[council] GNSO Council revised draft minutes 28 Nov 2005

["GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org]

Dear Council Members,

Please find a further revised draft minutes of the GNSO Council meeting 
held in Vancouver on 28 November 2005.
1. The end of the sentence: "situations as they arise." has been added 
to item 7:
Consensus policy recommendation from the WHOIS task force
2. Olof Nordling was present at the meeting.

Please let me know if there are other changes to be made.

Thank you very much.
Kind regards,
Glen

28 November 2005

Proposed agenda and related documents

List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C.
Marilyn Cade - Commercial & Business Users C.
Grant Forsyth - Commercial & Business Users C - remote participation
Greg Ruth - ISCPC - absent - apologies - proxy to Tony Holmes
Antonio Harris - ISCPC - proxy to Tony Holmes (joined meeting after roll 
call)
Tony Holmes - ISCPC
Thomas Keller- Registrars
Ross Rader - Registrars (joined meeting after roll call)
Bruce Tonkin - Registrars
Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries
Philip Colebrook - gTLD registries - remote participation
Cary Karp - gTLD registries
Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies - 
proxy to Niklas Lagergren
Niklas Lagergren - Intellectual Property Interests C
Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C. - absent - apologies 
- proxy to Niklas Lagergren
Robin Gross - Non Commercial Users C.- remote participation
Norbert Klein - Non Commercial Users C.
Alick Wilson - Nominating Committee appointee - remote participation
Maureen Cubberley - Nominating Committee appointee
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee

17 Council Members

ICANN Staff
Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination
Maria Farrell - ICANN GNSO Policy Support Officer
Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counselor
Tina Dam - Chief gTLD Registry Liaison
Diane Schroeder - General Manager, Conferences, Administration & Finance
Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat


GNSO Council Liaisons
Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison - absent - apologies
Bret Fausett - acting ALAC Liaison - absent - apologies

Michael Palage - ICANN Board member - absent - apologies
Quorum present at 9: 12 PST.

Two MP3 recordings of the second part of the meeting (not very clear)
http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO-Council20051122.mp3
http://gnso-audio.icann.org/GNSO2-20051122;MP3.mp3


Bruce Tonkin and Philip Sheppard chaired this teleconference.

Approval of Agenda

Diane Schroeder addressed the meeting informing the Council of an 
important time modification to the schedule for the GNSO Public Forum 
and GNSO Council meeting on Friday 2 December 2005 in Vancouver.
Marilyn Cade proposed ending the meeting early to prepare for the joint 
meeting with the ICANN Board in the afternoon.
Ken Stubbs, seconded by Marilyn Cade proposed Philip Sheppard as chair 
for the election process.
Motion carried unanimously
Decision 1: Philip Sheppard chaired the GNSO Council meeting for the 
election process.
Item 3: Election of GNSO Council chair
- Bruce Tonkin has been nominated and seconded
- term from 18 Nov 2005 until one month after 2005 AGM (4 Jan 2006)

Philip Sheppard proposed:
Whereas Bruce Tonkin had been nominated by Ken Stubbs and seconded by 
Ross Rader as GNSO Council chair for the period from 18 November 2005 
until one month after 2005 AGM (4 January 2006)
Recommended that Bruce Tonkin be elected as GNSO Council chair for the 
period 18 November 2005 until one month after the 2005 ICANN Annual 
General Meeting (4 January 2006).
Philip Sheppard called for a formal roll call vote.

The motion carried unanimously.
No vote was recorded for Tony Harris who joined the meeting late.

Decision 2: Bruce Tonkin was elected as GNSO Council chair for the 
period 18 November 2005 until one month after the 2005 ICANN Annual 
General Meeting (4 January 2006).
Philip Sheppard formally handed the chair to Bruce Tonkin.

Item 4: Approval of minutes
- GNSO Council teleconference - 13 October 2005
- GNSO Council teleconference - 20 October 2005

Maureen Cubberley moved the adoption of the minutes.
The motion carried. Niklas Lagergren abstained

Decision 3: The GNSO Council minutes of 13 October 2005 and 20 October 
2005 were adopted.
Item 5: Evaluation of new gtlds (.biz, .info etc as well as .travel,
.jobs. .mobi etc)
- update on questions to structure the evaluation

Olof Nordling commented that the document elaborated the need for 
further evaluation of recently introduced gTLDs and proposed an approach 
for this, focused to inform ongoing work on policy aspects regarding the 
introduction of new gTLDs.
Discussions on an evaluation of the ongoing sTLD round were under way 
with the consultant that performed the main evaluation of the 
“proof-of-concept” round for ICANN. It was recommended that the GNSO 
Council stated that questions relating to selection criteria, allocation 
methods and contractual conditions were of particular relevance in this 
context. The document proposed a draft list of questions to this end.
The report was designed to give the GNSO Council the information 
necessary to discuss and decide on ways to proceed with additional 
evaluation aspects of assigned new TLDs.
Maureen Cubberley referred to page 8 of the report, 'consideration for 
additional review', and commented that there was a need for emphasis on 
the process of decision making that informed the evaluation. It was 
essential to look at the content of the recent Request for Proposals 
(RFP) for the sponsored round of gTLDs .
Bruce Tonkin pointed out that the new gTLD process was under discussion, 
and that the evaluation was driven by a process several years ago. There 
were two issues, one, how to improve the process and the second, should 
new gTLDs be introduced.
Marilyn Cade noted from the Business Constituency’s perspective, that 
clear guidance was given for the recent round of gTLDs to be sponsored. 
Sponsored was discussed in depth yet there appeared to be a limited 
match in the case of some of the applicants. Further guidance and 
criteria on ‘sponsored’was required.
Maureen Cubberley commented that ambiguities in the RFP led to the issue.

Bruce Tonkin proposed that the project manager (Miriam Sapiro) produce a 
‘lessons learnt’ paper, a quick follow up of the report in terms of the 
outcome, which should not be wider but intended as input to a subsequent 
wider process and that an "independent external review" be carried out 
by someone different from the project manager.
ACTION
Council was encouraged to examine the list of questions and provide 
further questions to Miriam Sapiro.
Further it was suggested that Miriam Sapiro do a presentation at the 
GNSO Public Forum on Friday 2 December 2005.
Item 6: Policy Development Process for new gtlds
- discuss issues report
- decide whether to commence a PDP

Bruce Tonkin referred to the ICANN Bylaws.
Section 2. Creation of the Issue Report
Within fifteen (15) calendar days after receiving either (i) an 
instruction from the Board; (ii) a properly supported motion from a 
Council member; or (iii) a properly supported motion from an Advisory 
Committee, the Staff Manager will create a report (an "Issue Report"). 
Each Issue Report shall contain at least the following:
Section 2. Creation of the Issue Report had been completed

Section 2 e. A recommendation from the Staff Manager as to whether the 
Council should initiate the PDP for this issue (the "Staff 
Recommendation"). Each Staff Recommendation shall include the opinion of 
the ICANN General Counsel regarding whether the issue proposed to 
initiate the PDP is properly within the scope of the ICANN policy 
process and within the scope of the GNSO. In determining whether the 
issue is properly within the scope of the ICANN policy process, the 
General Counsel shall examine whether such issue:
The staff manager, Olof Nordling had recommended that a PDP be initiated.

Bruce Tonkin proposed that at the current meeting the Council vote to 
commence a PDP.
Marilyn Cade, seconded by Tom Keller proposed:
Whereas, the GNSO Council recognises that the review of the GNSO Council 
held in 2004 recommended that the PDP timelines be reviewed.
The GNSO votes to initiate the PDP on new gTLDs. The GNSO will develop a 
work program in consultation with the ICANN staff and ICANN board that 
sets out a timeframe for work
The vote was by show of hands.
The motion carried unanimously. No abstentions

Decision 4:
Whereas, the GNSO Council recognises that the review of the GNSO Council 
held in 2004 recommended that the PDP timelines be reviewed.
The GNSO votes to initiate the PDP on new gTLDs. The GNSO will develop a 
work program in consultation with the ICANN staff and ICANN board that 
sets out a timeframe for work

Item 7: WHOIS: Final task force report on a policy recommendation and 
advice on a procedure for handling conflicts between a 
registrar/registry's legal obligations under privacy laws and their 
contractual obligations to ICANN
- vote on final recommendation as completed by the WHOIS task force on
19 Oct
Bruce Tonkin noted that the "advice" as set forth was not consensus policy.
Niklas Lagergren stated that the task force Final Report was supported 
unanimously by the WHOIS task force.
Ross Rader, a member of the task force raised a procedural question that 
after the task force had already voted on the final report, it should be 
made precise that reference was to the gTLD WHOIS service and did not 
refer to the protocol, the RIR WHOIS service or the country code WHOIS 
service.
Tom Keller seconded by Niklas Lagergren proposed that:

The GNSO votes in favour of the following consensus policy 
recommendation from the WHOIS task force
CONSENSUS POLICY RECOMMENDATION

In order to facilitate reconciliation of any conflicts between 
local/national mandatory privacy laws or regulations and applicable 
provisions of the ICANN contract regarding the collection, display and 
distribution of personal data via the gTLD Whois service, ICANN should:
Develop and publicly document a procedure for dealing with the situation 
in which a registrar or registry can credibly demonstrate that it is 
legally prevented by local/national privacy laws or regulations from 
fully complying with applicable provisions of its ICANN contract 
regarding the collection, display and distribution of personal data via 
the gTLD WHOIS service.
Create goals for the procedure which include:

Ensuring that ICANN staff is informed of a conflict at the earliest 
appropriate juncture;
Resolving the conflict, if possible, in a manner conducive to ICANN's 
Mission, applicable Core Values and the stability and uniformity of the 
Whois system;
Providing a mechanism for the recognition, if appropriate, in 
circumstances where the conflict cannot be otherwise resolved, of an 
exception to contractual obligations to those registries/registrars to 
which the specific conflict applies with regard to collection, display 
and distribution of personally identifiable data via the gTLD WHOIS 
service; and
Preserving sufficient flexibility for ICANN staff to respond to 
particular factual situations as they arise.
The GNSO recommends the ICANN staff consider the advice given in the 
task force report as to a recommended procedure.
Bruce Tonkin called for formal roll call vote.

The motion carried.
26 Votes in support

Abstention from Avri Doria:
Reason: Does not believe goes far enough in protecting privacy

Decision 5
The GNSO votes in favour of the following consensus policy 
recommendation from the WHOIS task force
CONSENSUS POLICY RECOMMENDATION

In order to facilitate reconciliation of any conflicts between 
local/national mandatory privacy laws or regulations and applicable 
provisions of the ICANN contract regarding the collection, display and 
distribution of personal data via the gTLD WHOIS service, ICANN should:
Develop and publicly document a procedure for dealing with the situation 
in which a registrar or registry can credibly demonstrate that it is 
legally prevented by local/national privacy laws or regulations from 
fully complying with applicable provisions of its ICANN contract 
regarding the collection, display and distribution of personal data via 
the gTLD WHOIS service.
Create goals for the procedure which include:

Ensuring that ICANN staff is informed of a conflict at the earliest 
appropriate juncture;
Resolving the conflict, if possible, in a manner conducive to ICANN's 
Mission, applicable Core Values and the stability and uniformity of the 
Whois system;
Providing a mechanism for the recognition, if appropriate, in 
circumstances where the conflict cannot be otherwise resolved, of an 
exception to contractual obligations to those registries/registrars to 
which the specific conflict applies with regard to collection, display 
and distribution of personally identifiable data via the gTLD WHOIS 
service; and
Preserving sufficient flexibility for ICANN staff to respond to 
particular factual situations as they arise.
The GNSO recommends the ICANN staff consider the advice given in the 
task force report as to a recommended procedure.
Item 8: Policy development for IDNs
- discuss background document
- decide whether to formally request an issues report
section 1 - Raising an Issue
section 2 - Creation of the Issue Report

Bruce Tonkin referred to the background document which listed the 
existing resolutions, workshops, and information on the President’s 
Advisory Committee, of which Cary Karp was a member, and suggested that 
the GNSO request the staff to produce an issues report on the policy 
issues using the document as a basis.
Bruce added that there should be clarity for the community what the 
policy aspects for the GNSO were.
Cary Karp commented that attention should not only be to constrain 2nd 
level of the DNS, the top level and the 3rd and 4th level of the DNS 
should also be considered. If control was invoked as a term of 
delegation the domain space could not be policed, which means that 
anything not permitted should be folded into the underlying possible 
standards. The first generation would be a normative framework that 
expected anything to be done but allowed policy constraint to guide.
Cary further clarified that internationalization meant changing the 
system to make it useable in the polyglot world we live in while making 
it work with Cambodia, for example, is localization. An Arabic version 
of.com is a localization. The concern is the translated versions of the 
gtld labels.
Discussion followed on the motion to be drafted. Due to the complexity 
of the topic and in order for constituency discussion, Bruce Tonkin 
proposed tabling the following motion to be voted on at the GNSO Council 
meeting on Friday 2 December 2005:
Tabled motion:

WHEREAS, the GNSO Council recognises that one of the goals of ICANN to 
increase the internationalisation of the domain name space.
WHEREAS, the GNSO Council wishes to liaise closely with the ccNSO with 
respect to the issue of localised IDN equivalents of existing gTLDs and 
ccTLDs, and for the purpose of jointly requesting an issues report.
The GNSO Council requests that the staff produce an issues report on the 
policy issues associated with creating internationalised equivalents of 
existing gTLDs, and second level domains within existing gTLDs.
The GNSO also requests that the staff liaise with the ccNSO to ensure 
that the policy issues associated with internationalised versions of the 
existing ccTLDs can also be considered.
Bruce Tonkin proposed revisiting the process of the PDP on new gTLDs. 
and outlined the proposed work:
January to June
- PDP on New gTLDs
- PDP on IDNs
- WHOIS task force - considered to drain a lot of resources

Bruce Tonkin noted that with respect to issues such as WHOIS that will 
likely need to evolve over several years, it may be more efficient to 
spend a limited time on the issue each year, rather than tie up GNSO 
community and staff resources for the whole year, e.g. each year 
concentrate 3 months on an issue and spend 2 days face to face, then 
leave it alone and pick it up again.
There was general agreement on:
- scheduling new gTLDs work program with significant face to face 
interaction time.
- using new technologies, such as wikis and blogs to encourage community 
participation
- setting up a group outside Council with expertise to support running a 
wiki on the new gTLD issues for the community beyond the council.
- creating a structured mechanism to gather data

Bruce Tonkin recommended that the Council as a whole deal with the new 
gTLD PDP using mailing lists, wiki, and a 2 day face to face meeting. 
Each new effort should take into account the GNSO Council review 
recommendations looking at what has gone before and what can be improved.
The proposed IDN PDP would be managed by a task force of experts and the 
constituencies should work on identifying new people with particular skills.
Agenda Item deferred:
Item 8: WHOIS task force
- progress on purpose and definitions of contacts

Bruce Tonkin declared the GNSO meeting closed and thanked everybody for 
participating.
The meeting ended: 11: 45 PST.

Next GNSO Council meeting in Vancouver, Friday 2 December 2005 at 10:30 PST
see: Calendar




--
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org