Skip to main content
Resources

Minutes | Regular Meeting of the ICANN Board

A Regular Meeting of the ICANN Board of Directors was held on 26 June 2014 in London, England, at 18:30 local time.

Steve Crocker, Chair, promptly called the meeting to order.

The following Directors participated in all or part of the meeting: Sébastien Bachollet, Cherine Chalaby, Fadi Chehadé (President and CEO), Bruno Lanvin, Chris Disspain, Bill Graham, Olga Madruga-Forti, Gonzalo Navarro, Erika Mann, Ray Plzak, Bruce Tonkin (Vice Chair), George Sadowsky, Mike Silber, and Kuo-Wei Wu.

The following Directors sent their apologies: Wolfgang Kleinwächter

The following Board Liaisons participated in all or part of the meeting: Heather Dryden (GAC Liaison), Ram Mohan (SSAC Liaison), Jonne Soininen (IETF Liaison) and Suzanne Woolf (RSSAC Liaison).

Secretary: John Jeffrey (General Counsel and Secretary)

  1. Consent Agenda:
    1. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes
    2. Appointment of D- and E-Root Server Operator Representatives to the RSSAC
    3. Investment Policy Update
    4. New gTLD Program Committee Membership
    5. Thank You from Security and Stability Advisory Committee to Sarmad Hussain
    6. Thank You to Sponsors of ICANN 50 Meeting
    7. Thank You for Support of Remote Participation Efforts
    8. Thank You to Interpreters, Staff, Event and Hotel Teams of ICANN 50 Meeting
  2. Main Agenda:
    1. Redelegation of the .GW domain representing Guinea-Bissau
    2. Meeting Venue Location and Hotel Contract for February 2015 ICANN Meeting
    3. Multi-Stakeholder Meeting Strategy Working Group ICANN Future Meetings Strategy
    4. Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2) Recommendations

 

  1. Consent Agenda:

    Bruno Lanvin moved and George Sadowsky seconded the resolutions on the Consent Agenda. The Chair then provided a brief overview of the items on the consent agenda, including a brief description of each item. The Chair then called for a vote and the Board took the following action:

    Resolved, the following resolutions in this Consent Agenda are approved:

    1. Approval of Board Meeting Minutes

      Resolved (2014.06.26.01), the Board approves the minutes of its 30 April 2014 meeting.

    2. Appointment of D- and E-Root Server Operator Representatives to the RSSAC

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

      Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws call for Board appointment of RSSAC members based on recommendations from the RSSAC Chairs.

      Whereas, the RSSAC Chairs recommended for Board consideration appointments to the RSSAC to represent the D-root and E-root server operators.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.02), the Board appoints to the Root Server System Advisory Committee the representative for D-root server operator, Tripti Sinha, and the representative for E-root server operator, Kevin Jones, both through 31 December 2016.

      Rationale for Resolution 2014.06.26.02

      In May 2013, the Root Server Operators (RSOs) agreed to an initial membership of RSO representatives for RSSAC, and each RSO nominated an individual. The Board approved the initial membership of RSSAC in July 2013. The Board's action today is to appoint new representatives to replace the initial appointees from RSO-D and RSO-E.

      The appointment of these new representatives will allow the RSSAC to be properly composed to serve its function within ICANN's policy development work as an advisory committee.

      The appointment of these RSSAC members is not anticipated to have any fiscal impact on ICANN that has not already been accounted for in the budgeted resources necessary for ongoing support of the RSSAC. The appointment of RSSAC members contributes to ICANN's commitment to strengthening the security, stability and resiliency of the DNS.

      This resolution is an Organizational Administrative Function for which no public comment is required.

    3. Investment Policy Update

      Whereas, the Board Finance Committee requested that an outside expert review the ICANN Investment Policy currently in place to ensure that it continues to support the goals of ICANN's investment strategy.

      Whereas, the outside expert completed a review of the ICANN Investment Policy and concluded that overall the Investment Policy continues to support the conservative philosophy of ICANN's investment strategy.

      Whereas, the outside expert recommends that a few modifications be made to the ICANN Investment Policy to enhance and clarify some provisions, but not to change the overall investment strategy.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.03), the Board endorses and adopts the ICANN Investment Policy as revised.

      Rationale for Resolution 2014.06.26.03

      In furtherance of its due diligence in regards to ICANN's Investment Policy (Policy), the Board Finance Committee (BFC) asked staff to engage an investment consulting firm to review the Policy. For this purpose, ICANN used the services of Bridgebay Investment Consultant Services (Bridgebay), which had also performed the previous review of the Policy in 2011.

      As a result of its review process, Bridgebay recommended a few modifications to the Policy, intended to: (i) enhance consistency with ICANN's investment strategy; (ii) add to the philosophy of the Policy's reference to inflation when evaluating returns; and (iii) allow flexibility, within the existing limits, for rebalancing the assets in accordance with the strategic allocation. Bridgebay made additional suggested revisions to the terminology used in the Policy, including items such as: segregation of duties and responsibilities, risk controls, monitoring and reporting, and procedural exceptions to the Policy. Bridgebay presented comments, analysis and suggested changes to the Policy to the BFC during its meeting of 28 April 2014. These limited Policy modifications will enable the investment manager to optimize its asset allocation strategy for ICANN's Reserve Fund in a conservative, risk-controlled manner.

      Adopting the suggested modifications is expected to be in the best interest of ICANN and the ICANN community in that it is meant to enhance and clarify certain aspects of ICANN's investment strategy. This action is not expected to have any direct fiscal impact on budgeted resources or any impact on the security, stability and resiliency of the domain name system.

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

    4. New gTLD Program Committee Membership

      Whereas, on 10 April 2012 the Board created the New gTLD Program Committee, to which it delegated all legal and decision making authority of the Board relating to the New gTLD Program as set forth in its Charter, which excludes those things that the Board is prohibited from delegating by law, or pursuant to Article XII, Section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws.

      Whereas, the Board had previously determined that Suzanne Woolf should not participate in the New gTLD Program Committee due to actual, potential or perceived conflicts stemming from her then employment situation.

      Whereas, Suzanne Woolf has reported that with a change in her employment situation, there is no longer anything related to the New gTLD Program that would lead to an actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest with respect to the New gTLD Program.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.04), Suzanne Woolf is hereby appointed as a liaison to the New gTLD Program Committee.

      Rationale for Resolution 2014.06.26.04

      The Board reaffirms its Rationale for Resolutions 2012.04.10.01-2012.04.10.04, stating in full: In order to have efficient meetings and take appropriate actions with respect to the New gTLD Program for the current round of the Program and as related to the Applicant Guidebook, the Board decided to create the "New gTLD Program Committee" in accordance with Article XII of the Bylaws and has delegated decision-making authority to the Committee as it relates to the New gTLD Program for the current round of the Program which commenced in January 2012 and for the related Applicant Guidebook that applies to this current round.

      Establishing the New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) without conflicted members, and delegating to it decision making authority, has provided some distinct advantages, including helping eliminate any uncertainty for conflicted Board members with respect to attendance at Board meetings and workshops since the New gTLD Program topics can be dealt with at the NGPC level. Further, it has provided the community with a transparent view into the Board's commitment to dealing with actual, potential or perceived conflicts.

      The Board Governance Committee (BGC) Subcommittee for Conflicts & Ethics on new gTLDs initially evaluated all Board members' statements of interest related to new gTLDs when the membership of the NGPC was first established. At that time, the Subcommittee determined, and the Board agreed, that Suzanne should not be a member of the New gTLD Program Committee in light of actual, potential or perceived conflicts of interest resulting from her employment status at that time.

      Suzanne Woolf's employment status has changed and she has recently submitted a new Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Form wherein she reports nothing that could generally lead to an actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest as it relates to the New gTLD Program. Accordingly, Suzanne Woolf should be made part of the NGPC, given that the goal is to have all non-conflicted Board members be part of the NGPC.

      This resolution should have a positive impact on the community and ICANN as a whole, particularly the fact of increasing the number of Board members who participate in decisions concerning the New gTLD Program.

      No fiscal impact is anticipated as a result of this action and there will be no impact on the security, stability and resiliency of the domain name system.

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

    5. Thank You from Security and Stability Advisory Committee to Sarmad Hussain

      Whereas, the Board appointed Sarmad Hussain to the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) for a two-year term beginning on 1 January 2011 and ending on 31 December 2013.

      Whereas, the Board reappointed Mr. Hussain to a three-year term beginning 1 January 2014 and ending 31 December 2016.

      Whereas, Mr. Hussain resigned from the SSAC on 30 May 2014.

      Whereas, ICANN wishes to acknowledge and thank Mr. Hussain for his service to the community by his membership on the SSAC.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.05), that Sarmad Hussain has earned the deep appreciation of the Board for his service to ICANN by his membership on the SSAC, and that the Board wishes Mr. Hussain well in all future endeavors within the ICANN community and beyond.

      Rationale for Resolution 2014.06.26.05

      It is the practice of the SSAC to seek Board recognition of the service of Committee members upon their departure.

    6. Thank You to Sponsors of ICANN 50 Meeting

      The Board wishes to thank the following sponsors: EURid, Microsoft, Verisign, Inc., Nominet, Iron Mountain, Inc., NCC Group, Public Interest Registry, Afilias Limited, PDR Solutions FZC, Community.Asia, Neustar, .CLUB Domains, Freenom, China Internet Network Information Center, .GLOBAL, Afnic, Trademark Clearinghouse, FAITID, ZA Central Registry, Minds + Machines Group, Uniregistry Corp., nic.TM, 123-reg.co.uk, RU-CENTER and ICANNWIKI.

    7. Thank You for Support of Remote Participation Efforts

      The Board wishes to thank the Internet Society (ISOC), and multiple ISOC chapters, for supporting the provision of remote video hubs across the world that enabled broad remote participation opportunities during ICANN 50.

    8. Thank You to Interpreters, Staff, Event and Hotel Teams of ICANN 50 Meeting

      The Board expresses its deepest appreciation to the scribes, interpreters, 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 Hilton London Metropole for their assistance, and for providing a wonderful facility to hold this event. Special thanks are extended to Avner On, General Manager Hilton London Metropole, Rachel Stevenson, Conference & Events Sales Director and Linda Palotas, Convention and Events Group Coordinator.

    All members of the Board that were in attendance voted in favor of Resolutions 2014.06.26.01, 2014.06.26.02, 2014.06.26.03, 2014.06.26.04, and 2014.06.26.05. Wolfgang Kleinwächter was unavailable to vote on the Resolutions. The Resolutions carried.

  2. Main Agenda:

    1. Redelegation of the .GW domain representing Guinea-Bissau

      Kuo-Wei Wu introduced the agenda item and read the text of the proposed resolution.

      Chris Disspain then provided some background information, provided background information regarding the redelegation request, noting that the request for redelegation was evaluated and found to meet the required criteria.

      The Board then took the following action:

      Resolved (2014.06.26.06), as part of the exercise of its responsibilities under the IANA Functions Contract, ICANN has reviewed and evaluated the request to redelegate the .GW country-code top-level domain to the Autoridade Reguladora Nacional das Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação da Guiné Bissau. The documentation demonstrates that the proper procedures were followed in evaluating the request.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.07), the Board directs that pursuant to Article III, Section 5.2 of the ICANN Bylaws, that certain portions of the rationale not appropriate for public distribution within the resolutions, preliminary report or minutes at this time due to contractual obligations, shall be withheld until public release is allowed pursuant to those contractual obligations.

      Fifteen members of the Board voted in favor of Resolutions 2014.06.26.06 and 2014.06.26.07. Wolfgang Kleinwächter was unavailable to vote on the Resolutions. The Resolutions carried.

      Rationale for Resolutions 2014.06.26.06 – 2014.06.26.07

      Why is the Board addressing the issue now?

      In accordance with the IANA Functions Contract, ICANN staff has evaluated a request for ccTLD redelegation and is presenting its report to the Board for review. This review by the Board is intended to ensure that ICANN staff has followed the proper procedures.

      What is the proposal being considered?

      The proposal is to approve a request to IANA to change the sponsoring organisation (also known as the manager or trustee) of the .GW country-code top-level domain to the Autoridade Reguladora Nacional das Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação da Guiné Bissau.

      Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

      In the course of evaluating a delegation application, ICANN staff consults with the applicant and other interested parties. As part of the application process, the applicant describes consultations that were performed within the country concerning the ccTLD, and their applicability to their local Internet community.

      What concerns or issues were raised by the community?

      Staff is not aware of any significant issues or concerns raised by the community in relation to this request.

      [Rationale Redacted]

      What factors did the Board find to be significant?

      The Board did not identify any specific factors of concern with this request.

      Are there positive or negative community impacts?

      The timely approval of country-code domain name managers that meet public interest criteria is positive toward ICANN's overall mission, the local communities to which country-code top-level domains are designated to serve, and responsive to ICANN's obligations under the IANA Functions Contract.

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

      The administration of country-code delegations in the DNS root zone is part of the IANA functions, and the delegation action should not cause any significant variance on pre-planned expenditure. It is not the role of ICANN to assess the financial impact of the internal operations of country-code top-level domains within a country.

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

      ICANN does not believe this request poses any notable risks to security, stability or resiliency.

      This is an Organizational Administrative Function not requiring public comment.

    2. Meeting Venue Location and Hotel Contract for February 2015 ICANN Meeting

      Cherine Chalaby introduced the agenda item, and thanked all of the organizations that made proposals to host ICANN's first Public Meeting of 2015 in Africa. Cherine announced that Marrakech, Morocco will be hosting the ICANN 52 meeting, which will take place 8-12 February 2015. Cherine further thanked the Mediterranean Federation of the Internet Organizations, the At-Large Structure involved in the hosting proposal.

      Cherine moved and Erika Mann seconded the following and the Board took the following action:

      Whereas, ICANN intends to hold its first Public Meeting of 2015 in the Africa region.

      Whereas, staff has completed a thorough review of all proposed venues in Africa and finds the one in Marrakech, Morocco to be the most suitable.

      Whereas, during its meeting on 10 June 2014 the Board Finance Committee (BFC) reviewed the financial implications of contracting with the venue identified to hold the ICANN meeting in Marrakech, Morocco, and agrees with the recommendation from staff.

      Whereas, the BFC has recommended that the Board delegate to the President and CEO, or his designee(s), the authority to take all actions necessary to hold the February 2015 ICANN Meeting in Marrakech, Morocco, including all necessary contracting and disbursements.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.08), the Board approves Marrakech, Morocco as the location of the ICANN 2015 Africa Meeting from 8-12 February 2015, and authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to take all actions necessary to hold the February 2015 ICANN Meeting in Marrakech, Morocco.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.09), that Board authorizes the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to engage in and facilitate all necessary contracting and disbursements for the Meeting venue of the February 2015 ICANN Public Meeting, in an amount not to exceed [AMOUNT REDACTED FOR NEGOTIATION PURPOSES].

      Resolved (2014.06.26.10), specific items within this resolution shall remain confidential for negotiation purposes pursuant to Article III, section 5.2 of the ICANN Bylaws until the President and CEO determines that the confidential information may be released.

      Fifteen members of the Board voted in favor of Resolutions 2014.06.26.08, 2014.06.26.09 and 2014.06.26.10. Wolfgang Kleinwächter was unavailable to vote on the Resolutions. The Resolutions carried.

      Rationale for Resolutions 2014.06.26.08 – 2014.06.26.10

      As part of ICANN's public meeting schedule, three times a year ICANN hosts a meeting in a different geographic region (as defined in the ICANN Bylaws). ICANN Meeting 52, scheduled for 8-12 February 2015, is to occur in the Africa geographic region. A call for recommendations for the location of the meeting in Africa was posted on 03 May 2013. Several parties sent proposals to ICANN.

      The staff performed a thorough analysis of the proposals and prepared a paper to identify those that met the Meeting Selection Criteria (see http://meetings.icann.org/location-selection-criteria). Based on the proposals and analysis, staff has recommended that ICANN 52 be held in Marrakech, Morocco.

      The Board reviewed staff's recommendation for hosting the meeting in Marrakech, Morocco and the determination that the proposal met the significant factors of the Meeting Selection Criteria used to guide site selection work. The Board thanks all who recommended sites for ICANN Meeting 52. The process for selection of this site does not call for public consultation, as the assessment of the feasibility of a site is the primary consideration.

      There will be a financial impact on ICANN in hosting the meeting and providing travel support as necessary, as well as on the community that will incur costs to travel to the meeting. Such impact would be faced regardless of the location of the meeting.

      Taking this resolution will have no impact on the security or the stability of the domain name system.

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

    3. Multi-Stakeholder Meeting Strategy Working Group ICANN Future Meetings Strategy

      Sébastien Bachollet introduced the agenda item and noted that the Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG) is a multi-stakeholder group that worked very hard to produce the final report. Sébastien thanked the members of the MSWG and all the people that contributed their comments on the report. He noted that the objective is to implement the proposed meetings strategy in 2016. Sébastien expressed his hope that with the implementation of the recommendations, ICANN could meet a promise of selecting Public Meeting venues two years in advance. Sébastien noted that the resolution calls for staff work on potential implementation of the recommendations.

      Fadi Chehadé thanked the members of the Meeting Strategy Working Group and Sébastien for his work in chairing the group, noting that the group should be proud of the process that was followed as well as the good work they produced.

      Chris Disspain moved and Olga Madruga-Forti seconded the following and the Board took the following action:

      Whereas, ICANN public meetings are a central pillar of ICANN's multi-stakeholder model because they provide a venue for progressing policy work, conducting outreach, exchanging best practices, networking, interacting among members of the ICANN Community, including Board and staff, and learning about ICANN.

      Whereas, in February 2013 the ICANN Board resolved to create a multi-stakeholder working group, the Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG), to look into all aspects of ICANN meetings to meet growing global and multi-stakeholder needs. The MSWG's composition was announced in March 2013.

      Whereas, the MSWG was a true cross-community working group of which the mandate was to gather information, exchange ideas and propose strategic and operational changes to future ICANN meetings, in particular on: (i) scheduling and general conference agenda; (ii) length of the conference overall; and (iii) number of international public meetings per year.

      Whereas, the final report of the MSWG recommends changes to the meetings model of ICANN public meetings and proposes a new strategy for their structure, purpose and locations to support broad, informed participation, and to reflect the functional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levels of policy development and decision-making. These recommendations have been the subject of community comment and input.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.11), the Board receives the MSWG report.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.12), the Board acknowledges the MSWG's work and dedication, thanks the MSWG for producing a comprehensive set of recommendations anticipated to improve the long-term scalability of ICANN's public meetings, and thanks the ICANN community for commenting on the MSWG recommendations.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.13), in order to inform the Board's discussion on the MSWG recommendations, the Board directs the President and CEO, through his designee(s), to propose a plan for implementation of the recommendations contained in the MSWG report, to be provided to the Board for consideration in sufficient time for possible implementation for meetings to be held in calendar year 2016.

      Fifteen members of the Board voted in favor of Resolutions 2014.06.26.11, 2014.06.26.12 and 2014.06.26.13. Wolfgang Kleinwächter was unavailable to vote on the Resolutions. The Resolutions carried.

      Rationale for Resolutions 2014.06.26.11 – 2014.06.26.13

      The Multi-Stakeholder Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG) was a cross-community Working Group. Its mandate was to gather information, exchange ideas and propose changes to future ICANN meetings at both a strategic and operational level.

      The MSWG developed a constructive report that made proposals for changes to ICANN public meetings in the following areas: meeting timing, duration and format; rotation of the meeting location; meeting support and engagement activities; and meeting planning.

      The overall recommendations made by the MSWG for public comment were: (i) continue the three-meeting schedule annually, but evolve the structure of the three meetings (defined as Meeting A, B, and C) to better address meeting objectives, scheduling conflicts and to use the time in a most effective way; (ii) continue regional rotation for all meetings and coordinate rotation to balance global coverage on a multi-year cycle, but evolve the rotation strategy to take advantage of the smaller mid-year meeting (Meeting B) to rotate through new geographic locations previously unavailable to the meetings due to the attendance and logistical requirements of the current meeting structure; (iii) continue to allocate adequate time for SO/AC work, but evolve the format of the meetings to afford greater opportunity for cross-community engagement and outreach; and (iv) continue with the public forum at the first and third meetings in the cycle, but evolve the format by splitting the time into two portions with differing focus.

      The Working Group posted its Report and Recommendations [PDF, 3.54 MB] for public comment on 25 February 2014, in addition to which there were also consultations and discussions held at a public session in Singapore on 24 March 2014. Input from the community [PDF, 113 KB], including inputs from ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, was considered.

      In order for ICANN to move forward with implementation of the MSWG's recommendations, an implementation plan including estimated resource costs is required.

      This action will require the use of resources in the development of implementation plans, and the implementation of these recommendations is likely to result in a financial impact on the organization. The impacts to the budget will be considered as the implementation plan is developed. This action is not expected to have a direct impact on the security, stability or resiliency of the domain name system.

      This is an Organizational Administrative Function that has been subject to public comment.

    4. Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2) Recommendations

      Ray Plzak introduced and moved this agenda item, noting that the resolution has two parts: (a) the Board accepts all of the ATRT2 recommendations and directs the President and CEO to implement them; and (b) the President and CEO is directed to report regularly to the Board.

      the agenda item and provided an overview of the resolution.

      Bill Graham seconded the resolution.

      Bruce Tonkin then provided a summary of the Board's action, noting that the output of the ATRT2 is part of ICANN's continuous improvement on accountability issues. Bruce thanked the ATRT2 for their time and effort, and stressed that the community will be a necessary part of the implementation of these recommendations. For recommendations 9.2 and 9.3, involving ICANN's existing Independent Review Process, Reconsideration and the Ombudsman, these items will be considered – along with the GNSO's call for more independence in these mechanisms – as part of the Enhancing ICANN Accountability Process that is getting underway. Bruce explained that with respect to all of the recommendations, ICANN will be managing these through its project management office, with the provision of regular updates on process, milestones and metrics associated with the recommendations. The PMO's work will be overseen by an advisory committee from ICANN's executive management team.

      The Chair noted that the ATRT2 has been a priority for the Board and the Chair, and that since the submission of the ATRT2 recommendations at the end of 2013, the Board has conducted a thorough examination of the recommendations, potential consequences, and methods of implementation. The Chair further noted that, in the implementation of these recommendations, there will be a focus on project management, regular reporting and bringing each recommendation to fruition.

      Ray moved and Bill Graham seconded the following and the Board took the following action:

      Whereas, the Affirmation of Commitments reinforced ICANN's commitment to ensuring accountability, transparency, and the interests of global Internet users, and called for a community review of ICANN's execution of these commitments (the second Accountability and Transparency Review), to be acted upon by 30 June 2014.

      Whereas, ICANN has committed to maintain and improve its mechanisms for public input, accountability, and transparency so as to assure that the outcomes of its decision-making reflect the public interest and to be accountable to all stakeholders.

      Whereas, implementing the recommendations resulting from the second Accountability and Transparency Review will strengthen ICANN's global, multi-stakeholder model to assure that it continues operating in a manner that is transparent, accountable and in the public interest.

      Whereas, the second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2) produced a Final Report with 12 recommendations to improve ICANN and received the Board's gratitude for conducting this review.

      Whereas, designated Board committees (among others) considered ATRT2 Recommendations and provided the Board with recommendations on Board action. The designated committees are incorporating oversight of the implementation of the relevant recommendations into their work plans.

      Whereas, the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) and the Board-GAC Recommendation Implementation Working Group (BGRI-WG) have considered the ATRT2 Recommendations relating to GAC activities and are engaged in implementation planning.

      Whereas, transparent and regular reporting to the community on the status of the implementation work is an essential component of enhancing ICANN's accountability and transparency, and reporting will be available at ICANN Accountability and Transparency web pages.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.14), the Board accepts all ATRT2 Recommendations and directs the President and CEO, through his designee(s), to proceed with implementation. For Recommendation 6, focusing on enhancing the relationship between the GAC and the Board, the Board agrees that the BGRI-WG shall continue to assist with the implementation of several sub-recommendations pertaining to the GAC, and directs the President and CEO to provide required support to the GAC and the BGRI-WG to continue their assessment and implementation planning work.

      Resolved (2014.06.26.15), the President and CEO is directed to regularly report to the community and the Board on the status of implementation of the ATRT2 recommendations, including key performance indicators and other relevant metrics.

      Fifteen members of the Board voted in favor of Resolutions 2014.06.26.14 and 2014.06.26.15. Wolfgang Kleinwächter was unavailable to vote on the Resolutions. The Resolutions carried.

      Rationale for Resolutions 2014.06.26.14 – 2014.06.26.15

      As required by the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC), the recommendations resulting from the ATRT2 were provided to the Board on 31 December 2013 and posted for public comment. Under the AoC, the Board has up to six months to take action on the recommendations. Today's action is in furtherance of that commitment.

      The ATRT2 provided a constructive report that validates and builds upon ICANN's commitments and improvements on accountability and transparency measures. The Board encouraged and considered input from the community, including the Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees, and the Nominating Committee, and is awaiting input from the Board-GAC Recommendation Implementation Working Group (BGRI-WG). The public comments were supportive of the ATRT2 report. (See ATRT2 Public Comment Forum and Summary of Public Comments [PDF, 450 KB].)

      In consideration of the ATRT2 recommendations and public comments, the Board previously directed that the recommendations be assigned to specific Board committees to evaluate implementation feasibility of those recommendations. As a result of that committee work, the responsible committees recommend that the Board accept all of the ATRT2 Recommendations.

      For committee consideration, staff developed initial proposed implementation plans to evaluate ICANN's ability to implement the recommendations and estimated resource costs. In line with the committee directions, the Board now concludes that ICANN should move forward with implementing the recommendations (consisting of 51 component sub-recommendations). To move the recommendations to formal implementation, ICANN is using best practices and turning towards project management methods, which are expected to incorporate: clear definition of roles and responsibilities; instituting implementation process and standards; definition of project scope and deliverables; triggers that cause implementation work to move from project to operationalization; and reporting requirements and key performance indicators and metrics. Formal implementation plans will be developed with ICANN's Project Management Office and will be made publicly available as soon as possible.

      The Board finds that the ATRT2 recommendations: have the potential to advance ICANN's transparency and accountability objectives (as articulated in the AoC and ICANN's Bylaws); can be implemented by ICANN (with resource allocation); and do not appear to negatively impact the security, stability and resiliency of the DNS. The Board has asked staff to work with affected ICANN organizations to execute the implementation plans, and notes that ATRT2 recommendations are closely aligned with the work already underway at ICANN.

      This is an Organizational Administrative Function that has been subject to public comment.

    The Chair then called the meeting to a close.

Published on 31 July 2014

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."