An extract of the adopted resolutions by the ICANN Board in Paris on Thursday 26 June 2008. http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm Approval of Minutes GNSO Recommendations on New gTLDs IDNC / IDN Fast-track GNSO Recommendation on Domain Tasting Approval of Operating Plan and Budget for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Update on Draft Amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement Approval of PIR Request to Implement DNSSEC in .ORG ICANN Board of Directors' Code of Conduct Ratification of Selection of Consultant to Conduct Independent Review of the Board Appointment of Independent Review Working Groups Update on Independent Reviews of ICANN Structures Board Committee Assignment Revisions Approval of BGC Recommendations on GNSO Improvements Receipt of Report of President's Strategy Committee Consultation Review of Paris Meeting Structure Board Response to Discussions Arising from Paris Meeting ICANN At-Large Summit Proposal Other Business Thanks to Steve Conte Thanks to Sponsors Thanks to Local Hosts, Staff, Scribes, Interpreters, Event Teams, and Others Approval of Minutes Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the minutes of the Board Meeting of 29 May 2008 are approved. <http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-29may08.htm> GNSO Recommendations on New gTLDs Whereas, the GNSO initiated a policy development process on the introduction of New gTLDs in December 2005. <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/> Whereas, the GNSO Committee on the Introduction of New gTLDs addressed a range of difficult technical, operational, legal, economic, and policy questions, and facilitated widespread participation and public comment throughout the process. Whereas, the GNSO successfully completed its policy development process on the Introduction of New gTLDs and on 7 September 2007, and achieved a Supermajority vote on its 19 policy recommendations. <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-06sep07.shtml> Whereas, the Board instructed staff to review the GNSO recommendations and determine whether they were capable of implementation. Whereas, staff has engaged international technical, operational and legal expertise to provide counsel on details to support the implementation of the Policy recommendations and as a result, ICANN cross-functional teams have developed implementation details in support of the GNSO's policy recommendations, and have concluded that the recommendations are capable of implementation. Whereas, staff has provided regular updates to the community and the Board on the implementation plan. <http://icann.org/topics/new-gtld-program.htm> Whereas, consultation with the DNS technical community has led to the conclusion that there is not currently any evidence to support establishing a limit to how many TLDs can be inserted in the root based on technical stability concerns. <http://www.icann.org/topics/dns-stability-draft-paper-06feb08.pdf> Whereas, the Board recognizes that the process will need to be resilient to unforeseen circumstances. Whereas, the Board has listened to the concerns about the recommendations that have been raised by the community, and will continue to take into account the advice of ICANN's supporting organizations and advisory committees in the implementation plan. Resolved ( 2008.06.26.__ ), based on both the support of the community for New gTLDs and the advice of staff that the introduction of new gTLDs is capable of implementation, the Board adopts the GNSO policy recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm>. Resolved ( 2008.06.26.__ ), the Board directs staff to continue to further develop and complete its detailed implementation plan, continue communication with the community on such work, and provide the Board with a final version of the implementation proposals for the board and community to approve before the new gTLD introduction process is launched. IDNC / IDN Fast-track Whereas, the ICANN Board recognizes that the "IDNC Working Group" developed, after extensive community comment, a final report on feasible methods for timely (fast-track) introduction of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs associated with ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes while an overall, long-term IDN ccTLD policy is under development by the ccNSO. Whereas, the IDNC Working Group has concluded its work and has submitted recommendations for the selection and delegation of "fast-track" IDN ccTLDs and, pursuant to its charter, has taken into account and was guided by consideration of the requirements to: Preserve the security and stability of the DNS; Comply with the IDNA protocols; Take input and advice from the technical community with respect to the implementation of IDNs; and Build on and maintain the current practices for the delegation of ccTLDs, which include the current IANA practices. Whereas, the IDNC Working Group's high-level recommendations require implementation planning. Whereas, ICANN is looking closely at interaction with the final IDN ccTLD PDP process and potential risks, and intends to implement IDN ccTLDs using a procedure that will be resilient to unforeseen circumstances. Whereas, staff will consider the full range of implementation issues related to the introduction of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 list, including means of promoting adherence to technical standards and mechanisms to cover the costs associated with IDN ccTLDs. Whereas, the Board intends that the timing of the process for the introduction of IDN ccTLDs should be aligned with the process for the introduction of New gTLDs. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board thanks the members of the IDNC WG for completing their chartered tasks in a timely manner. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board directs staff to: (1) post the IDNC WG final report for public comments; (2) commence work on implementation issues in consultation with relevant stakeholders; and (3) submit a detailed implementation report including a list of any outstanding issues to the Board in advance of the ICANN Cairo meeting in November2008 GNSO Recommendation on Domain Tasting Whereas, ICANN community stakeholders are increasingly concerned about domain tasting, which is the practice of using the add grace period (AGP) to register domain names in bulk in order to test their profitability. Whereas, on 17 April 2008, the GNSO Council approved, by a Supermajority vote, a motion to prohibit any gTLD operator that has implemented an AGP from offering a refund for any domain name deleted during the AGP that exceeds 10% of its net new registrations in that month, or fifty domain names, whichever is greater. <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-17apr08.shtml> Whereas, on 25 April 2008, the GNSO Council forwarded its formal "Report to the ICANN Board - Recommendation for Domain Tasting" <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/domain-tasting/domain-tasting-board-report-gnso-council-25apr08.pdf>, which outlines the full text of the motion and the full context and procedural history of this proceeding. Whereas, the Board is also considering the Proposed FY 09 Operating Plan and Budget <http://www.icann.org/financials/fiscal-30jun09.htm>, which includes (at the encouragement of the GNSO Council) a proposal similar to the GNSO policy recommendation to expand the applicability of the ICANN transaction fee in order to limit domain tasting. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board adopts the GNSO policy recommendation on domain tasting, and directs staff to implement the policy following appropriate comment and notice periods on the implementation documents. Approval of Operating Plan and Budget for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Whereas, ICANN approved an update to the Strategic Plan in December 2007. <http://www.icann.org/strategic-plan/> Whereas, the Initial Operating Plan and Budget Framework for fiscal year 2009 was presented at the New Delhi ICANN meeting and was posted in February 2008 for community consultation. <http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-04feb08.htm> Whereas, community consultations were held to discuss and obtain feedback on the Initial Framework. Whereas, the draft FY09 Operating Plan and Budget was posted for public comment in accordance with the Bylaws on 17 May 2008 based upon the Initial Framework, community consultation, and consultations with the Board Finance Committee. A slightly revised version was posted on 23 May 2008. <http://www.icann.org/financials/fiscal-30jun09.htm> Whereas, ICANN has actively solicited community feedback and consultation with ICANN's constituencies. <http://forum.icann.org/lists/op-budget-fy2009/> Whereas, the ICANN Board Finance Committee has discussed, and guided staff on, the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget at each of its regularly scheduled monthly meetings. Whereas, the final FY09 Operating Plan and Budget was posted on 26 June 2008. <http://www.icann.org/en/financials/proposed-opplan-budget-v3-fy09-25jun08-en.pdf> Whereas, the ICANN Board Finance Committee met in Paris on 22 June 2008 to discuss the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget, and recommended that the Board adopt the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget. Whereas, the President has advised that the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget reflects the work of staff and community to identify the plan of activities, the expected revenue, and resources necessary to be spent in fiscal year ending 30 June 2009. Whereas, continuing consultation on the budget has been conducted at ICANN's meeting in Paris, at constituency meetings, and during the public forum. Resolved (2008.06.26.___), the Board adopts the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Operating Plan and Budget. <http://www.icann.org/en/financials/proposed-opplan-budget-v3-fy09-25jun08-en.pdf> Update on Draft Amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (For discussion only.) Approval of PIR Request to Implement DNSSEC in .ORG Whereas, Public Interest Registry has submitted a proposal to implement DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) in .ORG. <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/pir-request-03apr08.pdf> Whereas, staff has evaluated the .ORG DNSSEC proposal as a new registry service via the Registry Services Evaluation Policy <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/>, and the proposal included a requested amendment to Section 3.1(c)(i) of the .ORG Registry Agreement <http://icann.org/tlds/agreements/org/proposed-org-amendment-23apr08.pdf> which was posted for public comment along with the PIR proposal. Whereas, the evaluation under the threshold test of the Registry Services Evaluation Policy <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/rsep.html> found a likelihood of security and stability issues associated with the proposed implementation. The RSTEP Review Team considered the proposal and found that there was a risk of a meaningful adverse effect on security and stability, which could be effectively mitigated by policies, decisions and actions to which PIR has expressly committed in its proposal or could be reasonably required to commit. <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/rstep-report-pir-dnssec-04jun08.pdf> Whereas, the Chair of the SSAC has advised that RSTEP's thorough investigation of every issue that has been raised concerning the security and stability effects of DNSSEC deployment concludes that effective measures to deal with all of them can be taken by PIR, and that this conclusion after exhaustive review greatly increases the confidence with which DNSSEC deployment in .ORG can be undertaken. Whereas, PIR intends to implement DNSSEC only after extended testing and consultation. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), that PIR's proposal to implement DNSSEC in .ORG is approved, with the understanding that PIR will continue to cooperate and consult with ICANN on details of the implementation. The President and the General Counsel are authorized to enter the associated amendment to the .ORG Registry Agreement, and to take other actions as appropriate to enable the deployment of DNSSEC in .ORG. ICANN Board of Directors' Code of Conduct Whereas, the members of ICANN's Board of Directors are committed to maintaining a high standard of ethical conduct. Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has developed a Code of Conduct to provide the Board with guiding principles for conducting themselves in an ethical manner. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board directs staff to post the newly proposed ICANN Board of Directors' Code of Conduct for public comment, for consideration by the Board as soon as feasible. [Reference to PDF will be inserted when posted.] Ratification of Selection of Consultant to Conduct Independent Review of the Board Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has recommended that Boston Consulting Group be selected as the consultant to perform the independent review of the ICANN Board. Whereas, the BGC's recommendation to retain BCG was approved by the Executive Committee during its meeting on 12 June 2008. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board ratifies the Executive Committee's approval of the Board Governance Committee's recommendation to select Boston Consulting Group as the consultant to perform the independent review of the ICANN Board. Appointment of Independent Review Working Groups Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has recommended that several working groups should be formed to coordinate pending independent reviews of ICANN structures. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board establishes the following independent review working groups: ICANN Board Independent Review Working Group: Amadeu Abril i Abril, Roberto Gaetano (Chair), Steve Goldstein, Thomas Narten, Rajasekhar Ramaraj, Rita Rodin, and Jean Jacques Subrenat. DNS Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) Independent Review Working Group: Harald Alvestrand (Chair), Steve Crocker and Bruce Tonkin. Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Independent Review Working Group: Robert Blokzijl, Dennis Jennings (Chair), Reinhard Scholl and Suzanne Woolf. Update on Independent Reviews of ICANN Structures (For discussion only.) Board Committee Assignment Revisions Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has recommended that the membership of several Board should be revised, and that all other committees should remain unchanged until the 2008 Annual Meeting. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the membership of the Audit, Finance, and Reconsideration committees are revised as follows: Audit Committee: Raimundo Beca, Demi Getschko, Dennis Jennings, Njeri Rionge and Rita Rodin (Chair). Finance Committee: Raimundo Beca, Peter Dengate Thrush, Steve Goldstein, Dennis Jennings, Rajasekhar Ramaraj (Chair), and Bruce Tonkin (as observer). Reconsideration Committee: Susan Crawford (Chair), Demi Getschko, Dennis Jennings, Rita Rodin, and Jean-Jacques Subrenat. Approval of BGC Recommendations on GNSO Improvements Whereas, Article IV, Section 4 of ICANN's Bylaws calls for periodic reviews of the performance and operation of ICANN's structures by an entity or entities independent of the organization under review. Whereas, the Board created the "Board Governance Committee GNSO Review Working Group" (Working Group) to consider the independent review of the GNSO and other relevant input, and recommend to the Board Governance Committee a comprehensive proposal to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy activities, structure, operations and communications. Whereas, the Working Group engaged in extensive public consultation and discussions, considered all input, and developed a final report < http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03feb...
containing a comprehensive and exhaustive list of proposed recommendations on GNSO improvements.
Whereas, the Board Governance Committee determined that the GNSO Improvements working group had fulfilled its charter and forwarded the final report to the Board for consideration. Whereas, a public comment forum was held open for 60 days to receive, consider and summarize < http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00033.html
public comments on the final report.
Whereas, the GNSO Council and Staff have worked diligently over the past few months to develop a top-level plan for approaching the implementation of the improvement recommendations, as requested by the Board at its New Delhi meeting. Whereas, ICANN has a continuing need for a strong structure for developing policies that reflect to the extent possible a consensus of all stakeholders in the community including ICANN's contracted parties. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board endorses the recommendations of the Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working Group, other than on GNSO Council restructuring, and requests that the GNSO convene a small working group on Council restructuring including one representative from the current NomCom appointees, one member from each constituency and one member from each liaison-appointing advisory committee (if that advisory committee so desires), and that this group should reach consensus and submit a consensus recommendation on Council restructuring by no later than 25 July 2008 for consideration by Receipt of Report of President's Strategy Committee Consultation Whereas, the Chairman of the Board requested that the President's Strategy Committee undertake a process on how to strengthen and complete the ICANN multi-stakeholder model. Whereas, the PSC has developed three papers that outline key areas and possible responses to address them: "Transition Action Plan," "Improving Institutional Confidence in ICANN," and "FAQ." < http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-16jun08-en.htm > Whereas, these documents and the proposals contained in them have been discussed at ICANN's meeting in Paris. Whereas, a dedicated webpage has been launched to provide the community with information, including regular updates < http://icann.org/jpa/iic/ >. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board thanks the President's Strategy Committee for its work to date, and instructs ICANN staff to undertake the public consultation recommended in the action plan, and strongly encourages the entire ICANN community to participate in the continuing consultations on the future of ICANN by reviewing and submitting comments to the PSC by 31 July 2008. Selection of Mexico City for March 2009 ICANN Meeting Whereas, ICANN intends to hold its first meeting for calendar year 2009 in the Latin America region; Whereas, the Mexican Internet Association (AMIPCI) has agreed to host the meeting; Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board accepts the AMIPCI proposal to host ICANN's 34th global meeting in Mexico City, in March 2009. Review of Paris Meeting Structure (For discussion only.) Board Response to Discussions Arising from Paris Meeting (For discussion only.) ICANN At-Large Summit Proposal Whereas, at the ICANN meeting in New Delhi in February 2008, the Board resolved to direct staff to work with the ALAC to finalise a proposal to fund an ICANN At-Large Summit, for consideration as part of the 2008-2009 operating plan and budget process. < http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15feb08.htm > Whereas, potential funding for such a summit has been identified in the FY09 budget. < http://www.icann.org/financials/fiscal-30jun09.htm
Whereas, a proposal for the Summit was completed and submitted shortly before the ICANN Meeting in Paris. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board approves the proposal to hold an ICANN At-Large Summit as a one-time special event, and requests that the ALAC work with ICANN Staff to implement the Summit in a manner that achieves efficiency, including considering the Mexico meeting as the venue. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), with the maturation of At-Large and the proposal for the At-Large Summit's objectives set out, the Board expects the ALAC to look to more self-funding for At-Large travel in the fiscal year 2010 plan, consistent with the travel policies of other constituencies. _______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann