GNSO Council Status Update Notes 21 April 2010
Note: The latest status update date is provided for each item.
Inter-Registrar Transfer Policies Part B (IRTP B) - Michele Neylon - chair - 9 April 2010
IRTP - we are doing two things which are interconnected
- We are currently working on the 1st draft of our initial report to see if we have correctly reflected our current views, opinions, positions etc., This has led, obviously, to some discussion on some of the more awkward points. We are hoping to be able to release an initial report for public comment after Brussels while the report itself would be available for discussion during the meeting itself. Needless to say this is based on our hopes of progress etc., ie. if we get "stuck" we may not meet that deadline and I don't have a crystal ball :)
- One of the key areas that the IRTP has been concerned with is the concept of "rapid return" / "undoing" the damage of fraudulent transfers, often called "hijacks". To that end a subgroup (consisting of registrars, registry and BC members) has been working on drafting some concrete proposals for possible solutions. It is our intention to bring the work to date back to the main group for discussion next week and based on the feedback (or lack thereof) any recommendations will be part of our report.
Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery (PEDNR) - Tim Ruiz - Working Group Liaison to GNSO Council/ Marika KoningsStaff support - 19 April 2010
The PEDNR WG held first meeting on 28 July and has been meeting on a weekly basis since September. The WG is in the process of reviewing the survey that was conducted amongst its own membership to assess the views and positions on the different charter questions in order to determine whether there is agreement on a possible way forward / recommendation and there where further work needs to be done. Following this review, the WG will continue working on reviewing and revising the draft Initial Report with the objective to have it ready in time for the ICANN meeting in Brussels.
JIG (Joint ccNSO/GNSO IDN Group - Edmon Chung - 13 April 2010
- An initial conference call was conducted on March 30, 2010
- Conference call introduced the 3 issues of common interest
- Single character IDN TLDs
- Variant IDN TLDs
- Universal acceptance of IDN TLDs
- Much of the discussions for items 1 & 2 will build on the IDN implementation working team report
- A briefing from is expected on the outstanding policy issues identified in the working team report
- A bi-weekly conference call is expected to be started in the week of April 19
International Registration Data (IRD) Working Group - Edmon Chung - co-chair / Julie Hedlund - Staff support 8 April 2010
The WG continues to deliberate on several questions with the goal to produce recommendations.
- What should we require from internationalized registration data? And
- How would internationalized registration data affect the way data is represented and displayed?
The staff have produced a matrix to assist in addressing the questions.
The WG will continue deliberations in bi-weekly meetings and may produce a preliminary report by the ICANN Brussels meeting in June 2010.
Internationalized Domain Names Group (IDNG) - Edmon Chung - co-chair - 13 April 2010
Given no further discussions on the 2 topics that were identified:
- Application of confusingly similar TLD strings
- there seems to be enough agreement around this topic in general
- also attached clean version of the document
- Process for the application of IDN gTLDs, including those identified in 1
- there continues to be push back against having any dedicated process to handle special case IDN TLD applications
And given that it seems any further discussion would require the GNSO council to consider whether an actual working group should be formed for further work on 1 (if any) unless there is any particular objection, I will report the above back to the council.
Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) Working Group (WG) - Greg Aaron - chair - 8 April 2010
The RAPWG -- we are beginning our analysis of the public comments and plan to have the Final Report done in advance of Brussels.
Geo Regions Working Group - Olga Cavalli - 14 April 2010
A survey document has been prepared in several languages and will be distributed widely during the next months.
Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) Sub-team A (Registrant Rights Charter) - Beau Brendler coordinator - 30 March 2010
The group concluded its work and disbanded in late February. There are no further updates.
Sub-team A convened in mid-March to finalize its work. The plain language content of the RAA that was to be the basis of the statement of registrants' rights was submitted to the regional organizations for review, and returned with some minor comments. ICANN staff was requested that they incorporate the comments from the regional orgs where appropriate to create a final draft, which I agreed to review a last time before it was submitted for action to the GNSO. Unless I am missing something, I did not see a copy of that final draft, though I am happy to review it here in Nairobi, unless it has already been passed on to the GNSO. In which case, the work of Sub-team A is completed, with the agreement that I would hold or facilitate a session in Nairobi on the "aspirational rights" document, which was removed from Sub-team A's scope of work. The "aspirational rights" document will contain suggestions for changes to future iterations of the RAA.
Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) subteam B (identifying issues for possible RAA amendments) - Steve Metalitz coordinator - 16 April 2010
RAA subteam B has revised its timetable with the goal of submitting its draft report to the council in time for one of the June meetings. To achieve this, weekly teleconferences will be scheduled beginning the last week of April.
As it completes its compilation and prioritization of topics for RAA amendments, subteam members have also been discussing recommendations for next steps (task 3 in the charter) but has not yet reached a conclusion on this.
On its April 15 call, the subteam also discussed plans for a workshop or similar event in Brussels to present its recommendations. Subteam participants generally prefer a large cross-supporting organization session, where the SO/ACs can participate and share their perspective, including as one of the topics, a discussion of the law enforcement proposals with LE, GAC representatives, and registrars, among others.
Vertical Integration Policy Development Process (VI PDP) - Chairs Roberto Gaetano and Mikey O'Connor - Council Liaison - Stephane van Gelder - 12 April 2010
The working group initiated a public comment period and solicited constituency-statements.
Scope, timing and deliverable questions have been resolved -- a preliminary work schedule has been published, major deliverables will be ready for review during the Brussels meeting.
The working group was unable to arrive at consensus around Objective 5 of the charter -- the question was referred back to the Council and has been resolved.
The working group is focusing on iterative development of "proposals" as the primary work product -- proposal sub-groups are already active, with the prospect of one or two more coming online.
The working group launched a parallel effort (and sub-team) to evaluate proposals using definitions, use-cases, and evaluation criteria.
After further consideration, and noting the extraordinary size of the working group, the WG was closed to new members as of 31-March.
WHOIS Current Activity - Liz Gasster Staff support - updated 5 April 2010
Follow-up to WHOIS Studies discussion on 1 April 2010 (5 April 2010, Prepared by Liz Gasster)
Note: This is a working document and does not constitute or reflect the views of ICANN on any pending or proposed WHOIS study.
ccNSO update - Olga Cavalli - 14 April 2010
The ccNSO has submitted a comment to ICANN’s DNS-CERT proposal – it is now posted at
Travel drafting team - Olga Cavalli - 14 April 2010
DT is planning a teleconference to review the new document about ICANN travel policy that is available for public comments.
The DT will review the need to submit comments to this document.
GNSO Work Prioritization Model Drafting Team - Olga Cavalli - chair - 15 April 2010
Work Prioritization Model Drafting Team (WPM-DT) completed its deliberations and developed a written procedure recommended for inclusion in the GNSO Operating Procedures as Chapter 6 plus an accompanying ANNEX. WPM-DT has also developed a timeline of activities that it recommends be adopted in order that the first Work Prioritization effort can be completed by the ICANN Brussels meeting. Materials shared with Council on 9 April with expectation of Council review and consideration at 21 April meeting.
Operations Sreering Committee (OSC) - Philip Sheppard - OSC chair - 2010
ICANN GNSO Operating Steering Committee (OSC) Chairman's Overview of Work Items v4: April 2010
OSC Constituency & Stakeholder Group WT progress report - Olga Cavalli - chair - 14 April 2010
Working team is trying to complete the document about recomendations for constiturencies and stakeholdergroups on time for its revision by the OSC.
OSC Community Coordination Communications Work Team - Mason Cole - chair- 8 April 2010
Reports I and II have been delivered to the OSC. At the OSC's request, the report was merged into one document; delivery to the GNSO is now at the OSC chair's discretion. Absent any further requests from the OSC or the GNSO, the CCT's work is considered complete.
OSC GNSO Council Operations Work Team (GCOT) - Ray Fassett - chair - 16 April 2010
Below comprises items currently under WT discussion. Each pertains to WT completion of applicable GNSO Council Rules of Procedure under its purview:
Term Limits To be delivered to OSC
Board Seat Elections
Vacancies and Absences
Section 4.1: Quorum
Motions and Votes
Statements of Interest (consider and modify where applicable based upon OSC member feedback received by the WT)
PPSC Policy Development Process work team (PDP-WT) - Jeff Neuman - chair/Marika Konings - Staff support - 14 April 2010
The PDP-WT has now discussed all the five stages of the new PDP and a draft report has been prepared for review. The WT has now started to focus its attention on a number of other issues such as translation, timing, voting thresholds, decision-making methodology and transition. In addition, the WT will start discussing which changes to Annex A of the ICANN by-laws it will recommend in order to implement the new PDP.
PPSC Working Group model work team (WGWT) - J. Scott Evans - chair/ Marika Konings - Staff support - 14 April 2010
A public comment period on the proposed GNSO Working Group Guidelines closed on 22 March. The WG WT is now in the process of reviewing and analyzing the public comments received and will update the guidelines accordingly. Once completed, the WG WT will submit the final GNSO Working Group Guidelines to the PPSC for review.
Constituency/Stakeholder Group Update Report For 21 April 2010 Telephonic GNSO Council Meeting
Submitted by Rob Hoggarth – 9 April 2010
Renewed "Re-confirmation" Efforts For Existing GNSO Constituencies
The Board adopted a concept of "re-confirming" the charters and operational mechanisms of each GNSO Constituency every three years (see - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/minutes-28aug08.htm). The initial Constituency re-confirmation process was slated for 2009, but the process took a back seat as the Board focused its efforts on evaluation and approval of the new GNSO Stakeholder Group structures and approval of the processes and recommended Bylaws changes necessary for seating the new GNSO Council. Since the Board has generally resolved those issues, during the Seoul meeting it set a deadline of the Nairobi meeting for formal re-submission of any revised re-confirmation proposals by the existing GNSO Constituencies and directed the ICANN Staff to assist constituency leaders in developing those submissions (see - 30 October 2009 Board Meeting Resolutions - Consent Agenda Item 1.3 - see http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-30oct09-en.htm).
Given the GNSO community's focus on other substantive policy matters since Seoul, the potential value of dovetailing that effort with the work on GNSO constituency operating practices and procedures by the Constituency Operations Work Team and other uncertainties related to developing permanent Stakeholder Group Charters, at its Nairobi meeting the Board extended that timeline until the Brussels ICANN meeting (see - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm#1.7).
The GNSO Constituency Operations Work Team is continuing to make progress on its set of recommendations regarding Constituency and Stakeholder Group operations for review by the GNSO's Operating Steering Committee (OSC).
Potential New GNSO Constituencies
Since Board approval of the GNSO Improvements recommendations in June 2008, a total of four potential new Constituency groups have formally applied to the Board for recognition. At its 9 December 2009 meeting the Board decided to "not approve" the proposed charters for the potential new CyberSafety, City TLDs and IDNgTLDs constituencies. If they desire, the proponents for those potential constituencies can revise and re-submit their proposals in the future. The proposal for a new Consumers Constituency remains "pending" and a public comment period on the latest version of that proposal ran through 13 February 2010 (see - http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201002-en.htm#newco).
A Notice of Intent to Form A New GNSO Constituency (NOIF) has now also been submitted for a potential new Public Internet Access Constituency (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/piacc-constituency-noif-cover-redacted-02mar10-en.pdf and see http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/piacc-constituency-noif-redacted-02mar10-en.pdf). The process also remains available for other interested parties to develop proposals for new GNSO Constituencies and to submit them to the Board.
Permanent Stakeholder Group Charters
When the Board approved the four (4) new GNSO Stakeholder Group structures last year, it acknowledged that the charters for the Commercial Stakeholder Group and the Non Commercial Stakeholder Group were to be transitional/temporary and that permanent charters were to be developed over the course of the coming year. Based on discussions in Seoul and Nairobi, the Staff will be working to develop opportunities for dialogue and further community discussion of these important matters. Some work is already under way and the Staff has reached out to community leaders for their thoughts on timetables and benchmarks to