Skip to main content
Resources

Preliminary Report | Special Meeting of the Board

(Posted 25 February 2003)

ICANN's Transition Board of Directors held a meeting by teleconference on 25 February 2003. Directors Vint Cerf (chairman), Amadeu Abril i Abril, Karl Auerbach, Lyman Chapin (joined the meeting while in progress), Jonathan Cohen, Mouhamet Diop, Masanobu Katoh, Hans Kraaijenbrink, Sang-Hyon Kyong, Stuart Lynn, Andy Mueller-Maguhn, Jun Murai (attended first part of meeting), Alejandro Pisanty (joined the meeting while in progress and departed shortly before end), Nii Quaynor (joined the meeting while in progress), Helmut Schink, Francisco da Silva, and Linda S. Wilson participated. The Board adopted the following resolutions:

Approval of Minutes

Resolved [03.11] that the minutes of the meeting of the Transition Board held on 20 January 2003 are hereby approved and adopted by the Board as presented.

(The Board approved the above resolution by a 13-0-2 vote, with Mr. Kraaijenbrink and Dr. Murai abstaining.)

Resolved [03.12] that the minutes of the meeting of the Transition Board held on 23 January 2003 are hereby approved and adopted by the Board as presented.

(The Board approved the above resolution by a 11-0-4 vote, with Dr. Kyong, Dr. Lynn, Mr. Mueller-Maguhn, and Dr. Murai abstaining.)

Resolved [03.13] that the minutes of the meeting of the Transition Board held on 4 February 2003 are hereby approved and adopted by the Board as presented.

(The Board approved the above resolution by a 14-0-1 vote, with Dr. Lynn abstaining.)

ALAC Start-Up Funding

Whereas, on 10 February 2003 the Interim At-Large Advisory Committee (Interim ALAC) presented a budget request for "start-up/matching funds" for its activities in the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 fiscal years;

Whereas, the interim ALAC's 2002-2003 request includes US$5,300 for administration expenses, US$17,500 for regional expenses, and US52,000 for ALAC ICANN Meeting expenses, for a total of US$74,800;

Whereas, in resolution 02.149 the Board authorized the President to spend up to US$325,000 to implement the Evolution and Reform Plan in 2002-2003, but that authorization did not include the funds now requested by the Interim ALAC;

Whereas, the Finance Committee has reviewed the Interim ALAC's request and recommends that the Board increase the level of authorized funding associated with implementation of reform to include the amount requested by the Interim ALAC for funding during the 2002-2003 fiscal year;

Whereas, by resolution EC03.3 the Executive Committee authorized, in partial response to the Interim ALAC's request, the President to expend from the 2002-2003 ICANN budget up to US$33,000 to cover the portion of the Interim ALAC's request associated with expenses of the Interim ALAC members for travel to and from and attendance at the Rio de Janeiro meeting in late-March 2003;

Whereas, while of the view that the ALAC and its related structures and organizations need to evolve to become financially self-sufficient, the Board concludes that providing this funding during the Interim ALAC's start-up period will be beneficial to the establishment of an ALAC that effectively fosters informed participation in ICANN by individual Internet users;

Resolved [03.14] that the Board increases the level of authorized spending for implementation of reform in the 2002-2003 ICANN budget, by US$74,800 (to include the US$33,000 previously authorized by the Executive Committee) to cover the cost of providing funding as requested by the Interim ALAC;

Further resolved [03.15] that the Interim ALAC's request for funding from the 2003-2004 budget be considered in the framework of the currently ongoing development of ICANN's budget for the 2003-2004 fiscal year.

(The Board approved the above resolutions by a 15-0-1 vote, with Dr. Schink abstaining.)

Amendments to Bylaws

Whereas, on 8 February 2003 the Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform (ERC) posted proposed amendments to the New Bylaws that became effective on 15 December 2003 to reflect various clarifications, technical corrections, and minor modifications that had been called to the ERC's attention as desirable in light of the ongoing process of implementing ICANN's reformed structure;

Whereas, the ERC invited comments on its proposed amendments through 22 February 2003;

Whereas, the ERC reviewed the comments received and on 23 February 2003 posted a report revising its proposals in two respects;

Whereas, after considering the ERC's proposals and the comments, the Board concludes that the amendments to the bylaws as stated in the ERC's revised proposal would be in the best interest of ICANN;

Resolved [03.16] that the Board adopts the amendments to the bylaws shown in Appendix A to these minutes (amending Article VI, Section 8; Article VII, Section 2; Article VII, Section 3; Article X, Section 3; Article XI, Section 2(4); Article XX, Section 2; Article XX, Section 5; and Article XX, Section 7), to become effective immediately.

(The Board approved the above resolution by a 17-0-0 vote.)

Note: At this meeting, the Board did not take action on the proposal to add an Article VII, Section 8 (concerning ineligibility of Nominating Committee members for selection to ICANN bodies) because the Board believed that the restrictions in the proposed language should be strengthened. The Board requested the General Counsel to prepare a revised version of the proposed section, which the Board will consider adopting at a future meeting.

Redemption and ConsoliDate Services in .com and .net

Whereas, in resolution 02.83, the Board authorized the President and General Counsel to conduct negotiations on behalf of ICANN toward appropriate revisions to agreements between ICANN and the unsponsored TLD registry operators to implement the Redemption Grace Period in a manner consistent with an implementation proposal submitted by a Technical Steering Group on 7 June 2002;

Whereas, the General Counsel has reported to the Board that on 25 January 2003 VeriSign, Inc., the operator of the .com and .net registries, implemented, in consultation with ICANN, a Redemption Service in those registries that is in substantial compliance with the Technical Steering Group's implementation proposal, as well as a VeriSign-proposed registration-term-synchronization service known as ConsoliDate and display of registration-related dates and statuses in the registry-level Whois;

Whereas, on 15 January 2003 the General Counsel provisionally authorized the introduction of these services, subject to revision upon Board consideration;

Whereas, the General Counsel has negotiated with VeriSign revised language for services descriptions (Appendix C, part 7, and Appendix G) to be included in various appendices to the .com and .net registry agreements to formalize the arrangements for the Redemption Service, the ConsoliDate Service, and the addition of the dates and statuses to the registry-level Whois service, and has recommended that the services language be added to the appendices, with appropriate conforming adjustments to other appendices;

Whereas, the Board has reviewed the services descriptions and concludes that the appendices to the .com and .net registry agreements should be amended as recommended;

Whereas, the Board supports the principle embodied in the services descriptions that under the Redemption Service registry operators should not charge for restoring names that have been deleted because of registry error, and states its view that it is similarly appropriate for registrars to bear the costs of restoring names deleted due to registrar error;

Resolved [03.17] that the President is authorized to enter into amendments to the .com and .net registry agreements to include the services descriptions presented for the Redemption and ConsoliDate Services and the addition of date and status information to the registry Whois, as well as to make appropriate conforming amendments to other parts of the appendices to those agreements.

(The Board approved the above resolution by a 15-0-0 vote.)

Other Matters

The Board also discussed the 2003-2004 preliminary budget, establishing a Board governance committee, and designation under Article VII, Section 2(8)(g) of the bylaws of an entity to represent academic and similar organizations in the appointment of one delegate to the Nominating Committee.

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."