ICM Registry: Difference between revisions

Line 50:

* 2010, June - At [[ICANN Brussels]], the Board resolved that it would act in accept the majority opinion of the [[IRP]], and thus set the stage to approve .xxx. They then instructed staff to ensure that ICM's application was still current with no changes made or necessitated. In August, a proposed [[Registry Agreement]] was posted for public comment.

* 2010, October - ICANN began trying to rectify outstanding concerns from the [[GAC]] with the proposed registry agreement with ICM. This would not be possible, and in March, 2011, ahead of the official approval of the .xxx extension, the GAC issued a statement that it does not support the introduction of the .xxx namespace into the [[Root Zone|root zone]], that some of its members emphatically opposed the measure and would likely block the extension in their country, and that ICANN was risking technical and political fall-out by ignoring their outstanding concerns. ~~Reasons~~ for not following GAC advice, throughout the entire ICM .xxx application, can be found at the latter half of [http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf this document].<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf Draft ICM Rationale 18Mar11, ICANN.org]</ref>

* 2010, October - ICANN began trying to rectify outstanding concerns from the [[GAC]] with the proposed registry agreement with ICM. This would not be possible, and in March, 2011, ahead of the official approval of the .xxx extension, the GAC issued a statement that it does not support the introduction of the .xxx namespace into the [[Root Zone|root zone]], that some of its members emphatically opposed the measure and would likely block the extension in their country, and that ICANN was risking technical and political fall-out by ignoring their outstanding concerns. [[ICANN]]'s reasons for not following GAC advice, throughout the entire ICM .xxx application, can be found at the latter half of [http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf this document].<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf Draft ICM Rationale 18Mar11, ICANN.org]</ref>

* 2011- June, 25th - [[ICANN]]'s board approved the proposal at [[ICANN 40]] in San Francisco, USA, thereby authorizing the implementation of .xxx in the [[Root Zone|root zone]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/technology/26domain.html&OQ=_rQ3D1Q26srcQ3Dbusln&OP=10b995d5Q2Fzq@yzQ7E!Q5Do6!!DXzXCjCzCQ51zXQ51zD@Q5DQ2F_!5!Q7BQ26zXQ51Q7E!uiQ20_,Q2FDu5 Miguel Helft (June 25, 2010). "For X-Rated, a Domain of Their Own"]</ref>

@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 * 2010, June - At [[ICANN Brussels]], the Board resolved that it would act in accept the majority opinion of the [[IRP]], and thus set the stage to approve .xxx. They then instructed staff to ensure that ICM's application was still current with no changes made or necessitated. In August, a proposed [[Registry Agreement]] was posted for public comment.
-* 2010, October - ICANN began trying to rectify outstanding concerns from the [[GAC]] with the proposed registry agreement with ICM. This would not be possible, and in March, 2011, ahead of the official approval of the .xxx extension, the GAC issued a statement that it does not support the introduction of the .xxx namespace into the [[Root Zone|root zone]], that some of its members emphatically opposed the measure and would likely block the extension in their country, and that ICANN was risking technical and political fall-out by ignoring their outstanding concerns. Reasons for not following GAC advice, throughout the entire ICM .xxx application, can be found at the latter half of [http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf this document].<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf Draft ICM Rationale 18Mar11, ICANN.org]</ref>
+* 2010, October - ICANN began trying to rectify outstanding concerns from the [[GAC]] with the proposed registry agreement with ICM. This would not be possible, and in March, 2011, ahead of the official approval of the .xxx extension, the GAC issued a statement that it does not support the introduction of the .xxx namespace into the [[Root Zone|root zone]], that some of its members emphatically opposed the measure and would likely block the extension in their country, and that ICANN was risking technical and political fall-out by ignoring their outstanding concerns. [[ICANN]]'s reasons for not following GAC advice, throughout the entire ICM .xxx application, can be found at the latter half of [http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf this document].<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf Draft ICM Rationale 18Mar11, ICANN.org]</ref>
 * 2011- June, 25th - [[ICANN]]'s board approved the proposal at [[ICANN 40]] in San Francisco, USA, thereby authorizing the implementation of .xxx in the [[Root Zone|root zone]].<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/technology/26domain.html&OQ=_rQ3D1Q26srcQ3Dbusln&OP=10b995d5Q2Fzq@yzQ7E!Q5Do6!!DXzXCjCzCQ51zXQ51zD@Q5DQ2F_!5!Q7BQ26zXQ51Q7E!uiQ20_,Q2FDu5 Miguel Helft (June 25, 2010). "For X-Rated, a Domain of Their Own"]</ref>