Re: [council] Wrap-up topics

["Winterfeldt, Brian" <bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm sorry if my email request was unclear.  I was referencing the below 
resolved(s) from the 6 October resolution:


RESOLVED, the GNSO Council requests an Issues Report on the following possible 
policy revisions and/or additions:

1. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN staff 
must keep on record, a valid physical address for the purpose of receiving 
legal service. This record must include a valid street address, city, 
appropriate region, telephone number and fax number.

Registrars must publish this information on their respective web sites, and 
must notify ICANN staff and update their published addresses within 30 days of 
a change of address.

2. ICANN-accredited registrars must provide to ICANN staff, and ICANN staff 
must keep on record, the names of each registrar's respective corporate 
President, Vice President, and Secretary, or the appropriate equivalents of 
those positions. These data may be made available upon request to a verified 
representative of a law enforcement agency, in a manner agreed to by ICANN 
staff, ICANN-accredited registrars, and representatives of law enforcement 
agencies. Registrars will notify ICANN of any changes in this information 
within 30 days of a change.

3. ICANN-accredited registrars must publish on their respective web sites 
e-mail and postal mail addresses to which law enforcement actions may be 
directed. The e-mail address will use a uniform convention

(example: lawenforcement@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:lawenforcement@xxxxxxxxxxx>) to 
facilitate ease of use by law enforcement agencies. Registrars may, at their 
individual discretion, include language in this section of their web sites, 
directed to the general public, that makes clear the use and expected outcomes 
of these points of contact and identifies the appropriate points of contact for 
other forms of business. Requests submitted by verified law enforcement 
agencies to this discrete point of contact must receive an acknowledgement of 
receipt from the registrar within 24 hours.

4. Law enforcement agencies provide, within six months of the date of approval 
of this policy by the ICANN Board and via the general advice of the GAC to the 
Board, their recommendations for a database and identification system that 
allows for expedient identification to a registrar of a law enforcement agency, 
and verification of the contacting party as a law enforcement agency upon that 
agency's first contact with a registrar.

5. The Issue Report should include a freedom-of-expression impact analysis.


Brian J. Winterfeldt, Esq.
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
TEL 202.429.6260 | FAX 202.261.7547
bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx>

The information contained in this e-mail may be privileged, confidential, and 
protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think 
that you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the sender 
at “bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx.”  Thank you.

On Oct 27, 2011, at 11:54 AM, "Neuman, Jeff" 
<Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

Brian,

Which Issue Report are you referring to?

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy


________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Winterfeldt, Brian
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 11:48 AM
To: Stéphane Van Gelder
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Wrap-up topics

Thank you Stéphane.  May I request that next steps on the RAA issue report be 
added to the wrap up agenda?  It would probably assist Staff to know how to 
approach writing it, or whether the need for it has been superseded by 
subsequent events.
Thank you,

Brian

Brian J. Winterfeldt, Esq.
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
TEL 202.429.6260 | FAX 202.261.7547
bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx>

The information contained in this e-mail may be privileged, confidential, and 
protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think 
that you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the sender 
at “bwinterfeldt@xxxxxxxxxxx.”  Thank you.

On Oct 27, 2011, at 9:48 AM, "Stéphane Van Gelder" 
<stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Councillors,

As you know, our ICANN meeting wrap-up sessions do not have a set agenda, as 
they are discussions and stock-taking sessions.

As pointers to those discussions, here are a few topics we might like to 
consider. These are just suggestions stemming from the notes I have been taking 
throughout the week. We don't have to discuss them all during the wrap-up, and 
we can obviously add or delete topics as desired.

See you all in Salon Vert room from 12:30 to 2pm today.

Stéphane



IOC Red Cross, working with the GAC
A letter has been drafted, to be sent by GNSO Council Chair to GAC Chair. 
Edits/comments? Should we send?

Best practices
Where to next? What does the Council want to do now?

JAS Final report
What do we want to do now? We reserved our right to approve it in the 
resolution we passed and we heard from Kurt on Sunday that Staff would now like 
some direction from the GNSO Council on whether we approve it or not.

NCA
Discussion of possible interactions between the Council and the NomCom going 
forward (see notes from meeting between NomCom and GNSO leadership earlier this 
week).

Cross-TLD registration scam and domain kiting
See response from SSAC Chair Patrik Faltstrom sent to Council list this week.  
Next steps for the Council?

ccNSO
Suggestions from the ccNSO to have work sessions together on looking at the 
strategic plan. Our response?

A suggestion that the GNSO joins the ccNSO in requesting extra detail from the 
CFO on the budget.

Meetings: how do we strengthen our meetings with the ccNSO? How do we build the 
agenda in an effective way? The ccNSO has dedicated 2 people to looking at the 
agenda. The suggestion is that the GNSO agenda person liaise with them.


Post newgTLD landscape
Should the GNSO Council be looking at how the community will change as a result 
of new gTLDs and VI and ccNSO registries providing new gTLD services and 
vice-versa?

Costa Rica preparation
Who will handle the agenda?

Open Council meeting: Presentations by SG and C chairs at the start of the open 
council meeting. A suggestion to post a list of topics to the constituency list 
prior to the Open Council meeting so that the group leaders know what they are 
going to discuss…

GNSO teleconference schedule for the upcoming year
Secretariat to suggest a schedule, to be approved by Leadership team.