RE: [council] Notice of motion

["Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Jeff,

> 
> "The GNSO Council requests that the Staff Manager produce an 
> Issues Report on the need for a predictable procedure, 
> CONSISTENT WITH ICANN's CORE VALUES OF PRESERVING OPERATIONAL 
> STABILITY, RELIABILITY, SECURITY, AND GLOBAL INTEROPERABILITY 
> OF THE INTERNET, AND THE PROMOTION OF A COMPETITIVE 
> ENVIRONMENT, for the introduction of new "Registry Services," 
> AS DEFINED BY THE RELEVANT CONTRACTS WITH THE GTLD 
> REGISTRIES, by October 27, 2003 for consideration at the 
> [INSERT NOVEMBER COUNCIL MEETING]".

With regard to adding text about core values, I think that is
unnecessary because the issues report as defined in the bylaws must
include a statement from the ICANN General Counsel:
"In determining whether the issue is properly within the scope of the
ICANN policy process, the General Counsel shall examine whether such
issue:

1. is within the scope of ICANN's mission statement;

2. is broadly applicable to multiple situations or organizations;

3. is likely to have lasting value or applicability, albeit with the
need for occasional updates;

4. will establish a guide or framework for future decision-making; or

5. implicates or affects an existing ICANN policy."

You have also not mentioned all the ICANN core values in Article 1 of
the ICANN bylaws (there are 11 of them).  Might be better to just say
consistent with ICANN's mission and core values as defined in the ICANN
bylaws.

You suggested text to clarify the definition of Registry services seems
reasonable.

I note from the generic tld agreement that Registry Services is defined
as:
"Registry Services" means services provided as an integral part of the
operation of the Registry TLD, including all subdomains in which
Registered Names are registered. In determining whether a service is
integral to the operation of the Registry TLD, consideration will be
given to the extent to which the Registry Operator has been materially
advantaged in providing the service by its designation as such under
this Agreement. The development of technology, expertise, systems,
efficient operations, reputation (including identification as Registry
Operator), financial strength, or relationships with registrars and
third parties shall not be deemed an advantage arising from the
designation. Registry Services include: receipt of data concerning
registration of domain names and nameservers from registrars, provision
to registrars of status information relating to the Registry TLD,
dissemination of TLD zone files, operation of the Registry TLD zone
servers, dissemination of contact and other information concerning
domain-name and nameserver registrations in the Registry TLD, and such
other services required by ICANN in the manner provided in Subsections
4.3 through 4.6. Registry Services shall not include the provision of
nameservice for a domain used by a single entity under a Registered Name
registered through an ICANN-Accredited Registrar.

> 

> 
> In addition, I believe that getting the report on the 27th 
> and then voting on the issues report a couple of days later 
> )2 I think) is not enough time to consider this report.  This 
> issue is too critical to not have careful consideration and 
> is central to the Registries future viability.  That combined 
> with the fact that several members of the council will not be 
> present in Tunisia, makes it unrealistic for us as a group to 
> consider the Issues Report prior to the November meeting.

The Council needs to consider an issues report within 15 days of
receiving it.
I note that there may be difficulty in forming a properly constituted
council meeting at that time depending on the state of constituency
elections for new representatives.  However I accept that there would be
little time for Council representatives to consult with their
constituencies.  There is nothing stopping us considering the report in
Carthage, but I accept your comment that it maybe premature to actually
vote on initiating the policy development process at that time.

> 
> Furthermore, I have some other concerns about this process 
> that I may be ready to discuss at the next Council meeting.  
> Although a predictable process for the introduction of 
> Registry Services is certainly a good thing, we are reviewing 
> the legal implications of having members of the ICANN 
> community [other than the ICANN staff or Board], who may or 
> may not be competitors to us, provide input (either from a 
> process or substance
> standpoint) into the introduction of registry services.

Certainly the council would need to consider this in the development of
a process, and I encourage the committee/task force to request the ICANN
General Counsel to provide advice on this point.

Regards,
Bruce

>