Skip to main content
Resources

Minutes for the Regular Meeting of the ICANN Board of Directors

A A regular meeting of the ICANN Board of Directors was held in New Delhi, India, on 15 February 2008. Chairman Peter Dengate Thrush called the meeting to order at 8:30am local time. The following other Directors participated in all or part of the meeting: Harald Alvestrand, Raimundo Beca, Susan Crawford, Vice Chairman Roberto Gaetano, Demi Getschko (via phone), Steven Goldstein, Dennis Jennings, Rajasekhar Ramaraj, Njeri Rionge, Rita Rodin (via phone), Jean-Jacques Subrenat, Bruce Tonkin, President and CEO Paul Twomey and David Wodelet. The following Board Liaisons participated in all or part of the meeting: Steve Crocker, SSAC Liaison; Janis Karklins, GAC Liaison; Thomas Narten, IETF Liaison; Reinhard Scholl, TLG Liaison; Wendy Seltzer, ALAC Liaison; and Suzanne Woolf, RSSAC Liaison. John Jeffrey, General Counsel and Secretary, and numerous other ICANN officers and employees were also in attendance.

The following minutes are based on the real-time transcription of the meeting as posted at <https://delhi.icann.org/files/Delhi-ICANNBoardMeeting-15FEB08.txt> and the adopted resolutions from the meeting as posted at <http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15feb08.htm>.

Approval of Minutes

Approval of ICANN Accountability and Transparency Frameworks

Next Steps on GNSO Review

Approval of New Disbursement Policy

New gTLDs - Next Steps

Authorization to Engage Auditors

Acknowledgment of SSAC Reports on Domain-Name Front Running, Fast Flux, DNSSEC, and WHOIS

ICANN Bylaws Change Request from ALAC

Recognition of First APRALO General Assembly

Update on IDN Policy Activities

At-large Structures Summit

ICANN Deployment of IPv6-Capable Services

Other Business

Thanks to Local Hosts, Staff, Scribes, Interpreters, and Event Teams

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you very much for joining us and good morning, everybody to the board meeting.

The first thing I'd like to do is formally welcome in public Reinhard Scholl, who has joined us since the last meeting in Los Angeles. Reinhard is the nominee from the TLG, the technical liaison group, and we've welcomed him privately already. Now in public, Reinhard, that you very much for joining us.

[Applause]

Approval of Minutes

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: First item of business is the approval of minutes from the previous meeting and I'll call on Dave wood let to deal with that.

>>DAVE WODELET: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd love to approve -- or read the approval. So it's resolved (2008.02.15.01) the minutes of the board meeting of 23rd of January, 2008, are approved.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Is there a second for that? Susan Crawford. Any discussion about the minutes? They've been out for some time and available. I'll put that resolution, all those in favor say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any opposed?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Abstentions?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Carried unanimously.

| back to top |

Approval of ICANN Accountability and Transparency Frameworks

The next item of business is a substantial -- reflects a substantial amount of work by a large number of people, particularly Paul Levins on the staff, but also Paul Twomey, so I'd like to call on Paul Twomey to speak to this and then eventually move the resolution. Paul?

>>PAUL TWOMEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As you rightly said, Paul Levins and myself and a few others have been involved, I think, in hoping to put together in draft a lot of thinking and ideas that have come from the community over the last -- since October 2006. The issue of transparency and accountability has been a main theme for our community, particularly it was a theme for our community in discussions in September 2006, and the -- I think the community has done an intense piece of work as well as staff and the board in terms of really changing and looking at what's involved in transparency and accountability.

We've had consultations on this issue at all board meetings up to this board meeting. We have had very good input from people such as the government -- the Government Advisory Committee -- in particular, the government of Canada which gave a lot of careful thought about accountability for organizations like ICANN, and I think that has been frankly a matter -- should be a matter of pride for all in the community that we've been able to sit down and put on paper a set of accountability and transparency frameworks, many of which are not a new creation but which are, if you like, the constitutional expression of the political will of the community. The things that we've had in place, the sort of soft and hard accountabilities we've in place, we've put them in one written document.

The document has been posted. There is -- I would just note that there was -- even though the document is no longer open for public comment, it's been out for public notice. There was one small piece of feedback during the week, in particular, from Roelof Meijer from dot NL. And so there's been a slight -- very, very slight amendment to the issues on -- to one of the descriptions of the standards of behavior, which is now -- now appears on the list, so it's a three-word clarification. It's really quite minor.

So therefore, Chairman, I would like to move the following resolution:

Whereas, the transparency and accountability of ICANN and its processes are of crucial importance to the community.

Whereas, a draft set of frameworks and principles for accountability and transparency was released for consultation and public comment. The principles document ICANN's approach to its work, including several new elements such as a documentary information disclosure policy, a translation policy, and a participation policy.

Whereas, the board encouraged discussion and community input to facilitate continued improvements and measures designed to increase and assist accountability and transparency.

Whereas, workshops discussing the draft principles were held during ICANN meetings in San Juan and Los Angeles.

Whereas, the public comments were taken under consideration and a final draft framework and principles on accountability and transparency was posted on the 10th of January, 2008.

It is resolved (2008.02.15.03), the board hereby approves the framework and principles on accountability and transparency.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: So is there a seconder for that resolution? Dennis Jennings. Thank you, Dennis.

Any board members like to make any comments about this before I put that to the vote? Harald?

>>HARALD TVEIT ALVESTRAND: Just a question for clarification. The ones we are approving includes the three-word change, right?

>>PAUL TWOMEY: Yes.

>>HARALD TVEIT ALVESTRAND: So it's -- but the version of January 10th does not? So we are approving a three-word change from the January 10th draft.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: That's right.

>>HARALD TVEIT ALVESTRAND: Thank you.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any other comments? I'd like to say, first of all, what -- to acknowledge the work, again, that's been done and just to add to the discussion we've been having recently in terms of seeing these as a living document for the corporation. Now that we've done this, the intention is not that they be put on the shelf, and they're already out there. We've talked about two other probable additions or revisions to this. One is the ethics discussion that we've been having in relation to a list of ethical rules for the board, and also in relation to the board, the discussion has started on a mechanism for being able to vote the board down on a particular issue, and that document's being circulated.

And so they will eventually be incorporated in this part of the principles.

And of course the key issue for us in relation to the JPA and transition is to remain accountable for the entire Internet community, so these principles are really going to be a key part of our performance obligations. Paul?

>>PAUL TWOMEY: That's right, Chairman.

This is a document that we went out of our way this week to ensure that those who are participating here physically received a copy and actually at least opened and read and saw and confirmed.

I think it is a document to which the community should hold everyone in the community accountable. Particularly those in leadership positions. But it is a document for the community.

I think, secondly, what part of the transparency and accountability framework is that we will have an annual audit of ICANN's transparency, certainly, and that -- obviously the framework will be a basis for judgment against that audit.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: If there's no further discussion, then I'll put the resolution. The resolution is effectively for approve all these principles. All those in favor please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any opposed?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Abstentions?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Carried unanimously, John.

| back to top |

Next Steps on GNSO Review

Which leads to the discussion and the resolution on the next steps on our long -- on our ongoing GNSO review.

I'd like to call on Roberto to discuss that and move the resolution.

>>ROBERTO GAETANO: Whereas, Article IV, Section 4 of ICANN's bylaws calls for periodic reviews of the performance and operation of each supporting organization, each supporting organization council, each advisory committee (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and the nominating committee by an entity or entities independent of the organization under review.

Whereas, these reviews are part of ICANN's ongoing commitment to its evolution and improvement, and are intended to ensure an independent examination of the role and operation of the key elements of ICANN.

Whereas, independent reviews of the GNSO and the GNSO Council were completed and submitted to the board.

Whereas, the board created the "Board Governance Committee GNSO review working group" to consider the independent reviews and other relevant input, and recommend to the committee a comprehensive proposal to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy activities, structure, operations and communications.

Whereas, the working group posted working drafts and supporting documents which presented the group's initial ideas and posed key questions regarding GNSO improvements on which public comments were sought.

Whereas, public fora were held in Lisbon, San Juan and Los Angeles at which the community discussed the proposed draft and areas of emerging agreement, possible recommendations, and questions about how to improve the GNSO's inclusiveness and representativeness, while at the same time increasing its effectiveness and efficiency.

Whereas, the public comment periods on the working draft have been closed.

Whereas, the working group has considered all input and developed a final report containing proposed recommendations on GNSO improvements.

Whereas, the Board Governance Committee determined that the GNSO improvements working group had fulfilled its charter and forwarded the report to the board for consideration.

Whereas, the board would like to receive final public comments on this report to enable it to consider and implement the findings of the report as soon as possible.

Resolved (2008.02.15.03), the ICANN board directs staff to open a public comment forum for 30 days on the GNSO improvements report, draft a detailed implementation plan in consultation with the GNSO, begin implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, and return to the board and community for further consideration of the implementation plan.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Roberto. Is there a seconder for the resolution? Susan Crawford.

Any discussion? Susan.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Thank you, Chair. This report represents a culmination of a substantial amount of work and consultation with the community. It's also coming in response to the review report commissioned by ICANN performed by the London School of Economics, which was delivered to us in the fall of 2006.

So we've been going through this process for quite some time, and as a member of the working group, I'm looking forward to moving onward with the implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, of which there are many, and reporting back to the board with the results of this final public comment period.

I hope that we can seize the moment and move forward with what is quite a brave and ambitious plan to move towards a working group structure for the formation of policy within the GNSO.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks. I think it's become clear that much of -- most of the report, except for the actual structure of the council, has been accepted, and this resolution will allow work to begin on all those non-contentious parts.

Any further comments? Bruce? No?

All right. If there aren't any further comments, I'll put that resolution -- seconded by Roberto -- moved by Roberto, seconded by Susan. All those in favor please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any opposed?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Abstentions?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Rita and Demi, can we hear a vote from you on this, please?

>>DEMI GETSCHKO: I agree.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. Rita? We'll come back to Rita.

Is Steve Conte there.

>>RITA RODIN: I'm in favor. Can you hear me?

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Ah, thank you, Rita. So having heard from those, I can declare that carried unanimously. Thank you.

| back to top |

Approval of New Disbursement Policy

We now have a resolution to approve a new disbursement policy for the corporation. I'll call on Raimundo Beca, the Chairman of the Finance Committee that has been developing this work. Raimundo?

>>RAIMUNDO BECA: Thank you, Peter. Before reading the policy which is quite a long policy, I would like to highlight the three points on the rationale behind this policy which maybe will make more easy to understand what is in it.

First of all, this disbursement policy updates the current policy, which was approved in October 2006 in a time where this organization didn't have a COO. So now we have a COO, we have a CFO, and this policy needed to be updated.

Second, this policy empowers the senior officers of the organization, in accordance with the skills, the competence, and the ethics with which they were hired.

And third, this policy which, with other policies on budget and finance, helps the auditors to check the -- to make their work, to the extent that they can always check if the expenses are made or not in accordance with the policy.

The policy reads like this:

Whereas, the ICANN board adopted the current disbursement policy in October 2006.

Whereas, ICANN continues to evolve into a larger and more mature organization and is managed by a strong senior executive team.

Whereas, the ICANN board desires to optimize the strength of internal financial controls by hiring highly ethical, competent, and skilled officers and employees, by ensuring that appropriate policies and procedures are followed, by ensuring that financial reporting is accurate, timely and relevant, and by adopting disbursement policies that are best for ICANN's mission and culture.

Whereas, the ICANN board desires contracting and purchasing practices at ICANN to be most effective.

Whereas, the ICANN board desires to adopt disbursement policies that reflect ICANN's size, scope, and level of professionalism.

Whereas, the ICANN board Finance Committee has consulted with the CFO in the development of a new disbursement policy, and has recommended that the board approve the new disbursement policy.

Whereas, the current disbursement policy will not optimally meet the needs of ICANN's future disbursement requirements.

Whereas, the current policy in some cases has been found to be unclear in terms of the scope and nature of disbursement authority.

Whereas, the new disbursement policy will allow for stronger internal controls and more clarity on the scope and authority granted to officers to approve disbursements.

Resolved (2008.02.15.04) the board adopts the new ICANN disbursement policy as proposed by the board Finance Committee.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Raimundo. Is there a seconder for the new disbursement policy? Steve Goldstein.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Just a bit of discussion, please, or clarification. Again, we are so very fortunate in ICANN to have the services of our CFO, Kevin Wilson, who has done so much to prepare these things, and so much to help align our systems with the growing needs of the corporation, so I want to acknowledge his contribution to this, and I'd also like the privilege of seconding the motion.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Steve. I endorse all that you say.

Ram, did you want to add something as well, as a member of the Finance Committee?

>>RAJASEKHAR RAMARAJ: No. I think Steve got it.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Okay. Any further discussion about adopting the new disbursements policy? In that case, I'll put the resolution. All those in favor, please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any opposed?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Abstentions?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Rita and Demi, can you vote for us, please?

>>DEMI GETSCHKO: Demi votes in favor.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: thank you, Demi.

>>RITA RODIN: It's Rita. I'm also in favor.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you both. Carried unanimously.

| back to top |

New gTLDs - Next Steps

Which leads to another topic which has been the subject of a lot of work and a huge amount of discussion at this meeting, and that's the work that -- this is the new gTLD policy, and Susan, could I ask you to take that resolution?

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Thank you, Peter.

Yes, we -- one of ICANN's core functions is to introduce competition into the namespace and the GNSO Council has delivered to the board a set of policy recommendations on establishing a predictable and objective process for the introduction of new gTLDs. This resolution recognizes the work that's going on, and also tries to lay out a clear roadmap for where we're going from here.

So I'll read it.

Whereas, ICANN staff has been developing implementation vision and details for the GNSO's policy recommendations regarding the introduction of new gTLDs and has provided analysis to the board on a number of implementation issues.

Whereas, ICANN staff has retained subject matter experts and done considerable work developing the new gTLD program plan and designing elements of the implementation plan.

Whereas, the implementation of these policy recommendations is a complex process and raises a number of challenging technical, operational, legal, economic, and political questions that will affect the DNS.

Whereas, it is important to the Internet community that ICANN develop an orderly, timely, and predictable process for the introduction of new gTLDs.

Whereas, the introduction of new gTLDs is consistent with ICANN's mission and core values to promote competition in the registration of names, where practicable and beneficial in the public interest, and where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms, to promote and sustain a competitive environment.

Resolved (2008.02.15.06), the board directs staff to continue its implementation work on new gTLDs, inform the GNSO and the public on progress made in implementation efforts, discuss some issues raised by the staff and board regarding implementation with the GNSO Council, and provide information to the board in a timely manner to enable the board to discuss the recommendations and implementation issues and quickly determine a course of action for the introduction of new gTLDs, with staff to provide an update at the board workshop on the 17th of April, 2008.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Susan. Is there a seconder for that? Jean-Jacques. Any discussion? Bruce?

>>BRUCE TONKIN: Thank you, Peter. I'd like to speak in favor of the motion and also just perhaps give some examples of some of the implementation issues that have been discussed this week for some context.

So as the motion identifies, the -- a lot of the implementations of the policy recommendations is quite complex, and I think it's important that we're engaging the community that helped develop the recommendations in getting feedback on the proposed implementation.

A couple of the topics that have received a lot of discussion this week, to give some examples, one is the recommendation on confusingly similar. And certainly the intent of the committee was that that's focused on consumer confusion and the likelihood of that confusion, but certainly the parties that either have existing TLDs or that are proposing to submit TLDs want to see some clarity on how that would be interpreted, so the staff have been producing some information on that. They've given some advice to the board. But it's reflecting that -- their thinking so far, back into the community and getting their continued feedback is one example.

The other example where there's been quite a bit of discussion is -- or I guess uncertainty -- is around what the fee structure might be, both the application fee for a new gTLD as well as whatever ongoing fees there may be. And again, the policy principle there is that the fees should recover the full costs of ICANN implementing new gTLDs, and part of understanding those full costs is understanding how we implement some of these recommendations.

So it's not possible to come up with a fee structure right now until more work has been done in understanding the full costs of both the implementation in terms of all the legal costs, as well as the costs of actually operating the process and, you know, costs of operating dispute resolution, et cetera.

So I just wanted to draw out some -- those two examples to give people a reason as to why there is a need to get further feedback as we work through the implementation before the board would ultimately sign off on the -- on the recommendations.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: It's somewhat similar to the GNSO review development, in that there's quite a large piece of work which is moving ahead quite well, isn't it.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: Yes.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: And there's still some areas that need this. Paul, I wonder if you could just clarify exactly how -- the effect of this resolution in terms of the relationship that we are proposing between the staff and the GNSO. There's a number of elements to this resolution, aren't there. There's the liaison and the reporting and the -- sorry, I didn't mean to --

>>PAUL TWOMEY: Yeah. Thank you, Chairman. I was just getting the exact wording.

Yes, the board has asked the staff to help work through the implementation issues that would be involved if the policy were to be approved. As we are working through this implementation, we think it's very important to link back through with -- especially with the GNSO to ensure that we can share thinking about implementation and get clarity about what may have been people's intent in the report, but also to share what difficulties we'll be closer to, that we may all have to sort of further clarify what we think certain principles stood for.

This is unusual in an ICANN context, in that normally the board approves the policy and then asks the staff to go ahead and implement it, but the new gTLDs, to use the cliched phrase, is the devil is in the detail, and so we thought it's better to share as much of the details as we can with all the parties involved in the policy formation before it finally comes up for consideration by the board.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: And I think we heard a number of times from Kurt, in particular, and other staff that it's not that any of these policies will be unimplementable. It's simply a matter of working through.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: Yes. There might be an issue of when the report comes back, whether the implementation scope justifies the description of the policy terms, so that people might feel -- think it's implementation, but that's not what the policy said. But we have to have that -- if that is the case, we'd have to have that discussion in the future.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Susan.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Just briefly and following up on this exchange, our challenge here is to create a predictable global objective process for the introduction of new gTLDs, and we have several recommendations that deal really with content issues. Things like morality and public order and whether a particular string speaks to a community in some way.

These are very difficult issues and so the staff is doing its best, I believe, to provide us with an objective and narrowed implementation vision of those recommendations.

I am concerned that because it's a diverse and not homogenous world out there, frankly, that these recommendations will be extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible, to implement in an objective, predictable way.

But I await the recommendations of the staff as to implementation and their work with the GNSO Council. I just want to note my concern that we not take forever to figure out whether these recommendations are implementable. They may not be. Some of them may not be implementable. In which case we should be able to go forward with the new gTLD process nonetheless that leaves out some of these policy recommendations. Thanks.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Susan.

If there's no further discussion, then I'll put the resolution. All those in favor, please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any opposed.

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Abstentions?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Carried unanimously.

| back to top |

Authorization to Engage Auditors

The next item, then, will be the authorization to engage auditors and I call on Njeri Rionge, who is the Chair of our Audit Committee, to deal with this one. Thanks, Njeri.

>> NJERI RIONGE: Thank you.

Authorization to engage the auditors, and here goes the resolution.

Whereas, the ICANN bylaws in Article XVI, Section 3, requires that at the end of the fiscal year, the books of ICANN must be audited by certified public accountants. The bylaws also state that the appointment of the fiscal auditors shall be the responsibility of the board.

Whereas, the board Audit Committee and the staff interviewed Moss Adams LLP.

Whereas, the Chair of the Board Audit Committee has received a proposal from Moss Adams to be engaged as the auditor for the fiscal year ending 30th June, 2008.

Whereas, the board Audit Committee has reviewed the proposed engagement letter and professional services engagement and recommends to the board that ICANN enters into this engagement.

It's been resolved (2008.02.15.05), the board authorizes the chief financial officer of ICANN to engage Moss Adams as the auditors for fiscal year ending June 30th, 2008. So moved.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Njeri.

Is there a seconder for that?

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Second.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Steve.

Any discussion about appointing or reappointing our auditors? In that case, I'll put the resolution. All those in favor, please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any opposed?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Abstentions?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Carried unanimously.

| back to top |

Acknowledgment of SSAC Reports on Domain-Name Front Running, Fast Flux, DNSSEC, and WHOIS

Next is an acknowledgment of a number of detailed reports we've received from the SSAC, and I'm going to ask Steve Goldstein to take us through that. Steve?

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Thank you, Chair. I've been a board member for a little over a year now, and I've gradually come to learn how the corporation, ICANN, and the board in particular benefits greatly from the technical expertise and hard work of several technical members, liaisons. Thomas Narten, who is our liaison from the IETF for several years. Suzanne Woolf, who is our liaison from the root server advisory committee. And my very good friend and colleague, Steve Crocker, who is our liaison from the Security and Stability Advisory Committee.

You know, when we consider almost anything, any change, the first question that usually comes up is: How does it affect the security and stability of the Internet and the DNS, and Steve's committee, we count on them to deliver a study, and an opinion on that.

So there are four reports now to consider and whereas, ICANN's Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) has recently published five important documents including:

(1) a study that analyzed the use of WHOIS services by spammers. That's SAC 023;

(2) a comprehensive report (SAC 024) on domain name front running summarizing SSAC's study of 120 complaints submitted by Internet users;

(3) a Fast Flux and DNS advisory report (SAC 025) that explains how criminals use botnets to operate illegal Web sites, and how they exploit DNS and registration services to make their illegal activities difficult to locate and shut down;

(4) a statement (SAC 026) to ICANN and the community identifying actions that are required to accelerate DNSsec deployment, and;

(5), a comment (SAC 027) to the GNSO regarding the future of WHOIS, identifying actions that are required to accelerate DNSsec employment.

Resolved (2008.02.15.07), the ICANN board hereby accepts these various documents submitted by SSAC and thanks SSAC Chair Steve Crocker, senior security technologist Dave Piscitello, who cannot be with us at this meeting, the members of SSAC, and all their other contributors for their efforts in the creation of these documents.

Further resolved (2008.02.15.08), the board directs staff to bring the SSAC reports to the attention of interested parties, and in particular to refer the recommendations in the reports to ICANN's policy development and operational planning processes as appropriate.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Steve. Is there a seconder for that resolution? Ram. Thank you. Any discussion about these reports or what we propose to do with them? Steve Crocker.

>>STEVE CROCKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Goldstein, or Dr. Goldstein, for very complimentary words.

If I might, let me offer a couple of comments that set a slightly larger perspective. SSAC was formed in spring of 2002; and like the rest of the organization, SSAC has evolved over a period of time and has, I think, matured and we continue to do so. The addition of staff help in the form of Jim Galvin first as the exec and then more recently Dave Piscitello has made a first-order improvement in our ability to produce reports.

One of the features is that very early on we spent quite a lot of time on DNS security. It became clear that that was too large a topic to pursue within the confines of the committee -- the way we were organized and to cut a long story short, we, basically, organized a parallel track.

And over the past few years, we have made a regular practice of supporting a DNSsec session at ICANN as well as a full set of regular SSAC activities, if you will.

I have been very grateful that in the very packed agenda that we that there's been continued support for that use of resources within this group and that now things are coming to a head, I think, with DNSsec.

There will be further evolution, a note that we are scheduled to go through the formal review process shortly, which is just kicking off, and I expect that this will be a very positive experience to take a look backward at what we've set out to do and where that fits in.

I've taken notice over time that security is, of course, a priority for the entire organization and comes at the -- at least in terms of stating core principles and missions, at the top of every list. And, indeed, new security activities have cropped up across the entire organization, RSTEP for one, chief security technology officer is Steve Conte -- I don't know if I have mangled his proper term -- his proper title -- and additional things.

And it was -- perhaps, maybe I was the only one who noted it exactly, but when the secretary made his opening remarks at the beginning of the week, he made reference to the various security committees within ICANN and I thought that was quite perceptive.

So it's been a pleasure to lead this effort and as you said, there's been a quite stellar team that has made this possible and we hope to make even further improvements and push forward on this. So thank you all.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Steve.

Bruce and then, I think, Paul. Bruce?

>>BRUCE TONKIN: I just have a question to ask actually and maybe Paul can answer it or, perhaps, let me know later, but I noticed this resolution is requesting staff to bring it to the attention of interested parties. I was just wondering, is there any intent that these reports might be translated into other languages as well, because some of them, I guess, are fairly substantial and may be of interest to people more broadly than the English-speaking world.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Well, Steve, if you have an answer?

>>STEVE CROCKER: Yes, let me respond. Bruce, that topic has recently come to my attention and we received an offer -- I'm trying to remember exactly, I think it was from Nick Ashton-Tate but I may have it wrong, asking what we might ask for in the way of translation.

And I had not focused on the details of all of that before. Translation is an expensive and somewhat lengthy process, so the challenge is to get -- is to decide whether to be selective and whether there is any issues of what to do, in which order.

And, actually, to the extent that this is up to us to choose -- and I'm not sure whether that's the right path -- I'm keen to have input on that. So this is a very timely question on your part, and we are quite open to hearing whatever you might suggest on that and delighted to do so.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Does that deal with your point, Bruce?

Paul, do you got something to add?

>>PAUL TWOMEY: No.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Fine.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: Chairman, I have a general -- I suppose more of a news item around security issues and doesn't relate so much to the SSAC but perhaps might be an appropriate time to share it.

As Steve Crocker and I have discussed over quite some time and certainly has been discussed with the community through the strategic planning process, as well as having an important Strategic, Security and Stability Advisory Committee, there are also aspects around supporting the community and security and stability issues which have sort of a staff operational aspect to them as well.

Some of those relate to the support for registrar and registry issues in the g space, particular things like registry failover plans and exercises.

What I wanted to share with the board also and the community, that we have also been approached by some of the country code operators for similar assistance in partnership. Perhaps, it is worth just bringing that perhaps to the record.

One of the things that has -- that we are both increasing our human resources at the staff level in this proposed upcoming operational plan and also have operated in things like the registry failover plan, is bringing the experience both of the g space and the root server space into things such as exercises and tests, more focusing -- not so much focusing per se on the technical aspects of security and more on the governance and communications and exercise aspect of security.

Don Hollander from the Asia-Pacific top-level domain group has approached myself and others to see whether we would be interested in being a partner in an APTLD program for helping some of the members of that cc regional grouping on learning more about that sort of -- conducting those sorts of exercises and helping to build something of a curriculum to help people respond. And we are as a trial process working with the APTLD, met with them this week, to develop that sort of capacity.

I should be very clear about a few principles there. We are very, very focused on our core mission. Susan has made that regularly a major point, and she is actually right in this issue of security and stability, we stay firmly within mission.

Secondly, that we're doing this in partnership. This is not a question of sort of ICANN parachuting into some sort of space. This is where we have been approached and asked by a regional cc grouping.

And, also, we are doing it in collaboration not just with the cc grouping but potentially other players in the region. This piece of work is being scoped out. But one of its key focuses is about learning through testing and exercises and sharing of other peoples' experiences for things like attacks we had from within the root server experience.

So I wanted to share that with the board and the community because that seems to be -- we're testing it this year, but it seems to be something that is appreciated and it is a slightly -- well, it is a different function from the sorts of work that the Security and Stability Advisory Committee does for us.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Paul. Any further comment? In that case, then I will put the resolution. All those in favor please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

Any opposed?

[No verbal response.]

Abstentions?

[No verbal response.]

Carried unanimously.

| back to top |

ICANN Bylaws Change Request from ALAC

Next item is bylaws change which we don't do lightly. We've had a request from the At-Large Advisory Committee to change the bylaws relates to the ALAC, and I will call on Bruce to take us through that.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: Thank you, Peter. I will start by reading the resolution. It states that whereas, the At-Large Advisory Committee has proposed a resized process for handling applications for at-large structure applications worldwide.

Whereas, the process will bring improvements including by providing the Regional At-Large Organisations with an important role in evaluating applications. Whereas, the new process will increase transparency of the consideration of applications.

Whereas, the board directed the staff to allow the public to comment on the proposed bylaw change.

Whereas, the public comment period began 7th of November, 2007, and concluded on the 2nd of December, 2007, and during the comment period all substantive comments received from the public were in favor of the change.

It is, therefore, resolved (2008.02.15.09), that the board modifies Article XI, Section 2(4)(i) of the Bylaws as posted at -- and there is an URL reference [http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-07nov07.htm].

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Bruce. Is there a seconder for the resolution to amend the ALAC bylaw? Njeri, thank you.

Any discussion about amending the bylaw? Wendy.

>>WENDY SELTZER: I just want to take the opportunity to thank the board for considering this. This came from the At-Large Advisory Committee and, specifically, from its now fully-formed Regional At-Large Organisations which wanted to have more of a role that the original bylaws provided in the approval of new at-large structures to join the at-large. This bylaw change speeds the process by which those can be considered to make it easier for us to -- for the At-large to bring in new groups and helps to give those regional organizations that have now been constituted a role in helping to create their own structures. So we think that this is a valuable development in the growth of the At-large community.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Wendy. We look forward to the ALAC moving forward with this.

Any further discussion? In that case, I will put the resolution which will have the effect of amending the bylaws, the ALAC in the manner disclosed in that proposal. All those in favor please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

Any opposed?

[No verbal response.]

Abstentions?

[No verbal response.]

Carried unanimously.

 

| back to top |

Recognition of First APRALO General Assembly

Which brings to us a slightly related topic, also involving the At-large community, the recognition of the APRALO general assembly. And Dennis Jennings is going to move this resolution. Thank you, Dennis.

>>DENNIS JENNINGS: Chairman, thank you very much, indeed. I am very pleased to move this resolution because I regard strengthening the ALAC to represent the individual user and more generally civil society and consumer protection interests in the ICANN policy development framework is extremely important, so it gives me great pleasure to introduce this resolution, which is as follows, whereas, the ICANN bylaws, Article XI, Section 2, part 4, provide a process that allows individual Internet users to participate meaningfully in the work of ICANN, as the community known as "at-large."

Whereas, the Asia/Australia/Pacific Regional At-Large Organisation, APRALO, entered into a memorandum of understanding in March 2007 and held its first APRALO general assembly at the ICANN New Delhi meeting.

Resolved (2008.02.15.10), the board offers its congratulations to the APRALO and its thanks to the whole At-large community for their continuing work as a valued and integral part of the ICANN community.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Dennis. Is there a seconder for this?

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Second.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Steve. Any further discussion? Excellent. Well, we had a celebration with them yesterday. I think the goodwill is still continuing. Let's move the resolution.

All those in favor please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

Any opposed?

[No verbal response.]

Abstentions?

[No verbal response.]

There being none, carried unanimously.

[ applause ]

Well done to the APRALO and good luck to all who sail in her.

 

| back to top |

Update on IDN Policy Activities

The IDN policy activities. We have a resolution discussing IDN, and I'm going to call on Ram to take us through that.

>>RAJASEKHAR RAMARAJ: Thank you, Chairman. This is an update on IDN policy activities. Whereas, the ICANN board created the IDNC working group on 2 November 2007 to develop and report on feasible methods for timely introduction of a limited number of internationalized country code top level domain names, that is IDN ccTLDs associated with ISO-3166-1 two-letter codes, in a manner that ensures the continued security and stability of the Internet.

Whereas, on 1 February 2008, the IDNC working group posted a discussion draft of the initial report, which includes principles and methods for developing the so-called fast-track approach for consideration and input from the public.

Resolved (2008.02.15.11), the board expresses its gratitude to the IDNC working group for its draft initial report and to the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC for their ongoing collaborative efforts and commitment to recommend a course of action to the ICANN board in a timely manner.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Ram. Is there a seconder for that?

>>DEMI GETSCHKO: Demi seconds.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Demi seconds that one. Thank you, Demi.

I'd just like to associate myself particularly with the expresses of gratitude for all the hard work that's been going on in this area. It is an enormous exercise. There is a great deal of work going on on the technical, political, organizational level; and we've had very useful meetings and seen very useful meetings, including cross-constituency meetings between the ccNSO, the GAC, the GNSO and other parties. So that's excellent.

Any other comments? Janis.

>>JANIS KARKLINS: Thank you, Peter. I think that the latter part that you mentioned, the collaborative effort is the most important thing in this exercise because we heard during discussion this week that there are concerns in all corners, and only working together these concerns can be addressed. And I appreciate the encouragement for all organizations involved, namely ccNSO, GAC, GNSO, ALAC, all of them are mentioned and encouraged to work together and I hope that this will be the case.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Janis.

Dennis?

>>DENNIS JENNINGS: Thank you, Chairman. I'd like to -- as an ignorant English-speaking Westerner -- remark on how extraordinarily impressed I am with the work that's going on in the language area, which is fundamental to the IDNs and the complexity. I attended some of the IDN Indian language meeting, if that's the right phrase -- maybe I am showing my ignorance by calling it that. I was astonished at the complexity of the situation and the amount of work that needs to be done to develop the standards that would underpin the IDNs, both ccTLD IDNs and gTLD IDNs. I commend those people who are working in this area, very impressed with the number of people in the region that are working on it and similarly I understand in the Middle Eastern region and others.

I would just like to mention that it is enormously complicated and it will lead to standards, I believe, as I said, which will underpin the introduction of IDNs. Thank you, Chairman.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Dennis.

Any other comments? Susan.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Thank you, Chairman. We have been working on IDNs for some time here at ICANN. I personally feel we moved too slowly in the early years, and I am glad to see this acceleration of interest at ICANN for the introduction of IDNs.

As Dennis says, the policy work we're going through now underpins the introduction of both IDN gTLDs as well as IDN ccTLDs. And I would hope that those processes are actually merged and that we move towards a single unitary IDN process that makes set for the entire community. Thank you.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any other comment about IDNs? Okay. Thank you all. I will put the resolution. All those in favor please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

Any opposed?

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Opposed.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: You're opposed to the resolution?

Any abstentions? Susan, do you want to take an opportunity to record why you're opposed?

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: I think I expressed my concerns during the remarks I just made, Peter. Thank you.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: I understood those to be typically about the early days. I wasn't quite sure why this particular resolution you're opposing.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: I have concerns about the fast-track process. I don't think it is appropriate for me to say more about that now here when all we're doing is looking at the collaborative work of the community. There is no other way for me to express those concerns than to record a vote at this juncture. Thanks.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you for that clarification.

I will declare the motion carried and move on to the At-large structures summit.

| back to top |

At-large Structures Summit

The board has had a request for assistance from the At-large in relation to a summit. Jean-Jacques, can you take us through this resolution?

>>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT: Thank you, Peter. By way of introduction, I would like to underline how much the At-large community is important to the whole operation of the world Internet and its improvement.

ALAC is a fairly recent structure, and I think that the proposed resolution reflects in a way the importance -- the growing importance of this community. As I've been on the board for only a few months, I would like to take this opportunity to say how grateful I am to my colleagues on the board but also members of the staff and members of the community at-large with whom I have been in contact over the past few months in making me aware of the importance of this contribution. And I would say thank you especially to Wendy Seltzer who has made my awareness more acute on this.

So the proposed resolution is as follows: Whereas, the At-Large Advisory Committee is now supported by five Regional At-Large Organisations comprised of more than 100 at-large structures.

Whereas, members of the ALAC, RALOs and at-large structures believe that a face-to-face meeting of at least one person from each of these structures in conjunction with an ICANN meeting would facilitate their coordination and work on ICANN policy matters relating to the interests of individual Internet users.

Whereas, the ALAC and constituents have been planning for such a summit since ICANN's San Juan meeting.

Whereas, this would be a special event associated with the completion of the establishment of the At-Large Advisory Committee.

Whereas, many of the ALAC at-large structures are unable to cover the costs of sending a representative to an ICANN meeting for this purpose.

Resolved (2008.02.15.12), the board directs staff to work with the ALAC to finalize a proposal that will fund one person from each at-large structure to attend the proposed summit, for consideration as part of the 2008-2009 operating plan and budget process.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Jean-Jacques. Is there a seconder for that resolution? Njeri.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Discussion, chair?

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Yes, certainly, Steve.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Thank you, sir. I am going to vote in favor of this proposal, but I would like to explain that I see it as -- in the resolution to finalize a proposal for consideration. And this is by no means a check which is going to be signed at this point.

There are other parts of the organization that are also requesting assistance for travel costs, and all of those will have to be considered together relative to budget realities before any decision is made.

So I just wanted to point that out to anybody who may wonder about the words here and that's the reality behind it. Thank you.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Steve. And, Wendy?

>>WENDY SELTZER: Thank you, Jean-Jacques, for those kind words and especially towards the At-large community which I think as the previous resolutions reflected has finally grown into its organizational structure and believes that the summit will be the next step in bringing that to a real complete and well-formed part of the ICANN structures as an organization that can work effectively across numerous regional language, cultural divides and, yet, bring together the voices of the at-large public voices that we've heard we need to hear from on issues such as the question of consumer confusion, issues of consumer and registrant protection and numerous other IDNs and numerous other of the policy issues that come before ICANN.

So I'm greatly encouraged by the board's interest in an at-large summit and interest in helping the At-large community to bring people together to bring all of those groups up to speed and into contact with others in the ICANN process so that they can truly make those contributions.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Wendy. And, Roberto.

>>ROBERTO GAETANO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm personally looking very much forward to see this summit happening. I would like to just make a recommendation to the ALAC and to whoever is going to organize this, to be aware that it's going to be a very important event not only for the life of ALAC but also for the life of the organization for ICANN as a whole.

And I would encourage to put -- to prepare it well, to put every effort in place in order to make it a great success. I think that to have at-large structures from all over the world meeting in one please is something that would really mark a high moment in the life of this organization.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: And Susan.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Just very briefly, Chairman, I want to align myself with Roberto's remarks. I think this will be an important event. I think it deserves very careful planning and advance thought. Thanks.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Okay. Nothing further, I'll put the resolution. All those in favor please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

Any opposed?

[No verbal response.]

Abstentions?

[No verbal response.]

I will call on Rita Rodin and Demi, please, for a voice vote on this one. Rita?

>>RITA RODIN: In favor, Peter.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Rita. Demi?

>>DEMI GETSCHKO: In favor, too.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, both, so that resolution is carried unanimously.

| back to top |

ICANN Deployment of IPv6-Capable Services

Now, the next discussion and motion relates to IPv6, and I'm going to ask Harald to take us through this.

>>HARALD TVEIT ALVESTRAND: Prefacing, IPv6 is identified in the operational plan as one of the things ICANN has to address. There are many things we could do. This resolution identifies just one thing that we should do and we know how to do, so let's do it.

So the resolution is: Whereas, IPv6 deployment is of growing interest for many in the Internet community.

Whereas, ICANN's strategic plan lists as one of its key priorities for the next three years to monitor depletion of IPv4 address space and provide leadership towards IPv6 adoption. Whereas, ICANN should act as a leader in enabling IPv6 services throughout the DNS, including encouraging all providers of DNS services to implement IPv6 capability.

Whereas, IPv6 implementations are reaching a maturity of use and capability.

Whereas, five root name server operators have added IPv6 addresses to their root zone records, thus enabling native IPv6 DNS resolution.

Resolved (2008.02.15.13), the board requests that ICANN staff produce a plan to implement IPv6-capable services and deploy IPv6 across ICANN's infrastructure as part of the 2008-09 operating plan and budget. The board further requests that ICANN staff provide regular feedback to the community on progress and lessons learned.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, is there a seconder for that resolution? Thank you, Ram.

Any discussion? Raimundo.

>>RAIMUNDO BECA: Thanks, Peter. I would like to make four comments on this resolution.

Comment no. 1: I would certainly have preferred a much stronger wording which expresses the clear commitment of ICANN, in cooperation with all the other concerned organizations in the world, to identify all the obstacles that are responsible of the current situation of slow deployment of IPv6, and certainly in consequence, to help to remove all those obstacles.

For sure, I don't like the actual situation, the current situation in the world, where I see, ICANN included, a lot of number of other organizations which are washing their hands -- washing their hands -- and seeing that really deployment is very, very low.

We were briefed this week that a survey was made among 500 major players in the industry and only 2% of them, which means only one of them, has implemented IPv6. This is really -- things are not happening as we should like.

Comment no. 2: Notwithstanding, I am very pleased that this resolution records in its whereas no. 2 as was mentioned by Harald that the ICANN strategic plan lists as one of the key priorities for the next three years to monitor the depletion of IPv4 address space and provide leadership towards IPv6 adoption, which means that the -- what this resolution should consider is to implement a plan or something like that which helps the deployment of IPv6.

Comment no. 3: I don't share the statement in whereas no. 4 which says that, "IPv6 implementations are reaching a maturity of use and capability."

I think this is wishful thinking. We are not in a situation in which this is a maturity. As was mentioned by Paul Wilson in a workshop two days ago, the situation in which we are present here is more a situation in which we are building -- we are building not an Internet, we're building an Internat. This is the real situation. And I wouldn't call that a mature situation, and I think something has to be done and ICANN has to be one of the key players, the leader as it says in the strategic plan, in having an Internet and not an Internat.

Finally, comment no. 4: However, I will vote in favor of this resolution. I couldn't have doubted to vote against or to abstain, but I want to show the importance of this and we can do it in any way. I prefer to do it in this way.

And the reason why I vote in favor is mainly because the resolution calls ICANN staff -- not only IANA staff, but ICANN staff -- to prepare a plan and the plan has to be prepared in the framework of the operational plan and the budget, and my understanding is that this framework is the framework which is given in the whereas noted before and recorded before of the strategic plan. Thanks.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Raimundo. I have a speaking order starting to develop starting with Harald.

>>HARALD TVEIT ALVESTRAND: Speaking to the subject of what ICANN should be doing, we should respect a few things ICANN is not. ICANN is not an ISP. ICANN is not a software developer. And ICANN is not, despite something that looks like attempts occasionally, it's not a marketing agency.

What we need to do, what we must do, is the things that ICANN are uniquely positioned to do, and we must work with other players to get the things done that are necessary to do in order to make the whole Internet work, which includes working with the regional Internet registries, which includes working with the standards organizations, which includes working with fora that are especially established to further the course of IPv6 deployment.

This is something we need to work on, and which we are working on, but where we don't have exact enough knowledge of what we're going -- what we need to do in order to make it a resolution and vote on it at this point.

But in the terms of making our own services available on IPv6, we know that we have to do it, we know that we are the ones to do it, and we know that we have enough information to say it's time to start.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. And next is Steve Crocker.

>>STEVE CROCKER: Thank you. I agree with both Raimundo and Harald, and want to add a little bit of texture to this.

In my mind, things in this area divide up cleanly into two very distinct areas.

There are the specific things that ICANN can and should do within its own purview. Everything from modifying its own internal systems to use IPv6 to making sure that address allocation policies are prepared and matured and coordinated with the IRRs to the recent work of getting IPv6 addresses for the root servers into the root. All of these are inescapably core, central activities for ICANN.

The larger and somewhat less well-defined area is -- I would characterize as this:

We all share the same interest across the entire community of smooth advance of IPv6. Else we'll be in an ever-deepening quagmire with respect to the depletion of IPv4.

I put it this way: That there is a -- I have a degree of discomfort that there is not a clear plan, so there's a double negative there. I would like to understand how this whole process is going to evolve.

It is not, obviously, for ICANN to make it happen. It is not for ICANN to control it or manage it or so forth. But I do think that within this community, not just within the board or within the staff but within the overall ICANN community, very important for us to have a sense that there is a plan or multiple possibilities, but in any case a way forward that will work. And to the extent that it's not clear, to use our voice to ask for attention on that, and to the extent that we can contribute, to provide such insight as we can.

But it's more of -- I'd put it almost in consumer terms and in marketing terms -- we can put -- posture ourselves not so much as being in control, but being consumers of a shared vision of how this is going to work, and to the extent that that product, if you will, doesn't exist, to ask for it to exist and essentially to contribute to that.

So that's the role that I know some feel some discomfort about how far ICANN should go. I think there's no question, at least in my mind, that ICANN should seek that there is a sensible answer available to the community at large, and to the extent that there isn't, to participate in discussions to help bring that forth. I'm very deliberately not using terms where ICANN takes control or forces action.

How mature are things? Yes, I agree that we're some distance -- it's sort of a glass half full/half empty, and one minor point. Your point, Raimundo, that there was one out of 500 I think is the right statistic. That was actually .2% and so that -- that suggests that we're -- we're just at the earliest stage, and that's, I think, an extremely interesting measure: When are content providers going to provide their services so that there is a destination for IPv6 clients and customers to interact with the services that they expect to.

Thank you very much.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Steve. I've got a list with Thomas on it and Steve Goldstein. Thomas?

>>THOMAS NARTEN: Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to say that I agree pretty much with what Harald said. The only thing I really want to add is: I think we need to be careful here about scoping what ICANN does, because, you know, certainly there's a lot of interest in IPv6 and we all wish it were, in some sense, you know, more widely deployed and moving faster.

But much -- if you look at the reasons for that, much of the reasons are outside of, you know, the control or influence of ICANN, and so we need to be careful about, you know, trying to step into an area where we really have limited influence. And so the way I look at this resolution, it's really -- it's a first step. It's something that's clear, it's something we know we can do and we're comfortable, you know, resolving to do, and it doesn't preclude us from doing something further in the future when we have a better handle on what would be reasonable to do and what, you know, is more appropriate for some other group to do. Thanks.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Thomas. Steve G. and then Demi will be joining us.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Thank you, Chair.

The business constituency of the GNSO has suggested that at some point we have a session or program for business leaders to help raise their awareness of some of the things in which we are involved, and they've suggested that one of the things that might be done there would be a case study of a corporation that has adopted IPv6, just to raise their awareness.

So that's one of the things we might do there. Thank you, sir.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Steve. Demi, would you like to say something?

>>DEMI GETSCHKO: Thank you, Peter. Just to add that I think ICANN has really a very important role in this. Not an operational role or technical role, but we have to lead by example and maybe we can begin to inform the community what the central structures of the Internet does that's already running in IPv6, what other major players are going to use IPv6 in their services, and to try to picture for our community to see the evolution of the spreading of IPv6.

I agree with the speaker that said that we don't have to be involved in operational issues, but I think we have to lead by example and it will be very important for the future of the Internet if ICANN really copes with this role to lead in this area. Thank you.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks. Just for my own part, I'm obviously going to vote in favor of this resolution but I sympathize with the enthusiasm expressed by Raimundo and Steve and Demi that we've got to do more, but when this resolution was introduced, Harald said there is more we can do but this is something we can do straightaway and it's in-house. It seems to me more appropriate that before we go calling on other organizations to coordinate international efforts which, you know, may be a role for us, that before we do that, we have done in-house all the things that we could and should do, and so this is, seems to me, beginning the right way, getting our own house in order and doing what we can do at home.

Any further comment? Wendy?

>>WENDY SELTZER: Just a brief mention that the At-Large Advisory Committee also has a working group on the IPv4/v6 transition, and is engaging Internet users in discussion and welcomes further information on how they can help to further this process, and to work with -- because they work with groups who are both inside and outside ICANN, perhaps that's a -- one step toward bridging this gap.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Wendy. Any other comments? I think the obvious point is once we've done this, we can then move on to do the kind of things that others are calling for. So this isn't intended to exclude, you know, further developments.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Call the question, Chair.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks. All those in favor then please say aye.

[Chorus of ayes]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any opposed.

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Any abstentions?

[No verbal response]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Rita and Demi, could you vote, please? Rita?

>>RITA RODIN: I'm in favor, Peter.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. And Demi?

>>DEMI GETSCHKO: In favor, Mr. Chair.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. So that's carried unanimously.

| back to top |

Other Business

Well, that's the end of the organized formal motions relating to the activities we've been dealing with this week. In terms of other business, do any board members have items they want to raise?

I would like to just mention to the community that we have, as some of you will have seen, started to change some of the aspects of the way we conduct meetings. We changed a few details of the forum yesterday. That seemed to go down reasonably well. So feedback from that would be appreciated and I think that's just an indication that we do want to try and make sure that people get the most from these meetings, particularly in the opportunities for face-to-face discussions. So that's a work in progress.

Any other resolutions or -- Steve?

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: Well, no we're going to say something formally in just a moment, but on a personal note, I would just like to acknowledge the warmth by which we have been received by just every sector of the Indian community. It's been a wonderful experience to have been here in India.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Agreed.

Any other items of general business?

Well in that case, I'll move to one of the more pleasurable aspects of being the chair and there are many but this is a special one. This is the thanks that Steve Goldstein has foreshadowed. To all of those people who have made this such a tremendous, exciting and memorable meeting, so let me begin with the formal resolution and then we'll have some presentations and some opportunity for interaction.

| back to top |

Thanks to Local Hosts, Staff, Scribes, Interpreters, and Event Teams

The board wishes to extend its thanks to the local host organizing team of Mr. Jainder Singh, secretary, Department of Information Technology, the Government of India; Mr. N. Ravi Shanker, joint secretary, Department of Information Technology, the Government of India; Dr. Govind, senior director, Department of Information Technology, the Government of India; Mr. Praveen Misra, joint director, STPI; and Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal, additional CEO, NIXI.

The board would also like to thank Shri Andimuthu Raja, Minister of Communications and Information Technology, and Dr. Shakeel Ahmad, minister of state for Communications and Information Technology for their participation in the gala event.

The board thanks the participants in the I.T. success story in India program: Shri Saurabh Srivastava, Chairman, Indian Venture Capital Association; Shri Kiran Karnik, former president, NASSCOM; Shri Ashok Soota, Chairman and MD of Mindtree Consulting Ltd.; Shri Raman Roy, CEO of Quatrro; and Shri Ajai Chowdhry, Chairman and CEO of HCL.

The board expresses its appreciation to the scribes, Laura Brewer, Teri Darrenougue, Jennifer Schuck, Charles Motter, and Deanna Baker. And as one of the constant problem children of this, let me add my personal thanks for keeping up with me. To Pepperdine Law School extern Indu Sen, and to the entire ICANN staff for their efforts in facilitating the smooth operation of the meeting.

The board also wishes to express its appreciation to VeriLan Events Services, Inc. for technical support, Upasana for audio/visual support, interpretation and general event support, and VSNL and SIFY for bandwidth.

Additional thanks are given to the Taj palace for this fine facility and the event facilities and support.

In addition, the following have provided essential sponsorship for which the board and the community is grateful: The national Internet exchange of India, NIXI. The software technology parks of India, STPI. Dot IN, the ccTLD manager for India. Afilias, VeriSign, LogicBoxes, Skenzo, Internet X, NeuStar, IAMAI, SIFY, dot Asia, VSNL, dot mobi, ANRT, and the ICANN Wiki.

And last and very importantly, the members of the board wish to especially thank their fellow board member, Rajasekhar Ramaraj, for his assistance in making the arrangements for this meeting in New Delhi.

[Applause]

[Standing Ovation]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you for that spontaneous and very genuine response. What I'd like to get, first of all, is a hand-held microphone so I don't -- thank you.

Could I ask Dr. Govind, Mr. Praveen Misra, and Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal to come and join us on the stage so that we can thank you appropriately?

Perhaps detained by the important business of the Government of India. They're working, as are we. Well, let's move to the other item. Ram, could you come forward, please? We have a little presentation for you.

Ram, it's been extraordinary to come to your country and meet your people and see the business and we want to thank you for the extraordinary help that you've provided.

Having somebody on the inside is always a huge advantage and you've been fantastic. Thanks very much.

>> RAJASEKHAR RAMARAJ: My pleasure. Thank you. Thank you all for being here. We enjoyed hosting, and I look forward again to seeing many of you at the IGF in December.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks very much.

[Applause]

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: I'll just find out what the arrangements will be for our other Indian hosts. It may be that we have to adjourn for a cup of coffee and come back in which case, I would invite you to come back and express your appreciation again.

Well, we have two other things to do. Kieren is going to be passing around some feedback forms, so if you could do that. You could -- please, as always, fill those in so we know what your thoughts are.

And that's Kieren dealing with those there.

And then maybe one further item from the CEO. He's just checking a further item of general business.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: While we're waiting, does anybody down there have a good singing voice or tap dancer or any other entertainer?

[Speaker is off microphone]

>>PAUL TWOMEY: Okay. Chairman, perhaps a general point of business. The President's Strategy Committee, which you and I cochair, has obviously had some meetings in recent times and perhaps it's just worth sharing for the record for the community some specific reporting from the PSC and some expression of steps forward.

Since Los Angeles, the President's Strategy Committee has reviewed additional materials regarding potential additional structures and has reviewed the inputs related to the United States Department of Commerce notice of inquiry for the current Joint Project Agreement.

In New Delhi, the President's Strategy Committee has continued its discussions and listened to feedback regarding strategic issues such as the JPA and internationalization.

The President's Committee intends to continue its work making observations and recommendations in connection with strategic issues facing ICANN during the months leading up to ICANN's Paris meeting. The President's Strategy Committee will come to Paris with initial materials for discussion with the community regarding appropriate next steps for ICANN's future.

So perhaps I'd just, you know, read that into the record.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Yes. Thanks, Paul. It's important to keep that work moving and to keep reporting. Well, I think what we'll do is adjourn for coffee and when we have our guests of honor, we'll reconvene and make the presentation. So let's adjourn until 10:45. See you back here then.

(Break)

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, if I could have your attention, I think that we will be making our presentations to the guest of honor this afternoon as part of the outreach program, so I'm going to close the meeting now. Enjoy your coffee. We will not be reconvening as 10:45 but as I say, we will be making the presentations as part of the outreach program this afternoon at 3:00. Thank you all very much and I declare the meeting closed.

[Applause]

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:45 a.m. local time.

| back to top |

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."