أنشطة واجتماعات مجلس الإدارة

هل لديك سؤال أو تخوف أو شكوى؟ سوف تساعد المعلومات المدرجة هنا في توجيهك إلى الإجابة الصحيحة أو جهة الاتصال المناسبة.

هذا المحتوى متوفر فقط باللغة (أو اللغات)

  • English

Approved Resolutions | Regular Meeting of the ICANN Board | 16 March 2023

1. Consent Agenda

a. Appointment of Root Server Operator Organization Representative to the RSSAC

Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws call for the establishment of the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) with the role to advise the ICANN community and ICANN Board of Directors on matters relating to the operation, administration, security, and integrity of the Internet's Root Server System.

Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws call for the ICANN Board of Directors to appoint one RSSAC member from each root server operator organization, based on recommendations from the RSSAC Chair.

Whereas, the RSSAC Chair has recommended to the ICANN Board of Directors the appointment of representatives from Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and Réseaux IP Européens (RIPE) Network Coordination Centre to the RSSAC.

Resolved (2023.03.16.01), the ICANN Board of Directors appoints Hans Petter Holen as the representative of RIPE Network Coordination Centre and John Augenstein as the representative of DISA to the RSSAC through 31 December 2023 and 31 December 2025, respectively.

Rationale for Resolution 2023.03.16.01

In May 2013, the root server operator organizations agreed to an initial membership of representatives for the RSSAC, each nominating an individual. The ICANN Board of Directors approved the initial membership of the RSSAC in July 2013 with staggered terms. The representative from RIPE Network Coordination Centre, Kaveh Ranjbar, resigned from RSSAC on 25 January 2023. The representative from DISA, Ryan Stephenson, resigned from RSSAC on 1 March 2023.

Today, the Board is taking action pursuant to Article 12, Section 12.2 (c)(ii) of the ICANN Bylaws to appoint members to the RSSAC.

The appointment of the RSSAC members is not anticipated to have any fiscal impact on the ICANN organization (ICANN org) that has not already been accounted for in the budgeted resources necessary for ongoing support of the RSSAC.

This resolution is an Organizational Administrative Function for which no public comment is required. The appointment of the RSSAC members contributes to the public interest and the commitment of the ICANN org to strengthen the security, stability, and resiliency of the Domain Name System in the public interest and is in accordance with ICANN's mission.

b. Storage Area Network Equipment Replacement

Whereas, ICANN is dedicated to preserving the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet's Domain Name System (DNS).

Whereas, ICANN organization's (ICANN org) current storage network equipment is reaching its end of life and needs to be replaced.

Whereas, [Redacted – Confidential Negotiation Information] has provided hardware to ICANN org over the last several years.

Whereas, [Redacted – Confidential Negotiation Information] has the solution that best addresses ICANN org's technical requirements for storage area network equipment.

Whereas, ICANN org and the Board Finance Committee has recommended that the Board authorize the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to take all necessary actions to enter into, and make disbursement in furtherance of, a new storage system and support contract with [Redacted – Confidential Negotiation Information].

Resolved (2023.03.16.02), the Board authorizes the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s) to enter into, and make disbursement in furtherance of, a new storage system and support contract with [Redacted – Confidential Negotiation Information], in an amount not to exceed [Redacted – Confidential Negotiation Information].

Resolved (2023.03.16.03), specific items within this resolution shall remain confidential for negotiation purposes pursuant to Article 3, section 3.5(b) of the ICANN Bylaws until the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), determines that the confidential information may be released.

Rationale for Resolutions 2023.03.16.02 – 2023.03.16.03

ICANN org conducted a Request for Quotation to solicit bids for necessary storage area network equipment.

The infrastructure team has spent months researching and analyzing the best options for this equipment replacement.

After review of the bids received, only [Redacted – Confidential Negotiation Information] meets all of ICANN org's requirements and is also a leader in the Primary Storage Gartner Magic Quadrant.  Further, the relationship with this vendor has been beneficial to ICANN org and has been a success over the years.

This decision is in the furtherance of ICANN's mission and the support of public interest to support the security, stability, and resiliency of the DNS by ensuring that the company can rely on a stable and highly available storage area network.

This decision will have a fiscal impact, but most of the costs were budgeted and the remainder can be absorbed.

As noted above, this action is intended to have a positive impact on the security, stability, and resiliency of the domain name system.

This is an Organizational Administrative Function that does not require public comment.

2. Main Agenda

a. Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development

Whereas, on 24 March 2021, the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council (GNSO Council) transmitted its Recommendations Report regarding adoption of the final recommendations (Recommendations) from the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process to the ICANN Board to review and consider the recommendations, affirmations, affirmations with modification, and implementation guidance (collectively Outputs) contained in the "Final Report on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process" (Final Report).

Whereas, a public comment period to gather community input was opened from 22 April 2021 to 1 June 2021, with the resulting Staff Report published on 15 June 2021.

Whereas, the Board received input on the Final Report from the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), and Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), which informed the Board's deliberations on the Outputs.

Whereas, on 12 September 2021, the Board, in recognition of the complex operational requirements inherent in the implementation of the Outputs, directed the ICANN President and CEO to prepare to undertake an Operational Design Phase (ODP). The ODP was initiated to provide the Board with analysis to inform its decision on whether the Outputs are in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN in accordance with the ICANN Bylaws.

Whereas, on 12 December 2022, ICANN organization (ICANN org) completed the ODP by delivering the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Operational Design Assessment (ODA) to the Board for its consideration.

Whereas, the Board appreciates the considerations around the Global Public Interest (GPI) in the Final Report. The Board has reviewed these considerations around the GPI in the Final Report.

Whereas, the Board has engaged with the community on the Final Report and the ODA, including through the Advisory Committee Advice processes, correspondence1, written updates, webinars, and ICANN Public Meetings.

Whereas, the Board developed a Scorecard to facilitate its consideration of the Outputs titled "Scorecard on Subsequent Procedures PDP" (Scorecard).

Whereas, the Board notes the implementation analysis and proposed structure provided by ICANN org in the ODA, comprising four separate yet interdependent implementation streams: Policy Implementation, Program Design, Infrastructure Development, and Operationalization (collectively the Four Implementation Streams).

Whereas, the Board notes the ongoing community discussions relating to Topic 17: Applicant Support, Topic 23: Closed Generics, and Topic 25: Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs), as well as additional dependencies concerning specific Review Team Recommendations, the Name Collision Analysis Project Study 2 Report (NCAP2), and other items noted in Section C of the Scorecard. The Board also notes the importance of concluding these dependencies before the next round of new gTLDs can be opened.

Whereas, the Board has identified that the completion of the Policy Implementation stream (i.e., finalizing the updated Applicant Guidebook) is dependent on the resolution of those recommendations that are designated as "pending" in the Scorecard, as well as all other dependencies.

Whereas, the completion of the implementation of both the Program Design and Infrastructure Development streams are dependent on the approval of the Applicant Guidebook.

Whereas, the completion of the Operationalization stream is dependent on finalizing the Program Design and the Infrastructure Development streams.

Whereas, the Board understands the need for a comprehensive implementation plan containing a work plan that includes relevant information for the Infrastructure Development stream, timelines, and anticipated resource requirements (the Implementation Plan) to announce the opening of the next round of new gTLDs.

Whereas, the Board would like to receive the Implementation Plan no later than 1 August 2023.

Whereas, the Board understands that the delivery of the Implementation Plan no later than 1 August 2023 requires the satisfactory completion of the following four deliverables (the Deliverables) by the last day of the ICANN77 Public Meeting (15 June 2023):

  1. A plan and timeline as agreed upon by the ICANN Board and the GNSO Council for consideration and resolution of all Outputs contained in Section B of the Scorecard;
  2. A working methodology and Implementation Review Team (IRT) work plan and timeline as agreed upon by ICANN org and the GNSO Council;
  3. A GNSO Council project plan and timeline for policy work, or an alternate path, on how to handle closed generics for the next round of new gTLDs; and
  4. A project plan from the GNSO Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) Working Group (WG) identifying all charter questions that will impact the next Applicant Guidebook, along with considerations to ensure a consistent solution on IDN Variant TLDs with the ccPDP4 on IDN ccTLDs (in accordance with prior Board Resolution 2019.03.14.09), and a timeline by when the IDNs EPDP WG will deliver relevant recommendations to the GNSO Council.

Whereas, the Board recognizes that the delivery of the Implementation Plan by 1 August 2023 and the successful completion of all Four Implementation Streams to open the next round of new gTLDs will require the collective commitment, considerable resources, and effort from the ICANN Board, the ICANN community, and ICANN org. The Board encourages all parties to work together efficiently and constructively to meet relevant timelines.

Whereas, the Board Finance Committee (BFC) has considered ICANN org's funding request for the implementation work to be incurred through 31 October 2023, and has recommended that the Board approve funding of up to US$9 million to cover implementation costs through that date. The source for this funding is the remaining funds of the 2012 new gTLD round.

Whereas, any request for implementation funding beyond 31 October 2023 should be submitted to the BFC in a timely manner, so that the committee can make a recommendation to the Board for its consideration at the ICANN78 Public Meeting.

Whereas, the Board emphasizes a need to continue ICANN org's outreach and communications strategy to promote the New gTLD Program to prospective applicants, with an emphasis on encouraging uptake from potential applicants in currently "underserved or underrepresented regions" to enable the introduction of new gTLDs (including both ASCII and IDN) into the domain name space, as noted in the Final Report.

Whereas, the Board understands the need for regular updates on the progress and status of implementation until the opening of the next application round of the New gTLD Program.

Resolved (2023.03.16.04), the ICANN Board adopts the Scorecard in full. Section A of the Scorecard identifies the Outputs that the Board adopts. Section B identifies the Outputs that the Board designates as pending. Section C identifies dependencies, which the Board is committed to resolving in a timely manner.

Resolved (2023.03.16.05), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to proceed with the implementation of all Outputs in Section A of the Scorecard, to start work on all Four Implementation Streams, and to make available resources required for the successful and timely opening of the next round of new gTLDs.

Resolved (2023.03.16.06), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to issue as soon as practicable a call for volunteers for membership of the IRT to assist ICANN org during the Policy Implementation stream.

Resolved (2023.03.16.07), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to provide, by the last day of the ICANN77 Public Meeting (15 June 2023), relevant information regarding the work necessary to complete the Program Design, Infrastructure Development, and Operationalization streams.

Resolved (2023.03.16.08), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to deliver the Implementation Plan to the Board no later than 1 August 2023. The timely delivery of the Implementation Plan requires the satisfactory completion of the following four deliverables by the last day of the ICANN77 Public Meeting (15 June 2023):

  1. A plan and timeline as agreed upon by the ICANN Board and the GNSO Council for consideration and resolution of all Outputs contained in Section B of the Scorecard;
  2. A working methodology and IRT work plan and timeline as agreed upon by ICANN org and the GNSO Council;
  3. A GNSO Council project plan and timeline for policy work, or an alternate path, on how to handle closed generics for the next round of new gTLDs; and
  4. A project plan from the GNSO Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) Working Group (WG) identifying all charter questions that will impact the next Applicant Guidebook, along with considerations to ensure a consistent solution on IDN Variant TLDs with the ccPDP4 on IDN ccTLDs (in accordance with prior Board Resolution 2019.03.14.09), and a timeline by when the IDNs EPDP WG will deliver relevant recommendations to the GNSO Council.

Resolved (2023.03.16.09), the Board requests that the GNSO Council deliver the plans referenced in the preceding paragraph by the last day of the ICANN77 Public Meeting (15 June 2023).

Resolved (2023.03.16.10), the Board emphasizes that successful completion of all Four Implementation Streams to open the next round of new gTLDs will require the collective commitment, considerable resources, and effort of the ICANN Board, the ICANN community, and ICANN org. The Board encourages all parties to work together efficiently and constructively to meet relevant timelines.

Resolved (2023.03.16.11), the Board authorizes the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to spend up to US$9 million to fund the implementation work through 31 October 2023. The source for this funding is the remaining funds of the 2012 new gTLD round.

Resolved (2023.03.16.12), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to prepare any request for implementation funding beyond 31 October 2023 to be submitted to the BFC in a timely manner, so that the committee can make a recommendation to the Board for its consideration at the ICANN78 Public Meeting.

Resolved (2023.03.16.13), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to continue ICANN org's outreach and communications strategy to promote the new gTLD Program to prospective applicants, with an emphasis on encouraging uptake from potential applicants in currently "underserved or underrepresented regions" to enable the introduction of new gTLDs (including both ASCII and IDN) into the domain name space, as noted in the Final Report.

Resolved (2023.03.16.14), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to publish a report on the progress and status of implementation until the opening of the next application round of the New gTLD Program, at least two weeks prior to the start of each ICANN Public Meeting, starting with the ICANN77 Public Meeting.

Resolved (2023.03.16.15), the Board extends its great appreciation to the community, which has invested considerable time and resources developing the recommendations that are being acted upon today. The Board especially extends its appreciation to the community leadership and members of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process Working Group (SubPro PDP WG) and org staff who supported the SubPro PDP WG, as well as the impressive effort that resulted in the ODA. Thanks to this effort, the Board is taking this significant step today. The Board further notes that it is critical that this collective commitment carries through the implementation phase.

Rationale for Resolutions 2023.03.16.04 – 2023.03.16.15

Why is the Board addressing the issue?

The Board takes these important decisions today for several reasons. This resolution reflects the Board's careful consideration of the Final Report, the result of a bottom-up, consensus based policy-making process, and the Board's extensive consultation with ICANN org and the community. The Board's action also acknowledges the importance of the next round of new gTLDs to the ICANN community. The Board's action follows its prior consideration and adoption of the GNSO policy recommendation calling for multiple rounds of new gTLDs, realizing the Board's longstanding commitment to opening another application round for new gTLDs as expeditiously as possible.

The 2007 Board-adopted GNSO policy recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs called for new gTLDs to be conducted in rounds until the scale of demand is clear. The Board adopted those recommendations, and ICANN org noted the initiation of future rounds as a central objective in the 2012 Applicant Guidebook: "ICANN's goal is to launch subsequent gTLD application rounds as quickly as possible." The Board explicitly committed in 2012 to "opening a second application window for the New gTLD Program as expeditiously as possible," and reiterated this commitment in 2015.

The Board's action to allow ICANN org to commence work on the implementation phase for the next round of new gTLDs furthers ICANN's Commitments and Core Values to introduce and promote competition in the registration of domain names and its strategic goals to "increase awareness and readiness for Universal Acceptance [and] IDN implementation", and to "support the continued evolution of the Internet's unique identifier systems with a new round of gTLDs". This work will require significant resources to develop and construct the essential program infrastructure, including IT systems, operational processes, and applicant procedures required to ensure the successful launch of the program and its continued operability.

In recognition of these factors and the Board's desire for the next round of new gTLDs to open as expeditiously as practicable, the Board has instructed ICANN org to begin the implementation of all Outputs in Section A of the Scorecard, while the Board considers the Outputs identified as "pending" in Section B of the Scorecard and the dependencies identified in Section C of the Scorecard are resolved.

The Board understands the importance of transparency about the planning for the implementation phase, including clarity on projected timelines and financial impacts entailed by this work, and has directed ICANN org to publish details of its Implementation Plan and provide regular updates to the Board and community on its status. The Board has also authorized ICANN org to continue its work on an enhanced outreach and communications strategy for the promotion of the New gTLD Program to prospective applicants, with an emphasis on encouraging uptake from potential applicants in "underserved or underrepresented regions".2 Finally, the Board emphasizes the need for all parties and community members to share knowledge and advice, and to work together constructively to implement the recommendations and resolve the remaining outstanding issues.

Background: History of the New gTLD Program

ICANN has maintained a longstanding commitment to introducing future rounds of new gTLDs, in line with the ICANN Bylaws Core Value to foster "competition in the registration of domain names where practicable and beneficial to the public interest as identified through the bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development process".

In 2008, the Board adopted the 2007 GNSO policy recommendations that called for the introduction of new gTLDs in rounds until the scale of demand is clear, beginning a policy implementation process that resulted in the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program. The 2012 round opened in January 2012, and ICANN received 1,930 gTLD applications. In the decade since the launch of the New gTLD Program, more than 1,200 of these applied-for gTLDs have been delegated into the DNS root zone.

Deliberations by the Board on if, when, and how a subsequent round of the New gTLD Program might proceed were already taking place at the time of the launch of the 2012 round. In 2011, the Board approved the gTLD Applicant Guidebook, which included an ambition for ICANN "to launch subsequent gTLD application rounds as quickly as possible". That same year, the Board passed a resolution directing ICANN org to open a second application window "as expeditiously as possible", in addition to the development of a "work plan… prior to initiating a second application window for the New gTLD Program". Two years later, in November 2014, the Board passed a resolution on Planning for Future gTLD Application Rounds, directing ICANN org to work with the community on reviews of the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program and identifying a set of topics for potential GNSO discussion in the Policy Development Phase (PDP). This commitment was reaffirmed in May 2015, when the Board once again stated its aim to open an additional round of the New gTLD Program "as expeditiously as possible" and began to consider a process and timeframe for an additional round.

Precursory policy steps towards a new round were taken in June 2015, when the GNSO Council requested an Issue Report to explore potential changes or adjustments to procedures of new gTLDs. In August 2015, ICANN org published the Preliminary Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures, which was subject to a public comment forum from 31 August 2015 to 30 October 2015.

In December 2015, ICANN org prepared and delivered the Final Issue Report on New gTLDs Subsequent Procedures, which declared that any future Policy Development Process Working Group on new gTLD Procedures should "work constructively towards new or modified policy recommendations for New gTLD subsequent procedures". Later that same month, the GNSO Council initiated a PDP for New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. The SubPro PDP WG was subsequently chartered by the GNSO Council in January 2016, with the objectives of clarifying, amending or overriding existing policy principles, recommendations, and implementation guidance; developing new policy recommendations; and supplementing or developing new implementation guidance.

In July 2018, the SubPro PDP WG published the Initial Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Initial Report), containing the output of the SubPro PDP WG on the Overarching Issues as well as preliminary recommendations from Work Tracks 1-4, for public comment. In December 2018 the SubPro PDP WG published a Supplemental Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Work Track 5) focused on Geographic Names at the Top-Level. Work Track 5 subsequently adopted its own Final Report by consensus and submitted it to the full SubPro WG in October 2019.

In September 2020, the Draft Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process was opened for public comment, and subsequently published in full in September 2020. On 18 February 2021, the GNSO Council voted to approve, by a GNSO Supermajority, all of the Outputs that were determined to have received either "Full Consensus" or "Consensus" designations documented in the Final Report. On 24 March 2021, the GNSO Council transmitted its Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board to review and consider, requesting that the Board "initiate an Operational Design Phase on the Final Report of the SubPro Working Group and its Outputs as soon as possible." A period of public comment to gather community input followed from 22 April 2021 to 1 June 2021, with the ensuing Staff Report published on 15 June 2021.

On 12 September 2021, the Board, in recognition of the complex operational requirements inherent in the implementation of the Outputs, directed the ICANN President and CEO to prepare to undertake an ODP to provide the ICANN Board with additional analysis to inform its decision on whether the Outputs contained in the Final Report represented the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN, in accordance with the ICANN Bylaws, with Board questions framing the ODP, as well as a project timeline recorded in the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Operational Design Phase Scoping Document. On 12 December 2022, ICANN org delivered the resulting ODA to the Board for its consideration.

What are the proposals being considered?

The Board is considering the Final Report, published on 20 January 2021 and transmitted to the Board for consideration on 24 March 2021.

The Final Report is divided into 41 topics and contains over 300 Outputs. It was the intention of the SubPro PDP WG that the Report and its Outputs be considered holistically by the Board. Of the topics considered by the SubPro PDP WG, all but one of the topics were designated either "Full Consensus" or "Consensus". More specifically, 25 received "Full Consensus", 16 received "Consensus", and one topic received "Strong Support but Significant Opposition". The Output under Topic 23: Closed Generics was categorized as "No Agreement" in the Final Report.

On 18 February 2021, the GNSO Council voted to approve the Affirmations, Recommendations, and Implementation Guidance designated "Full Consensus" or "Consensus". Nearly all of the Outputs were approved by the GNSO Council, with the exception of three, namely:

  • The sole output under Topic 23: Closed Generics, which was designated in the Final Report as "No Agreement".
  • Recommendations 35.2 and 35.4, under Topic 35: Auctions: Mechanisms of Last Resort / Private Resolution of Contention, which were classified as obtaining "Strong Support but Significant Opposition" and were not approved by the GNSO Council.

Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

The Final Report is the product of a bottom-up, consensus-driven community policy development process involving all parts of the ICANN multistakeholder community. The Initial Report of the SubPro PDP WG was published for public comment on 3 July 2018. Following updates to the original Recommendations, the Draft Final Report was published for an additional public comment period on 20 August 2020. A period of public comment on the Final Report was opened from 22 April 2021 to 1 June 2021.

The Board is appreciative of the following input from the Advisory Committees on the Final Report Outputs, which has informed the Board's deliberation:

  • The GAC: Comment on Subsequent Rounds for New gTLDs Draft Final Report Public Comment Proceeding, 1 June 2021.
  • The SSAC:
    • SAC114 Comments on the GNSO New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Draft Final Report, 14 February 2021;
    • Addendum to SAC114: Additional Context for Recommendation 1; Recommendation 3, Recommendation 7, and Additional References, 24 February 2022.
  • The ALAC:
    • Statement for Subsequent Procedures PDP Final Report, 18 January 2021;
    • Advice on the Final Report to the Board, 16 April 2021;
    • Public Comment: APRALO Statement on GNSO New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Final Outputs for ICANN Board Consideration, 1 June 2021; and
    • Comments and Concerns on the SubPro Operational Design Assessment (ODA), 19 January 2023.

The Board has received the following input from the community and other interested parties on the Draft Final Report, Final Report, and ODA:

Following publication of the draft Final Report in September 2020, a number of information sessions, seminars, and updates on the new gTLD PDP and ODP were held during the following ICANN Public Meetings:

  • ICANN69 - Virtual, Annual General Meeting (AGM) - 13-15 & 19-22 October 2020
  • ICANN70 - Virtual, Community Forum - 22-25 March 2021
  • ICANN71 - Virtual, Policy Forum - 14-17 June 2021
  • ICANN72 - Virtual, AGM - 25-28 October 2021
  • ICANN73 - Virtual, Community Forum - 7-10 March 2022
  • ICANN74 - Hybrid, Policy Forum - The Hague, Netherlands - 13-16 June 2022
  • ICANN75 - Hybrid, AGM - Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia - 17-22 September 2022

ICANN org communicated extensively with the ICANN community on status and progress of the ODP. These efforts included several webinars, including on 14 December 2022 following the delivery of the ODA to the Board, sessions at ICANN Public Meetings, and numerous blogs and written updates. A comprehensive list of ODP-focused community engagements is detailed in Appendix 18 of the ODA.

What concerns or issues were raised by the community?

Correspondence and dialogue between the Board and community identified numerous issues of concern related to the Final Report recommendations, including but not limited to:

  • The necessity of further rounds and metrics to measure success;
  • Lack of provisions on DNS abuse mitigation;
  • Enforcement of Registry Voluntary Commitments/ Public Interest Commitments (PICs);
  • Lack of consensus on how to treat closed generic gTLD applications in future rounds;
  • Lack of specific goals or provisions relating to the Applicant Support system;
  • Absence of a clear policy for avoiding and handling new gTLD-related name collisions;
  • Concerns relating to recommendations on auctions as a mechanism of last resort for the private resolution of contention sets;
  • Lack of metrics on Universal Acceptance (UA) adoption;
  • Issues relating to recommendations on Community Priority Evaluation (CPE);
  • Insufficient protections for Geographic Names at the Top Level.

The Board acknowledges the community's concerns and notes that it has considered the concerns at length before adopting the Scorecard. The Board has taken considerable efforts to engage with the community to understand and address specific concerns, and responded to official correspondence, community comments, and Advice in line with the established Correspondence and Board Advice processes.

ICANN org identified a set of Advisory Committee Advice and Specific Review Team Recommendations in the ODA that may be considered dependencies for the completion of an updated Applicant Guidebook. These are detailed in Section C of the Scorecard.

What significant materials did the Board review?

To help facilitate the Board's determination of whether the Outputs are in the best interest of the ICANN community or ICANN, the Board considered the following factors to be significant:

  • The volume and complexity of the Outputs.
  • The value of assessing the Outputs as a whole rather than individually.
  • The need to understand what resourcing is required to launch subsequent rounds of new gTLDs based on the Outputs.
  • The ODA.

Are there positive or negative community impacts?

The Board anticipates the overall impact of the New gTLD Program on the community to be positive. The Board believes the New gTLD Program, as envisaged in the Final Report and ODA, would be an inclusive program with predictable processes with procedures defined upfront for applicants. The New gTLD Program will help promote and sustain a competitive environment in the DNS market, including increased choice for a variety of users and communities, as well as furthering the universal acceptance of TLDs in multiple languages and scripts. The Board believes that the New gTLD Program will ultimately result in an improved DNS space, with enhanced competition, innovation and consumer choice, as well as introducing new safeguards to help support a secure, stable and resilient Internet.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, budget); the community; and/or the public?

As of December 2022, US$7 million of the previously Board-approved US$9 million ODP funds have been spent and ICANN org estimates the remaining US$2 million of funds will be utilized by 31 March 2023. In order for ICANN org to conduct implementation work, as directed by the Board, ICANN org has requested an additional US$9 million of funding through 31 October 2023.

The table below shows a breakdown of the estimated implementation costs until 31 October 2023.

SubPro Implementation Costs April - October 2023
(in millions)
Notes

Personnel

US$3.3

ICANN org staff costs for implementation, IT Systems, research, community engagement

External Costs

US$2.1

Vendor costs: IT System Development, Socio Economic Report, Communications Outreach

Shared Services & Org Support

US$2.6

Support functions: Communications, Language Services, Human Resources, Finance, Legal, Facilities

Contingency

US$1.0

Placeholder for unknown and hard to predict costs

Total US$9.0  

The source for this funding is the remaining funds of the 2012 new gTLD round. As of 30 January 2023, there are US$61 million in remaining New gTLD Program funds.

ICANN org has incorporated into the strategic plan and operating plan and budget continued efforts and work related to implementation of the outputs. Implementation cost estimates take into account the number of current staff supporting this effort as well as required additional resources. The US$9 million of funding for implementation costs to be incurred through 31 October 2023 differs from what was published in the Draft Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Operating Plan and Budget that was posted for public comment on 14 December 2022. The Draft FY24 Operating Plan and Budget included US$13.4 million for preparation phase work on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures. These funds were intended to provide funding for the entire Fiscal Year 2024 (1 July 2023 - 30 June 2024) whereas the current amount that is approved via this resolution is intended only to cover 1 April 2023 through 31 October 2023. Revisions will be made to the FY24 budget before it is submitted for Board approval in order to align the FY24 Operating Plan and Budget with this approved funding.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

Part of ICANN's continued commitment in monitoring the impact of the introduction of new gTLDs includes the impact on the security and the stability of the DNS. While the Board does not believe that the action required in this resolution will intrinsically impact the security or the stability of the DNS, the Board is reassured that ICANN org has noted this issue in the ODA and has reviewed policies that can be used as resources, tools, and plans for addressing unforeseen DNS stability issues as part of its implementation planning. ICANN org acknowledged in the ODA that depending on the potential problem, additional unplanned resources may be needed to mitigate DNS instability.

The Board also notes that the SubPro PDP WG emphasized the importance of conservatism and recommended mechanisms for tracking the rate of growth in the root zone, as reflected in its recommendations on Topic 26, Security and Stability. The principle of conservatism also applies to Implementation Guidance 26.4, which calls on ICANN org to limit the root zone's growth rate to approximately five percent per month. Implementation Guidance 26.5, which says ICANN org should, in case of string instability, "delay their addition to the root zone in case of DNS service instabilities" may be tied to the development of the pre-delegation and delegation process.

The Board further notes that the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) function has identified approaches that may be used to address aspects of unforeseen DNS instability. The IANA function can maintain the ability to rate-limit growth of the root zone in order to stay within an algorithmic threshold or for emergency purposes to observe instabilities. ICANN org also noted that the roles of ICANN org and the IANA function should be similar to that of the previous round and should be able to adhere to systems, processes, and capabilities of handling compounding TLD delegation requests.

Finally, the Board believes the Outputs related to name collision, which are currently designated as pending, may, if adopted, further mitigate potential DNS stability issues. The Board notes that Recommendation 29.1, which states that ICANN org "must have ready prior to the opening of the application submission period a mechanism to evaluate the risk of name collisions in the New gTLD evaluation process", and Affirmation 29.2, which affirms the continued use of the existing Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework (NCMF) unless and until a new mitigation framework is adopted by the Board, are both noted by ICANN org in the ODA as being capable of being implemented should the Board eventually decide to adopt them.

The NCMF, adopted by the Board in August 2014 and which continues to be in use, provides provisions for implementation by registries regarding name collision report handling, controlled interruptions, and interim emergency back-end registry operators. The Board is, however, aware that there is ongoing work regarding name collisions via the Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP). The Board recognizes that the results of the NCAP studies may result in changes in how name collisions are managed and mitigated. The Board continues to monitor the progress of the NCAP and will take into consideration the results of the NCAP studies.

Is this decision in the public interest and within ICANN's mission?

This action is within ICANN's Mission and is in the public interest as it is important to ensure that, in carrying out its Mission, ICANN's decisions and actions are guided by the following Core Values: "where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms to promote and sustain a competitive environment in the DNS market" and "[i]ntroduc[e] and promot[e] competition in the registration of domain names where practicable and beneficial to the public interest as identified through the bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development process." (See ICANN Bylaws at 1.2 (b) (iv)). The Board appreciates the considerations around the GPI in the Final Report. The Board has reviewed these considerations around the GPI in the Final Report.

Under the ICANN Bylaws, the Board is obligated to consider and adopt all Recommendations formally approved by a GNSO Council "unless, by a vote of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the Board, the Board determines that such policy is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN". However, the Board's interest in the expansion of the gTLD namespace is also consistent with ICANN's role, as defined in the Bylaws, to coordinate the development and implementation of policies relating to "the allocation and assignment of names in the root zone of the Domain Name System ("DNS")" and promote competition in the DNS marketplace.

Is this either a defined policy process within ICANN's Supporting Organizations or ICANN's Organizational Administrative Function decision requiring public comment or not requiring public comment?

This action by the Board fits under its fiduciary duty and oversight role of the organization, and is the next step in carrying out the Board's previous commitment to opening subsequent procedures for gTLDs. It should be noted that the Outputs were the subject of public comment, and that the Final Report was developed in collaboration with the ICANN community, in accordance with the GNSO PDP Manual.

b. Acceptance of the Second Organizational Review of the NomCom (NomCom2 Review) – Final Implementation Report and Initiation of Bylaws Amendment Process

Whereas, on 7 November 2019, the ICANN Board accepted the NomCom2 Review Implementation Working Group (NomComRIWG) Detailed Implementation Plan on the Second Organizational Review of the Nominating Committee (NomCom2 Review) and directed the NomComRIWG to provide the Board with regular reporting on the implementation efforts.

Whereas, the NomComRIWG provided the Board via the Board Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) with semi-annual updates on the progress of implementation efforts until such time that the implementation efforts concluded.

Whereas, the NomComRIWG submitted a Final Implementation Report on 30 June 2022, detailing the completion of implementation of the 27 recommendations arising out of NomCom2 Review, and documenting that one recommendation3 will not be implemented by the NomComRIWG and four recommendations4 will require a Standard and Fundamental ICANN Bylaws Amendment Process.

Whereas, as one of the NomCom2 recommendations proposes moving all NomCom delegates into voting roles, the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) requests that a complementary Bylaws amendment be considered that removes the ICANN Board's role in comprising the RSSAC.

Whereas, the OEC recommends that the Board accept the NomCom2 Review Final Implementation Report issued by the NomComRIWG and approved on 30 June 2022, and requests that the ICANN Board direct ICANN org to initiate Standard and Fundamental ICANN Bylaws Amendment Processes.

Whereas, the OEC recommends that the Board direct the ICANN Interim President and CEO to include the publication of the draft NomCom Standing Committee Charter and the statement defining Unaffiliated Directors for public comment, to provide the ICANN community an opportunity to evaluate the sufficiency of inaugural Charter before Board Approval. The Board notes that because of the governance implications of the NomCom Standing Committee as well as the definition of Unaffiliated Directors, any future revisions to the NomCom Standing Committee Charter or the definition of Unaffiliated Directors will also require a public comment proceeding and Board approval.

Whereas, the OEC recommends that the Board acknowledges the NomComRIWG's withdrawal of its proposal on rebalancing the NomCom.

Resolved (2023.03.16.16), the ICANN Board acknowledges the implementation work of the NomComRIWG aimed at improving the effectiveness, transparency, and accountability of the NomCom, in line with the findings and recommendations from the Independent Examiner and the subsequent Detailed Implementation Plan, and accepts the status of implementation of recommendations from NomCom2 Review as reported by the NomComRIWG.

Resolved (2023.03.16.17), the ICANN Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to initiate both a Fundamental and a Standard ICANN Bylaws Amendment Process on Articles 7, 8, and 27 of the ICANN Bylaws, by opening a Public Comment proceeding on the proposed Bylaws amendments for the implementation of four NomCom2 Review recommendations (7, 9, 24, and 27), relating to composition of the ICANN Board of Directors, composition and terms of the NomCom, and implementation of the NomCom Standing Committee. The ICANN Board also directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to initiate a Standard ICANN Bylaws Amendment Process on amendments to Article 12 of the Bylaws relating to the RSSAC.

Resolved (2023.03.16.18) considering the important implications on ICANN's governance, the ICANN Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to publish the draft NomCom Standing Committee Charter and the draft statement defining Unaffiliated Directors as part of the public comment proceeding, to provide an opportunity for the ICANN community to express their views prior to Board approval.

Resolved (2023.03.16.19), the Board acknowledges the NomComRIWG's position that Recommendation 10 of NomCom2 Review, stating "Representation on the NomCom should be re-balanced immediately and then be reviewed every five years", is not feasible for implementation at this time, and has been withdrawn. Recognizing that the ICANN community has an important responsibility to address NomCom rebalancing, along with the ICANN Board and org, the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s) to facilitate and support Board's engagement with the Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs) to understand community views on how the NomCom should be rebalanced, who should conduct this work and the level of priority that the SO/ACs would assign to this work within their planning efforts. The Board requests that ICANN org provide an update on the results of the Board's engagement with the SO/ACs within six months of this Board action.

Rationale for Resolutions 2023.03.16.16 – 2023.03.16.19

Why is the Board addressing the issue?

To ensure the ICANN multistakeholder model remains transparent and accountable, and to improve its performance, ICANN conducts Organizational Reviews of its SO/ACs (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee) and the Nominating Committee, as detailed in Article 4 Section 4.4 of the ICANN Bylaws.

Reviews are critical to maintaining an effective multistakeholder model and in helping ICANN achieve its mission, as detailed in Article 1 of the Bylaws. Reviews also contribute to ensuring that ICANN serves the public interest. The role of the ICANN Board is to ensure that the review process was in compliance with the relevant Bylaw provisions.

The NomCom2 Review convened in 2017. The OEC has been overseeing the progress of NomCom2 Review and implementation thereof, including consultations with the Independent Examiner that conducted the NomCom2 Review, and the community's NomComRIWG.

This action completes the NomComRIWG's role in implementation efforts on all 27 recommendations, as noted in its Final Implementation Report. The Board is also initiating the ICANN Bylaws Amendment Process on Fundamental and Standard portions of the ICANN Bylaws, and seeking public comment on the proposed Charter for a Nominating Committee Standing Committee. The NomComRIWG's Final Implementation Report notes the withdrawal of implementation on Recommendation 10 on the rebalancing of the NomCom, and this action acknowledges the withdrawal and directs ICANN org to continue monitoring whether the rebalancing is being addressed in other activities within the ICANN community.

Background

The NomCom2 Review commenced in June 2017 with the announcement of the selection of the Independent Examiner. The Independent Examiner conducting the NomCom2 Review produced a Final Report in June 2018, which was received by the ICANN Board along with the NomCom2 Review Implementation Planning Team's Feasibility Assessment and Initial Implementation Plan (Feasibility Assessment) for all 27 of the recommendations in the Independent Examiner's Final Report. The NomComRIWG was created in response to the Board Resolution, and developed the Detailed Implementation Plan on 12 September 2019. On 07 November 2019, the ICANN Board accepted the NomCom2 Review Detailed Implementation Plan and directed the NomComRIWG to commence implementation, and to provide periodic updates to the OEC. The NomComRIWG submitted implementation progress reports to the OEC on 30 June 2020, 21 December 2020, 25 August 2021, 17 December 2021, and a Final Implementation Report on 30 June 2022.

Recommendation 10: Rebalancing the NomCom

Recommendation 10 from the Independent Examiner stated that "Representation on the NomCom should be re-balanced immediately and then be reviewed every five years." This recommendation related to the finding that "There is concern that the NomCom may not accurately represent constituencies (both across SOs/ACs and within SOs/ACs)." The NomComRIWG's approach to the implementation of these recommendations focused on the GNSO in light of expressed concerns that led to the finding, proposing to remove hard-coding of GNSO NomCom members from the ICANN Bylaws and allow the GNSO to conduct an internal rebalancing exercise themselves. During the NomComRIWG's discussions and engagement with the GNSO leadership on the proposed implementation path, it became clear that several constituencies in the GNSO held strong objections to conducting a rebalancing exercise themselves and thus objected to the proposed Bylaw changes, even if they did not necessarily result in any changes to the status quo. The NomComRIWG decided to withdraw its proposed Bylaws changes for Recommendation 10. The NomComRIWG noted that it devoted significant time and effort to resolve the rebalancing issue, but the ensuing conversations with the community, including the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), made clear that significantly more time needs to be devoted to this issue at a broader community level to address the representation issues raised by this recommendation. The OEC and community were informed that this recommendation will not be implemented by the NomComRIWG, via direct communication, public webinar(s) and the Implementation Status Report(s).

The implementation of this recommendation is not feasible at this time, and has been withdrawn with justification by the NomComRIWG. To note, the original Implementation Plan recognized the need for a broad community agreement on how the NomCom is composed, and what it means to have diverse views represented. The process of rebalancing the NomCom is dependent on community work currently underway, including the evolution of Organizational Reviews into a Continuous Improvement Program. Recognizing that the community has an important responsibility to address NomCom rebalancing, along with the ICANN Board and org, the Board therefore directs ICANN org to facilitate and support Board's engagement with the SO/ACs to understand community views on how the NomCom should be rebalanced, who should conduct this work and the level of priority that the SO/ACs would assign to this work within their planning efforts. The Board requests that ICANN org provide an update on the results of the Board's engagement with the SO/ACs within six months of this Board action.

What is the proposal being considered?

The Final Implementation Report indicates that all 27 recommendations accepted by the Board have now been completed, noting that four recommendations (7, 9, 24, 27) require amendments to the ICANN Bylaws. The proposed changes are limited to Article 7: Board of Directors and Article 8: Nominating Committees, along with a transition article (Article 27). The NomComRIWG further noted that implementation of Recommendation 10 has been withdrawn accordingly, with justification. Having reviewed relevant documents, the Board, after OEC recommendation, agrees with the NomComRIWG assessment that their implementation work is complete, and takes the following action accordingly:

  1. Accept the Final Implementation Report of the Second Organizational Review of the Nominating Committee NomCom2 Review.
  2. Initiate a Standard and Fundamental ICANN Bylaws Amendment Process for the implementation of four NomCom2 Review recommendations (7, 9, 24, and 27) which relate to the ICANN Board of Directors, NomCom members, and implementation of the NomCom Standing Committee.
  3. Direct ICANN org to include the draft NomCom Standing Committee Charter in the Public Comment proceeding, to allow the ICANN community an opportunity to express their views on the proposed charter that will have implications for ICANN's governance.
  4. Acknowledge that the recommendation to rebalance the NomCom is not feasible at this time due to various dependencies, and that ICANN org should support the Board's engagement with the ICANN community on the issue of NomCom rebalancing, providing an update on the results of the Board's engagement with the community in six months (est. September 2023).
  5. Consolidated with initiating a Bylaws amendment process on the NomCom-related Bylaws amendments, initiate a Bylaws amendment process on Article 12.2 of the Bylaws relating to the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC), that removes the Board's role in selection of RSSAC membership. The RSSAC specifically requests this change in light of having an RSSAC-appointed delegate anticipated to serve as a voting member of the NomCom in the nomination of ICANN Board members.

Most elements of NomCom2 Review recommendations pertain to and will be incorporated into the NomCom operating procedures, and some will be addressed through the proposed NomCom Standing Committee. For the four recommendations requiring ICANN Bylaws Amendments, the following changes would be implemented:

  • Recommendation 7: "NomCom members, except for leadership positions, should serve two-year terms, and be limited to a maximum of two terms."
  • Recommendation 9: "All NomCom members should be fully participating and voting members, except for NomCom leadership."
  • Recommendation 24: "An empowered body of current and former NomCom members should be formed to ensure greater continuity across NomComs, and in particular, to recommend and assist in implementing improvements to NomCom operations."
  • Recommendation 27: "Provide clarity on desire for independent directors and designate three specific seats for 'Unaffiliated Directors'."

Implementation of Recommendation 24 resulted in the proposed NomCom Standing Committee, and its draft Charter will be included in the ICANN public comment proceeding for community input.

Implementation of Recommendation 27 resulted in a definition of a proposed Statement setting forth principles for a higher standard associated with "Unaffiliated Directors" which will apply to three out of the eight seats that the NomCom nominates to the ICANN Board.

There are certain objective measures that can help demonstrate that a candidate for the Board has no prior affiliation with ICANN. These are provided to inform the NomCom during its selection process when evaluating whether a candidate is able to be appointed as "Unaffiliated" Directors. The NomComRIWG developed a proposed statement defining what "Unaffiliated" could mean, with an emphasis on bringing new perspectives to the ICANN Board demonstrated by a lack of formal involvement in ICANN.

If approved, those seeking appointment to the ICANN Board as an Unaffiliated Director shall attest to the NomCom that, upon review of the ICANN Conflicts of Interests Policy in force at the time of their candidacy, they have a good faith belief that they would not be identified as having an actual or perceived conflict of interest for matters that routinely come before the Board.

The proposed Statement on Unaffiliated Directors will also be posted for public comment alongside the proposed Bylaws amendments. Once the Statement is adopted by the Board, the Statement cannot be amended unless approved by the Board after public comment(s). The Board notes that it has not performed a substantive review and evaluation of the proposed ICANN Bylaws Amendments. As with all Bylaws amendment processes, the Board initiates the Standard and Fundamental Bylaws Amendment Process so that it can hear from the community on the viability of the proposals, and will consider all community inputs when it evaluates whether it will accept the amendments. Unless and until the Bylaws amendments are approved and in force, the obligations of the NomCom are not altered. The Bylaws amendments will include appropriate transition procedures to incorporate any new or changed requirements.

The Board is also, at the request of the RSSAC, including proposed revisions to Article 12 of the ICANN Bylaws within the Standard Bylaws Amendment Process. The RSSAC identified that if its appointed delegate to the NomCom becomes a voting delegate participating in ICANN Board nominations, the RSSAC wishes to remove the ICANN Board's role in appointing RSSAC membership. The Board notes its expectation that if this appointment responsibility is returned to the RSSAC, the RSSAC should maintain document procedures on how these appointments are to be made, for example within the RSSAC Operating Procedures.

Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

The Board, through the OEC, regularly consulted with the Independent Examiner and the NomComRIWG, which was responsible for the implementation of recommendations. The OEC monitored the progress of the NomCom2 Review as well as the progress of the implementation of review recommendations as reported by the NomComRIWG.

The NomComRIWG consulted regularly with the ICANN community and provided several updates during the review implementation phase through public webinars, engagement sessions, bilateral sessions, and a blog post.

What concerns, or issues were raised by the community?

The implementation work conducted by the NomComRIWG followed its standard best practices to ensure transparency and accountability.

After extensive engagement with the ICANN community, the NomComRIWG acknowledged that Recommendation 10 of the NomCom2 Review, "Representation on the NomCom should be re-balanced immediately and then be reviewed every five years", is not feasible at this time, and has been withdrawn accordingly, with justification.

No other concerns were voiced by the ICANN community.

What factors did the Board find to be significant?

The Board found several factors to be significant, contributing to the effective completion of the implementation work:

  • Convening a dedicated group that oversees the implementation of Board-accepted recommendations.
  • Adherence to the implementation plan that included a timeline for the implementation, definition of desired outcomes, as well as ways to measure current state and progress toward the desired outcome.
  • Timely and thorough reporting on the progress of implementation.

Are there positive or negative community impacts?

The completion of the implementation of NomCom2 Review recommendations results in the improvement in overall effectiveness of the NomCom.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, budget); the community; and/or the public?

This Board action is anticipated to have no additional fiscal impact to that noted in the Board's acceptance of the NomCom2 Review Implementation Plan. The ramifications of this resolution on ICANN org, the community and the public are anticipated to be positive, as this Board action signifies an important milestone for Organizational Reviews and improvements in the effectiveness of the NomCom.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

This Board action is not expected to have a direct effect on security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS.

How is this action within ICANN's mission and what is the public interest served in this action?

The Board's action is consistent with ICANN's commitment pursuant to Section 4 of the Bylaws to ensure the ICANN multistakeholder model remains transparent and accountable, and to improve the performance of its Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees and the NomCom. This action will serve the public interest by contributing to the fulfillment of ICANN's commitment to maintaining and improving its accountability and transparency.

Is Public Comment required prior to Board action?

Public Comment proceeding is not required. However, the Board is being asked to initiate a Standard and Fundamental ICANN Bylaws Amendment Process (see Article 25) for proposed Bylaws amendments, which will initiate an ICANN Public Comment proceeding.

c. Thank You to Departing Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Member

Whereas, Jonathan Spring was appointed to the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee on 22 July 2021.

Whereas, Jonathan Spring resigned from the SSAC on 23 December 2022.

Whereas, ICANN wishes to acknowledge and thank Jonathan Spring for his service to the community by his membership on the Security and Stability Advisory Committee.

Resolved (2023.03.16.20), Jonathan Spring has earned the deep appreciation of the Board for his term of service to ICANN.  The ICANN Board of Directors wishes him well in all future endeavors.

d. Thank You to Manal Ismail for her service to the ICANN Board

Whereas, Manal Ismail was appointed by the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to serve as a liaison to the ICANN Board on 2 November 2017.

Whereas, Manal Ismail concludes her term on the ICANN Board on 16 March 2023.

Whereas, Manal served as a member of the following Board Working Groups and Caucuses:

  • Board Anti-Harassment Working Group
  • Board Internationalized Domain Names-Universal Acceptance (IDN-UA) Working Group
  • Board Caucus on Accountability and Transparency Reviews 3 (ATRT3)
  • Board Caucus on CCWG-Accountability Work Stream (WS2)
  • Board Caucus on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (SubPro)
  • General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)/ Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) Caucus

Resolved (2023.03.16.21), Manal Ismail has earned the deep appreciation of the Board for her term of service, and the Board wishes her well in her future endeavors within the ICANN community and beyond.

e. Thank You to the local hosts of ICANN76 Meeting

The Board wishes to extend its thanks to Arq. Rogelio Jiménez Pons Gómez, Undersecretary of Transportation for the Secretariat of Infrastructure, Communications and Transportation of Mexico and his team for their great support. The Board also extends its thanks to ICANN76 Local Host Committee members, NIC México, the Mexican Internet Industry Association, the Internet Society Chapter Mexico, Punto 2012, and Neubox for their great support.

f. Thank You to Sponsors of ICANN76 Meeting

The Board wishes to thank the following sponsors: Teléfonos de México, S.A.B. de C.V. (Telmex), Sia Intis Telecom (.IT), VeriSign Inc., Public Interest Registry, CentralNic Group PLC, and ICANNWiki.

g. Thank You to Interpreters, Staff, Event and Hotel Teams of the ICANN76 Meeting

The Board expresses its deepest appreciation to the scribes, interpreters, audiovisual team, technical teams, and the entire ICANN staff for their efforts in facilitating the smooth operation of the meeting. The Board would also like to thank the management and staff of the Cancún Convention Center for providing a wonderful facility to hold this event. Special thanks are extended to the Cancún Convention Center team as well as Wilson Alers from Media Stage Productions, for helping to make ICANN76 a success.

Published on 16 March 2023

Footnotes

[1] Correspondence to the Board on the subject of the draft Final Report was chosen as the earliest limit for inclusion, as by that time references to the Outputs had become stable and largely correspondent with the substance of the Final Report.

[2] See Final Report, p.73.

[3] Recommendation 10

[4] Recommendations 7, 9, 24, 27