ICANN 64: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
===ccNSO=== | ===ccNSO=== | ||
The ccNSO Council established a study group to provide a comprehensive overview of the risks associated with the use of emoji in second-level domains as documented in SAC095 and current practices by ccTLD managers when accepting emoji in second-level domains. The ccNSO also discussed the administrative issues the ccTLD community and ICANN face with invoicing of voluntary contributions. The goal was to make the contribution process more predictable for both ccTLDs and ICANN. | The ccNSO Council established a study group to provide a comprehensive overview of the risks associated with the use of emoji in second-level domains as documented in SAC095 and current practices by ccTLD managers when accepting emoji in second-level domains. The ccNSO also discussed the administrative issues the ccTLD community and ICANN face with invoicing of voluntary contributions. The goal was to make the contribution process more predictable for both ccTLDs and ICANN. | ||
===GNSO=== | |||
* The EPDP Team brainstormed Phase 2, especially its scope, the consideration of a standardized access model to non-public registration data, issues identified in the annex to the Temporary Specification, and issues deferred from Phase 1. | |||
* The New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group focused on Work Track 5, triggering events, such as initiation of the subsequent procedure, treatment of pending/rejected strings in subsequent procedures, and a New gTLD Program limited appeal mechanism. | |||
===ALAC=== | |||
* The At-Large community held three workshops on policy topics: balancing privacy and security/stability, Universal Acceptance, and new gTLD subsequent procedures. | |||
* ALAC and GAC drafted and approved a statement in agreement on the need to distinguish between natural and legal persons and highlighting the importance of data accuracy, the technical contact field, and protecting the public interest | |||
===GAC=== | |||
Sixty-seven GAC members and seven observers participated in drafting the ICANN 64 communique to the ICANN Board about WHOIS and data protection legislation and the Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team recommendations. | |||
==Host== | ==Host== | ||
Revision as of 21:06, 4 October 2021
Dates: | March 9-14, 2019 |
Location: | Kobe, Japan |
Website: | ICANN 64 |
ICANN 64, the 2019 Community Forum, was held from 9-14 March 2019 at the Kobe Portopia Hotel & Kobe International Conference Center in Kobe Japan.
Sessions[edit | edit source]
ccNSO[edit | edit source]
The ccNSO Council established a study group to provide a comprehensive overview of the risks associated with the use of emoji in second-level domains as documented in SAC095 and current practices by ccTLD managers when accepting emoji in second-level domains. The ccNSO also discussed the administrative issues the ccTLD community and ICANN face with invoicing of voluntary contributions. The goal was to make the contribution process more predictable for both ccTLDs and ICANN.
GNSO[edit | edit source]
- The EPDP Team brainstormed Phase 2, especially its scope, the consideration of a standardized access model to non-public registration data, issues identified in the annex to the Temporary Specification, and issues deferred from Phase 1.
- The New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group focused on Work Track 5, triggering events, such as initiation of the subsequent procedure, treatment of pending/rejected strings in subsequent procedures, and a New gTLD Program limited appeal mechanism.
ALAC[edit | edit source]
- The At-Large community held three workshops on policy topics: balancing privacy and security/stability, Universal Acceptance, and new gTLD subsequent procedures.
- ALAC and GAC drafted and approved a statement in agreement on the need to distinguish between natural and legal persons and highlighting the importance of data accuracy, the technical contact field, and protecting the public interest
GAC[edit | edit source]
Sixty-seven GAC members and seven observers participated in drafting the ICANN 64 communique to the ICANN Board about WHOIS and data protection legislation and the Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team recommendations.
Host[edit | edit source]
ICANN 64 was hosted by the specially formed, ICANN64 Local Host Committee (LHC), consisting of local registries, registrars, and other ICT companies and associations, including:
- Members
- GMO Internet, Inc.
- Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd.
- Internet Initiative Japan Inc.
- Internet Association Japan
- JPNAP (INTERNET MULTIFEED CO.)
- Innterlink Co. Ltd.
- NTT DOCOMO, INC.
- Telecom Services Association
- Japan Network Information Center
- BusinessRalliart inc.
- Cyber Kyoto Laboratory, Kyoto College of Graduate Studies for Informatics
- Com Laude (Japan) Corporation
- Taka Enterprise Ltd.
- Japan Internet Providers Association
- WIDE Project
- Network and Connectivity Sponsors (Also Members)
- NTT Communications Corporation
- KDDI CORPORATION
- NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE WEST CORPORATION
- Observers
- Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications
- Kobe Tourism Bureau/Kobe Convention Bureau
- Chair