|GNSO Council Meeting Minutes 7 May 2009
Proposed agenda and documents
List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C -absent, apologies
Mike Rodenbaugh - Commercial & Business Users C
Zahid Jamil - Commercial & Business Users C -absent.
Greg Ruth - ISCPC - absent
Antonio Harris - ISCPC
Tony Holmes - ISCPC - absent, apologies
Stéphane van Gelder - Registrars
Tim Ruiz - Registrars
Adrian Kinderis - Registrars - absent, apologies
Chuck Gomes - gTLD registries
Edmon Chung - gTLD registries
Jordi Iparraguirre - gTLD registries
Kristina Rosette - Intellectual Property Interests C
Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C
Cyril Chua - Intellectual Property Interests C
Mary Wong - NCUC - joined late during WHOIS discussion
William Drake - NCUC
Carlos Souza - NCUC
Olga Cavalli- Nominating Committee appointee - absent, apologies
Terry Davis - Nominating Committee appointee
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee
16 Council Members
( 21 Votes - quorum)
Denise Michel - Vice President, Policy Development- absent apologies
Kurt Pritz - Senior Vice President, Services
Robert Hoggarth - Senior Policy Director
Liz Gasster - Senior Policy Officer
Marika Konings - Policy Director
Margie Milam - Senior Policy Counselor
Julie Hedlund - Policy consultant
Glen de Saint G�ry - GNSO Secretariat
GNSO Council Liaisons/Observers
Alan Greenberg - ALAC Liaison
Mr Han Chun Lee - ccNSO observer
Rita Rodin - ICANN Board member - absent - apologies
Bruce Tonkin - ICANN Board member - absent apologies
Item 1: Update any Statements of Interest
Item 2: Review/amend the agenda
Item 3: Approve GNSO Council minutes:
Council minutes not yet edited for approval
Item 4: Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Policy Development Process (PDP) decision
Tim Ruiz proposed friendly amendment which Avri Doria transmitted to the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery drafting team, who drafted the motion, asking whether the amendment could be accepted. Hearing no objections Avri Doria accepted the friendly amendment
During the Council meeting Alan Greenberg stated that he did not consider the amendment friendly because it explicitly restricts the type of output that is allowed. Specifically the amendment states best practices and consensus policy with no comment on either recommendations for staff on how changes in the policies are enforced and monitored or the possibility of suggesting that there could be changes to the RAA provisions.
The discussion pointed to support for a strictly defined scope of work so as not to overstep the mark and attempt amendments to the RAA.
It was pointed out that the Working Group, once formed, could negotiate with the Council to amend the charter.
Avri Doria and seconded by Chuck Gomes proposed the motion on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery (PEDNR) as amended:
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:
- that it should consider recommendations for best practices as well as or instead of recommendations for Consensus Policy;
- 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 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.
A roll call vote was taken.
In favour: 20 votes
Cyril Chua, Ute Decker, Kristina Rosette, Tony Harris, Mike Rodenbaugh, Zahid Jamil, William Drake, Carlos Souza, Avri Doria, Terry Davis ( one vote each) Chuck Gomes, Edmon Chung, Jordi Iparraguirre, Tim Ruiz, Stéphane van Gelder (two votes each)
[Absentee ballots were sent to eligible Councillors.
Greg Ruth, Philip Sheppard, Tony Holmes, Mary Wong, Olga Cavalli (one vote each) Adrian Kinderis (two votes)
There were 5 absentee votes in favour:
Philip Sheppard, Mary Wong, Olga Cavalli (one vote each) Adrian Kinderis (two
Absent from voting: Greg Ruth, Tony Holmes (1 vote each)
(Final results for the record)]
The motion passed. 25 Votes in favour.
Item 5: Government Advisory Committee (GAC) Position Paper on Geographic Names
Kurt Pritz reminded Council of the ICANN Board resolution in Mexico City in March 2009 on the protection for Geographic Terms in New gTLDs. The Board was in general agreement with the proposed treatment of geographic names at the top-level.
There was not the same consensus at the second level and staff was directed to send a letter to the GAC by 17 March 2009 identifying the implementation issues that have been identified in association with the GAC's advice, in order to continue communications with the GAC to find a mutually acceptable solution. The Board requested a preliminary response by 24 April 2009 and a final report by 25 May 2009.
Kurt Pritz referred to the GAC's response to Geographic Terms Protection that was also sent to the Supporting Organisation and Advisory Committee chairs and noted the narrow time frame for comments.
There will be opportunity for community comment when the full report is published on May 25, 2009, but if the Council wishes to provide interim comments, the GNSO Chair should signal the intent to the GAC Chair and provide such comments quickly.
Stéphane van Gelder proposed providing a draft response for comment and input by the Council by Monday 11 May 2009. After including the Council's input, the draft document will be submitted to a 48 hour comment turn around on the Council mailing list. If there are no substantive comments, Avri Doria will submit the response with a cover letter to the GAC chair.
Chuck Gomes commented that documenting the Council position would be a valuable attribute going into the meeting with the GAC in Sydney
Item 6: Whois service requirements motion
Staff emphasised the need for Council direction and guidance to collect and organize a comprehensive set of requirements for the Whois service policy tools.
Avri Doria, seconded by Chuck Gomes proposed the following motion as amended by Tim Ruiz.
Whereas there have been discussions for several years on the adequacy of the current set of Whois tools to provide the necessary functions to support existing and proposed Whois service policy requirements,
and, there have been questions as to the adequacy of these tools for use in an IDN environment,
and, that there have been extensive discussions about the requirements of the Whois service with respect to Registry and registrar operations,
and, new architectures and tools have been developed and suggested by the technical community,
and, the GNSO accepted the recommendation of the IRT-A Working Group to encourage staff to explore further assessment of whether IRIS would be a viable option for the exchange of registrant email address data between registrars and conduct an analysis of IRIS' costs, time of implementation and appropriateness for IRTP purposes,
The GNSO Council requests that Policy Staff, with the assistance of technical staff and GNSO Council members as required, collect and organize a comprehensive set of requirements for the Whois service policy tools. These requirements should reflect not only the known deficiencies in the current service but should include any possible requirements that may be needed to support various policy initiatives that have been suggested in the past.
The synthesis of requirements should be done in consultation with the SSAC, ALAC, GAC, the ccNSO and the GNSO and a strawman proposal should be prepared for these consultations. The Staff is asked to come back with an estimate of when this would be possible.
Motion passed by voice vote.
One 'nay vote' was heard.
Present at the time of voting:
Mike Rodenbaugh, Zahid Jamil, Ute Decker, Kristina Rosette, Cyril Chua, Tony Harris, William Drake, Carlos Souza, Mary Wong, Terry Davis, Avri Doria, Tim Ruiz, Stéphane van Gelder, Jordi Iparraguirre, Edmon Chung, Chuck Gomes.
Absent at the time of voting:
Philip Sheppard, Tony Holmes, Greg Ruth, Adrian Kinderis, Olga Cavalli.
Request the constituencies to indicate volunteers to advise the Policy Staff in collecting and organizing a comprehensive set of requirements for the WHOIS service policy tools.
Avri Doria and Tim Ruiz volunteered during the meeting and the Commercial and Business Users Constituency indicated that they would provide a member for the group.
Item 7: Preparation for the Sydney meetings.
Avri Doria noted that Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Operations Steering Committee (OSC) work teams will meet on Saturday, 20 and Sunday, 21 June 2009 and a detailed schedule is in progress.
In addition the overarching issues on new gTLDs, particularly the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) report and Geographic names at the first and second levels will be discussed.
Staff availability needs to be ascertained for the discussions on the mentioned issues.
Sunday, 21 June 2009, at the end of the day, the GAC and GNSO will meet. Proposed agenda item is understanding the GAC perspective on Geographic names at the second level.
Avri Doria proposed a doodle vote on several issues to decide on the topic for the Board/GNSO Council/staff dinner on Sunday evening.
Monday, 22 June 2009, Avri Doria noted that there would be one Advisory Committee/Supporting Oganisation (AC/SO) meeting. The proposed topic is the roles and responsibilities of volunteers and staff and the relationship between the ICANN Board and the AC/SO. There will be an open microphone, meeting notes will be available on the ICANN web site and there will be a public comment period for those who prefer to express themselves in writing or who do attend the session in person.
Wednesday 24 June 2009, GNSO Council Open meeting. Detailed agenda to be decided, however there will be an item on GNSO restructuring and an open microphone session.
Councillors are invited to propose agenda items.
Thursday 25 June 2009, GNSO Council wrap-up session and the agenda has still to be decided.
Item 8: Status Updates
8.1 Board update
Denise Michel, unable to attend the Council meeting, provided a written Board update.
Liz Gasster highlighted the following sections:
- 1) GNSO Improvements -- Implementation Efforts and Council Restructuring
Staff provided an update to the Board on the status of the GNSO Improvements Implementation Efforts and the work remaining prior to the June 2009 implementation timeline approved by the Board. Staff and Board addressed specific issues relating to the outstanding petitions and charters of new Stakeholder Groups and potential amendment of those documents, as well as petitions and charters for new Constituency groups and the anticipated receipt of further petitions.
Staff was directed to continue work towards implementation, and no Board action was taken. The Board's Structural Improvement Committee will be discussing these issues at their 14 April 2009 meeting and may provide the Board with recommended actions.
- 2) RAA Amendments
The Board discussed the amendments and directed Staff to send a letter to the US DOC confirming the benefits of the new RAA, prior to the Board's final approval. The Board is expected to act on the amendments at their next (21 May) meeting. This information was provided to the Council list on 24 April by Director Bruce Tonkin (see <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg06692.html>).
- 3) Working Group to Review the Structure of ICANN’s Present Geographic Regions
The Board briefly discussed the proposed charter of the community-wide working group to review the structure of ICANN’s present geographic regions. As a question was raised by a Board member, the Board deferred approval of the charter until their next (21 May) meeting.
The full agenda for the Board's 23 April meeting is posted on the ICANN web site.
If there were any questions, Avri Doria proposed addressing them directly to Denise Michel by email.
8. 2 ccNSO Liaison update
Olga Cavalli provided a written update.
8. 3 Geographical Region WG update
Olga Cavalli provided a written update.
Robert Hoggarth added that the initial report, which will provide a factual representation and suggestion of potential issues the working group is considering, is on track for June 12, 2009 and may merit Council discussion during the Sydney meetings.
8. 4 Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) status update
Kristina Rosette provided the Council with an update on the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) draft report highlighting the recommendations:
- IP Clearinghouse, Globally Protected Marks List and associated rights protection mechanisms, and standardized pre-launch rights protection mechanisms;
- Uniform Rapid Suspension System (“URS”);
- Post delegation dispute resolution mechanisms at the top level;
- Whois requirements for new TLDs; and
- Use of algorithm in string confusion review during initial evaluation.
Kristina Rosette noted that the Intellectual Property leadership is aware of the concerns expressed about the perceived lack of participation on the IRT by consumer protection expertise and explained that no timely expression of interest was received from anyone one in that field. In the only one expression of interest received, the person was not able to make the time commitment of 15 business days and so was not invited.
Public comment is being solicited.
Staff clarified that there will not be a third version of the applicant guidebook published before Sydney. Discussion on the overarching issues, will not be completed by that time. In order to furnish enough information for significant discussion in Sydney, ICANN is going to publish a comment analysis.
On Wednesday 24 June, during the Sydney meetings, there will be a consultation session to discuss the IRT report and other input on the Applicant Guide Book.
Staff clarified that a third version of the Applicant Guide Book (DAG) is expected around September 2009 with a public comment period that will end after the Seoul meeting and after that, a final version of the Applicant Guide Book will be published before the end of the year.
8. 5 . 1 Joint GNSO/ccNSO group to discuss coordination of timing for IDN TLDs (Avri Doria /Chris Disspain) update
Under discussion with Chris Disspain.
8. 5. 2 Appointment of 2 GNSO Council representatives on the ccNSO PDP working group
Olga Cavalli and Edmon Chung volunteered to be the two representatives from the GNSO.
There were no objections.
8. 5. 3 RAA with ALAC
No Board action has been taken.
Avri Doria committed to connecting up with Cheryl Langdon-Orr, the ALAC chair for discussions
8. 6. 1. 1. Fast Flux
Mike Rodenbaugh updated the Council that the Fast Flux working group is holding weekly meetings and a report is expected in time for the Sydney meetings.
8. 6. 1. 2. Registration Abuse Policies Working Group (RAPWG)
Tim Ruiz updated the Council that the working group is working on registration abuse definitions, defining what is within ICANN scope, and how that might be addressed by changes in registration abuse policies.
8. 6. 2. 1. Travel Policy Drafting Team - Travel Database for Sydney
Olga Cavalli noted in a written update that there was nothing to report.
Tim Ruiz added that the DNSO funds would be divided equally among the 6 constituencies and the constituencies should submit their requests to staff for the funds to be distributed.
8. 6. 2. 2. IDN gTLD Fast Track
Edmon Chung reported that the group had accomplished much work on the mailing list and that a call was being scheduled to further discuss the charter.
8.6.3 Policy Process Steering Committee
Liz Gasster provided the Council with an update on the Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) work teams which are meeting regularly.
8. 6. 3. 1 Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) Policy Development Process (PDP) work team (WT)
The PDP work team is examining the initial stages of the policy development process, initiating and scoping an Issues report.
8. 6. 3. 2. PPSC Working Group work team WGWT
The working group team is examining guidelines and whether charters should be standardised for the working group model.
8.6.4 Operations Steering Committee
Chuck Gomes provided an update on the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) work teams which are all meeting bi-weekly,
and have approved and submitted their final charters to the OSC.
8. 6. 4. 1. Operations Steering Committee (OSC) Communications coordination work team
The Communications Work Team under the leadership of Mason Cole, has divided into specific teams dealing with GNSO Web site requirements, document management, and possibly GNSO Board communications.
8. 6. 4. 2. OSC Constituency operations work team
The GNSO constituency and stakeholder group work team has gathered information regarding existing constituency operations, their charters, and proposed stakeholder group operations, while small teams have been formed to focus on specific tasks.
Chuck reminded the Council that this particular team is dependent on input from constituencies and pending stakeholder groups, and encouraged active constituency participation to provide the input.
8. 6. 4. 3. OSC GNSO Council operations work team
The GNSO Operations Team is developing high-level principles and statement of interest documents under the leadership of Ray Fasset.
8. 7. Restructuring group
The Restructuring Group is focused on the by-law discussions and the list of items found under the action items. The group has had one teleconference, the liaison from the Board's Structural Improvements Committee (SIC) is participating both on the calls and on the mailing list.
8. 7. 1. Status of By-Law discussions
All questions arising from the last teleconference were submitted to the list, another teleconference is being scheduled to continue from where the group left off, and when the group is finalised, there will be a set of by-laws that Council would recommend to the ICANN Board.
The list of issues has been divided up and each issue is discussed separately on the mailing list until closure is reached so eliminating it from the list and making the list shorter.
Chuck Gomes commented that the by-law changes were needed before the bi-cameral Council can be seated which would make the June timeframe impossible.
Rob Hoggarth noted that the Council restructuring will be prime agenda material for the SIC at the May 14 Board Retreat meeting. In addition to the by-laws, issues relating to the stakeholder group charters, and the effort to bring together the two proponents of the Non Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG), all dovetail to suggest that the June 2009 timeframe will need adjustment.
In the case of the policy development process (PDP), transition articles are foreseen in the bylaws that will cover cases where Voting thresholds will be affected so it would mean operating under the existing PDP rules in Annex A of the current bylaws with the idea that Annex A will be amended when the By-law work is complete.
Kristina Rosette noted that the Intellectual Property constituency did not hold elections in November 2008 because their bylaws were amended to tie the elections to the new representatives and be simultaneous with the new Council. This affected their travel request for Sydney.
Avri Doria adjourned the GNSO Council meeting and thanked everyone for their participation.
Next GNSO Council teleconference will on 7 May 2009 at 14:00 UTC.
The meeting ended at 16:10 UTC.