Skip to main content

Adopted Resolutions | Special Meeting of the Board

.TRAVEL Sponsorship Resolution

Resolved (04.86) the board authorizes the President and General Counsel to enter into negotiations relating to proposed commercial and technical terms for the .TRAVEL sponsored top-level domain (sTLD) with the applicant.

Resolved (04.87) if after entering into negotiations with the .TRAVEL sTLD applicant the President and General Counsel are able to negotiate a set of proposed commercial and technical terms for a contractual arangement, The President shall present such proposed terms to this board, for approval and authorization to enter into an agreement relating to the delegation of the .TRAVEL sTLD.

Redelegation of .LY (Libya)

Whereas, on 7 April 2004 the .LY ccTLD ceased functioning due to the failure of the master (primary) nameserver.

Whereas, on 13 April 2004 minimal functionality was restored when the last good copy of the .LY zone was slaved by the former master nameserver to a master.

Whereas, as set forth in RFC 1591 (ftp:/ and later affirmed in ICP-1 (, TLD managers are trustees for the delegated domain, and have a duty to serve the community"

Whereas, on 10 May 2004, the proposed delegees began offering name service for the .LY domain on a limited basis. To date their servers have responded well to the load, Mr. Marwan Maghur's team has been responsive to requests, and there is every reason to believe that their servers, along with the slave (secondary) will be more than adequate to handle the full load as a result of updating the nameserver delegation in the root zone.

Whereas, pursuant to ICANN Board Resolution Resolved 04.48, the Board approved the provisional redelegation of the .LY domain to GPTC and Mr. Maghur, until such time as a full redelegation could be arranged.

Whereas, the process of technically validating the legitimacy of the redelegation application by Mr. Maghur and his team has been completed and the appropriateness of the request from GPTC has been validated, and therefore it is appropriate at this time to allow Mr. Maghur and his team to provide greater operational stability for the .LY domain.

Whereas, IANA has been provided and has put on record all the required official paperwork needed including records of meetings that took place locally in the Libyan Internet Community by ISOC, GPTC, LTT, et al. and that all agree with the redelegation to GPTC. Most recently, the GPTC has sent a letter of intent to enter into an agreement with ICANN.

Resolved [04.88] that the redelegation of .LY to Mr. Marwan Magure is approved.

Resolved [04.89] that, upon signature of the agreement, the President is authorized to take appropriate steps to negotiate and agreement with Mr. Marwan Magure and GPTC.

Resolution for Authorization of Insurance Binder

Resolved [04.90] that the President is provided authority to execute the professional liability insurance binder in excess of his normal financial controls and authority, not to exceed $150,000 (US).

Resolution regarding GNSO Council Review Terms of Reference

Whereas, Article IV, Section 4 of the ICANN bylaws requires the ICANN Board to organise regular reviews of each Supporting Organisation, Council, and Advisory Committee. The review must be undertaken by an independent entity.

Whereas, the GNSO Council authorised the preparation of terms of reference (TOR) by a small subcommittee of the Council, in cooperation with ICANN staff, which is now presented to the Board for ratification.

Whereas, the review of the GNSO Council (rather than a review of the entire GNSO) is to be completed before the ICANN annual general meeting scheduled for December 2004.

Whereas, the GNSO Council review calls for some specific actions within a short time period, short, factual, staff analysis of GNSO Council activities whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, and whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, and whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, and if so, whether any change in structure or operations is desirable to improve its effectiveness.

Resolved (04.91) the Board hereby ratifies the erms of Reference; to guide an outside consultant in conducting a review of the GNSO Council.

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."