| 26 March 2009 Proposed agenda and documents List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C
Mike Rodenbaugh - Commercial & Business Users C
Zahid Jamil - Commercial & Business Users C.
Greg Ruth - ISCPC
Antonio Harris - ISCPC
Tony Holmes - ISCPC
Stéphane van Gelder - Registrars
Tim Ruiz - Registrars
Adrian Kinderis - Registrars
Chuck Gomes - gTLD registries
Edmon Chung - gTLD registries
Jordi Iparraguirre - gTLD registries - absent - apologies
Kristina Rosette - Intellectual Property Interests C
Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent, aplogies
Cyril Chua - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent
Mary Wong - NCUC
William Drake - NCUC - absent - apologies
Carlos Souza - NCUC - absent, apologies
Olga Cavalli- Nominating Committee appointee
Terry Davis - Nominating Committee appointee - absent - apologies
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee 15 Council Members
( 20 Votes - quorum)
ICANN Staff
Denise Michel - Vice President, Policy Development
Kurt Pritz - Senior Vice President, Services
Dan Halloran - Deputy General Counsel
Robert Hoggarth - Senior Policy Director
Liz Gasster - Senior Policy Officer
Olof Nordling - Director, Services Relations and Branch Manager, Brussels office
Marika Konings - Policy Director
Margie Milam - Senior Policy Counselor
Julie Hedlund - Policy consultant
Glen de Saint G�ry - GNSO Secretariat
GNSO Council Liaisons
Alan Greenberg - ALAC Liaison
Rita Rodin - ICANN Board member - absent - apologies
Bruce Tonkin - ICANN Board member - absent apologies
MP3 Recording Roll Call.
Item 1: Update any Statements of Interest
No updates recorded
Item 2: Review/amend the agenda
Item 8: Current Whois policy requirements for IDNs
Change 'policy' to 'services' in the title of the item Item 3: Approve GNSO Council minutes:
29 January 2009 Chuck Gomes, seconded by Olga Cavalli, moved the adoption of the GNSO Council minutes of 29 January 2009
The motion passed unanimously.
One Abstention: Mike Rodenbaugh - the reason for the abstention is that Mike had not yet reviewed the minutes
Decision 1. The Council approved the GNSO Council minutes of 29 January 2009.
Item 4: Motion on Users in the GNSO (deferred from Council meeting on 4 March 2009
Avri Doria commented that the report, already forwarded to the Board, encouraged the Board to change the original recommendation from 'registrants' and broaden it to allow 'users' in the GNSO. Denise Michel clarified that the ICANN Board was seeking further guidance on how to involve users in a productive way, without confusing user groups, that does not result in overlapping structures or duplicating ICANN constituencies that are participating in the GNSO election of ICANN Board members and consensus policy work.
Some councillors were of the view that the language in the motion was unclear, and the GNSO was not required to endorse the report. Avri Doria withdrew her motion as there was no consensus in the Council for endorsing the report.
http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-26mar09.shtml
It was suggested that the Board be made aware that Council had disquiet with this report. Staff confirmed the request.
Item 5 Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part A Policy Development Process (PDP) The motion on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part A Policy Development Process (PDP) proposed by Mike Rodenbaugh, and seconded by Chuck Gomes was briefly discussed.
Chuck Gomes suggested that the motion needed certain revision and suggested that the working group review the recommendation to request an assessment of IRIS in the light that it will be a significant and costly effort for registries and registrars to implement IRIS; and would it make sense to do that just for the exchange of registrant contact information. If not, then does it even make sense to do the cost estimates?
It was agreed that questions about the report should be submitted to the list so that they could be addressed in the IRTP working group.
Council decided to defer voting to the next Council meeting on 16 April 2009 at which Staff would give an overview of the Final Report. Item 6 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) Motion Action Items Avri Doria reminded Council that the ICANN Board had not yet acted on the resolution approved by Council on 4 March 2009:
"Whereas, the GNSO voted unanimously to support adoption of the updated set of amendments, and agreed to convene two groups of representatives from the GNSO Community within 30 days of Board approval to: 1) draft a registrant rights charter; and 2) identify further amendments to the RAA on which further action may be desirable and provide its advice to the Council and ICANN staff no later than 31 July 2009. It is resolved (2009.03.06.09), that the Board thanks the ALAC for its advice, and thanks the GNSO for its recommendation on the proposed RAA amendments, particularly thanks the members of the GNSO Council who worked this week to finalize their resolution. It is resolved (2009.03.06.10), that the Board agrees with the substance of the amendments, and directs staff to immediately publish them for public comments for a period of no less than 30 days, and commits to act on approval of the amendments at the earliest opportunity." Council supported taking preparatory action before the Board approved the amendments and were informed that the ALAC and NCUC were ready to form a drafting team and proposals were put forward to form one single group or two different groups. A proposal was made that the Registrars be requested to provide a list of existing rights.
Avri Doria suggested that Council revisit the issue at the next Council meeting, but in the mean time Avri proposed writing a description of the group's mission which would clarify the issue, submitting that to the Council list for discussion, and then commence with one drafting group, leaving open the option to split into two groups if needed.
Item 7: Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Policy Development Process (PDP) decision Avri Doria, seconded by Chuck Gomes proposed the motion on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Alan Greenberg reported that the group, supported by the Staff came to the consensus that a Policy Development Process (PDP) should be initiated and that if further studies were needed, these could be done as part of the PDP process and not as a separate process. The motion before Council is based on the recommendations in the Issues Report on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery with one change, that the concept of transferring a domain name during the Redemption Grace Period (RGP) mentioned in the Issues Report, might better fit into the following Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy PDP C. The motion on Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery was deferred to the next Council meeting on 16 April 2009.
Item 8: Current Whois service requirements for IDNs Liz Gasster commented that the topic was a place holder for further Council discussion.
Chuck Gomes commented that the current WHOIS system is limited and archaic, especially with regard to protecting privacy and handling IDNs. The answer is not simple, but Council needs to be responsible and move ahead on the issue which is further complicated by having to distinguish policy from technical issues. Avri Doria explained that there is a set of policies that define a body of requirements and a technical approach. An analysis is needed of the various requirements that currently exist for the WHOIS service including IDNs and then these should be examined by such bodies as the Council, the Security and Stability Advisory Committeee (SSAC) and other parts of the community. Only when the set of requirements is drawn up can the question be asked if the Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) Protocol, for example, would be the right tool. Avri Doria proposed undertaking the first step of writing a request to the Staff for requirement gathering and submitting that request to the Council for review. Item 9: New Bylaw discussion Margie Milam reported that ICANN Staff has been working on a set of recommended draft bylaw revisions, specifically to Article 10: Generic Names Supporting Organisation (GNSO) that are an essential part of the GNSO restructuring process. These revisions have been drafted from the perspective that the GNSO procedures need to be flexible and some topics have been moved out of the bylaws into the GNSO Operating Rules and Procedures.
In terms of timing, to have the new Council seated in June, the bylaw revisions would have to be effective prior to the Sydney meeting which would mean they should be submitted to the ICANN Board at its May 2009 meeting and this would require the Council to finalize its recommendations by April 16, 2009.
The foreseen distribution date of the document to the Council is 27 March 2009, and it was noted that ICANN Legal Counsel had not yet reviewed the document. Council discussion emphasised the necessity for the bylaws to reflect that different stakeholder groups will have different challenges to geographical diversity. General concern was expressed at the very tight timeline and the inability to work within the timeframe.
Avri Doria proposed further discussion on the GNSO Restructuring drafting team list then reporting back to the Council with eventually a draft motion for the next Council meeting on 16 April 2009. Item 10: Status Updates
Philip Sheppard requested that Item 10.4 be reported on before Item 10.1.
10. 4 Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT) status update http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-06mar09.htm#07 Kristina Rosette reported that the Implementation Recommendation Team (IRT), consisting of 17 geographically diverse participants, but unfortunately no one from the African region, held its initial procedural and administrative teleconference on 25 March 2009.
The first face to face consultation is scheduled for April 1 and 2, 2009, in Washington, D.C. and the second one is scheduled for May 11 through 13, 2009, in San Francisco. The group expects to meet the timeframe set out in the ICANN Board resolution.
Steve Metalitz, President of the Intellectual Property Interests Constituency (IPC), invited other constituency leaders, representatives from the ALAC, the GAC and the SSAC, to submit additional ideas, proposals or solutions that either the constituencies or advisory committees as a whole, or the individual members or participants had endorsed.
The IPC formed a team that examined every single public comment and put together an elaborate matrix of comments that contains proposals, suggestions or solutions to trademark issues. An IRT announcement is expected to be posted on the ICANN web site. 10 . 1 Board Update
No update since the Mexico City ICANN Board meeting.
The next ICANN Board meeting is scheduled for 23 April 2009. 10. 2 ccNSO Liaison update
Olga Cavalli reported that the ccNSO now has 90 members, Montserrat being the most recent.
10. 3 Geographical Region WG update
Olga Cavalli reported that a template was submitted on the uses of Regions by the respective Advisory Committees/Supporting Organisations and the community was invited to provide input on other references for uses of Regions in the GNSO Council or in the constituencies.
10. 5 Joint GNSO/ccNSO group to discuss coordination of timing for IDN TLDs update
Edmon Chung proposed forming a drafting team focused on IDN gTLD Fast Track implementation issues following from the recent resolution on the timing of the introduction of IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs consistent with the position the Council has maintained regarding the issue. Action Item:
The Secretariat will create a mailing list.
Call for volunteers.
10. 6. 1. 1. Fast Flux
Avri Doria reported that the group had met twice in the last two weeks. The focus was on going through all the public comments and deciding how to complete the Final Report and what recommendations to make to Council. 10. 6. 1. 2. Registration Abuse Policies Working Group (RAPWG)
Kristina Rosette confirmed her resignation as a RAPWG member and as the Council liaison and proposed that Mike Rodenbaugh take the position as the Council liaison. Mike Rodenbaugh accepted the liaison role on the Registration Abuse Policies working group, but resigned as liaison to the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (ITRP) working group. Tim Ruiz accepted the role of liaison to the IRTP Group. Council approved the moves.
10. 6. 2.1. Travel Policy Drafting Team - Travel Database for Sydney
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg06424.html
Olga Cavalli reminded Council that input was needed to make recommendations for the allocation of the GNSO reserve funds to be used for the Sydney meeting.
Avri Doria proposed that the constituencies discuss the issue and that a motion be drafted for the next Council meeting. Kristina Rosette noted that the IPC has a structural problem with identifying persons for travel support by April 6, 2009 because their bylaws were amended so that instead of having elections for two seats in November 2008 those elections will happen within 30 days of when the new Council is seated, which means that the IPC has not yet held elections.
Other constituencies were in similar situations. Denise Michel informed Council that Kevin Wilson was responsible for travel funding and should be approached about extending the deadline for submitting the names of the ICANN sponsored travelers. Council was reminded to submit comments to the Travel Support public comment forum open till the 24 April 2009.
Olga Cavalli confirmed that the Travel Drafting Team had made recommendations for travel support beyond the Sydney meeting. 10. 6. 2. 2. Response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track
Edmon Chung drew Council's attention to the draft comments he submitted to the draft IDN ccTLD Fast Track Implementation Plan
and highlighted the following points:
1. the consideration of variants for IDN TLDs
2. the identification of need for a formalized relationship between ICANN and the IDN ccTLD manager
3. the recognition that financial contribution should be required from IDN ccTLD managers to offset its program cost. Avri Doria proposed that the Council review the document in a 48 hour window in which time comments should be incorporated and the response will be submitted to the public comment forum before the closure on 6 April 2009 10. 6. 3. 1 Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) Policy Development Process (PDP) work team (WT)
The PPSC has not met since Mexico City and is not scheduled to meet in the near future. The PDP work team is meeting regularly.
10. 6. 3. 2. PPSC Working Group work team WGWT
The team has regular meetings scheduled and the work is progressing.
10. 6. 3. 3. Operations Steering Committee (OSC) Communications coordination work team
No meeting scheduled.
10. 6. 3. 4. OSC Constituency operations work team
Chuck Gomes encouraged participation.
10. 6. 3. 5. OSC GNSO Council operations work team
Chuck Gomes highlighted that there was minimal participation in this work team, and pointed out that its work is critical because its focus is on the rules and procedures in terms of the GNSO Council functioning.
10. 7. Restructuring group
Avri Doria informed the Council that a drafting team comprising of all council members (or alternates), liaisons to the Council, constituency chairs and potential new constituency leaders were working on a list of work items relating to the restructuring process with the aim of grouping some of the topics and drafting motions for Council to approve to make progress in the restructuring program.
Avri Doria adjourned the GNSO Council meeting and thanked everyone for their participation.
The meeting ended at 21: 22 UTC. Next GNSO Council teleconference will on 16 April 2009.
see: Calendar
| 