Transcript ICANN ICANN The Internet Compartion for Assigned Names and Numbers IRP President & CEO: Mike Roberts CHAIR: VINT CERF November 1998 - 9 Member Virgin Birth.

ICANN
ICANN
The Internet Compartion for Assigned Names and Numbers
IRP
President & CEO: Mike Roberts
CHAIR: VINT CERF
November 1998 - 9 Member Virgin Birth Board
3 DNSO
Domain Name
Support Org.
3 PSO
Protocol
Support Org
Names Council (21)
ISPS
Trade Marks
ITU
IETF
ETSI
WWWC
3 ASO
44 ccSO
VB’s
5 @ Large
GAC
Address
Support Org
Address
Council
At Large
Membership
Becky Burr
Bob Shaw
176,837
RIPE
ARIN
APNIC
Christopher
Wilkinson
WIPO
Business
Non-Commercial
Registries
Registrars
Country Code Managers
General Assembly
Others
ICANN
ICANN
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
CHAIR: VINT CERF
President & CEO: Stuart Lynn
Board seats
2 GNSO
Generic
Support Org
Names Council (16)
ISPS
Registries
Registrars
Non-Commercial
2 ASO
2 CCSO
Address
Support Org
Country code
Support Org
Address
Council
International
Council
(number
unspecified)
RIPE
ARIN
APNIC
LACNIC
tbd
Voting
members
commit to
ICANN policy
development
8 “At Large”
Selected by
the
Nominating
Committee*
5 Liaison
* Non Com
Standing
committees
g Registries
g Registrars
c Registries
TAC
IAB/IETF
RIR’s
ISP’s
RSSAC
Large business
users
SAC
Small business
users
GAC
IP organisations
Academic/Public
Trade Marks
Business
Others ?
Consumer groups
Individual
Nameholders
IAB/IETF
TAC
GAC
General Assembly
4 unspecified
ERC PROPOSAL
The “Names Council”
Chair
Selected by the Council
Providers
Users
ISP
Business
ISP
Business
Registries
Non Commercial
Registries
Non Commercial
Registrars
IP
Registrars
IP
Elected by Nom Com Elected by Nom Com Elected by Nom Com
(voting)
(voting)
(voting)
GAC Appointer
(non-voting)
ERC PROPOSAL
The Country Names Council
Unspecified number
of regionally voting
Councillors
Unspecified number
of regionally voting
Councillors
1/3 of Council by :
- appointments by Nominating Committee (voting),
- 1 GAC appointee (non-voting)
3 seats
elected to
ICANN Board
International Council
15 seats:
3 per Region
Chair
elected by Council
Officers: VP’s for Works, L&R,
Secretariat
Membership, F&A
Regional
associations
by contract
Member
ccTLDS
LACTLD
Latin
America
Interface
with other
SO’s
APTLD
Asia Pacific
AFTLD
CENTR
African
European
International Assembly
NATLD
North
America
ccTLD Response to the
Blueprint
.The cctld members meeting in Bucharest Romania on
25th June have considered the Blueprint issued on
21st June. This response concentrates on the ccTLD
aspects of the structure of the new ICANN proposed
by the ICANN Board Evolution and Reform
Committee (ERC). Due to the time available, the
ccTLDs do not in this response address all the
details of the Blueprint document and lack of
comment should not be taken as approval.
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• .The ccTLDs are in favour of a number of aspects of
the Blueprint, including the formation of an SO for
developing policy on cctld domain name matters,
and the provision of staffing.
ccTLD Resposnse to Blueprint
• In the spirit of “bottom up” development,
the cctlds prefer to continue using the
established name for this SO, (“ccSO”)
which is used in all of our documentation,
website domain name, committee names
and lists, and which reflects the cultural and
historical language of the internet.
ccTLD response to Blueprint
The cctlds are committed to a continuing dialogue within ICANN in good
faith on a number of matters in which the cctlds disagree with the
recommendations or discussion in the Blueprint. The following paragraphs
outline the most important of those differences
ccTLD Responsse to Blueprint
•5
The board should not make policy in those
areas for which a support organization exists. The
function of the board is to receive and respond to
policy that has been developed by those
organisations specifically intended, designed,
populated and staffed for the express purpose of
developing policy.
ccTLD response to Blueprint
• It is not the board’s job to make policy, but
rather to ensure that policy developed is
timely, useful, appropriate, and compliant
with the processes of the respective SO
providing it.
ccTLD Responsse to Blueprint
Therefore the Board could not adopt any
policy binding on ccTLDs that had not
been through this process.
ccTLD Response To Blueprint
• The Board may initiate policy discussions in an SO,
and might provide guidance and encouragement at
various times in the SO’s development process but it
cannot be the Board’s role to make policy in the
absence of SO agreement.
ccTLD response to Blueprint
Policy for each ccTLD is primarily local and is therefore made locally by the local
internet community for the local internet community. The primary purpose of
the ccSO is to provide policy on the few matters which are of global
significance. Those have been recognized by the ccTLDs as :
“… a carefully definable set of global issues which can be put through
the ccSO consensus policy development process to the policy making process
of the Corporation. These are referred to herein as “global” policies.”
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• It will be a part of the ccSO function to
characterise issues as either local or global.
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
– The ccTLDs are committed to funding those
overheads of the corporation directly related to
ccTLD activities, for example the IANA
services, and in addition are willing to make a
fair contribution to ICANN for its more general
overheads. While the level of funding is not a
requisite part of the re-structuring debate, we
make the following points:
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• No cross subsidy of non-ccTLD activities
• ccSO approves the Icann Budget, then
guarantees ccTLD funding to ICANN
• Allocation of funding between ccTLDs
done by ccSO
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
– The ccTLDs are not prepared to have any
agency, including the Nominating Committee,
appoint members to its Council, the
“International Council”. We understand that the
purpose of these appointments is to provide the
council with individuals having the attributes
described as desirable for Directors, and with
the additional qualification of an “interest in
global names policy”. Those attributes are
present in the members of the ccSO, and will be
available to the council, and to the Board by
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
– We understand the committee’s view is that
such appointments will provide:
( 1)reporting to the Board on minority view
points,
( )facilitation in case of deadlock or other
stoppages, and
( )leadership
( )representation in what is, otherwise, a
monolithic structure
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• The ccTLDs will work with the committee
to demonstrate that those concerns are
already dealt with by the ccTLDs and their
proposed ccSO structure (a copy of the draft
structure for the SO, and its Council are
attached)
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• The ccTLDs are prepared to work in close
liaison with the GAC, in relation to those
matters of interest to governments. We do
not believe that an appointed liaison officer
will be an efficient way of arranging that….
We are committed to working with the GAC
to improve liaison, and point instead to the
first joint ccTLD-GAC workshop held in
Bucharest
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• Each SO should have 3 seats on the Board.
…..and for ICANN to have credibility as an
international organisation, those interests
should be represented on the board….. that
number greatly facilitates fair geographic
representation. With two directors, at any
given time, three ccTLD regions are
unrepresented
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• We suggest that the Board seats in question
be re-allocated from those appointed by the
Nominating Committee, reducing those to 5
(1 per geographic region) rather than
creating any additional seats. This would
mean that there would be 3 directors from
each SO (a total of 9) providing specialist
input, 10 directors from the wider
community (5 voting and 5 non-voting)
providing general, public interest
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
– We have reservations about the concept and
composition of the Nominating Committee, and
ICANN’s ability to find and select members in
an open transparent and contestable manner in
the time frame. If there is to be such a body, it
is essential for the reputation of the Corporation
that there be no allegation that it was not
created under conditions of the greatest fairness
and openness.
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
• The ccTLD representation in the
Nominating Committee is
disproportionately small (1 of 19 seats). We
recommend that should a Nominating
Committee be created there should 1
representative of the ccTLD mangers and 5
regionally selected representatives of local
internet communities, with the ccSO
recommending candidates to the Board
ccTLD Response to Blueprint
– The ccTLDs recommend that there be no
extension of the current 2 term limit for
directors.
– The ccTLDs look forward to working with the
ERC to develop a transition plan and schedule
that can be implemented.
Policy Development Process : ccSO
(see www.wwtld.org/documents)
International Council
GNSO
Vice President, Works
(Policy Development)
International Assembly
An Open List for the
discussion of ccTLD matters,
announcements, Minutes etc
Notice of Policy
Request
Issue List automatically
created by Secretariat/VP
Notified. Specified period.
Implement
as Policy
Rapporteur provides
synthesis
Council reviews
Establish a Working Group
(plus outside Representatives)
Remits for
further work
Developments since Bucharest;
the Board’s instruction to ERC.
• Board in Romania adopts Blueprint, saying
meeting in Bucharest had provided
“additional feedback”...
• Public Forum had identified the following
important issues…geo/cultural
diversity…At Large Committee
creation…Nom.Com to be
balanced…collaborate with critical
infrastructure providers….(cont’d)
Developments since Bucharest;
the board’s instruction
• …and the technical community to further
the establishment of effective working
relationships
• “…ensure that Icann’s policy development
processes enhance and promote a
transparent bottom up process”
Documents issued by ICANN
since Bucharest
•
•
•
•
•
•
15 July Status Report on Implementation
26 July Names Policy AG - Preliminary
29 July Accountability AG -Preliminary
1 August First Interim Implementation
2 September : 2nd Interim Implementation
19 August ALAC AG Reports
Developments since Bucharest
• 21 August Adcom conference call with ERC
recomends cc AG
• further discussion with Adcom promised
• last contact by ERC with adcom
• 23 August ccTLD group call with ERC discusses cc AG
• No further contact
Developments since Bucharest
• 21 August NP AG reports on NPDP
• 2 September 2nd Interin Implementation
• 18 September ERC announces formation of
ccAG
Developments since Bucharest
• 20 September : Renewal of MoU between
US Government and ICANN
• 20 September : Statement from USG on
Extension
Documents issued by ICANN
• 2 October : Final Implementation Report
First re-drafted Bylaws
GNSO policy development
process annexed
• 4 October : Progress report from ccNSO
Assistance Group
Documents issued by ICANN
• 9 October : RIRs deliver “Blueprint for
Evolution of Address Management”
• 11 October : First Supplemental
Implementation Report
• 12 October : Fourth Status Report (on RIRs)
Documents issued by ICANN
• 22 October : ccNSO Update to ERC
• 23 October : Second Supplemental
Implementation Report
Second Re-draft of proposed
Bylaws