CCNSO 2006 03 28
Link to CCNSO
Contents |
[edit] Photos of the session
[edit] Participants
- Chris Disspain
- Thomas Roessler
- Bernard Turcotte
- Raymond King
- Tommy Ho
- Adam Peake
- George Sadowsky
- Euginio Triana
- Roland LaPlante
- Karina Cortés
- Pablo Rodriguez
- Donna Austin
- Jean-Christophe Vignes
- Jaeyoun Kim
- Desiree Miloshevic
- Josh Rowe
- ...add more here
[edit] Discussion with Kurt Pritz
Discussion of ICANN budget issues
- Discussions with CCNSO budget ... workgroup and appreciative of those efforts
- Complex set of issues, ICANN looks for continued revenues from cc's in exchange for services
- Will present material on ICANN operations, especially those related to ccTLDs
- Internet Governance / and Outreach
- reasonable expectation of funding from ccTLDs (circulated to this group last Nov/Dec) (2-3pages) / back of the envelope calculation showing resulting fees / 20% of ICANN budget from ccTLDs, current levels are about 4%. Where document falls short
- Wide spectrum of ICANN services and outcomes provided / some ccTLDs will find some services valuable, others may not
- IANA services should be worthwile to most
- on the other hand, gTLD services may be of little value to ccTLDs
- Single interoperable Internet / benefit to some
- Global outreach / benefit to some
- overall benefits from services and outcomes should be around 20%
- Wide spectrum of ICANN services and outcomes provided / some ccTLDs will find some services valuable, others may not
- other shortcoming of document was that shorthand was used for some efforts and the depth of service might not be clear
- Budgeting for L root locations and regional locations in different continents / substantial investment / increases number of root names servers
- IANA Services / everyone should see value / continue to enhance those services / someone to talk to 24 hrs a day / and increasing automation of services / staffing to enhance IANA services
- Data Escrow services / ICANN to hire someone to do that, may be of more value to gTLDs than ccTLDs
- Deployment of IDNs at the top level
- Importance of IDNs deployed at the top level / preserving universal resolvability
- Policy coordination aspect made in an adequate fashion and involves the entire community, especially the ccTLDs
- Working to find the right level of government participation / ICANN model appropriately balances role of gov't and the community / need to carefully taylor that role
- Translation / increases from year to year / not an end in itself and therefore there isn't a translation staff or translation budget, but rather it's by project / interested in hearing from this group on this matter
[edit] Theresa Swinehart
- Global partnership program
- ccTLDs not currently involved in ICANN Space on a more active level
- Outreach / WSIS / Partnership with diff organizations
- liaisons spend 1-2 hrs / day / especially with developing countries
- WSIS / 3 years of advertising of ICANN as a multi stakeholder model / how people want to do things on a local level / education and awareness how the Internet space work and the importance of the multi-stakeholder approach. Resulted in interest in technical training / domino effect from these discussions / local level important as opposed to top down intergovermental / now there is expertise developing within the regions / we are noticing increased level of participation
- Diplo Foundation / important that the next generation of gov't officials are far more informed / how GAC partnership will evolve.
- Partnerships with ISOC / some of these initiatives are requested at the local level
- enhancement of the network of contacts / managers with best practices have the opportunity to share
- Profile and awareness overall has increased dramatically
[edit] more from Kurt Pritz
- Increased spending on GAC initiatives
- Increased spending on IANA
- Increased spending on Root Servers
- Internet Governance
- gTLD support also, but that increase is not as great
- what we still owe you is elaboration on some of the things said here
- ICANN has a planning calendar / 2 parts / strategic plannning (July 1 - Dec 31st) / operational planning (Jan 1 - Jun 30th) / we will here with our draft plans and work more intimately with you in this type of setting.
- Thank you for working so hard with us ...
- Eberhard Lisse - why should ccTLDs pay for redelegation services and GAC services, etc. Most of this is perfectly useless to me.
- Kurt - I appreciate your opinion
- Eberhard Lisse - but you don't answer my question
- Kurt - this forum is valuable for us to discuss and without it, it might be worse for you
[edit] CNNIC
PPT presentation by Li Guanghao (Presentation will be available online later)
- Chris - how do you define an Internet User
- Li - one hour of use/week
- Audience - question regarding the definition of a cyber squatter / we are starting to see holders of domain names not trying to sell or rent, but rather to redirect, how is this in China?
- Li - Monetizing domain names is becoming more common, if not in bad faith it shouldn't be considered bad faith.
- audience, so its ok to monetize a similar trademark name?
- Li - if it's in good faith its ok
- audience, but the monetization could be to a different service every day, the domain name is making money from the similarity of its name to a trademark. Am I interpreting your new policy correctly?
- Li - it depends, i'm not an expert but we leave the decision to the arbitrator (i.e. if it's good or bad faith use) but if the use is not connected to the other business, we don't consider it cybersquatting
- Li - Monetizing domain names is becoming more common, if not in bad faith it shouldn't be considered bad faith.
- Audience - adding to the previous quesion, what if the name is offered back to the TM holder for huge some of money?
- Li - I'd say that could be considered cybersquatting
- Audience - who authorizes the publication of zone information (i didn't catch the entire question)
- Li - .CN is under the global Internet system with ICANN, the 3 IDNs are authorized by MII (Ministry of Internet Information) / right now using the client side plug-ins.
[edit] Register.com / Tommy Ho
- PPT Presentation
[edit] InterNetX / Thomas Moerz
- PPT Presentation
[edit] Q&A
- Audience - comments on drop systems?
- Tommy and Thomas - No experience
- Why do you need a cancellatin policy?
- clarification - do you mean non-renewal?
- Chris Disspain so we're talking about a deletion policy?
- Bernard Turcotte question on transfers
[edit] 30 min Break
[edit] ICANN Nominating Committee
- New Chair Euginio Triana & Associate Chair Adam Peake
- close to launching the call for candidates
- 3 positions for 2006 / 2 positions ALAC 1 position GNSO
- Selection is an important part of the whole system / persons need to be qualified, etc.
- we will put the call for candidates up in 2 weeks / 3 month process from there
- this is particularly important after the summit in Tunisia and the future of ICANN is at stake
Q&A
- Chris Disspain Question - question on whether it makes sense to put forward any names, i.e. if there are already 2 designated seats are we wasting our time?
- Adam Peake - yes and no, Nominating Committee is set up to be a separate process, we are not exluding people who have ccTLD backgrounds or other people knowledgeable in ICANN functions. We're trying to look for a balance, and are looking for people with ICANN knowledge and a broad global knowledge.
- George Sadowsky - didn't get comment...
- Chris Disspain - I want to be sure that putting someone on who is closely related to a ccTLD won't look like giving the ccNSO an extra seat. Yes and No answer is not very helpful.
- Euginio Triana - Nominating Committee has a responsibility to select persons on their own merits and nothing to do with ... and I think this case is perfectly reasonable. We are also bound by the code of ethics. This year, we are going to reinforce this code of ethics.
- Adam Peake - I can categorically say that the example you have of a person connected to the ccNSO would not be excluded. But there may be a scale where if someone is too close to another path to the board they might require more consideration
- George Sadowsky - Nominating Committe should be given the freedom to make its decisions
- Chris Disspain - I just want to make sure that proximity to the ccNSO won't be a exclusionary factor
[edit] Markus Kummer on Internet Governance Forum
- WSIS started as a debate "who should be in charge of the Internet and ICANN" / in the end they gave good marks; not 100% -- always room for improvement. The summit demonstrated that all of the governments recognize that the Internet is the backbone for globalization. Governments want to be involved, it does not mean taking over and running it themselves, but starting dialog and voicing their concerns and priorities.
- The forum goes beyond the core Internet functions to cybercrime and other areas
- We have had first round of consultation
- meetings are open / if you have an interest you are free to attend
- agenda is not yet set
- how to steer this process / you need a broader proces / can't be totally open either with hundreds of people in the room / moving towards a program committee of 10 - 15 people which could work efficiently
- Group of 77 were not ready to agree to that last February and came back to us repeating the request for 3 bureaus with lots of people ...
- we went a long way to meet their concerns, but moved towards an integrated bureau of 40 members with 20 split 3 ways including the Internet community
[edit] Budget Working Group
Eva
- cc's contribution to ICANN
- this working group started April 2005, in Mar Del Plata
- Bart, Dotty, Eva (presenting) and one more
- We have seen various budgets, % and # of the budget
- discussion with Kurt, Theresa and Melanie / we hope to be able to go forward from there
- Areas that raise the budget
- Policy development support
- Internet governance
- Outreach
- IDN Project
- IANA
- Anycast
- Sources of revenue
- Current status
- Strategic plan broken down into a budget
- Kurt Pritz document (dec 2005)
- Proposed 20% of the ICANN budget funded by ccTLDs
Bart
- covered entire arena of ICANN activities and as a result, here's a % for ccTLDs to contribute
- what i need from the audience is to tell us if we're going in the right direction
- what is a reasonable proportion?
- how to determine what reasonable proportion?
- some percentage is not good enough, we need to know where it's going and more specifics, not that cherrypicking would work either
- stable framework
- Rationales
- general support of ICANN Structure
- there are common interests in having an ICANN structure
- as a consituency, the ccTLDs should help pay a reasonable share of the operational costs...
- costs need to be covered
- financial contribution should correlate with benefits
- not % based contribution
- benefit based contribution
- solidarity of ccTLDs
- no cross-funding
- financial contribution should correlate with representation
- linking up contributing and influence
- general ICANN direction and strategy
- scope and extent of activities
- linking up contributing and influence
- general support of ICANN Structure
...
- want to come back to you in Marrakesh meeting but feeling is that the number will be a lot lower than 20%
- Question to constituency -- "Is this the way you want us to proceed"?
- Chris Disspain - in the past, there has been resistance from ICANN to provide details on the budget, are they prepared to give us more detail now?
- Bart - yes, having sufficient data to see the "zones" of activities is good, but not line item by line item. again, cherrypicking is not productive
- Eva - Kurt Pritz has offered to work more closely with us
- Audience - worried about committing to a %
- Chris Disspain - % is a start but we're really talking #'s here / % is there to help get us to the right ballpark
- Berard Turcotte - i like some of the notions, but my worries are the same as Faye's (sp?), my concern is that it needs to be formally linked to managing the total amount and B) like Chris i've been around the budget committee for a while and in the past they've promised a lot and delivered various results. Best of luck in getting actual data :-)
- Chris Disspain - question to the room - should we just pick a number or go through the outlined process
- Eberhard Lisse - not so sure about the benefits ccTLDs get. Went down the list of thing ccTLDs get and felt that most were not useful ("rubbish"). I was too busy laughing to take good notes on this one.
- Dottie (sp?) - interesting that Sabina (sp?) and Everhard saying that they'd be willing to pay by name.
- Eva - Eberhard has been clear, what are the views from the rest of you?
- Chris Disspain - suggestion that we send around a survey
ICANNwiki: An industry resource fostering global collaboration and transparency within the ICANN community
