[council] GNSO Council teleconf. revised draft minutes 21 December 2005

Mon Jan 9 17:00:43 UTC 2006

[To: council[at]gnso.icann.org]

Dear Council Members,

Please find a revised draft minutes of the GNSO Council teleconference 
on 21 December 2005.

Olof Nordling has been added to the list of attendees present at the 
meeting.

Please let me know if there are other changes to be made.

Thank you very much.

Kind regards,
Glen

21 December 2005

Proposed agenda and related documents

List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C.
Marilyn Cade - Commercial & Business Users C.
Grant Forsyth - Commercial & Business Users C
Greg Ruth - ISCPC
Antonio Harris - ISCPC
Tony Holmes - ISCPC - proxy to Tony Harris/Greg Ruth (if necessary)
Thomas Keller- Registrars
Ross Rader - Registrars
Bruce Tonkin - Registrars
Ken Stubbs - gTLD registries - absent - apologies - Cary Karp
June Seo - gTLD registries
Cary Karp - gTLD registries
Lucy Nichols - Intellectual Property Interests C
Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent - apologies - 
proxy to Lucy Nichols
Kiyoshi Tsuru - Intellectual Property Interests C. - proxy to Lucy 
Nichols (if necessary)
Robin Gross - NCUC.
Norbert Klein - NCUC.- absent - apologies - proxy to Mawaki Chango
Mawaki Chango - NCUC
Sophia Bekele - Nominating Committee appointee
Maureen Cubberley - Nominating Committee appointee - absent - apologies 
- proxy to Ross Rader
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee

17 Council Members

ICANN Staff
Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination
Maria Farrell - ICANN GNSO Policy Support Officer
Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counselor
Tina Dam - Chief gTLD Registry Liaison
Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat

GNSO Council Liaisons
Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison
Bret Fausett - ALAC Liaison

Michael Palage - ICANN Board member
Quorum present at 19 : 07 UTC.

MP3 recording

Bruce Tonkin and Philip Sheppard chaired this teleconference.

Approval of agenda

Bruce Tonkin welcomed the new councillors, Sophia Bekele Nominating 
Committee Appointee, Mawaki Chango - NCUC representative and June Seo - 
gTLD registries representative.

Bruce Tonkin handed the chair to Philip Sheppard.

Item 2: Election of GNSO Council chair for period 4 Jan 06 to 3 Dec 2006
- nominations close on Friday 16 Dec 2005
- election to be held during the meeting

Philip Sheppard stated that Bruce Tonkin, the only nominee at close of 
nominations on Friday 16 December 2005, accepted his nomination by Lucy 
Nichols, seconded Ken Stubbs, to be the GNSO Council chair for the 
period 4 January 2006 to 3 December 2006.

Philip Sheppard proposed a roll call vote of affirmation to elect Bruce 
Tonkin as GNSO Council chair for the period 4 January 2006 to 3 December 
2006.

The motion carried. Unanimous vote of acclamation

25 votes in favour, one abstention Bruce Tonkin (2 votes) Ross Rader's 
vote and proxy held for Maureen Cubberley were votes recorded on line 
due to telephonic connectivity issues.

Decision 1: Bruce Tonkin elected as GNSO Council chair for the period 4 
January 2006 to 3 December 2006.

Philip Sheppard handed the chair back to Bruce Tonkin.

Item 3: Next steps on new TLD policy development process
- public comment period opened on 6 December 2005

Bruce Tonkin stated that each constituency needed to identify a person 
to collect input to the policy development process on new gTLDs and 
notify the GNSO Secretariat accordingly.
In addition Council members should reflect on proactive means of 
obtaining input from members of the communities not directly involved in 
the GNSO and input from the Council.
It was important to gather input on the terms of reference to open 
questions and then seek the commonalities.

Marilyn Cade referred to her proposal on the Council mailing list 
setting out a process, previously used in task forces and public 
meetings, where a request was posted for interested individuals, 
organizations, (could be a constituency) to submit an outline, sign up 
for a specific time to address their responses to a particular set of 
questions, take clarifying questions, and have the material transcribed 
and posted on the website. This allowed for input from people with 
expertise in particular areas in contrast to the input from the public 
comment process. The proposal further suggested 2 such events before the 
end of January 2006 and an extension of the current public comment 
period to the end of January 2006.

<Finally, I offer the following proposal for fellow Councilors to 
consider regarding the gTLDS policy process: The Council should invite 
all constituencies to prepare their statements for contribution, BUT in
ADDITION, and in parallel, other mechanism should be used to inform the 
policy development process. I describe a recommendation below that I've 
previously mentioned in less detail.

1) Given that we are losing about two weeks due to holiday, I propose 
that Council formally announce an extension in the initial comment 
process to extend it to the end of January. This would give more time to the
Constituency statements, and also allow the following process to take 
place for more input into the policy development process.
2) I propose that Council direct the staff director, Olof Nordling, to 
manage a process on behalf of Council that would be structured 
consultation and input into the process. All of our constituencies and 
the broader community could undoubtedly benefit from the opportunity to 
hear from experts, rather than just gather opinions or make statements.

Thus, I would suggest that the following guidelines be followed [or some 
modified version developed]

3) The Council should host two phone conferences with the following 
structure/format.

a) Organizations, individuals, and interested parties should be invited 
to make presentations related to the questions that are contained in the 
ToR, and provide any other statements that they consider relevant.
20 minute slots would be reserved for anyone who submits a "white 
paper/PowerPoint" to the Staff Director.
NOTE: This would NOT be a place for the Constituency Statements, since 
those will come into the process anyway, but offers a way to get unique 
contributions. For instance, outreach to the SSAC, to OECD, etc. might 
be useful to suggest that they may want to make a "presentation".
b) the calls should be transcribed via a conference call transcription 
service and the transcripts would be posted
c) all white papers or PowerPoint presentations would be made available 
and posted
d) Do others think that there should also be 3 - 4 three minute slots at 
the end of each of the conference calls for "open mike" statements from 
those who don't bother to submit a white paper/PowerPoint?

I would suggest that the presentations be limited to 15 minutes and a 5 
minute clarification q and a be allowed.

Given the time between here and Wellington, I would suggest that two 
calls be held, broken into two segments of 2 hours each.

It is important to remember the constituencies and the ALAC will have 
their own consultation process to undertake as well, and thus, if we can 
do these calls in the early part of January, that would be most helpful.

Again, I am proposing that we also recognize that the PDP time frames do 
not work, especially taking into account the holiday period and we 
formally extend the time frame now for the preparation of the initial 
submission of information to the Staff Manager.

I also think that Council needs to be very realistic about the need to 
take extensive input; we may find that we need to have more than one 
round of input and discussion of the inputs to the questions, for instance.

Finally, we need to discuss how best to establish a mechanism to have 
consultation with the other SOs, and with the GAC and SSAC. As I recall, 
that is part of our responsibility. We may want to schedule discussion 
sessions of 1-2 hours in Wellington, for instance. >

There was general agreement among the Councillors for a call for papers 
with clearly formulated expectations, moderated conference calls with a 
web based forum, allowing people to identify, if they wished, to address 
their responses, an acknowledgement that all requests for presentation 
may not be possible to accommodate, but that all material would be 
posted on the website for the public, read by the Councillors and 
summarised by the staff who would produce a Staff Manager's report. The 
Council as whole would undertake the work and would benefit from all the 
input during the proposed face to face March meeting in Wellington.

Ross Rader proposed that agreement on details should be referred to the 
planning committee.

Proposed time line:
31 January 2006
- extension for public comments on the Terms of Reference for new gTLDs
- constituency statements due and conference call
1st week February
- conference call

The Initial report should be considered as an evolving draft until 
Wellington.

Suzanne Sene remarked that it would be difficult to produce a document 
by a government organization even by the end of January 2006.

Bruce Tonkin, seconded by Philip Sheppard proposed a procedural motion:
Council agrees to extend the time for public comments on the Terms of 
Reference for new gTLDs until 31 January 2006 in order to receive 
substantive papers addressing the terms of reference on the policy 
development process.
Council will also formally issue a "Call for Papers" and the potential 
presentation of the papers as soon as a text for that call for papers 
has been developed in the days following.

The motion carried unanimously by voice vote.

Decision 2:
Council agrees to extend the time for public comments on the Terms of 
Reference for new gTLDs until 31 January 2006 in order to receive 
substantive papers addressing the terms of reference on the policy 
development process.
Council will also formally issue a "Call for Papers" and the potential 
presentation of the papers as soon as a text for that call for papers 
has been developed in the days following.

Bruce Tonkin noted that each constituency should be thinking about what 
process the constituency should use to inform the constituency 
statements such as, teleconferences and different ways within the 
constituencies to get broad coverage. The constituencies were encouraged 
to try methods that they have not used in the past to make sure the 
statements were as broad and representative of all views as possible and 
focused on substantive and reasoned comments on the issue areas in the 
Terms of Reference on new gTLDs.

.Bruce Tonkin, seconded by Philip Sheppard proposed a procedural motion:
The due date for constituency statements be extended until 31 January 2006.

The motion carried unanimously by voice vote.

Decision 3: The due date for constituency statements be extended until 
31 January 2006.

Action Item: Each constituency needs to identify a person to collect 
input to the policy development process on new gTLDs and notify the GNSO 
Secretariat accordingly.

Item 4: Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) issues report

Olof Nordling stated that Maria Farrell was the person identified to 
focus on developing the IDN Issues Report.

Tina Dam reported that the version 2.0 of the IDN Guidelines approved in 
November 2005, were discussed in Vancouver and the working group would 
reconvene to consider the Vancouver input and whether there should be 
further revisions to the IDN Guidelines. In parallel, the Best Current 
Practice track for the IDN Guidelines would move forward and there would 
be opportunity for public input. The working group and the President's 
Advisory Committee would provide feedback and updates to the ICANN Board.
The community had made enquiries about the functionality of the IANA 
registry. Based on the previous IDN committee consultations, a briefing 
paper had been developed for the President's Advisory Committee where 
positive changes had been recommended.
Initial discussions have taken place amongst technical experts regarding 
IDNs at the top level and the relation to the Issues Report requested by 
the GNSO council in Vancouver. The plan is to move forward the 
experiment on IDNs at the top level, but a framework is needed around 
how it would happen and what issues should be solved.
The experiment could possibly show whether d name or a records in the 
root, or neither would be a good technical solution. The evaluation of 
the report was as important as the initial framework and the result 
would feed back into the ccNSO, GNSO and the GAC policy processes. There 
was no current timeline for the Issues Report as it was to some extent 
dependent on the experiment. In the mean time, while waiting for the 
technical results, Tina suggested identifying initial issues and start 
work on process.

Cary Karp commented that currently, before the policy development 
process started the suitability of candidate technologies for that 
purpose were being tested and referred to the recent Internet 
Architectural Board (IAB) report "Review and Recommendations for 
Internationalized Domain Names".

Bruce Tonkin, supported by most of the councillors, proposed that staff 
should be encouraged to start identifying and documenting policy 
questions and issues related to IDNs.

Bruce Tonkin proposed further discussion on IDNs as an agenda item on 
the next council call, 17 January 2006, and suggested inviting the 
authors, John Klensin and Patrick Falstrom, of the "Review and 
Recommendations for Internationalized Domain Names" to participate in 
the discussion.

Item 5: Update on initial planning for Wellington meeting

The Secretariat read out the email from Diane Schroeder with the broad 
outline of the meeting schedule for Wellington New Zealand.

31 March, Friday Board Meeting
30 March, Thursday Public Forum (am)
29 March, Wednesday GNSO & CCNSO Council meetings & Public Forum (pm)
28 March, Tuesday Workshops, GAC, GNSO Public Forum - potential 
Board/GNSO Council dinner
27 March, Monday Constituency Day, CCNSO & GAC
26 March, Sunday GAC, GNSO Council Prep
25 March, Saturday GAC, GNSO Council Prep

Item 6 Any other business

a. Follow up on .com settlement GNSO resolution

Bruce Tonkin commented that as GNSO Council chair he would formally send 
the resolution of 2 December 2005 to Dr. Vint Cerf, ICANN Board chair.

Bruce Tonkin declared the GNSO meeting closed and thanked everybody for 
participating.

The meeting ended: 20:40 UTC.

Next GNSO Council teleconference 17 January 2006 at 19:00 UTC
see: Calendar

-- 
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org