Difference between revisions of "ICANN 59"

From ICANNWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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

Icann59-logo.png
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

ASO

  • ITEMS International presented the Draft Final Report of the organizational review of the ASO.

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 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.

References