[council] GNSO Council resolutions 13 January

[Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

Before the official minutes, the following motions were passed by the GNSO 
Council at its meeting on Thursday, 13 January 2011.

Thank you very much.

Kind regards,

Glen


Joint SO/AC Working group on support for new gTLD applicants (JAS) Motion

Whereas:
The GNSO Council and ALAC established the Joint SO/AC Working group on support 
for new gTLD applicants in April of 2010; and

The Working Group has completed the work as defined in its initial charter and 
published a Milestone report on 10 November 2010 covering those chartered items 
and including a list of further work items that it recommended further work on; 
and

In recognition of the ICANN Board's resolution 2010.12.10 which reiterated its 
2010.10.28.21 in response to an Interim report from the JAS WG, which states:

the Board encourages the JAS WG and other stakeholders to continue their work 
on the matter, and in particular, provide specific guidelines on the 
implementation of their recommendations such as determining the criteria for 
eligibility for support.


Resolved:

1. The charter of the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant Support Working Group is 
extended to include the following limited objectives:

a) Propose criteria for financial need and a method of demonstrating that need. 
Financial need has been established as the primary criterion for support. The 
group should seek out expert advice in this area, especially given the 
comparative economic conditions and the cross-cultural aspects of this 
requirement.

b) Propose mechanisms for determining whether an application for special 
consideration should be granted and what sort of help should be offered;

c) Propose methods for applicants to seek out assistance from registry service 
providers.

d) Propose methods for applicants to seek out assistance from other top-level 
domain consultants, translators, and technicians, in the application for, and 
administration of, a new top-level domain

e) Design mechanisms to encourage the build out of Internationalized Domain 
Names (IDNs) in small or underserved languages.


2. The Working group is asked to present a schedule for the work that allows 
for completion in time for the opening of the application round, currently 
scheduled for Q2 2011, in any event no delays for the new gTLD program should 
result from the working group's work.

3. The Working group shall report its results and present a final report 
directly to the GNSO Council and the ALAC for discussion and adoption, as 
appropriate, according to their own rules and procedures.

4. All communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this Working 
Group shall be through the respective SO/AC unless expressly approved by the 
respective SO/AC.

Motion to Approve the Recommendations in the Final Report on Proposals for 
Improvements to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.

"WHEREAS, a motion to approve the recommendations in the final report on 
proposals for improvement to the Registrar Accreditation
Agreement has been submitted and seconded;

(8 December motions 
https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?8_december_motions)

WHEREAS, that motion called for the GNSO Council to accept the final report to 
approve the form of the Registrant Rights andResponsibilities Charter as 
described in Annex D of the final report, to recommend that staff commence the 
consultation process withRegistrars to finalize the Registrant Rights and 
Responsibilities Charter for posting on the Web sites of Registrars as 
specified in Section 3.15 of the RAA, and to recommend that staff adopt the 
process specified as Process A in the final report, to develop a new form of 
RAA with respect to the high and medium priority topics described in the final 
report;

WHEREAS, some GNSO Councillors have expressed the view that further work is 
necessary on the portion of that motion relating to
the process specified as Process A in the final report to develop a new form of 
RAA;

WHEREAS, the GNSO Council does not wish for such work to delay progress on the 
Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Charter referenced above;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the motion to approve the recommendations 
in the final report on proposals for improvements to the Registrar 
Accreditation Agreement be amended as set out below:

WHEREAS, on 4 March, 2009, the GNSO Council approved the form of the 2009 
registrar accreditation agreement (RAA) developed as
a result of a consultative process initiated by ICANN;

WHEREAS, in addition to approving the 2009 RAA, on 4 March 2009 the GNSO 
Council convened a joint drafting team with members of theAt-Large community to 
conduct further work related to improvements to the RAA. Specifically, to draft 
a charter identifying Registrant Rights and Responsibilities;

WHEREAS, on 18 October 2010 the joint GNSO/ALAC RAA drafting team published its 
final report describing specific recommendations and proposals for improvements 
to the RAA;
(http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18oct10-en.pdf)

WHEREAS, the GNSO Council has reviewed the final report and desires to approve 
some of the recommendations and proposals contained therein;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the GNSO Council appreciates the effort of 
the joint GNSO/ALAC RAA drafting team in developing the recommendations and 
proposals delineated in the final report for improvements to the RAA;
(http://gnso.icann.org/issues/raa/raa-improvements-proposal-final-report-18oct10-en.pdf)

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council hereby accepts the final 
responsibilities charters as described in Annex D of the final report;

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the GNSO Council recommends that the staff commence the 
consultation process with registrars in the RAA to finalize the registrant 
rights and responsibilities charter for posting on the Web sites on specified 
in Section 3.15 of the RAA.


Motion on the implementation of the Fast Flux recommendations that were adopted 
by the GNSO Council on 3 September 2009

Whereas the Fast Flux PDP Working Group submitted its Final Report to the GNSO 
Council on 13 August 2009;

Whereas the Fast Flux PDP Working Group did not make recommendations for new 
consensus policy, or changes to existing policy, but did develop several other 
recommendations that were adopted by the Council on 3 September 2009 
(seehttp://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-03sep09.htm);

Whereas the GNSO Council intended to create a drafting team to develop a plan 
with a set of priorities and schedule to address the adopted recommendations 
for review and consideration by the GNSO Council;

Whereas due to workload and other priorities such a drafting team was never 
created;

Whereas the Council tasked the Council leadership at the wrap up meeting at the 
ICANN meeting in Cartagena to put forward proposals to suggest which projects 
should be continued and discontinued;

Whereas the Council leadership has reviewed the Fast Flux Recommendations that 
were adopted by the GNSO Council, also in light of the recent recommendations 
made by the Registration Abuse Policies Working Group;

Whereas the Council leadership has recommended the approach outlined below to 
the GNSO Council for consideration as an acceptable way of implementing the 
adopted recommendations and therewith closing the project;

RESOLVED,

The Council accepts the approach identified below for the adopted 
recommendations (see http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-03sep09.htm) and 
instructs the ICANN Staff to implement these recommendations as set forth below:

a) Adopted recommendation Fast-Flux Working Group (FFWG) #1: To encourage 
ongoing discussions within the community regarding the development of best 
practices and / or Internet industry solutions to identify and mitigate the 
illicit uses of Fast Flux
* Proposed implementation: This recommendation is encompassed by the 
Registration Abuse Policies WG (RAPWG) Malicious Use of Domain Names 
Recommendation #1 which  recommends the creation of non-binding best practices 
to help registrars and registries address the illicit use of domain names.

b) Adopted FFWG recommendation #2: The Registration Abuse Policy Working Group 
(RAPWG) should examine whether existing policy may empower Registries and 
Registrars, including consideration for adequate indemnification, to mitigate 
illicit uses of Fast Flux;
* Implementation completed as it was addressed by the RAP WG in its final 
report (see http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf)

c) Adopted FFWG recommendation #3: To encourage interested stakeholders and 
subject matter experts to analyze the feasibility of a Fast Flux Data Reporting 
System to collect data on the prevalence of illicit use, as a tool to inform 
future discussions;

*         The RAPWG Final Report and the Fast-Flux Working Group Final Report 
indicated that fast-flux is generally a domain use issue and not a domain 
registration issue, and as such falls outside the purview of the GNSO and 
ICANN. Therefore no further action is recommended*.

d) Adopted recommendation #4: To encourage staff to examine the role that ICANN 
can play as a "best practices facilitator" within the community;
* Proposed Implementation: Integrate this recommendation into the RAP WG 
Recommendation on "Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices" 
which recommends that the "GNSO, and the larger ICANN community in general, 
create and support structured, funded mechanisms for the collection and 
maintenance of best practices."

e) Adopted FFWG recommendation  5: To consider the inclusion of other 
stakeholders from both within and outside the ICANN community for any future 
Fast Flux policy development efforts;
* Proposed Implementation:

It is assumed that if the Registration Abuse Policies WG's (RAPWG) Malicious 
Use of Domain Names Recommendation #1 is adopted by the Council, that the 
subsequent effort will be open to participation by stakeholders from both 
within and outside the ICANN community.


f) Adopted FFWG recommendation #6: To ensure that successor PDPs on this 
subject, if any, address the charter definition issues identified in the Fast 
Flux Final Report.
* Proposed Implementation: No action needed at this point, but should be 
included if any future PDPs are initiated on this subject.

g) Adopted FFWG recommendation #6: To form a Drafting Team to work with support 
staff on developing a plan with set of priorities and schedule that can be 
reviewed and considered by the new Council as part of its work in developing 
the Council Policy Plan and Priorities for 2010.
* Proposed Implementation: The Council deems this work to be completed in 
conjunction with the above-proposed implementation proposals.

RESOLVED FURTHER

The Council now considers the work of the Fast Flux WG complete. As such, the 
"Fast Flux Council Follow-up" action item is deemed closed and will be deleted 
from the Pending Project List.

Motion to Acknowledge the Receipt of the GNSO Working Group Guidelines and 
Initiate a Public Comment Period

WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see GNSO 
Council Improvement Implementation Plan;
(http://www.icann.org/en/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-implementation-plan-16oct08.pdf)
for implementing the various GNSO Improvements identified and approved by the 
ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008
(http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm#_Toc76113182)
(http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm);

WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two 
Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and the Policy 
Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the efforts of 
five community work teams in developing specific recommendations to implement 
the improvements;

WHEREAS, the PPSC established two work teams, including the Working Group Work 
Team (WG WT), which was chartered to develop a new GNSO Working Group Model 
that improves inclusiveness, improves effectiveness, and improves efficiency;

WHEREAS, the WG WT completed its deliberations and forwarded the GNSO Working 
Group Guidelines to the PPSC on 1 November 2010;

WHEREAS, the PPSC reviewed and approved the GNSO Working Group Guidelines on 20 
December 2010
http://gnso.icann.org/improvements/gnso-working-group-guidelines-final-10dec10-en.pdf
and forwarded the report to the GNSO Council on 1 January 2011 ;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT:

RESOLVED that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the GNSO Working Group 
Guidelines as delivered by the PPSC and directs ICANN Staff to commence a 
twenty-one (21) day public comment period on the GNSO Working Group Guidelines.

RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the GNSO Working 
Group Guidelines as soon as possible after the end of the public comment period.

RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council recommends that a concise summary of the 
WG Guidelines be drafted by ICANN Staff, following approval of the GNSO Working 
Guidelines by the GNSO Council, in order to serve as a primer to the full 
document for potential WG members. The summary should be approved by the PPSC 
before being submitted to the GNSO Council.




Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://gnso.icann.org