Skip to main content
Resources

Approved Board Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board

  1. Consent Agenda:
    1. Initiating the Second Review of the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC)
    2. SO/AC FY18 Additional Budget Requests Approval
    3. AOB

 

  1. Consent Agenda:

    1. Initiating the Second Review of the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC)

      Whereas, the ICANN Bylaws state that the ICANN Board 'shall cause a periodic review of the performance and operation of each Supporting Organization, each Supporting Organization Council, each Advisory Committee (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and the Nominating Committee (as defined in Section 8.1) by an entity or entities independent of the organization under review';

      Whereas, as part of the first Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) Review, the RSSAC Review Working Group submitted its Final Report to the ICANN Board on 5 August 2010;

      Whereas, on 28 July 2015 the Board resolved to defer the second RSSAC Review until 2017.

      Resolved (2017.04.19.01), that the Board initiates the second RSSAC Review and directs ICANN organization to post a Request for Proposal to procure an independent examiner to begin the review as soon as practically feasible.

      Resolved (2017.04.19.02), that the Board encourages the RSSAC to prepare for the second RSSAC review by organizing a Review Working Party to serve as a liaison during the review and to conduct a self-assessment of effectiveness of implementation of recommendations from the first review.

      Rationale for Resolution 2017.04.19.01 – 2017.04.19.02

      Why is the Board addressing the issue?

      This action is taken to provide a clear and consistent approach towards complying with ICANN Bylaws' mandate to conduct reviews. Moreover, the Board is addressing this issue because the Bylaws stipulate organizational reviews take place every five years. The ICANN Board had deferred the RSSAC Review in 2015 to commence in 2017. After the RSSAC declined the offer to defer the review by another 12 months, the Board is now initiating the second Review of the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC).

      Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

      The Board Organizational Effectivness Committee (OEC) reached out to the RSSAC leadership to confirm their support to initiate the second RSSAC Review in 2017.

      Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, and budget); the community; and/or the public?

      Timely conduct of organizational reviews is consistent with ICANN's strategic and operating plans. The budget for the second RSSAC Review has been approved as part of ICANN's annual budget cycle and the funds allocated to the RSSAC Review are managed by the ICANN organization team responsible for these reviews. No additional budgetary requirements are foreseen at this time and separate consideration will be given to the budget impact of the implementation of recommendations that may result from the review.

      Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

      There are no security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS as the result of this action.

    2. SO/AC FY18 Additional Budget Requests Approval

      Whereas, prior discussions between community members and ICANN Organization identified the need for an earlier decision on the funding of additional budget requests from ICANN's Supporting Organizations (SO) and Advisory Committees (AC).

      Whereas, ICANN Organization created an SO/AC additional budget requests process, to collect, review and submit for Board approval funding requests from the SOs and ACs.

      Whereas, requests were submitted by the ICANN Community by the set deadline, and were reviewed by a panel of staff members representing the Policy, Stakeholders Engagement and Finance personnel.

      Whereas, the review panel recommended the approval of requests representing $646,800 for approval.

      Whereas, the Board Finance Committee reviewed the process followed and ICANN Organization's proposal, and has recommended that the Board approve ICANN Organization's recommendation.

      Resolved (2017.04.19.03), the Board approves committing $646,800 during Fiscal Year 2018 to cover the costs associated with the adopted SO/AC additional budget requests.

      Rationale for Resolution 2017.04.19.03

      The budget approval earlier in the year is a reasonable accommodation of the established budget approval process and timeline, that facilitate the work of the ICANN community and of the ICANN Organization, and does not create additional expenses. The amount of the committed expenses resulting from this resolution is considered sufficiently small to not require that funding resources are specifically identified and approved by the Board.

      There is no anticipated impact from this decision on the security, stability and resiliency of the domain name system as a result of this decision.

      The approval process is an Organizational Administrative process that has already been subject to significant input from the community.

    3. AOB

      No resolution taken.

Published on 20 April 2017

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."