ICANN 59: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''ICANN 59''' was a [[ICANN Meetings|ICANN Meeting]] held in Johannesburg, South Africa, at which [[Hiro Hotta]] and [[Patricio Poblete]] received the [[Multistakeholder Ethos Award]].<ref>[https://meetings.icann.org/en/johannesburg59/post-icann59-policy-report-13jul17-en Post-ICANN 59 Policy Report]</ref> | '''ICANN 59''' was a [[ICANN Meetings|ICANN Meeting]] held in Johannesburg, South Africa, at which [[Hiro Hotta]], [[.jp]], and [[Patricio Poblete]], [[.cl]]. received the [[Multistakeholder Ethos Award]].<ref>[https://meetings.icann.org/en/johannesburg59/post-icann59-policy-report-13jul17-en Post-ICANN 59 Policy Report]</ref> | ||
It was the 3rd return to South Africa after [[ICANN 21]] in Cape Town and [[ICANN 47]] in Durban.<ref>[https://meetings.icann.org/en/calendar ICANN Meeting Calendar]</ref> | It was the 3rd return to South Africa after [[ICANN 21]] in Cape Town and [[ICANN 47]] in Durban.<ref>[https://meetings.icann.org/en/calendar ICANN Meeting Calendar]</ref> | ||
Revision as of 17:19, 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 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.