[council] Draft GNSO Council minutes 12 July 2007

[GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG]

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

Dear Council Members,

Please find the draft minutes of the GNSO Council teleconference held on
12 July 2007.

Please let me know if you would like any changes made.

Thank you very much.

Kind regards,
Glen
.......................................................................
12 July 2007

Proposed agenda and documents

List of attendees:
Philip Sheppard - Commercial & Business Users C.
Mike Rodenbaugh - Commercial & Business Users C.
Alistair Dixon - Commercial & Business Users C - absent - apologies
Greg Ruth - ISCPC - absent - apologies
Antonio Harris - ISCPC - absent - apologies
Tony Holmes - ISCPC
Thomas Keller- Registrars - absent - apologies
Ross Rader - Registrars - absent - apologies
Adrian Kinderis - Registrars - absent - apologies
Chuck Gomes - gTLD registries
Edmon Chung - gTLD registries - absent
Cary Karp - gTLD registries
Kristina Rosette - Intellectual Property Interests C
Ute Decker - Intellectual Property Interests C
Cyril Chau - Intellectual Property Interests C - absent
Robin Gross - NCUC
Norbert Klein - NCUC - absent
Mawaki Chango - NCUC - absent - apologies
Sophia Bekele - Nominating Committee appointee - absent - apologies
Jon Bing - Nominating Committee appointee - absent
Avri Doria - Nominating Committee appointee

8 Council Members
(10 Votes - no quorum)

ICANN Staff

Denise Michel - Vice President, Policy Development
Olof Nordling - Manager, Policy Development Coordination
Liz Williams - Senior Policy Counselor
Maria Farrell - GNSO Policy Officer
Craig Schwartz - Chief gTLD Registry Liaison
Tina Dam - IDN Program Director
Karin Lentz - gTLD Registry Liaison
Glen de Saint Géry - GNSO Secretariat

GNSO Council Liaisons
Suzanne Sene - GAC Liaison - absent - apologies
Alan Greenberg - ALAC Liaison - absent - apologies

Rita Rodin - ICANN Board member

No Quorum

MP3 Recording

Avri Doria chaired this meeting

Approval of the agenda

AOB - possible additions
Role of Vice chair
Future ICANN meetings

Item 1: Update any Statements of Interest
No update of statements

Item 2: Approval of GNSO Council minutes
- 7 June 2007
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg03587.html

Approval of minutes deferred to next Council meeting in the absence of 
quorum

Item 3: Review of Pending Action Items
http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-action-list.htm

(GNSO Council chair will update this table after each meeting, if not 
more often, and suggest that Council go through it quickly at the 
beginning of each of the Council's monthly meetings.)

Pending action list

- Contractual Conditions
Liz Williams reported that the Staff report should be provided to the 
Council one week before the next Council meeting on August 9, 2007 .
- WHOIS update
Philip Sheppard, working group chair reported that the working group 
would possibly need 3 more meetings and that the final outcome report 
would not be ready for the next Council meeting on August 9, 2007.
- new TLD
Avri Doria reported that the committee was on track and that the final 
recommendations and report would be ready for discussion at the Council 
meeting on 6 September 2007 as planned.

The following items would be dealt with on the agenda.
- IGO Issues follow-up
- Domain Tasting issues follow-up
- Response to GAC IDN question paper
- RN recommendations for existing TLD's

Item 4: Follow up on Domain Tasting decision
Selection of ad-hoc group

Olof Nordling was assigned as the staff support to the Domain Name 
Tasting issue and Mike Rodenbaugh volunteered to coordinate the ad hoc 
group. There were currently 25 subscribers to the ad hoc group.

Council comments generally indicated that the group should be narrowed 
down as a planning and preparation group, and that constituencies should 
be requested to pick someone as their main representative.

Rita Rodin supported this idea, saying that it was important to get 
qualified and informed people up front on the issue with a broad range 
of ideas on the issue.
Avri Doria commented that some of the tasks of the ad hoc planning group 
would be gathering additional information, drafting terms of reference 
and recommending a way in which the work should be done, whether by a 
working group, committee of the Council as a whole or task force and 
coming back to Council with its recommendations.

Item 5: Approach to handling board request on GAC IDN questions
http://gac.icann.org/web/communiques/gac28com.pdf

Avri Doria commented that there were 2 parts to the ICANN Board resolution:

Resolved (07.___), the ICANN Board respectfully requests that that the 
ICANN community including the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC provide the 
Board with responses to the published list of issues and questions that 
need to be addressed in order to move forward with IDN ccTLDs associated 
with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes in a manner that ensures the 
continued security and stability of the Internet. The Board requests 
status reports regarding progress by the conclusion of the ICANN meeting 
in Los Angeles in October 2007.
Resolved (07.___), the ICANN Board respectfully requests that the ICANN 
community including the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC continue to work 
collaboratively, taking the technical limitations and requirements into 
consideration, to explore both an interim and an overall approach to IDN 
ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes and recommend a 
course of action to the Board in a timely manner.

Avri Doria suggested that some of the possible issues to consider were:
- the approach to drafting questions, whether an ad hoc group should be 
formed that would report back to Council with questions and responses?
- a question and answer session with the ccNSO and the GAC to understand 
the issues
- checking where the work done by the Reserved Names and IDN working 
groups could be useful.

Cary Karp commented that one of the key issues was the extensibility in 
the inherent notion of country codes which are taken literary from a 
list of abbreviations prepared by an external agency while the country 
codes being addressed were a localized parallel system of correlates to 
those ISO 3166 code which could not be considered in the context of 
country codes. In particular, the contractual prospects with ICANN would 
be completely different from those of the generic top level domains. 
Cary continued that it would be worthwhile to comment from the generic 
perspective.

Olof Nordling commented that the joint efforts of the ccNSO and the GAC 
had produced an Issues Report Selection of IDN ccTLDs associated with 
the ISO 3166-1 two letter codes 
http://www.icann.org/topics/idn/ccnso-gac-issues-report-on-idn-09jul07.pdf

Not all countries had advanced at the same pace and it was realised that 
there had to be an intermediate as well a long term solution to the IDN 
ccTLD issue which prompted the two track approach proposed in the Board 
resolution.

Chuck Gomes highlighted 2 issues:
1) whether ASCII and IDN new TLDs would be introduced at the same time and

2) whether if new IDN TLDs introduced by ccTLDs would be considered to 
be gTLDs. The nature of the GNSO could change drastically if the latter 
happened

Cary Karp commented further that it would be difficult to maintain the 
dichotomy between the generic and the country code top level domains and 
the approach to the issue should be an early recognition that there 
could be a completely different type of top level domain emerging from 
the current ones.

Rita Rodin commented that if a double track for examining the issues 
would be possible, it would be helpful to pursue it.

Action Item on Resolution
Resolved (07.___), the ICANN Board respectfully requests that that the 
ICANN community including the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC provide the 
Board with responses to the published list of issues and questions that 
need to be addressed in order to move forward with IDN ccTLDs associated 
with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes in a manner that ensures the 
continued security and stability of the Internet. The Board requests 
status reports regarding progress by the conclusion of the ICANN meeting 
in Los Angeles in October 2007.

Chuck Gomes, with Olof Nordling as staff support, volunteered to 
coordinate and work with a small group to
prepare a draft paper for Council consideration in response to the 
resolution.


Action Item on Resolution
Resolved (07.___), the ICANN Board respectfully requests that the ICANN 
community including the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC continue to work 
collaboratively, taking the technical limitations and requirements into 
consideration, to explore both an interim and an overall approach to IDN 
ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes and recommend a 
course of action to the Board in a timely manner.

Avri Doria suggested taking it upon herself to talk to other communities 
and gather ideas about how to work collaboratively as well as soliciting 
input from the ad hoc group on the second part of the resolution

Item 6: Approach to handling RN recommendations for existing TLDs
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-council/msg00624.html

In the final report, 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/final-report-rn-wg-23may07.htm, 
the Reserved Names working group recommended additional work for several 
name categories.

- Recommendation 2, ICANN & IANA names at the Top level, IDN: For all 
but “example”, reservations are not required for Unicode versions in 
various scripts, or ACE versions of such translations or 
transliterations if they exist.
All possible Unicode versions of the name “example” must be reserved

- Recommendation 3, ICANN & IANA names at the 2nd & 3rd levels, IDN: For 
all but “example”, reservations are not required for Unicode versions in 
various scripts, or ACE versions of such translations or 
transliterations if they exist. Do not try to translate ‘example’ into 
Unicode versions for various scripts or to reserve any ACE versions of 
such translations or transliterations if they exist, except on a case by 
case basis as proposed by given registries.

The RN-WG validated the above two recommendations with IDN experts but 
suggested that the final recommendation be tested one more time with IDN 
experts. Upon further discussion, the Council decided that no further 
validation was needed so the recommendations 2 and 3 will remain unchanged.

- Recommendation 4, Symbols at all levels: We recommend that current 
practice be maintained, so that no symbols other than the ‘-’ [hyphen] 
be considered for use at any level, unless technology at some time 
permits the use of symbols.

Cary Karp promised to rewrite this recommendation pertaining to symbols. 
Chuck will follow-up with Cary in this regard.

- Recommendation 5, Single and Two Character IDNs at all levels: Single 
and two-character U-labels on the top level and second level of a domain 
name should not be restricted in general. At the top level, requested 
strings should be analyzed on a case by case basis in the new gTLD 
process depending on the script and language used in order to determine 
whether the string should be granted for allocation in the DNS. Single 
and two character labels at the second level and the third level if 
applicable should be available for registration, provided they are 
consistent with the IDN Guidelines. Examples of IDNs include .?, ??. 
com, ????.icom.museum.

Additional examples will be provided by Avri Doria and Edmon Chung; Liz 
Williams will add the new examples.

- Recommendation 7, Single Letters and Digits at the 2nd level: We 
recommend that single letters and digits be released at the second level 
in future gTLDs, and that those currently reserved in existing gTLDs 
should be released. This release should be contingent upon the use of 
appropriate allocation frameworks. More work may be needed.

If an allocation method is needed the whole Council will be involved. 
Liz Williams confirmed that ICANN staff was working on this issue.

- Recommendations 20-30, Geographic and Controversial names.

These recommendations are being dealt with by the full new gTLD committee.

Avri Doria suggested that the items be kept on the pending action item 
list http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-action-list.htm

Item 7: discussion and vote on Contractual conditions
- Final Discussion of report
- Vote
(note if the Staff report is not available on Thursday 5 July, this item 
falls off the schedule and we just do a schedule update in the review of 
pending actions item)

The staff report was not available, but was scheduled to be published 
one week before the GNSO Council meeting on August 9, 2007 where the 
final discussion and vote would take place.

Item 8: Initial planning for LA

8.1 Review suggestion for full day equivalent session on New gTLD 
recommendations
It has been suggested that it would be useful to do a full day's meeting 
(perhaps split into two sessions on different days) to cover all of the 
recommendations in the New gTLD PDP that will have been sent on to the 
board by then. Different council members could take leadership of 
discussion section on each of the recommendations.

Chuck Gomes commented that the meetings in San Juan indicated that there 
was a tremendous lack of understanding about the recommendations on new 
gTLDs. During those meetings there had not been enough time to focus on 
the total package and explain to the community all the thinking that the 
committee had put into the process over the last 18 months.
In view of the possible action the ICANN Board might take on the 
recommendations and public comments that would be received at the ICANN 
meetings in Los Angeles it would be important for the Council committee 
to have interaction with all parts of the community, the supporting 
organizations, the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) and the At Large 
Advisory Committee (ALAC) to make sure the recommendations as a whole 
were fully understood.

Philip Sheppard suggested that the implementation plans should also be 
clearly defined because without implementation details certain questions 
were left unanswered.

Ute Decker empasised that not only the constituencies should be made 
aware of the tutorials, but the business world who needed to be informed 
of implementation details.

Avri Doria suggested that the staff produce a briefing on implementation 
plans and that another session would be needed by staff, not during the 
Los Angeles meetings but early in the new year at the next ICANN meeting.

Denise Michel confirmed that there were plans to devote Monday 29 
October from 12:00 midday onwards to such a tutorial session open to all 
stakeholders and that possibly the GNSO Council/ICANN Board dinner would 
follow.

Action Item
Avri Doria, Chuck Gomes and Kristina Rosette agreed to form a group to 
produce an outline for the tutorial, indicate volunteers to lead the 
discussions, find out what the ALAC and GAC need to be informed about 
and do timely outreach. The discussion would continue at the next meeting.

8.2 - suggestion for restructuring Public Forum + Public meetings

Proposal to try an experiment with the Public Forum and public council 
meeting in LA. Instead of the current arrangement of a meeting for 
listening and then a meeting for talking, we could divide a 4 hour 
meeting up into topical sections. Each topic could then be structured to 
include:
- Constituency Overview on the Topic
- Public comment on the topic
- Council discussion and resolution on the Topic.

Avri Doria commented in response to a suggestion that the GNSO Council 
meeting and the GNSO public forum should be made more interactive, that 
a different meeting format would be considered for the Los Angeles 
meetings, and requested input from the constituencies on this.

Philip Sheppard expressed concern and considered that it may work when 
Council was being informed on an issue, but not necessarily taking a 
vote on the issue. The vote on a well discussed and thought out response 
on a long standing piece of work could turn out in a completely opposite 
way if swayed by the public discussion.

It was generally agreed that there should be a period between the public 
input and the Council pronouncing a vote, such as a follow up Council 
meeting shortly afterwards.

Avri Doria proposed drafting an agenda would be divided into topical 
blocks for the GNSO Council meeting and GNSO Public Forum in Los Angeles.

8.3 other planning issues

Chuck Gomes suggested having the four hour interactive sessions before 
constituency day and then have a brief meeting, while still at the 
venue, for the Council after constituency day thereby giving the 
constituencies the chance to incorporate public comment at the end of 
the meeting.

Item 9: Any Other Business

9.1 Role of vice chair
Philip Sheppard raised a question on the email list regarding a specific 
role for the vice chair.
It was agreed to continue discussing the topic on the Council mailing list.

9.3 Avri Doria mentioned that there may be an additional Council meeting 
on August 23, 2007.

9.4 Vote of thanks to Alistair Dixon

Avri Doria on behalf of the GNSO Council, proposed a vote of thanks to 
Alistair Dixon for all his work as a councillor on several working 
groups and committees. It was Alistair Dixon's last meeting as he 
resigned from the Council as the CBUC representative.

The motion passed by unanimous acclamation.

Avri Doria formally closed the meeting and thanked everyone for their 
participation.

Next GNSO Council teleconference will be on 9 August 2007 at 12:00 UTC.
see: Calendar


Action items arising from the Minutes

Item 4. GNSO Secretariat to provide Mike Rodenbaugh with the subscribed 
members to the domain name tasting ad hoc group and suggest meeting times.

Item 5.1
Action Item on resolution
Resolved (07.___), the ICANN Board respectfully requests that that the 
ICANN community including the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC provide the 
Board with responses to the published list of issues and questions that 
need to be addressed in order to move forward with IDN ccTLDs associated 
with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes in a manner that ensures the 
continued security and stability of the Internet. The Board requests 
status reports regarding progress by the conclusion of the ICANN meeting 
in Los Angeles in October 2007

Chuck Gomes, with Olof Nordling as staff support, volunteered to 
coordinate and work with a small group to prepare a draft paper for 
Council consideration in response to the resolution.

Item 5.2
Action Item on Resolution
Resolved (07.___), the ICANN Board respectfully requests that the ICANN 
community including the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC continue to work 
collaboratively, taking the technical limitations and requirements into 
consideration, to explore both an interim and an overall approach to IDN 
ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes and recommend a 
course of action to the Board in a timely manner.

Avri Doria suggested taking it upon herself to talk to other communities 
and gather ideas about how to work collaboratively as well as soliciting 
input from the ad hoc group on the second part of the resolution

Item 8.1
Action Item
Avri Doria, Chuck Gomes and Kristina Rosette agreed to form a group to 
produce an outline for the tutorial, indicate volunteers to lead the 
discussions, find out what the ALAC and GAC need to be informed about 
and do timely outreach. The discussion would continue at the next meeting.
-- 
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org