups of 500, that's four batches. Rob Hall's "digital archery" product is starting to look pretty prescient. another interesting dimension -- there's a pretty lively discussion over on the Facebook "ICANN Social" group about forming a new constituency for gTLD applicants to advance the agenda of those applicants. that group must be pretty big, given the number of strings applied for. just a few observations to feed into the "reorganization" discussion. when i was in the Business Constituency we wrestled with the puzzle of how to accommodate corporations that were likely to become registries and this implies that there may be a fair number of those type people. from our perspective, it seems to me that 2000+ new gTLDs in the root have quite a number of operational, stability and support issues that come along with them. just food for thought. mikey PS -- for those of you who are wondering, this is the first post from your newest member. i've been involved with ICANN for about 7 years and have moved from the Business Constituency to the ISPCP now that i am part of an ISP again. i started one of those 2nd-generation ISPs in the mid-90's and sold it just before the bubble burst -- now i'm a volunteer at a regional peering point in the north-central US. over the years my focus has been on the bottom of the bottom-up process -- working groups. i try to participate in the working-groups that make policy, and avoid the ones that focus on process issues. so here's a string of working-group acronyms for you (sorry about this) -- IRTP-A/B/C, Fast Flux, RAP-WG, RAP-DT, PEDNR, HSTLD-AG, ZFA-AG, VI, DSSA, CCWG-DT, FRN-DT. if you're interested in knowing a little more about all that, here's a link to my ICANNwiki page -- http://icannwiki.com/index.php/Mike_O%27Connor Begin forwarded message: > From: "ICANN News Alert" <communications(a)icann.org> > Date: May 5, 2012 1:05:03 AM CDT > To: <mike(a)haven2.com> > Subject: ICANN News Alert -- TAS Interruption - Update (4 May 2012) > > > News Alert > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-04may12-en.htm > > TAS Interruption - Update (4 May 2012) > Statement by Akram Atallah, COO > 4 May 2012 > The TLD Application System, or TAS, held 2091 applications - either submitted or in progress - when it was taken offline on 12 April 2012. > > In addition, there are 214 potential applications that were registered prior to the 29 March cut-off date, but whose payments have not yet been received or reconciled. > > ICANN has received approximately USD $350 million in fees for applications for new gTLDs. > > As we have reported, we are in the process of notifying applicants whether they were affected by the software glitch, and plan to complete this process on or before Tuesday, 8 May. Shortly after that process is complete, we will announce the schedule for reopening TAS and completing the application period. Once the system is reopened, we will keep it open for at least five business days. > > We appreciate your understanding as we work to bring the TLD application system back online. > > > > This message was sent to mike(a)haven2.com from: > ICANN | 4676 Admiralty Way Suite 330 | Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6601 > Email Marketing by > > Manage Your Subscription > - - - - - - - - - phone 651-647-6109 fax 866-280-2356 web http://www.haven2.com handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)

2 2

RE: Timing of Conference call Tuesday 15 May
by tony holmes May 8, 2012

May 8, 2012

All Having received feedback from a number of members I'd like to confirm the call will commence at 15.30 UTC on the 15th May. Call in details will be circulated nearer the time. Best Tony From: tony holmes [mailto:tonyarholmes@btinternet.com] Sent: 07 May 2012 09:47 To: ispcp(a)icann.org Subject: Timing of Conference call Tuesday 15 May All We have an ISPCP conference call scheduled for 14.00 UTC on Tuesday 15th May. Since that time was agreed ICANNs CFO Xavier Calvez has scheduled a conference call commencing the same time to discuss the FY13 operating plan and budget framework, which will last for 1.5 hours. As The ISPCP rep on the CSG Budget group I'd very much like to participate in that call, particularly as the other date scheduled for the budget call I cannot make. Therefore I'd like to propose the ISCP call is now scheduled to commence at 15.30 UTC. I realise this is not ideal for those of you in Europe and Asia but hope we can make this an exception. Please let me know ASAP if this change of time is not acceptable. Thanks Tony

1 0

Timing of Conference call Tuesday 15 May
by tony holmes May 8, 2012

May 8, 2012

All We have an ISPCP conference call scheduled for 14.00 UTC on Tuesday 15th May. Since that time was agreed ICANNs CFO Xavier Calvez has scheduled a conference call commencing the same time to discuss the FY13 operating plan and budget framework, which will last for 1.5 hours. As The ISPCP rep on the CSG Budget group I'd very much like to participate in that call, particularly as the other date scheduled for the budget call I cannot make. Therefore I'd like to propose the ISCP call is now scheduled to commence at 15.30 UTC. I realise this is not ideal for those of you in Europe and Asia but hope we can make this an exception. Please let me know ASAP if this change of time is not acceptable. Thanks Tony

5 7

WG: WHOIS Access Report (Port 43)
by KnobenW＠telekom.de May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

FYI Best regards Wolf-Ulrich ________________________________ Von: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] Im Auftrag von Marika Konings Gesendet: Mittwoch, 2. Mai 2012 09:56 An: council(a)gnso.icann.org Betreff: [council] WHOIS Access Report (Port 43) Dear All, In keeping with the commitment of the ICANN Compliance Department to publish "more data about WHOIS accessibility, on at least an annual basis", please find their latest report, which has been just published, at http://www.icann.org/en/resources/compliance/audits. If you have any questions, please let us know. With best regards, Marika Sr. Policy Director ICANN

1 0

AW: AW: Motion to Address Whois Access
by KnobenW＠telekom.de April 30, 2012

April 30, 2012

1. Rrs are requested to provide more reliable WhoIs service. In order to achieve this they may have to improve their operations and to invest money. 2. NCSG members may have reservations against an "enforceable" way to access WhoIs. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich ________________________________ Von: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com] Gesendet: Samstag, 28. April 2012 21:46 An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Cc: marilynscade(a)hotmail.com; evansj(a)yahoo-inc.com; bwinterfeldt(a)steptoe.com; David.Taylor(a)hoganlovells.com; john(a)crediblecontext.com; zahid(a)dndrc.com; cdigangi(a)inta.org; tonyarholmes(a)btinternet.com; harris(a)cabase.org.ar; onovoa(a)antel.com.uy; excomm(a)bizconst.org; ispcp(a)icann.org Betreff: Re: AW: Motion to Address Whois Access I don't see any problem but can you explain why opposition is expected ? Sent from my iPhone On Apr 28, 2012, at 10:47 AM, "KnobenW(a)telekom.de<mailto:KnobenW@telekom.de>" <KnobenW(a)telekom.de<mailto:KnobenW@telekom.de>> wrote: Friendly reminder Best regards Wolf-Ulrich _____________________________________________ Von: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. April 2012 12:03 An: 'Marilyn Cade'; Steve Metalitz; J.Scott Evans; Brian Winterfeldt; David Taylor; 'john(a)crediblecontext.com<mailto:john@crediblecontext.com>'; Zahid Jamil; cdigangi(a)inta.org<mailto:cdigangi@inta.org>; Tony Holmes; harris(a)cabase.org.ar<mailto:harris@cabase.org.ar>; Novoa, Osvaldo; excomm(a)bizconst.org<mailto:excomm@bizconst.org>; ISPCP Betreff: Motion to Address Whois Access Dear CSG colleagues, following a discussion within the ISP constituency on Whois Access I would appreciate your comments on a related draft motion to be brought before the GNSO council (see attached). Background is that I've grounded a council consent agenda item some weeks ago which was intended not to address furthermore Whois access as recommended by the RAP WG. The draft motion is to be seen as a proposal on how to cover this item in future. The RAA PDP seems to be the right environent for this since the issue of access is certainly one of the issues addressed in the RAA Final Issue Report. As we're expecting opposition from the CPH as well as the NCSG - based on different rationales - ideas regarding socializing and timing are also welcome. < Datei: Motion to Address Whois Access - 24 April 2012.doc >> Mit freundlichen Grüßen Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Knoben

1 0

AW: Motion to Address Whois Access
by KnobenW＠telekom.de April 28, 2012

April 28, 2012

Friendly reminder Best regards Wolf-Ulrich _____________________________________________ Von: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. April 2012 12:03 An: 'Marilyn Cade'; Steve Metalitz; J.Scott Evans; Brian Winterfeldt; David Taylor; 'john(a)crediblecontext.com'; Zahid Jamil; cdigangi(a)inta.org; Tony Holmes; harris(a)cabase.org.ar; Novoa, Osvaldo; excomm(a)bizconst.org; ISPCP Betreff: Motion to Address Whois Access Dear CSG colleagues, following a discussion within the ISP constituency on Whois Access I would appreciate your comments on a related draft motion to be brought before the GNSO council (see attached). Background is that I've grounded a council consent agenda item some weeks ago which was intended not to address furthermore Whois access as recommended by the RAP WG. The draft motion is to be seen as a proposal on how to cover this item in future. The RAA PDP seems to be the right environent for this since the issue of access is certainly one of the issues addressed in the RAA Final Issue Report. As we're expecting opposition from the CPH as well as the NCSG - based on different rationales - ideas regarding socializing and timing are also welcome. < Datei: Motion to Address Whois Access - 24 April 2012.doc >> Mit freundlichen Grüßen Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Knoben

1 0

Motion to Address Whois Access
by KnobenW＠telekom.de April 25, 2012

April 25, 2012

Dear CSG colleagues, following a discussion within the ISP constituency on Whois Access I would appreciate your comments on a related draft motion to be brought before the GNSO council (see attached). Background is that I've grounded a council consent agenda item some weeks ago which was intended not to address furthermore Whois access as recommended by the RAP WG. The draft motion is to be seen as a proposal on how to cover this item in future. The RAA PDP seems to be the right environent for this since the issue of access is certainly one of the issues addressed in the RAA Final Issue Report. As we're expecting opposition from the CPH as well as the NCSG - based on different rationales - ideas regarding socializing and timing are also welcome. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Best regards Wolf-Ulrich Knoben

1 0

FW: [ispcp] Agenda for todays call
by tony holmes April 24, 2012

April 24, 2012

Dial in details for todays call From: Nathalie Peregrine [mailto:nathalie.peregrine@icann.org] Sent: 24 April 2012 14:17 To: tony holmes Subject: RE: [ispcp] Agenda for todays call Dear All, Please note that the next ISPCP call is scheduled on Tuesday 24 April 2012 at 1400 UTC. To check your local time: <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ISPCP+Call&iso=201…> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ISPCP+Call&iso=201… Please find the dial-in details below: Participant Passcode: Participant: 3429 # Dial-in numbers: <http://www.adigo.com/icann/> http://www.adigo.com/icann/ Thank you. Kind regards, Gisella ----------------- Gisella Gruber GNSO Secretariat Staff Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: <mailto:gisella.gruber@icann.org> gisella.gruber(a)icann.org Tel: +44 7545 334 360 Skype ID: gisella.gw

3 3