Skip to main content
Resources

Minutes | Special Meeting of the Board

A Special Meeting of the ICANN's Board of Directors was held via teleconference on 28 February 2006 and was called to order at 1:04 P.M. PDT US.

Vinton G. Cerf (Chairman) presided over the entire meeting. The following other Board Directors participated in all or part of the meeting: Raimundo Beca, Susan Crawford, Mouhamet Diop, Demi Getschko, Hagen Hultzsch, Joichi Ito, Veni Markovski, Michael Palage, Alejandro Pisanty, Hualin Qian, Njeri Rionge, Vanda Scartezini, Peter Dengate Thrush and Paul Twomey.

Liaisons present included Steve Crocker (SSAC), Daniel Dardailler (TLG), Roberto Gaetano (ALAC), Thomas Narten (IETF), Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi (GAC), and Suzanne Woolf (RSSAC). John Jeffrey, General Counsel and Board Secretary; Melanie Keller, CFO; and Kurt Pritz, Vice President, Business Operations were also present.

VeriSign Settlement Agreements

There was an extensive and detailed discussion involving all board members and staff present relating to the public comments received from both public comment periods, the written statements received during the comment period from both individuals and from various constituencies, the comments received during the recent Wellington Meeting and how some of the items raised in Wellington had been altered in the agreement while others could not be due to the positions of the parties in the litigation and within the individual negotiations. The Board also discussed the specifics of the changes to the agreement between the October version and the currently proposed version; and the litigation risks and likelihood of success in the VeriSign lawsuit. Board and Staff discussed the proposed agreement and staff responded to Board questions that were raised regarding the terms of the settlement. Following this discussion, Vint Cerf moved, and Hagen Hultzsch seconded the following resolution:

Whereas, a revised proposal to settle the several legal disputes between VeriSign, Inc. and ICANN has been posted for public comment <http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-29jan06.htm> and presented to the Board;

Whereas, the proposal to settle the disputes would require ICANN to enter three new agreements with VeriSign: a Settlement Agreement, a new .COM Registry Agreement, and a Root Server Management Transition Completion Agreement;

Whereas, the Board has carefully considered the settlement proposal and the other new agreements with VeriSign, and the public comments thereon, and finds that acceptance of the settlment proposal would be beneficial for ICANN and the Internet community;

Resolved (06.07), that the proposed agreements with VeriSign are hereby approved, and the President is authorized to take such actions as appropriate to implement the agreements.

ICANN's Board voted 9 to 5 in favor of the settlement agreements with one director abstaining. Affirmative votes were cast by the following Board Members: Vint Cerf (Chairman), Alejandro Pisanty (Vice-Chairman), Mouhamet Diop, Demi Getschko, Hagen Hultzsch, Veni Markovski, Vanda Scartezini, Paul Twomey (President and CEO), and Hualin Qian. Directors who voted against the approval of the settlement documents were: Raimundo Beca, Susan Crawford, Joichi Ito, Njeri Rionge, and Peter Dengate Thrush. Director Michael Palage abstained due to a conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict of Interest relating to his personal contractor agreement with another registry operator.

Following the vote, there was also a detailed discussion regarding communicating the decision. A general sense of the board was reached on how the board would communicate its decision including: a joint board statement for those who voted in the majority; individual statements from any board member who wished to offer one; and early publication of the voting transcript which was to be produced with the preliminary report rather than with the minutes. The board also jointly agreed that all of the information relating to the board's vote would be made as soon as possible and a schedule was set to allow board members to review the voting transcript and issue joint and individual statements.

Approval of Directors' Expenses

After a discussion by the board the following resolution was voted on after a motion by Vint Cerf and a second by Michael Palage:

Whereas, Article VI, Section 22 of the ICANN Bylaws provides that the Board may authorize the reimbursement of actual and necessary reasonable expenses incurred by Directors and non-voting liaisons in the performance of their duties.

Resolved (06.10), the Board hereby authorizes the reimbursement of expenses to Directors and liaisons as follows: Alejandro Pisanty - for travel to Geneva in July 2005 for participation in WGIG - US$2,441.92; for travel to Geneva in September/October 2005 for participation in Prepcom 3 of WSIS - US$6,192.12; for travel to Tunis in November 2005 for participation in WSIS - US$8,344.57 - for a total reimbursement of US$16,978.61; and Veni Markovski - for transportation in Tunis in November 2005 for participation in WSIS - US$74.50.

The Board approved the resolution by a voice vote of the 14 members present. Hagen Hultszch departed from the call before the vote.

Consideration of ccNSO's Recommendations 1, 6, 7 and 8 on Proposed ICANN Bylaws Changes

John Jeffrey presented the proposed ICANN Bylaws changes from the recommendations from the ccPDP (the ccNSO's Policy Development Process) and outlined the public comment received. The following resolution was offered by Peter Dengate Thrush, which was seconded by Alejandro Pisanty:

Whereas, the ccNSO Council has considered a number of issues which are understood to stand in the way of a number of ccTLD managers joining the ccNSO.

Whereas, the ccNSO Council resolved on 28 May 2005, to initiate a ccNSO Policy Development Process to consider changes to ICANN Bylaws Article IX (Country-Code Names Supporting Organisation), Annex B (ccNSO Policy-Development Process) and Annex C (the scope of the ccNSO) to address the matters outlined in paragraphs A to M of section 3.2 of the Issues Report as published on 7 June 2005.

Whereas, the ccNSO has conducted the ccPDP in accordance with Annex B of the ICANN Bylaws.

Whereas, the ccNSO Council resolved on 2 December 2005, to approve the Board Report containing eight ccNSO Recommendations for changes to improve and clarify the ICANN Bylaws on the ccNSO and the ccPDP in the interest of the ccNSO membership, the ccNSO Council and other stakeholders.

Whereas, the Issue Manager has submitted the Board Report to the Board for consideration on 2 December 2005.

Whereas, the proposed ccNSO Bylaw changes have been posted for public comment on the ICANN webpage for over 21 days, and no comments regarding Recommendations 1, 6, 7 or 8 were received.

Resolved (06.08), that the Bylaws changes as proposed through ccNSO Recommendation 1, 6, 7 and 8 are approved.

The Board approved the resolution by a voice vote of the 14 members present. Hagen Hultszch was not present for the vote.

Consideration of ccNSO's Recommendations 2, 4 and 5 on Proposed ICANN Bylaws Changes

John Jeffrey presented these additional recommendations for ICANN Bylaws changes from the ccPDP (the ccNSO's Policy Development Process). After a discussion of the proposed changes and public comment by the Board, Peter Dengate Thrush moved and Demi Getschko seconded the following resolution:

Whereas, the ccNSO Council has considered a number of issues which are understood to stand in the way of a number of ccTLD managers joining the ccNSO.

Whereas, the ccNSO Council resolved on 28 May 2005, to initiate a ccNSO Policy Development Process to consider changes to ICANN Bylaws Article IX (Country-Code Names Supporting Organisation), Annex B (ccNSO Policy-Development Process) and Annex C (the scope of the ccNSO) to address the matters outlined in paragraphs A to M of section 3.2 of the Issues Report as published on 7 June 2005.

Whereas, the ccNSO has conducted the ccPDP in accordance with Annex B of the ICANN Bylaws.

Whereas, the ccNSO Council resolved on 2 December 2005, to approve the Board Report containing eight ccNSO Recommendations for changes to improve and clarify the ICANN Bylaws on the ccNSO and the ccPDP in the interest of the ccNSO membership, the ccNSO Council and other stakeholders.

Whereas, the Issue Manager has submitted the Board Report to the Board for consideration on 2 December 2005.

Whereas, the proposed ccNSO Bylaw changes have been posted for public comment on the ICANN webpage for over 21 days, and one comment regarding Recommendations 2, 4,and 5 was received.

Whereas, with regard to ccNSO Recommendation 2 the comment received did not oppose the principle underlying Recommendation 2, but suggested different language which was not only an attempt to clarify the accepted principle, but would also imply a change to this principle.

Whereas, with regard to ccNSO Recommendation 4 no comments were received on the additional element that in order for a ccNSO policy to apply to a member of the ccNSO by virtue of membership of the ccNSO this policy has to be within the scope of the The comment received was on the aspect of determination whether an issue is within scope or not. According to current Bylaws the ccNSO Council may initiate a ccPDP whether an issue is in scope or not. The Recommendation balances the roles and responsibilities of General Counsel and the ccNSO Council to determine whether an issue is within Scope of the ccNSO. Further, according to the current rules and procedures of the ccNSO itself, the membership can co-determine the initiation of a ccPDP and the decision of the ccNSO Counsel.

Whereas with regard to ccNSO Recommendation 5 the comment received was on the possibility that the ccNSO itself may develop policies binding on its members. According to the Recommendation ccNSO policies apply only to members of the ccNSO by virtue of their membership if they are developed in accordance with Article IX, section 4.10 and 4.11. Furthermore, according to the same Recommendation it is clarified that the output of other activities by the ccNSO can only be adhered to voluntary by members of the ccNSO.

Resolved (06.09) that the Bylaws changes as proposed through ccNSO Recommendations 2, 4 and 5 are approved.

The Board approved the resolution by a voice vote of the 14 members present. Hagen Hultszch was not present for the vote.

The Meeting was adjourned at 3:06 PM.

Domain Name System
Internationalized Domain Name ,IDN,"IDNs are domain names that include characters used in the local representation of languages that are not written with the twenty-six letters of the basic Latin alphabet ""a-z"". An IDN can contain Latin letters with diacritical marks, as required by many European languages, or may consist of characters from non-Latin scripts such as Arabic or Chinese. Many languages also use other types of digits than the European ""0-9"". The basic Latin alphabet together with the European-Arabic digits are, for the purpose of domain names, termed ""ASCII characters"" (ASCII = American Standard Code for Information Interchange). These are also included in the broader range of ""Unicode characters"" that provides the basis for IDNs. The ""hostname rule"" requires that all domain names of the type under consideration here are stored in the DNS using only the ASCII characters listed above, with the one further addition of the hyphen ""-"". The Unicode form of an IDN therefore requires special encoding before it is entered into the DNS. The following terminology is used when distinguishing between these forms: A domain name consists of a series of ""labels"" (separated by ""dots""). The ASCII form of an IDN label is termed an ""A-label"". All operations defined in the DNS protocol use A-labels exclusively. The Unicode form, which a user expects to be displayed, is termed a ""U-label"". The difference may be illustrated with the Hindi word for ""test"" — परीका — appearing here as a U-label would (in the Devanagari script). A special form of ""ASCII compatible encoding"" (abbreviated ACE) is applied to this to produce the corresponding A-label: xn--11b5bs1di. A domain name that only includes ASCII letters, digits, and hyphens is termed an ""LDH label"". Although the definitions of A-labels and LDH-labels overlap, a name consisting exclusively of LDH labels, such as""icann.org"" is not an IDN."