A vital part of ICANN’s processes is the opportunity for there to be public comment on each substantial piece of work before it is put forward for final approval. This is an archive of one month’s public comment periods, arranged according to the month in which the comment period was closed.
Each box below provides a brief explanation of what the comment period hoped to achieve, as well as: links to relevant reports and/or webpages; a link to the official announcement of the comment period; a link to where all existing comments can be found; and an email link for anyone that wished to send in a comment. A “summary/analysis” objectively reviews the comments.
| Forums Closing This Month | Public Comment | Archived Forums |
|
2009 |
Closed Forums
| Expense Analysis | |||||
|
Explanation: As one important element of transparency and accountability, ICANN strives to publish meaningful, accessible financial and operational information. Through its history, ICANN has consistently increased the quantity and quality in the amount of detail provided in its financial reporting. Within the last 24 months, for example, ICANN developed monthly dashboard reporting on financial data. Earlier this year, the dashboard started to provide financial information by primary functions. See http://forms.icann.org//idashboard/public/. In response to community requests to view ICANN’s expenses in reports more aligned with stakeholder interest areas, ICANN has developed a new financial report: Expense Area Group (EAG) reporting (formally known as Cost Analysis Group). The categories depicted in this view of ICANN’s budget are based on ICANN’s organizational structure. http://www.icann.org/en/structure/ The attached paper [PDF, 272K] describes the Expense Area Group reporting, the analysis and methodology used to create these reports, and more information on cost accounting at ICANN. This new EAG reporting is simply one more view of ICANN’s finances, equal in importance with a functional representation, or a representation by ICANN’s accounting codes. In fact, no single representation captures the fundamentally interconnected nature of ICANN’s work and mission. ICANN is responsible for coordinating the Internet’s unique identifiers at a global level, which is only possible when all of ICANN’s organizational structures are working with each other, and on a global basis. Still, this EAG analysis should provide another useful way to understand the totality of ICANN’s financial operation. The community is encouraged to provide feedback on this new financial report, to help ensure that this type of reporting is responsive to the needs of the community. |
||||
| Staff member responsible: Kevin Wilson | |||||
| Trademark Protection (IRT Final Report) | |||||
|
Explanation: IRT Final Report on Trademark Protection Issues [PDF, 300K] now available for Public Comment The IRT team participated in numerous teleconferences and several face-to-face meetings in Washington, D.C. and San Francisco, California, over a two month period. The resulting recommendations report on Trademark Protection Issues identifies several proposed solutions, including:
|
||||
| Staff member responsible: Carole Cornell | |||||
| ccNSO Review (Terms of Reference) | |||||
|
Explanation: ICANN’s bylaws require that Supporting Organizations, Councils and Advisory Committees be reviewed by an entity or entities independent of them. In accordance with Article IV, Section 4, Clause 1 of ICANN bylaws, the review of each key structure of ICANN is designed to determine:
The Structural Improvements Committee approved for public comments the proposed Terms of Reference[PDF, 205K], which detail questions that would guide the independent review of ICANN’s Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO); the ICANN Board agreed and directed staff to post these Terms of Reference. Comments on these ToR are now sought from the community; they will be taken into consideration for the finalization of the ToR and the publication of the relevant Request for Proposal for the selection of the independent reviewer of ccNSO. |
||||
| Staff member responsible: Marco Lorenzoni | |||||
| SSAC Review (Final Report) | |||||
|
Explanation: ICANN appointed JAS Communications as the consultants for the independent review of SSAC, the Security and Stability Advisory Committee. The consultants released their draft final report [PDF, 673K], which was presented and discussed at the ICANN Mexico City meeting. Slides used during the presentation and transcript of the discussion are available here. A public comment period was then open to allow inputs from the community. Based on comments and feedbacks received from the community and the SSAC review Working Group, JAS Communications finalized their report to ICANN. The final report of external reviewersis available in English [PDF, 745K]; further linguistic versions will follow shortly. Comments on this version are now sought from the community; they will be taken into consideration by the SSAC review Working Group for the issuing of their recommendations to the Structural Improvements Committee and the Board. |
||||
| Staff member responsible: Marco Lorenzoni | |||||
| Plan for Enhanced Internet Security, Stability and Resiliency | |||||
|
Explanation: ICANN has developed a plan to enhance the security, stability and resiliency [PDF, 1,930K] of the Internet’s naming and addressing systems as called for in its Strategic Plan and in accordance within its bylaws. The plan notes how the Internet has thrived by engaging many stakeholders who collaborate to foster communication, creativity and commerce in a global commons. The interoperability of the global commons depends on the operation and coordination of the Internet’s unique identifier systems. ICANN and the operators of these systems acknowledge that maintaining and enhancing the security, stability and resiliency of these systems is a core element of their collaborative relationship. The plan notes the growing risks to the security, stability and resiliency of the unique identifier systems and the need to collaboratively address these risks. The plan delineates ICANN’s specific programs that will address security, stability and resiliency. It also details planned activities that will enhance its contributions through the next operational year. This first version of the plan is intended as a foundation for ICANN and its community to establish a framework for organizing its security, stability and resiliency efforts. The plan does not envision major new roles or programs for ICANN in this area. The programs and initiatives in which ICANN plans to engage during the 2009-2010 operating year include:
|
||||
| Staff member responsible: Greg Rattray | |||||
Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments |
|||||
| Draft FY10 Operating Plan and Budget | |||||
|
Explanation: Draft FY10 Operating Plan and Budget for Community Review [PDF, 936K]
The draft FY10 Operating Plan and Budget is posted and ready for community feedback. The draft plan and budget follows the plans described in the FY10 Framework which was posted in mid February prior to the Mexico City meeting. The FY10 Framework was discussed with members of the ICANN community at the Mexico City meeting in March, through online public fora, and through conference calls with ICANN constituencies. The comments received and the summary analysis of those comments can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200904.html#op-budget-fy2010. This draft FY10 Operating Plan and Budget provides more detailed information but follows the essence of the plan and budget described in the Framework with adjustments in response to community feedback and further research including:
In addition, more detailed analysis and more views of ICANN’s budget are provided. ICANN has now completed its 10th year, and this draft FY10 Operating Plan and Budget reflects a growing organization that is attaining operational maturity in many areas. Many of the organizational support elements envisioned for ICANN are at levels adequate to provide sufficient support for the current scale of community work. This means that ICANN’s spending growth is anticipated to slow substantially in the FY10 budget as compared with previous years (4.9% compared with 30.1% in FY09). After more public comment and feedback, the budget is expected to be adopted by the ICANN Board at its Sydney meeting in June 2009. The world economic environment has dictated that costs that can be deferred will be. ICANN will likely under run its FY09 budget through some explicit cost controls as well as through the shifting of some program expenses into FY10. As always, the community is encouraged to comment on how well this plan addresses priorities identified in the Strategic Plan. The community is encouraged to comment further regarding the plan elements that might be streamlined, reduced, or deferred: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200906.html#draft-opplan-budget |
||||
| Staff member responsible: Kevin Wilson | |||||
| Revised gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group Petition | |||||
|
Explanation:As part of the comprehensive GNSO Improvements effort, last August the ICANN Board approved the formation of four new Stakeholder Groups (SGs). These SG structures represent a new concept for the GNSO that was envisioned by the Board Governance Committee GNSO Review Working Group On GNSO Improvements (BGC WG). On 4 March, the Registries Constituency of the GNSO (RyC) submitted its original petition and charter proposal for the gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) in the Contracted Parties House of the GNSO. On 24 April, the RyC submitted the “final version” of its petition for approval of Articles of Operation for the RySG. Final RyC SG Proposal [PDF, 276K] Original 4 March 2009 Ry SG Filing [PDF, 58K] The overall GNSO Improvements effort and the role SGs will play in that arena is more fully described in the Stakeholder Group section of the GNSO Improvements Information Page - http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/stakeholder-process-en.htm All members of the ICANN community are now invited to review, compare and comment on the two RySG submissions through 10 June 2009. Staff Responsible: Robert Hoggarth Deadline and How to Submit Comments: The Staff is opening a 30-day public consultation forum, from 11 May 2009 through 10 June 2009, and invites community comments on this topic. To submit comments: Comments on the document are welcome via email at ryc-sg-petition@icann.org. This public forum will be open at least through 5 April 2009 and is subject to extension as described above. To view comments: An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at http://forum.icann.org/lists/ryc-sg-petition/. For a copy of the public announcement of this forum please see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-11may09-en.htm. |
||||
| Staff member responsible: Robert Hoggarth | |||||
| Revised Conflicts of Interest Policy | |||||
|
Explanation:A new public comment period opens today on the revised Conflicts of Interest Policy [PDF, 117K]. The ICANN Board initially adopted a Conflicts of Interest Policy on 4 March 1999, pursuant to ICANN Bylaws, Article V, Section 7, and Article VI, Section 3(b)]. The Board Governance Committee ("BGC") has responsibility for administration of ICANN’s Conflicts of Interest Policy. The Committee charter specifically states that the BGC “shall periodically review the Conflicts of Interest Policy and consider whether any modifications should be made to the policy to improve its effectiveness.” In furtherance of its role, the BGC has reviewed and significantly revised the Conflicts of Interest Policy in order to, among other things, remain current with legal disclosure requirements. On 23 April 2009, the ICANN Board of Directors followed the BGC’s recommendation that the revised Conflicts of Interest Policy [PDF, 117K] be posted for public comment. |
||||
| Staff member responsible: Amy Stathos | |||||
| Single, Two and Select Three Character Names in Dot-pro | |||||
|
Explanation:RegistryPro has proposed allocation of single, two and select three-character second-level domain names in Dot-pro through the Registry Services Evaluation Process, and is seeking an amendment to proceed with a phased allocation program. The amendments provide for changes to Appendix K, List of Reserved TLD Strings (Schedule of Reserved Names), and a new Section 12 in Appendix C, Functional Specifications.
All documentation related to the RegistryPro proposal is available at http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/#2009002. |
||||
| Staff member responsible: Patrick Jones | |||||