Skip to main content
Resources

Board Governance Committee (BGC) Meeting Minutes

BGC Attendees: Cherine Chalaby, Chris Disspain, Olga Madruga-Forti, Ray Plzak, Mike Silber, and Bruce Tonkin – Chair

Other Board Member Attendees: Steve Crocker

Executive and Staff Attendees: Megan Bishop (Board Support Coordinator), Michelle Bright (Board Support Manager), John Jeffrey (General Counsel and Secretary), Elizabeth Le (Senior Counsel), and Amy Stathos (Deputy General Counsel)

Apologies: Ram Mohan


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

  1. Minutes – The BGC approved the minutes from the meeting on 27 February 2014.
  2. Request 14-1 – Ram Mohan abstained from participation of this matter noting conflicts. Staff briefed the BGC regarding Medistry LLC's Request seeking reconsideration of the Expert Determination, and ICANN's acceptance of that Determination, upholding the Independent Objector's Community Objection to the application for .MED. After discussion, the BGC noted that additional clarification is required and continued consideration of this Request to its next meeting in Singapore.
  3. Request 14-4 – Ram Mohan abstained from participation of this matter noting conflicts. Staff briefed the BGC regarding the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America's Request seeking reconsideration of the Expert Determination, and ICANN's acceptance of that Determination, dismissing the Requester's community objection to the application for .KOSHER. After discussion, the BGC noted that further evaluation is required and postponed consideration of the Request until after the additional evaluation has been completed.
  4. Request 14-6 - Ram Mohan abstained from participation of this matter noting conflicts. Staff briefed the BGC regarding Dot Rugby Limited's Request seeking reconsideration of the Expert Determination, and ICANN's acceptance of that Determination, upholding the community objection to the Requester's application for .RUGBY. Dot Rugby Limited claims the Panel failed to follow the standard for evaluating a community objection by finding a likelihood of material detriment based on the Requester's alleged association with gambling. After discussion and consideration of the Request, the BGC concluded that the Requester has not stated proper grounds for reconsideration because there is no evidence that the Panel violated any policy or process in reaching the Panel's determination. There is no evidence that the Panel misapplied the standard for evaluating the likelihood of material detriment. The Bylaws authorize the BGC to make a final determination on Reconsideration Requests brought regarding staff action or inaction; the BGC still has the discretion, but is not required, to recommend the matter to the Board for consideration. Accordingly, the BGC concluded that its determination on Request 14-6 is final; no consideration by the NGPC is warranted.
  5. Request 14-7 - Ram Mohan abstained from participation of this matter noting conflicts. Staff briefed the BGC regarding Asia Green IT System Ltd.'s Request seeking reconsideration of the NGPC's 5 February 2014 resolution deferring the contracting process for the .ISLAM and .HALAL strings until certain noted conflicts have been resolved. The Requester also seeks reconsideration of an alleged staff action implementing the NGPC's resolution; namely, the 7 February 2014 letter from Steve Crocker, Chairman of the ICANN Board, to the Requester. The Requester claims that the NGPC failed to consider material information in taking its action and also claims that ICANN staff violated an established policy or procedure by failing to inform the Requester how it should resolve the noted conflicts. After discussion and consideration of the Request, the BGC concluded that there is no indication that the NGPC failed to consider material information in reaching its 5 February 2014 Resolution. Rather, the record demonstrates that the NGPC was well aware of the information Requester claims was material to the 5 February 2014 Resolution. The BGC further determined that the Requester has not identified an ICANN staff action that violated an established ICANN policy or procedure. Instead, the action challenged by the Requester was that of the Board, not staff, and, in any event, the Requester has failed to identify any ICANN policy or procedure violated by that action. The BGC recommended that the NGPC deny Request 14-7.

    • Action: Staff to submit the BGC Recommendation to the NGPC for consideration.
  6. AOB

    • Board Working Group on the NomCom – The BGC discussed and approved the composition of the Board Working Group on the NomCom.

Published on 26 March 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."