Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content

Agenda for GNSO Council Meeting 7 October 2010

Last Updated:

This agenda was established according to the GNSO Council Operating Procedures approved 5 August 2010 for the GNSO Council.

For convenience:

* An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda.
* An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda.

Meeting Time 15:00 UTC

See the following and for other times:
08:00 PDT; 10:00 CDT; 11:00 EST; 12:00 Buenos Aires; 12:00 Brazil; 17:00 CET; 19:00 Moscow, 20:00 Karachi, 23:00 Hong Kong,

Friday, 8 October
00:00 Tokyo, 01:00 Melbourne

Dial-in numbers will be sent individually to Council members. Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if a dial out call is needed.

GNSO Council meeting audiocast

Item 1: Administrative matters (15 minutes)

1.1 Roll call of Council members and polling for Disclosures of Interest

• Per the GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 5.4, we are required to poll Councilors regarding “any direct or indirect interests that may affect a Relevant Party’s judgment on an issue that is under review, consideration, or discussion” in this meeting.
Here is the definition provided in the procedures:

“Disclosure of Interest: Relevant to a specific issue at a specific time. A written statement made by a Relevant Party of direct and indirect interests that may be commercial (e.g. monetary payment) or non-commercial (e.g. non-tangible benefit such as publicity, political or academic visibility) and may affect, or be perceived to affect, the Relevant Party's judgment on a specific issue.”

  • The main issues for this meeting are:
    • New gTLDs Recommendation 6 Community WG Report to the Board
    • Excerpt from Draft Final Report -­ New gTLD Applicant Support
    • New gTLD Board Resolutions from Board Retreat
    • GNSO Comments regarding both of the above
    • GNSO Prioritization

1.2 Update any statements of interest

1.3 Review/amend agenda

1.4. Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meeting per the GNSO Operating Procedures:
8 September 2010 meeting minutes – Approved on 30 September 2010.

Item 2: New gTLD Board Resolutions from Board Retreat (15 Minutes)

2.1 Refer to Board Resolutions:

2.2 Comments from Staff (Kurt Pritz)

• Questions?

2.3 Action items

• Response regarding VI PDP WG due 8 October

o Refer to letter from VI PDP WG:
o Refer to motion:
o Discussion
o Vote (Note that absentee voting is not allowed.)

• Request from the ALAC

o Refer to message from Cheryl Langdon-Orr at
o How should Chuck respond?
o What actions being taken by the At-Large are ones that the GNSO would like to jointly support?

• Other?

Item 3: New gTLD Recommendation 6 Community WG (25 minutes)

3.1 Summary of Report (Margie Milam)

3.2 Discussion

3.3 GNSO Comments

• Summary of comments on Council list to date (Margie Milam)
• Additional comments
• Should we submit comments from the Council or from individual SGs/Constituencies?
• Next steps?

o Possible Council action on 28 October (if needed)?

3.4 Special thanks to the Rec6 CWG and to Margie & Marika for their incredible support.

Item 4: Excerpt from Draft Final Report -­ New gTLD Applicant Support (JAS) WG (15 minutes)

4.1 Refer to the following:

Excerpt from Draft Final Report -­ New gTLD Applicant Support

New gTLD Applicant Support Draft Recommendations Summary presentation

4.2 Brief Summary of Report (Rafik Dammak)

4.3 Discussion

4.4 GNSO Comments

• Should we submit comments from the Council or from individual SGs/Constituencies?
• Next steps?

o Possible Council action on 28 October (if needed)?

4.4 Special thanks to the JAS WG members

Item 5: GNSO Project Prioritization (20 minutes)

5.1 Refer to posted project ratings:

5.2 Key points made in the 15 July Council meeting (from meeting minutes):

• “. . . not a useful exercise, not much was learnt, should not proceed further with the prioritization exercise.”
• “. . . spending more time on the exercise will not accomplish useful results.”
• “It was a difficult exercise, policy matters were not prioritized and the core issue, management of the workload, still has not been resolved.”
• “The exercise was intended as a first step and not intended to solve the workload management; other steps are needed. The exercise contributed an important degree of common awareness and dissent to the group.”
• “The prioritization process could be improved with further input from the Councilors and stakeholder groups.”
• “The exercise is important and informative from a staff perspective and the Council needs to look at a two-step process going forward: step one - form a small team to improve the process used to date drawing on input received; step two - develop a process to manage the workload with input from staff of the resources being used to support each of the working groups, which will reflect both staff and community efforts.”
• “Support was expressed for continuing the prioritization work, but linking it to the overall ICANN Staff and Community workload and to the Budget process.”
• “The question of available resources should be looked at in context. The Vertical Integration working group as an example of one that would not normally have commenced with all the work before Council, yet it did and the community resources were available.”
• “Some believe that work should be prioritized but the methodology chosen is not the most appropriate or efficient.”

5.3 Next Steps

• Staff Utilization Analysis (Liz Gasster)
Refer to:

• Results of Adobe Connect Poll regarding possible next steps:

o Option 1: Spend no more time on prioritization - 5 votes (33%)
o Option 2: Develop a plan for using the results to manage the workload in the near term - 2 votes (13%)
o Option 3: Form a drafting team with the task of developing a new process - 0 votes (0%)
o Option 4: Form a drafting team with the task of improving the process - 1 vote (7%)
o Option 5: Other? (including combinations of options 2, 3, and or 4) - 7 votes (47%)

• Discussion?
• Action Items

Item 6: Selections for the AoC RTs (10 minutes)

6.1 Refer to:

• GNSO AoC Reviews site:
• GNSO SSR RT site:
• GNSO Whois RT site:

6.2 Selections by Rod Beckstrom & Heather Dryden for the SSR & Whois RTs

SSR PrimaryJeff BrueggemanDavid Cake (Australia) Ken Silva
Whois PrimarySusan KawaguchiKim G. Von ArxJames BladelKathy Kleiman


6.3 Confirmation of endorsement of Carlos Affonso Pereira de Souza to replace Willie Currie for the NCSG on the A&T RT

6.4 Discussion?

Item 7: Suggested Improvements for GNSO Public Council meetings (10 minutes)

7.1 Proposed recommendations (Wendy Seltzer)

7 .2 Discussion

Item 8: Status of Continued Action Items (10 Minutes)

8.1 Drafting team for draft DNS-CERT/SSR WG charter (Chuck Gomes)

8.2 Standing committee to monitor GNSO Improvements implementation (Glen de Saint Géry)

• Volunteers to date: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben (ISCPC), Tatyana Khramtsova (RrSG), Ray Fassett (RySG), Avri Doria (NCSG), Rudi Vansnick (NCSG), Philip Sheppard (CBUC)
• Feedback from Steering Committees (Rob Hoggarth)
• Question raised regarding GNSO Operating Procedures: Should the concerns about the newly approved disclosure of interest requirements be dealt with by the OSC & GCOT or by the standing committee?

Next Steps? Charter?

8.3 High Level Progress of House/Stakeholder Group Elections

• Councilors
• Chair & Vice Chair Nominations
• NCA Assignments

8.4 Whois Studies

• Status report for Whois Studies 3 & 4 (Liz Gasster)
• Refer to redline version of Proxy/Privacy Reveal study (Study 4) RFP at

Item 9: Other Business (5 minutes)

9.1 Status update on efforts to hire a new Director of Compliance and additional Compliance personnel necessary to bring current staff levels back up to 100% (David Olive)

Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article X, Section 3)

9. Except as otherwise specified in these Bylaws, Annex A hereto, or the GNSO Operating Procedures, the default threshold to pass a GNSO Council motion or other voting action requires a simple majority vote of each House. The voting thresholds described below shall apply to the following GNSO actions:
1. Create an Issues Report: requires an affirmative vote of more than 25% vote of each House or majority of one House;
2. Initiate a Policy Development Process (“PDP”) Within Scope (as described in Annex A): requires an affirmative vote of more than 33% of each House or more than 66% of one House;
3. Initiate a PDP Not Within Scope: requires an affirmative vote of more than 75% of one House and a majority of the other House (“GNSO Supermajority”);
4. Approve a PDP Recommendation Without a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a majority of each House and further requires that one GNSO Council member representative of at least 3 of the 4 Stakeholder Groups supports the Recommendation;
5. Approve a PDP Recommendation With a GNSO Supermajority: requires an affirmative vote of a GNSO Supermajority; and
6. Approve a PDP Recommendation Imposing New Obligations on Certain Contracting Parties: where an ICANN contract provision specifies that “a two-thirds vote of the council” demonstrates the presence of a consensus, the GNSO Supermajority vote threshold will have to be met or exceeded with respect to any contracting party affected by such contract provision.

Appendix 2: Absentee Voting Procedures (Council Operating Procedures 4.4)

Members that are absent from a meeting at the time of a vote on the following items may vote by absentee ballot:
1. Initiate a policy development process;
2. Forward a policy recommendation to the Board;
3. Recommend amendments to the ICANN Bylaws;
4. Fill a position open for election.

The GNSO Secretariat will provide reasonable means for transmitting and authenticating absentee ballots, which could include voting by telephone, e- mail, or web-based interface. Absentee ballots must be submitted within 72 hours following the start of the meeting in which a vote is initiated, except that, in exceptional circumstances announced at the time of the vote, the Chair may reduce this time to 24 hours or extend the time to 7 days. There must be a quorum for the meeting in which the vote is initiated.
Local time between March and October, Summer in the NORTHERN hemisphere
Reference (Coordinated Universal Time) 15:00UTC
California, USA (PST) UTC-8+1DST 08:00
Cedar Rapids, USA (CDT) UTC-6+1DST 10:00
New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-5+1DST 11:00
Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-3+0DST 12:00
Rio de Janeiro/Sao Paulo Brazil UTC-3+0DST 12:00
Dublin, Ireland (GMT) UTC+1DST 16:00
Darmstadt, Germany (CET) UTC+1+1DST 17:00
Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+1DST 17:00
Moscow, Russian Federation (MSK) UTC+3+1DST 19:00
Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+0DST 20:00
Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 23:00
Tokyo, Japan UTC+9+0DST 00:00
Melbourne/Sydney Australia (EDT) UTC+10+0DST 01:00 (Friday)
The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of October 2010, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions)