RE: [registrars] FW: [council] GNSO Council meeting agenda and dial-in details

["Adrian Kinderis" <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Great work Stéphane,

Thanks for the insight.

Adrian Kinderis
Managing Director
AusRegistry Group Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: www.ausregistrygroup.com

The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
Sent: Friday, 9 May 2008 6:58 AM
To: Adrian Kinderis; 'Registrars Constituency and observers'
Subject: RE: [registrars] FW: [council] GNSO Council meeting agenda and dial-in details

Adrian,

It may be useful for you to know about the work we've been doing on the
WHOIS study group as I see there's an item about it on the agenda.

As a reminder, the group was formed at the behest of the GNSO council and
given as its main mission the task of drawing up a list of studies which
should be undertaken regarding WHOIS.

A list of 7 study areas was drawn up, but it's so far proved impossible to
reach consensus within the group on the fundamental questions of "should any
further studies be done on WHOIS at all?". Several members of the group feel
that there's already been too much time and effort spent studying WHOIS and
that any more studies would achieve nothing beyond further delaying actual
decision-making on the WHOIS issue. Other members feel that further studies
would be useful, especially in areas which have become increasingly relevant
in the last few years and where extra information would be welcome, such as
private WHOIS services.

Being half French half, English and 100% European :-) I've made a point of
highlighting to the group the specifics of WHOIS systems currently used in
France and Europe and of describing the legal environment which we Europeans
find ourselves in regarding WHOIS. There are other members of the RC on the
group (Paul, Krista, James and Eric) who have also provided the group with
registrars' viewpoints. Our discussions occur on the group mailing list and
so far we've had 4 group telephone meetings (we meet for an hour every
Tuesday).

The group was initially scheduled to report to the GNSO council by the end
of April, but this proved impossible and we requested more time. We now have
until the second to last week of May.

I hope this helps and would be happy to provide more details if required
(I've tried to keep this email as short as possible).


Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager

INDOM - Noms de domaine / Domain names
124-126, rue de Provence
75008 Paris. France
0820 77 7000
(Prix d'un appel local) 
De l'étranger (calling from outside France): + 33 1 76 70 05 67
www.indom.com

Daily domain name industry news: www.domaines.info
Mon blog/My blog : www.stephanevangelder.com



 
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis
Sent: jeudi 8 mai 2008 05:02
To: Registrars Constituency and observers
Subject: [registrars] FW: [council] GNSO Council meeting agenda and dial-in
details


All,

Please find the agenda for the upcoming GNSO council call.

Let me know if there are any particular issues you wish to discuss
further.

Adrian Kinderis
Managing Director
AusRegistry Group Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: www.ausregistrygroup.com

The information contained in this communication is intended for the
named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain
legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an
intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action
in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error,
please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately.



Agenda 08 May 2008
Proposed GNSO Council Agenda 8 May 2008

This agenda was established according to the Rules of Procedure for the 
GNSO Council

Coordinated Universal Time12:00 UTC - see below for local times
(05:00 Los Angeles, 08:00 Washington DC, 13:00 London, 14:00 Brussels, 
22:00 Melbourne)

Avri Doria will be chairing the GNSO Council meeting
Scheduled time for meeting 120 mins.

Dial-in numbers sent individually to Council members.

Item 0: Roll call of Council members

Item 1: Update any statements of interest

Item 2: Review/amend agenda

Item 3: Approve GNSO Council minutes of 27 March 2008 and 17 April 2008 
(5 mins)
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04962.html

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04999.html

Item 4: Update from Denise Michel on Board activities (10 mins)

Item 5: Update from Edmon Chung on IDNC (10 mins)

Item 6: Front-running discussion (15 mins)

Should the council initiate a drafting team to work with staff to define

a pre-issues research effort?
If so, what sort of expertise is required and what questions need to be 
asked?

Item 7: Fast-Flux vote on motions (20 mins)

Moved: Mike Rodenbaugh
Seconded:

Friendly amendment: Philip Sheppard

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04958.html

MOTION 1
===============
Whereas, "fast flux" DNS changes are increasingly being used to commit 
crime and frustrate law enforcement efforts to combat crime, with 
criminals rapidly modifying IP addresses and/or nameservers in effort to

evade detection and shutdown of their criminal website;

Whereas, the Security and Stability Advisory Committee has reported on 
this trend in its Advisory SAC 025, dated January 2008: 
http://www.icann.org/committees/security/sac025.pdf/

Whereas, the SSAC Advisory describes the technical aspects of fast flux 
hosting, explains how DNS is being exploited to abet criminal 
activities, discusses current and possible methods of mitigating this 
activity, and recommends that appropriate bodies consider policies that 
would make practical mitigation methods universally available to all 
registrants, ISPs, registrars and registries,

Whereas, the GNSO resolved on March 6, 2008 to request an Issues Report 
from ICANN Staff, to consider the SAC Advisory and outline potential 
next steps for GNSO policy development designed to mitigate the current 
ability for criminals to exploit the NS via "fast flux" IP and/or 
nameserver changes;

Whereas, the ICANN Staff has prepared an Issues Report dated March 25, 
2008, 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/fast-flux-hosting/gnso-issues-report-fast-f
lux-25mar08.pdf, 
recommending that the GNSO sponsor additional fact-finding and research 
to develop best practices guidelines concerning fast flux `hosting, and 
to provide data to assist policy development and illuminate potential 
policy options.;

Whereas, ICANN should consider whether and how it might encourage 
registry operators and registrars to take steps that would help to 
reduce the damage done by cybercriminals, by curtailing the 
effectiveness of these fast flux hosting exploits.

The GNSO Council RESOLVES:

To initiate a Policy Development Process uniquely on the issues deemed 
in scope in the Issues report.

(This will require a 33% vote)

MOTION 2 (Contingent on success of Motion 1)
=============================================

Whereas Council has decided to launch a PDP on fast flux hosting;

The GNSO Council RESOLVES:

To form a Task Force of interested stakeholders and Constituency 
representatives, to collaborate broadly with knowledgeable individuals 
and organizations, in order to develop potential policy options to 
curtail the criminal use of fast flux hosting.

The Task Force initially shall consider the following questions:

Who benefits from fast flux, and who is harmed?
Who would benefit from cessation of the practice and who would be
harmed?
How are registry operators involved in fast flux hosting activities?
How are registrars involved in fast flux hosting activities?
How are registrants affected by fast flux hosting?
How are Internet users affected by fast flux hosting?
What measures could be implemented by registries and registrars to 
mitigate the negative effects of fast flux?
What would be the impact (positive or negative) of establishing 
limitations, guidelines, or restrictions on registrants, registrars 
and/or registries with respect to practices that enable or facilitate 
fast flux hosting?
The Task Force shall report back to Council within 90 days, with a 
report discussing these questions and the range of possible answers 
developed by the Task Force members. The Task Force report also shall 
outline potential next steps for Council deliberation.

(This will require a 50% vote)

Chuck Gomes alternate/contingent motion

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04995.html

"Whereas:

The Security and Stability Advisory Committee reported on "fast flux" 
DNS changes in its January 2008 Advisory SAC 025 
(http://www.icann.org/committees/security/sac025.pdf/),

The GNSO resolved on March 6, 2008 to request an Issues Report from 
ICANN Staff to consider the SAC Advisory and outline potential next 
steps for GNSO policy development designed to mitigate the current 
ability for criminals to exploit DNS via "fast flux" IP and/or 
nameserver changes.

ICANN Staff prepared an Issues Report dated March 25, 2008 
(http://gnso.icann.org/issues/fast-flux-hosting/gnso-issues-report-fast-
flux-25mar08.pdf) 
recommending that the GNSO sponsor additional fact-finding and research 
to develop best practices guidelines concerning fast flux hosting and 
that it may be appropriate for the ccNSO also to participate in such an 
activity,

Resolve that:

The Council form a drafting team of interested and qualified individuals

to develop a list of questions regarding "fast flux" hosting for which 
answers would facilitate pending action by the Council regarding policy 
development work and task that team with submitting the list to the 
Council not later then 22 May 2008,

Form an expert panel consisting of volunteers from groups such as the 
SSAC, the APWG, and constituencies that have expertise related to the 
use of fast flux and task that group with answering as best as possible 
the questions delivered by the drafting team and delivering those 
answers to the Council NLT 11 June 2008.

The Council decide whether or not to initiate a "fast flux" PDP as soon 
as possible after receipt of answers from the expert panel.

Item 8: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Review - next steps (20 mins)

Chuck Gomes' motion
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04994.html

GNSO Council Motion regarding Additional IRTP PDPs

Motion from Chuck Gomes, 21 April 2008

Whereas:

The Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) is an existing consensus 
policy under review by the GNSO,

An IRTP working group examined possible areas for improving the existing

policy and delivered its outcome in August 2007 in a report posted at 
http://www.gnso.icann.org/drafts/Transfer-Policy-Issues-23aug07.pdf and 
this report provided a list of potential issues to address for 
improvement of the transfer policy,

In September 2007 a working group was tasked by the GNSO Council to 
assign priorities to the remaining issues in the report (i.e., those not

addressed in the PDP underway regarding four reasons for denial of a 
registrar transfer) resulting in the prioritized issue list contained in

that group's report at 
http://www.gnso.icann.org/drafts/irdx-policy-priorities-20dec07.pdf,

In its meeting on 17 January 2008 the GNSO Council requested a small 
group of volunteers arrange the prioritized issue list into suggested
PDPs,

The small group delivered its recommended PDPs on19 March 2008 in its 
report 
athttp://gnso.icann.org/drafts/transfer-wg-recommendations-pdp-groupings
-19mar08.pdf,


Resolve that five PDPs be initiated one at a time in the order suggested

by the small group and shown here:

PDP ID PDP Category Name Policy Issue #'s
A New IRTP Issues 1, 3, 12
B Undoing Registrar Transfers 2, 7, 9
C IRTP Operational Rule Enhancements 5, 6, 15*, 18
D IRTP Dispute Policy Enhancements 4, 8, 16, 19
E Penalties for IRTP Violations 10


First part of issue only
Resolve that the recommendations of the small group be approved to not 
initiate PDPs at this time for issues 11, 13, 14, the second par of 15, 
and 17.

Item 9: Discussion on pending budget measure for domain tasting (10
mins)
http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-23jan08.htm
THEREFORE, the Board resolves (2008.01.04) to encourage ICANN's 
budgetary process to include fees for all domains added, including 
domains added during the AGP, and encourages community discussion 
involved in developing the ICANN budget, subject to both Board approval 
and registrar approval of this fee.

Item 10: Single character 2 letter domain names (10 mins)
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/icann-synthesis-on-sldns-27feb08.pdf

Item 11: Status update on Whois proposals (5 mins)
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04998.html

Item 12: GNSO Improvements - discussion (15 mins)

Item 13: Action Items (5 mins)
http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-action-list.pdf

Item 14: AOB