Skip to main content
Resources

Regular Meeting of the Board Preliminary Report

Consideration of ccNSO's Recommendation 3 on Proposed ICANN Bylaws Changes

Whereas, the ccNSO Council has considered a number of issues which are understood to stand in the way of a number of ccTLD managers joining the ccNSO.

Whereas, the ccNSO Council resolved on 28 May 2005, to initiate a ccNSO Policy Development Process to consider changes to ICANN Bylaws Article IX (Country-Code Names Supporting Organisation), Annex B (ccNSO Policy-Development Process) and Annex C (the scope of the ccNSO) to address the matters outlined in paragraphs A to M of section 3.2 of the Issues Report as published on 7 June 2005.

Whereas, the ccNSO has conducted the ccPDP in accordance with Annex B of the ICANN Bylaws.

Whereas, the ccNSO Council resolved on 2 December 2005, to approve the Board Report containing eight ccNSO Recommendations for changes to improve and clarify the ICANN Bylaws on the ccNSO and the ccPDP in the interest of the ccNSO membership, the ccNSO Council and other stakeholders.

Whereas, the Issue Manager has submitted the Board Report http://ccnso.icann.org/announcements/ccnso-board-report-04dec05.pdf to the Board for consideration on 2 December 2005.

Whereas, the proposed ccNSO Bylaw changes have been posted for public comment on the ICANN webpage http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-21dec05.htm for over 21 days, and one comment concerning Recommendation 3 was received.

Whereas, Recommendation 3 suggested the addition of a new subsection 3 to ICANN Bylaws Article IX, Section 6, which would require that "Any change of this article IX shall be recommended to the Board by the ccNSO by use of the procedures of the ccPDP as stated in Annex C to these bylaws, and shall be subject to approval by the Board."

Whereas, the General Counsel has advised the Board that adopting the ccNSO Recommendation 3 may raise issues regarding corporate governance and might adversely impact ICANN's organizational structure.

Whereas, the Board believes that it is essential that the Board maintain its role of independent oversight of the organization and its Bylaws, and that this independence is one of the key elements which makes ICANN free from capture by any particular interested party or industry sector.

Resolved (06.11), that the Board hereby rejects ccNSO Recommendation 3, and directs staff to communicate to the ccNSO that it is amenable to receiving further input from the ccNSO through its processes for a supplemental recommendation regarding good faith notice and consultation, before the amendment of any provision of Article IX of the ICANN Bylaws.

ICM Registry sTLD Application

Whereas, on 1 June 2005, the ICANN Board authorized the President and General Counsel to enter into negotiations with ICM Registry LLC relating to proposed commercial and technical terms for the .XXX sponsored top-level domain.

Whereas, on 9 August 2005, the proposed .XXX sponsored TLD registry agreement was posted on the ICANN website http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/xxx/proposed-xxx-agmt-09aug05.pdf and submitted to the ICANN Board for approval.

Whereas, on 15 September 2005, the ICANN Board directed staff to discuss possible additional contractual provisions or modifications for inclusion in the .XXX Registry Agreement, to ensure that there are effective provisions requiring development and implementation of policies consistent with the principles in the ICM application, and to return to the board for additional approval, disapproval or advice.

Whereas, discussions between ICANN and ICM Registry have continued, and additional public input has been received concerning the terms of the proposed sTLD agreement.

Whereas, on 30 March 2006, ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee issued a communiqué identifying public policy issues relating to the ICM Registry application http://gac.icann.org/web/communiques/gac24com.pdf .

Resolved (06.12), the President and the General Counsel are directed to analyze all publicly received inputs, to continue negotiations with ICM Registry, and to return to the Board with any recommendations regarding amendments to the proposed sTLD registry agreement, particularly to ensure that the TLD sponsor will have in place adequate mechanisms to address any potential registrant violations of the sponsor's policies.

SSAC Report on Alternative TLD Name Systems and Roots

Whereas, on 30 March 2006, ICANN's Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) submitted a comprehensive report entitled Alternative TLD Name Systems and Roots: Conflict, Control and Consequences. The report was the subject of a valuable workshop presented by the SSAC at these meetings in Wellington.

Whereas, the SSAC report describes the operational models and the technical mechanisms alternative TLD name system and root operators employ to provide name resolution and registration services, and considers the impact on Internet users and service providers (ISPs), domain name registrants, and registries that operate under agreements with ICANN.

Resolved (06.13), the ICANN Board hereby accepts the Report, and thanks SSAC Chair Steve Crocker, SSAC Fellow Dave Piscitello, the members of SSAC, and all other contributors for their efforts in the creation of the report.

Resolved (06.14), the ICANN Board directs staff to forward the Report to ICANN's advisory committees, supporting organizations and other interested parties for their consideration in connection with the IDN TLD policy development process.

SSAC Report on DNS Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Attacks on TLD and Root Name System Operators

Whereas, on 30 March 2006, ICANN's Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) submitted a security advisory on DNS Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Attacks. The advisory was the subject of a valuable workshop presented by the SSAC at these meetings in Wellington.

Whereas, the SSAC Advisory describes recent incidents, identifies the impacts, and recommends countermeasures that TLD name server operators can implement for immediate and long-term relief from the harmful effects of these attacks.

Resolved (06.15), the ICANN Board hereby accepts the Report, and thanks SSAC Chair Steve Crocker, SSAC Fellow Dave Piscitello, the members of SSAC, and all other contributors for their efforts in the creation of the Advisory.

Resolved (06.16), the ICANN Board directs staff to forward the Report to Internet service providers and operators, to ICANN's advisory committees and supporting organizations, and to other interested parties for their consideration.

Resolved (06.17), the ICANN Board urges interested parties to consider a strategy to encourage the broad adoption of BCP 38, RFC 2827, Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing and SSAC004, Securing The Edge to reduce or mitigate entirely not only the threats posed by DNS DDoS attacks, but other, similar DDoS attacks as well.

Consideration of and Approval of ICANN's Strategic Plan

Whereas, ICANN's 2006-2009 Strategic Plan is based on many rounds of consultation with the community through workshops at ICANN meetings, through Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees and through public forums on the ICANN website.

Whereas, the 2006-2009 Strategic Plan gives a brief description of challenges and opportunities that ICANN is likely to face in the next few years and outlines five strategic objectives for the ICANN community.

Whereas, the strategic objectives in the plan will form the framework around which the 2006-2007 Operational Plan is constructed.

Whereas, members of the community have been very generous with their time and the Board appreciates the work that they have done.

Resolved (06.18), the Board approves the 2006-2009 Strategic Plan, and directs the President and staff to move forward with the community-based operational planning process based on the strategic objectives as set forth in the plan.

Review of Recommendations 06.01 and 06.02 of the Board's Reconsideration Committee

Whereas, on 28 February 2006, the Board approved a set of agreements to settle the legal disputes between VeriSign, Inc. and ICANN.

Whereas, in requests for reconsideration RC 06-1 and 06-2, various parties requested reconsideration of that Board decision;

Whereas, the Reconsideration Committee has reviewed the reconsideration requests and has submitted its recommendations to the Board, as posted at http://www.icann.org/committees/reconsideration/reconsideration-recommendation-06-1.htm and http://www.icann.org/committees/reconsideration/reconsideration-recommendation-06-2.htm .

Resolved (06.19), that the Reconsideration Committee's Recommendation RC 06-1 is adopted for the reasons stated in that recommendation.

Resolved (06.20), that the Reconsideration Committee's Recommendation RC 06-2 is adopted for the reasons stated in that recommendation.

Appointment of Lyman Chapin as the Chairman of the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel

Whereas, on 8 November 2005, the ICANN Board approved the consensus policy adopting a process for the implementation of proposed new registry services http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-08nov05.htm .

Whereas, according to the consensus policy, the technical evaluation of proposed registry services will be conducted by a standing panel of experts coordinated by a Chair "who is agreeable to both ICANN and the registry constituency of the supporting organization then responsible for generic top level domain registry policies."

Whereas, ICANN and the gTLD Registry Constituency of the GNSO have reached an agreement that Lyman Chapin is an outstanding candidate for the Chair position.

Whereas, Lyman Chapin is eminently qualified to take on such a position.

Resolved (06.21), the President and the General Counsel are directed to enter into an agreement with Lyman Chapin to undertake the duties of Chair of the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel.

Notice of Intent to Advance Implementation of New gTLD Process

Whereas, ICANN's Core Values support the introduction and promotion of choice and competition in the registration of domain names where practicable and beneficial in the public interest; and

Whereas, ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organization ("GNSO") has launched a policy development process designed to determine specific mechanisms for the additional introduction of new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs); and

Whereas, consistent with the timelines for policy development specified in ICANN's Bylaws, the GNSO should complete its initial report on new gTLDs before ICANN's next public meeting in Marrakech, Morocco in June 2006; and

Resolved (06.22), ICANN Staff is authorized and instructed to post a "Notice of Intent to Advance Implementation of New gTLD Process," as soon as practicable, stating that ICANN intends to advance the implementation of a new gTLD process on or before 1 January 2007. The Notice should instruct interested parties to monitor and participate in the public process now underway in the GNSO; and,

Resolved (06.23), the Board asks the GNSO to make its best efforts to complete its initial report on new gTLDs at or before ICANN's next public meeting in Marrakech, Morocco so that the GNSO's report can be posted for public comment, considered by the Board and the rest of the ICANN community, and implemented by Staff in accordance with the Board's instructions, with sufficient time to allow for advancement of a new gTLD process on or before 1 January 2007.

Resolved (06.24), the Board asks the Chair to communicate this action to ICANN's supporting organizations and advisory committees.

Thanks to Scribes, Sponsors, and Staff

The Board wishes thanks to the Government of New Zealand for significant contribution to hosting the GAC, and most particularly to the Honorable David Cunliffe and the Honorable Winnie Laban for opening the ICANN meeting in Wellington.

The Board extends its thanks to all sponsors of the meeting, including Public Interest Registry, Afilias, auDA, Melbourne IT, VeriSign, City Link and especially Andy Linton who has managed the technical aspects for the host FX Networks and AsianetCom for international bandwith, ICMP, Domainz, Catalyst, State Services Commission, Logic Boxes, Skenzo FabulousDomains, ausRegistry, Overstock, Internet Users Society of Niue.

Special thanks go to Laura Virgo and team, the Conference Organisers, Conference On Line.

We would like to acknowledge the effort made by the staff of the Wellington Convention Center to meet all of our many requests.

The Board expresses its great appreciation to the ICANN staff present here in Wellington; Laura Brewer; and Terri Darrenougue and the rest of the ICANN staff for their dedicated efforts in ensuring the smooth operation of the meeting.

Thanks to Local Hosts

Whereas, ICANN has successfully completed its 2006 Meeting in Wellington, New Zealand.

Resolved (06.25), the ICANN Board expresses its deep appreciation and thanks, on its own behalf and on behalf of all participants, to .nz Regsitry Services, the Office of the Domain Name Commissioner, and InternetNZ. Special thanks to InternetNZ's Colin Jackson, President, David Farrar, Vice President and Chair of the ICANN meeting committee, and Keith Davidson, Executive Director of InternetNZ.

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."