Skip to main content

Minutes | Board Finance Committee (BFC) Meeting

BFC Attendees: Becky Burr, Ron da Silva, Cherine Chalaby, Asha Hemrajani (Chair), George Sadowsky, and Lousewies van der Laan

Board Members Observing: Akinori Maemura and Rafael Lito Ibarra

ICANN Executives and Staff Attendees: Xavier Calvez (Chief Financial Officer), Samantha Eisner (Deputy General Counsel), Elise Gerich (VP, IANA & Technical Operations and President of PTI), Melissa King (VP, Board Operations), Becky Nash (VP, Finance), Wendy Profit (Board Operations Specialist), and Lisa Saulino (Board Operations Sr. Coordinator)

The following is a summary of discussions, actions taken and actions identified:

  1. BFC Schedule – The BFC discussed its schedule, which is on track as planned.
  2. Financials – The BFC reviewed the most recent financials for FY17 and noted the following:
    • the total actual ICANN funding is US$134.5M higher than budget and
    • the actual total ICANN expenses is US$2.6M favorable to budget.

    The BFC further reviewed the four funds under management including the new gTLD auction proceeds, the new gTLD fund, the Operations Operating Fund, and the Reserve Fund and noted that, as of 30 November 2016, the total funds under management decreased by US$1.4M. The BFC also discussed the FY17 year-to-date project cost support team for the IANA Transition project, which shows that the total spend after five months represents 48 percent of the annual budget as compared to a year-to-date budget of 42 percent.

  3. Updates
    1. Public Technical Identifiers (PTI) FY18 Operating Plan & Budget – The BFC received an update on the PTI FY18 Operating Plan & Budget. The draft budget was published for public comment from 24 October 2016 to 10 December 2016. The report of public comments was published on 23 January 2017. Based on the comments received, no substantive changes to the draft PTI FY18 Operating Plan and Budget were made, and the PTI Board approved the PTI FY18 Operating Plan & Budget on 18 January 2017 for submission into the ICANN budget. The BFC noted that the comments received from the community during the public comments process indicated support for the fact that ICANN and PTI started the budgeting process nine months before the beginning of the next fiscal year.
    2. Reserve Fund Project Status – The BFC received an update on the status the Reserve Fund replenishment process. The process has been divided into two parts. The first part relates to the purpose of the Reserve Fund, the rationale, the target, and the governance of withdrawals. The second part relates to the replenishment of the Reserve Fund. The BFC intends to first submit Part 1 to the Board for approval for posting for public comment. The BFC intends to present Part 2, which among other things will address various options for replenishment, once the public comments have been received for Part 1, so that there will be continuous community engagement, and thereafter present the final process for Board approval as soon as practicable, with a goal of ICANN 59.
    3. Process for the Review of Performance for the New gTLD and Auction Proceeds Funds – The BFC received an update on the process for the review of the performance of the new gTLD and auction proceeds funds, which staff is recommending to be completed twice a year. The BFC's external advisor will prepare a consolidated, independent performance review of three fund managers that hold the new gTLD investments and auction proceeds.
    4. Update of ICANN FY18 Operating Plan & Budget Process – The BFC received an update on the ICANN FY18 Operating Plan & Budget process. The process is currently in development by the Organization. Following completing of this stage, the draft FY18 Operating Plan & Budget will be submitted to the BFC for review and approval for posting for public comments.
  4. Any Other Business – The BFC discussed a proposal to have the ICANN Board review the draft FY18 Operating Plan & Budget before it is posted for public comment and the feasibility of pursuing the proposal under the current schedule for the FY18 Operating Plan & Budget approval process.
    • Action:
      • ICANN Organization to provide BFC with meeting/timing options for BFC and Board reviews of the Draft FY18 Operating Plan & Budget.

Published on 07 June 2017

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"""" is not an IDN."