Skip to main content

Board Governance Committee (BGC) Meeting Minutes

BGC Attendees: Cherine Chalaby, Chris Disspain, Mike Silber, Ram Mohan, Ray Plzak, and Bruce Tonkin – Chair

BGC Member Apologies: Olga Madruga-Forti

Other Board Member Attendees:Fadi Chehadé

Executive and Staff Attendees: John Jeffrey (General Counsel and Secretary), Megan Bishop (Board Support Coordinator), Vinciane Koenigsfeld (Board Support Content Manager), Michelle Bright (Board Support Manager), Samantha Eisner (Associate General Counsel), and Amy Stathos (Deputy General Counsel)

Invited Guests:Asha Hemrajani

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

  1. Minutes – The BGC approved the minutes from the meeting on 4 September 2014.

  2. Committee Slating – The BGC discussed Committee slating and noted that the Board will discuss the proposed slate later in the week, and that the slate will be subject to Board approval on 16 October 2014.Specifically, the BGC discussed which Board members should serve as chair of certain committees.

  3. Board Leadership Slating – The BGC discussed Board leadership slating and noted that the Board will discuss the proposed slate later in the week, and which will be subject to Board approval on 16 October 2014.

  4. 2015 Nominating Committee Chair-Elect – The BGC chair reminded the committee that, on 9 September 2014, following a BGC recommendation, the Board approved Stéphane Van Gelder as the 2015 NomCom Chair.At that time, the BGC was still conducting interviews of a short list of candidates for the NomCom Chair-Elect. The Chair noted that the BGC has concluded its interviews of the candidates for the Chair-Elect position. The BGC approved a motion recommending a candidate to the Board for the Chair-Elect position for NomCom, which the Board will consider later today.

  5. Reconsideration Request 14-38 – Staff briefed the BGC regarding ICANN's Business Constituency, the Registries Stakeholder Group, and the Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group's ("Requesters'") request seeking reconsideration of the ICANN staff's 14 August 2014 posting of a proposed process for developing enhancements to ICANN's accountability mechanisms ("Proposed Process").On 29 August 2014, the Requesters filed Reconsideration Request 14-38 claiming that ICANN staff failed to allow for community participation and consider community input in the development of the Proposed Process.Subsequent to the submission of this Request, ICANN addressed the request for additional time for community input into the process design through further dialogue and through the opening of an additional 21-day public comment period.The BGC notes the importance of the issues raised by the Requesters and hopes that the constructive dialogue that has recently been initiated over those issues continues. After discussion and consideration of the Reconsideration Request, the BGC agreed to reach out to the Requesters to determine whether they prefer to withdraw the Request or proceed to disposition.

    • Action: BGC Chair to reach out to the Requesters as to whether they would prefer to withdraw the Request or proceed to disposition.

  6. Reconsideration Request 14-39 – Ram Mohan abstained from participation in this matter noting conflicts.Staff briefed the BGC regarding Despegar Online SRL, Radix FZC, Famous Four Media Limited, Fegistry LLC, Donuts Inc., and Minds + Machines' ("Requesters'") request for reconsideration of ICANN staff's response to the Requesters' request for documents pursuant to ICANN's Document Information Disclosure Policy ("DIDP").The Requesters each applied for .HOTEL.HOTEL Top-Level Domain S.à.r.l. ("Applicant") filed a community application for .HOTEL.Because the Applicant participated and prevailed in CPE, none of the Requesters' applications for .HOTEL will proceed.The Requesters subsequently filed a DIDP Request seeking documents relating to the CPE Panel's Report finding that the Applicant had prevailed in CPE.In its response to the DIDP Request, ICANN:(a) identified and provided links to all publicly available documents responsive to the DIDP Request; (b) noted that many of the requested documents did not exist or were not in ICANN's possession; and (c) explained that any remaining responsive documents were not produced because they were subject to certain of the Defined Conditions of Nondisclosure set forth in the DIDP.On 22 September 2014, the Requesters filed Request 14-39.The Requesters do not identify any policy or procedure that ICANN staff violated with respect to the DIDP Response, but simply disagree with the determination that certain requested documents were not appropriate for public disclosure. After discussion and consideration of the Request, the BGC concluded that the Requester has not demonstrated that ICANN staff acted in contravention of established policy or procedure in responding to the DIDP Request and, therefore, determined that Request 14-39 be denied.The Bylaws authorize the BGC to make a final determination on Reconsideration Requests brought regarding staff action or inaction and the BGC concluded that its determination on Request 14-39 is final; no consideration by the NGPC is warranted.

  7. Guidance to Nominating Committee on Desired Board Member Skill Sets – The BGC reviewed the current draft of the Advice from the ICANN Board on Board Skills to the Nominating Committee (the "Advice").The Advice recommends that the NomCom use certain listed criteria as guidance when selecting Directors for the Board.After discussion and consideration of the Advice, the BGC agreed to send the the Advice to the NomCom.

    • Action: Staff to send the Advice to the Nominating Committee.

Published on 23 October 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"""" is not an IDN."