ICANN 59: Difference between revisions
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
===ccNSO=== | ===ccNSO=== | ||
* The Cross-Community Working Group on the Use of Country and Territory Names as Top-Level Domains (CWG-UCTN) received support for the recommendation to close the working group and organize a new effort with a broader mandate embedded in a broader context. | * The Cross-Community Working Group on the Use of Country and Territory Names as Top-Level Domains (CWG-UCTN) received support for the recommendation to close the working group and organize a new effort with a broader mandate embedded in a broader context. | ||
* The ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee (GRC), formed to structure the decision-making of the ccNSO to become a [[Empowered Community|Decisional Participant]], found out that the ccNSO decision-making process is incompatible with the timelines of the ICANN Bylaws Approval Action procedure. The GRC proposed 3 solutions, of which the ccNSO Council decided that both the Approval Action process and the Rejection Action petition process should be subject to the request of a members’ ratification vote (under the ccNSO 2004 rules). | * The ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee (GRC), formed to structure the decision-making of the ccNSO to become a [[ICANN Empowered Community|Decisional Participant]], found out that the ccNSO decision-making process is incompatible with the timelines of the ICANN Bylaws Approval Action procedure. The GRC proposed 3 solutions, of which the ccNSO Council decided that both the Approval Action process and the Rejection Action petition process should be subject to the request of a members’ ratification vote (under the ccNSO 2004 rules). | ||
* The ccNSO Council approved [https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/proposed-fundamentals-bylaws-changes-to-move-the-board-governance-committees-reconsideration-process-responsibilities-to-another-board-committee-31-3-2017-en Fundamental Bylaw change proposed by ICANN Board]. | * The ccNSO Council approved [https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/proposed-fundamentals-bylaws-changes-to-move-the-board-governance-committees-reconsideration-process-responsibilities-to-another-board-committee-31-3-2017-en Fundamental Bylaw change proposed by ICANN Board]. | ||
* The ccNSO Council initiated the [[CcNSO Policy Development Process - Retirement|third ccNSO Policy Development Process concerning the Retirement of ccTLDs]] and review mechanisms for decisions relating to the delegation, transfer, revocation, and retirement of ccTLDs. | * The ccNSO Council initiated the [[CcNSO Policy Development Process - Retirement|third ccNSO Policy Development Process concerning the Retirement of ccTLDs]] and review mechanisms for decisions relating to the delegation, transfer, revocation, and retirement of ccTLDs. | ||
Revision as of 18:01, 6 October 2021
 | |
| Dates: | 26-29 June 2017 |
| Location: | Johannesburg, South Africa |
| Venue: | Sandton Convention Centre |
| Registration: | Registration |
ICANN 59 was a ICANN Meeting held in Johannesburg, South Africa, at which Hiro Hotta, .jp, and Patricio Poblete, .cl. received the ICANN Multistakeholder Ethos Award.[1]
It was the 3rd return to South Africa after ICANN 21 in Cape Town and ICANN 47 in Durban.[2]
Sessions[edit | edit source]
ASO[edit | edit source]
- ITEMS International presented the Draft Final Report of the organizational review of the ASO.
ccNSO[edit | edit source]
- The Cross-Community Working Group on the Use of Country and Territory Names as Top-Level Domains (CWG-UCTN) received support for the recommendation to close the working group and organize a new effort with a broader mandate embedded in a broader context.
- The ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee (GRC), formed to structure the decision-making of the ccNSO to become a Decisional Participant, found out that the ccNSO decision-making process is incompatible with the timelines of the ICANN Bylaws Approval Action procedure. The GRC proposed 3 solutions, of which the ccNSO Council decided that both the Approval Action process and the Rejection Action petition process should be subject to the request of a members’ ratification vote (under the ccNSO 2004 rules).
- The ccNSO Council approved Fundamental Bylaw change proposed by ICANN Board.
- The ccNSO Council initiated the third ccNSO Policy Development Process concerning the Retirement of ccTLDs and review mechanisms for decisions relating to the delegation, transfer, revocation, and retirement of ccTLDs.