Explanation/Background: On 27 August 2009, the ICANN Board of Directors passed a resolution approving in principle the implementation of the Board Review WG recommendation “to add one voting director appointed from the At-Large Community to the ICANN Board of Directors, and removing the present ALAC Liaison to the Board (…).”

In preparation for this new appointment, the ALAC, in consultation with the At-Large Community, has prepared a White Paper [PDF, 240K] entitled “Call for Community Comment on the Proposed Process for the 2010 Selection of an ICANN At-Large Board Member”. Included in this document is a review of community discussions to date, inclusive of debate points and rationale for any recommendations made, a draft process timeline, specific issues and recommendations for community review and feedback.

This White Paper has already been subject to At-Large Community review beginning 11 January 2010.

On 26 January 2010, the Board Review WG released its final report [PDF, 116K]. Regarding the issue of the voting director to be appointed by the At-Large Community, the report stipulates in part:

• The acknowledgement that the Board already approved in principle its recommendation for one At-Large voting Director replacing the ALAC Liaison
• The conclusion that ALAC and At-Large should develop a mechanism for the selection of their voting Board Director. “The selection process must ensure that the appointment has the approval of ALAC and the approval of the At-Large Community more broadly.”

All members of the ICANN community and the public are invited to review the ALAC and At-Large Community White Paper on the Proposed Process for the 2010 Selection of an ICANN Board Member and share comments through 6 March 2010.

Please note that this public consultation is organized pending any Board decision on the formalization of the in-principle decision adopted in August 2009 on the possibility for the ALAC/At-Large Community to select a voting Board Director in replacement of the present non-voting ALAC Liaison to the Board.

Relevant Board Resolution

• Minutes of 27 August 2009 ICANN Board Meeting:
  http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/minutes-27aug09-en.htm

Staff Responsible: Heidi Ullrich

Deadline and How to Submit Comments:

The Staff is opening a 30-day public consultation forum, from 5 February 2010 through 6 March 2010, and invites community comments on this matter.

To submit comments: Comments on the document are welcome via email at (at-large-director@icann.org). This public forum will be open through 6 March 2010.

To view comments: An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at (http://forum.icann.org/lists/at-large-director/).

For a copy of the public announcement of this forum please see: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-05feb10-en.htm

Announcement | Comments | Add a comment | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: As part of the GNSO Improvements Process, which has as its objective to improve the structure and operations of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), a Working Group (WG) Work Team was tasked with developing a Working Group Model. This Working Group Model should become the focal point for policy development and enhance the policy development process by making it more inclusive and representative, and – ultimately – more effective and efficient.

To this end, the WG WT has developed this document, entitled ‘Working Group Guidelines’, which brings together two different elements of the Working Group process; on the one hand it addresses what should be considered in creating, purposing, funding, staffing, and instructing/guiding a WG to accomplish the desired outcome (the chartering process), and; secondly, what guidance should be provided to a WG on elements such as structuring, norms, tasking, reporting, and delivering the outcome(s) as chartered (the working group process). The WG WT is seeking your input on this document, especially on the elements contained in this document as well as what other information should be included as part of Working Group Guidelines. Following the public comment period, the WG WT intends to review the comments received and determine if and how this document should be updated before being submitted to the Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) for its consideration.

Background documents / links

• Working Group Guidelines [PDF, 608K]
• Working Group Work Team Workspace
• The GNSO Improvements Web Site

Staff responsible: Marika Konings

Deadline and how to submit comments

Comments are welcome via e-mail to working-group-guidelines@icann.org until 22 March 2010.

Access to the public comment forum from which comments can be posted can be found at:
http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#working-group-guidelines

An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/working-group-guidelines/

Announcement | Comments | Add a comment | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: The ICANN Bylaws specify that the GNSO has the right to select two individuals to serve on the ICANN Board, commonly referred to as Board Seats 13 and 14. Under the Bylaws, the Contracted Party House selects Board Seat 13, and the Non-Contracted Party House selects Board Seat 14.

On 28 January 2010, the GNSO Council approved the process proposed by the Contracted Party House to select a representative to fill Board Seat 13 for the 2010 election, and amended its Operating Procedures to include this process and timeline. Because the current term for Board Seat 13 expires at the end of April 2010, the GNSO Council is proposing an expedited process for the 2010 selection of Board Seat 13, but has also specifically reserved the right to modify the election procedures before the nomination period expires if public comments raise issues or matter that merit changes to the adopted processes. The GNSO Council also tasked the GNSO Operations Work Team with the responsibility of developing the procedures for future selection of Board Seats 13 and 14 to be included in the GNSO Operating Procedures.

Announcement | Comments | Add a comment | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: The ongoing GNSO Improvements process has created significant community interest in the formation of new GNSO constituencies. One of those proposals is for a new Consumers Constituency. Proponents of the Consumers Constituency originally submitted a New Constituency Petition and Charter to the ICANN Board on 14 April 2009. A revised version of the proposal, responding to several Board inquiries was submitted to the Board on 15 September 2009.

All members of the ICANN community and the public are now invited to review the revised petition and charter of the Consumers Constituency and share comments with the Board through 13 February 2009.

Background and Explanation:

In June 2008, the Board of Directors endorsed a series of recommendations on how to improve the GNSO's structures and operations. One of the significant drivers of those recommendations was an interest in maximizing participation in the GNSO and its policy development processes. Among the various recommendations endorsed by the Board was that ICANN take steps to clarify and promote the option to self-form new constituencies.

The ICANN Bylaws provide that any group of individuals or entities may petition the Board for recognition as a new or separate constituency, in accordance with Section 5(4) of Article X. Such a petition must explain (1) why “the addition of such a Constituency will improve the ability of the GNSO to carry out its policy-development responsibilities” and (2) why “the proposed new Constituency would adequately represent, on a global basis, the stakeholders it seeks to represent.” Despite those Bylaw provisions, it has been many years since the organization has had formal requests for any new GNSO constituencies. Since the Board action last June, however, the Board has received four petitions for potential new GNSO Constituencies. In December, the Board chose not to approve three of those proposals (see http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/prelim-report-09dec09-en.htm) and the Consumers proposal is still under consideration.

The ICANN bylaws do not provide specific procedural guidance for how interested parties should submit the petitions contemplated in Article X. Mindful that explicit steps, formats, and/or processes for expansion would take some time for the community to develop in the implementation of the improvements recommendations, the Board directed ICANN Staff to provide the community with some initial guidance, a structure and a specific procedural path for potential new constituencies to follow. At its 1 October 2008 meeting, the Board acknowledged Staff's development of a "Notice of Intent" document for potential new constituencies and directed Staff to develop a formal petition and charter template to assist new constituency applicants in satisfying the formative criteria (consistent with the ICANN Bylaws) to facilitate the Board's evaluation of petitions to form new constituencies.

At the direction of the Board, the ICANN Staff developed a two-step process for potential new constituencies to follow. The proponent of the Consumers Constituency completed the first step of the process on 28 February 2009 by filing a Notice of Intent to Form a New Constituency – (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/consumers-constituency-noif-28feb09.pdf. The proponents of the Consumers Constituency completed the second step of the process- submission of a New Constituency Petition and Charter on 14 April 2009 – (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/consumers-constituency-intro-letter-10apr09.pdf and http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/consumers-constituency-petition-charter-redacted-10apr09.pdf).

In August 2009 the members of the ICANN Board developed a number of questions regarding the proposal. As a result of those proposals the Consumer Constituency Proponents revised their original NOIF and updated their proposed charter document on 15 September 2009 (see the revised NOIF http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/consumers-constituency-noif-redacted-15sep09.pdf and the revised charter http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/consumers-constituency-charter-15sep09.pdf.

 Relevant Board Resolution, Bylaws and Constituency Submissions:

• Minutes of 1 October 2008 ICANN Board Meeting: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/minutes-01oct08.htm

• ICANN Bylaws Article X, Section 5, Subsection 4: http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm - X-5.1

• Copies of the original and Revised Consumers Constituency Petition Documents can be found at this web page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/newco-process-en.htm

• Revised (15 Sept) Consumers Constituency NOIF: http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/consumers-constituency-noif-redacted-15sep09.pdf

• Revised (15 Sept) Consumers Constituency Charter Document; http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/consumers-constituency-charter-15sep09.pdf

To facilitate community review, the staff has prepared comparison documents of the NOIF and Charter documents that highlight the changes between the original submissions and the 15 September revised versions.

• Comparison (15 Sept) Consumers Constituency NOIF: http://www.gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/comparison-consumers-constituency-noif-redacted-15sep09-en.pdf [PDF, 69K]

• Comparison (15 Sept) Consumers Constituency Charter Document: http://www.gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/comparison-consumers-constituency-charter-15sep09-en.pdf [PDF, 109K]

Staff Responsible: Robert Hoggarth

Deadline and How to Submit Comments:

The Staff is opening a 21-day public consultation forum, from 22 January 2010 through 13 February 2010, and invites community comments on this matter.

To submit comments: Comments on the document are welcome via email at consumers-constituency-petition@icann.org. This public forum will be open through 13 February 2010.

To view comments: An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at http://forum.icann.org/lists/consumers-constituency-petition/.

For a copy of the public announcement of this forum please see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-22jan10-en.htm.

Announcement | Comments | Add a comment | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: ICANN is publishing today for public comment a discussion draft that addresses the requirements and implementation processes for the reviews called for in the Affirmation of Commitments.

The Affirmation of Commitments contains specific provisions for periodic review of ICANN's key objectives. These reviews are to be performed by review teams composed of volunteer community members representative of the relevant ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, as well as independent experts.

The paper [PDF, 620K] posted for public consultation presents a discussion draft to address the Affirmation review requirements; it describes:

• The Affirmation requirements for reviews
• The proposed methodology for conducting the reviews
• The preliminary activities (such as the establishment of the review Teams and others)
• The timeline of the preparatory activities and of the first review
• A draft Terms of Reference for the first review

Inputs are sought from the community on the full set of proposals contained in this paper.

Announcement | Comments | Add a comment | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: ICANN is soliciting comments on the Draft Expressions of Interest/Pre-Registrations Model for new generic top-level domains (new gTLDs). According to this draft model, entities interested in participating in the first round of the New gTLD Program are required to submit basic information about the participating entity and requested top-level domain, also referred to as "string".

The model is a direct result of community recommendations for such an undertaking. The proposed model published today is not an operationally complete plan, i.e., it is not intended to include all the details that would be needed for implementation of a functioning process. Rather, it is intended to convey the detail necessary for robust public discussion.

After the end of this public comment period, the ICANN Board will convene to consider the community feedback and decide on the path forward. A decision is expected in the first quarter of 2010. If approved, the final process and announce the opening date for EOI will be published.

See Model here: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/eoi-model-18dec09-en.pdf [PDF, 192K]

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: The Special Trademarks Issues Working Team (STI) has published its Report on its recommendations to create a Trademark Clearinghouse and Uniform Rapid Suspension procedure to protect trademarks in the New GTLD Program. The public comment period ends on 26 January 2010.

Special Trademark Issues Review Team Recommendations:

• English [PDF, 404K]
• [PDF, 428K] العربية
• 中文 [PDF, 412K]
• Français [PDF, 300K]
• Español [PDF, 364K]
• Русский [PDF, 620K]

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: As the next element of consultation on the Strategic Plan, ICANN invites comments from the community on a first draft of the plan based on material presented to the community at the Seoul meeting. In particular, we are seeking the views of the community on the following issues:

• What should be the three to five year high level strategic objectives for each of the four areas of work?
• What would be the specific metrics for each of the four areas of work?

The draft Strategic Plan for 2010- 2013 [PDF, 209K] is being posted for public comment for 45 days to ensure broad community input. Comments regarding the draft Plan may be submitted by email to stratplan-2010@icann.org.

The comment period will close on 21 January 2010. The draft plan will be revised based on the comments received and the responses to the community survey posted earlier this month. A final version of the Strategic Plan will be submitted to the Board for approval at their February meeting.

View the draft Strategic Plan 2010-2013 [PDF, 209K]

• العربية [PDF, 236K]
• 中文 [PDF, 238K]
• Français [PDF, 240K]
• Español [PDF, 304K]
• Русский [PDF, 300K]

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: The IDN-Implementation Working Team was established to study two topics in anticipation of the delegation of Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) into the root zone:

1. Management of Variant Top-Level Domains (TLDs);
2. Whether there can be exceptions to the three-character requirement for generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs).

The Final Report on 3-Character Requirement and Variant Management [PDF, 337K] is being posted for public comment to ensure broad community input on the proposed recommendations. After the public comment period, a set of solutions will be devised for further discussion and consideration in the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process, the IDN ccTLD PDP, and in the next version of the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: The Czech Arbitration Court (CAC), an Approved Provider for the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) is proposing to amend its Supplemental Rules to provide for an alternative page limit and processing fee for certain UDRP Complaints. CAC is not proposing any changes to the text of the UDRP (http://www.icann.org/en/dndr/udrp/policy.htm) or the UDRP Implementation Rules (http://www.icann.org/en/dndr/udrp/uniform-rules.htm).

The CAC provides a cover letter explaining their proposal as well as a redline of the proposed changes to the Supplemental Rules (available at http://www.icann.org/en/dndr/udrp/cac-proposed-supplemental-rules-11nov09-en.pdf).

CAC's proposal is being posted for public comment for 30 days to ensure broad community input. Comments regarding CAC's proposal maybe submitted by email to: cac-prop-supp-rules@icann.org through 11 December 2009.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: In February 2009, with Resolution 2009-02-03-04, the ICANN Board requested the Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC), the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), and the ICANN staff, including the IANA team, to study the potential issues regarding the addition of IDNs, IPv6 addresses, DNSSEC and substantial numbers of new TLDs to the root zone. The Terms of Reference for this study are at http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-study-tor-05may09-en.htm.

The Root Scaling Study Team led by Lyman Chapin of Interisle Consulting was selected to perform this study.

We are hereby releasing the Interisle report as delivered for public comment and analysis as well as a covering note from the joint RSSAC/SSAC/ICANN staff steering group for this study.

The steering group will be evaluating the report against the Terms of Reference and preparing recommendations for the Board and the public.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: ICANN has published a report prepared by TNO entitled "Root Scaling Study: Description of the DNS Root Scaling Model" [PDF, 677K]. TNO (Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research) is an independent research organization based in Delft, Netherlands (http://www.tno.nl). This report is an additional product of the root scaling study led by Lyman Chapin of Interisle Consulting, and complements the "Scaling the Root" report [PDF, 1,340K] published on 18 September 2009. The TNO report describes the characteristics of a quantitative model developed by TNO for dynamic analysis of root scaling issues. The TNO model and simulation system are undergoing verification.

ICANN is soliciting public comment on both reports. The Root Scaling Steering Group is evaluating these reports and plans to provide an evaluation and recommendations for the Board and the public.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

The public comment period on this proposed bylaw change has been extended by two months, to 27 October 2009, to allow users of the translated versions to prepare and submit their views.

Explanation: Two proposed accountability measures have been posted by direction of the Board for 60 days of public comments, from 27 July 2009 through 25 September 2009. This is the latest step in the Improving Institutional Confidence process.

The first bylaw revision is a new mechanism called the "Community Re-Examination Vote". It would allow the ICANN community to request the Board to re-examine a Board decision taken by resolution.

The second proposal would revise one of the existing bylaws and replace the independent third-party review process with a more robust process, the "Independent Review Body".

These proposals represent a significant step forward in ICANN's already considerable accountability. The draft bylaw changes have been developed in response to community input to the President's Strategy Committee over the last 12 months.

You are invited to review the proposed changes to the ICANN Bylaws linked to on this page and provide your input to the public comments forum.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: ICANN, assisted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC), recently completed a draft of its study of the percentage of domain names registered using a privacy or proxy service. Today, that draft report is being posted for review and comment through 6 November 2009.

The findings in the report identify a percentage range of domain names that appear to have been registered using a privacy or proxy service. To inform this study, ICANN relied on a random sample of 2400 domain names drawn in March 2009 from the universe of domain names registered under the top 5 gTLDs (i.e., .com, .net, .org, .biz, and .info).

Community members are invited to review the draft report and its findings and comment on all aspects of the report.

The draft report can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/compliance/reports/privacy-proxy-registration-services-study-28sep09-en.pdf [PDF, 124K]

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: After receiving recommendations from the Implementation Recommendation Team and others, taking extensive comment and conducting consultation with the broader community, ICANN Staff have drafted a set of implementation recommendations related to intellectual property protections for the new gTLD program.

Those proposed rights protection mechanisms are:

• The creation of an IP Clearinghouse, which is a database of validated trademarks to be utilised by new gTLD registry operators in implementing either an IP Claims service or Sunrise process during TLD launch; and
• The creation of a Uniform Rapid Suspension process for use in clear-cut, blatant cases of trademark infringement.

These proposed rights protection mechanisms are available for review and comment at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/gnso-consultations-reports-en.htm.

All materials are in draft form for public comment and review. Your comments will help with the production of the next version of the Applicant Guidebook.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: The Draft Applicant Guidebook, V3 is now available for review and comment at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-3-en.htm. The Guidebook has been changed significantly. In all, there are over 50 areas of change, clearly indicated in the "redline" version of the Guidebook. All materials are in draft form for public comment and review. Your comments will help with the production of the next version of the Applicant Guidebook.

Further details about the New gTLD Program can be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation: The joint session of the Advisory Committees and Supporting Organizations in Sydney was summarized in a one-page document that included six issues of most concern to the community as well as seven possible solutions.

This comment period is an opportunity for the community to discuss that summary in the expectation that pragmatic solutions can be found.

This comment period is also notable in that it is being used to experiment with new online collaborative software that is being trialed by ICANN staff in an effort to see if the organization can improve its public comment process.

As such, you can email in comments as normal but you will have a far greater opportunity to interact and discuss the summaries as well as propose solution by logging onto the comment period's discussion space.

Email acso-discussion@icann.org, or interactive online at https://jive.dev.icann.org/community/acso.

Announcement | Discussion space | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation: IRT Final Report on Trademark Protection Issues [PDF, 300K] now available for Public Comment

The IRT team participated in numerous teleconferences and several face-to-face meetings in Washington, D.C. and San Francisco, California, over a two month period. The resulting recommendations report on Trademark Protection Issues identifies several proposed solutions, including:

• IP Clearinghouse, Globally Protected Marks List and associated Rights Protection Mechanisms, and standardized pre-launch rights protection mechanisms;
• Uniform Rapid Suspension System;
• Post delegation dispute resolution mechanisms;
• Whois requirements for new TLDs; and
• Use of algorithm in string confusion review during initial evaluation.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation: ICANN has developed a plan to enhance the security, stability and resiliency [PDF, 1,930K] of the Internet's naming and addressing systems as called for in its Strategic Plan and in accordance within its bylaws.

The plan notes how the Internet has thrived by engaging many stakeholders who collaborate to foster communication, creativity and commerce in a global commons. The interoperability of the global commons depends on the operation and coordination of the Internet's unique identifier systems. ICANN and the operators of these systems acknowledge that maintaining and enhancing the security, stability and resiliency of these systems is a core element of their collaborative relationship. The plan notes the growing risks to the security, stability and resiliency of the unique identifier systems and the need to collaboratively address these risks.

The plan delineates ICANN's specific programs that will address security, stability and resiliency. It also details planned activities that will enhance its contributions through the next operational year. This first version of the plan is intended as a foundation for ICANN and its community to establish a framework for organizing its security, stability and resiliency efforts. The plan does not envision major new roles or programs for ICANN in this area.

The programs and initiatives in which ICANN plans to engage during the 2009-2010 operating year include:

• Improving root zone management through automation; improve authentication of communications with TLD managers and support implementation of DNS Security Extensions (DNSSec)
• Ensure the maturation of the gTLD registry continuity plan and test the data escrow system
• Build on the collaborative efforts of the Internet security community efforts to effectively respond to malicious abuses of the Domain Name System (DNS).

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation:ICANN retained Dennis Carlton, Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago and Senior Managing Director of Compass Lexecon, to perform two independent analyses:

1. Preliminary Report of Dennis Carlton Regarding Impact of New gTLDs on Consumer Welfare [PDF, 160K]
2. Preliminary Analysis of Dennis Carlton Regarding Price Caps for New gTLD Internet Registries [PDF, 56K]

The preliminary reports represent a third party independent analysis. A public comment period is now open to allow for further inputs from the community.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments

Explanation/Background: puntCAT has proposed allocation of one and two-character second-level domain names in .CAT through the Registry Services Evaluation Process, and is seeking an amendment [PDF, 32K] to proceed with a request for proposals process. The amendment provides for a change to Appendix 6, Schedule of Reserved Names.

Announcement | Comments | Summary/analysis of comments