Page History
This page is for you to publish your reports of the meetings you attended during the third day of the ICANN Sydney meeting. Please log in with your email address and password ad use the "edit" button to add your report.
Reports from other days:
Sunday, 21 June Monday, 22 June Tuesday, 23 June Thursday, 25 June Friday, 26 June
GNSO Council Open Meeting
Time: 08:00 - 12:30
Location: Ballroom A (L3)
At-Large Delegates: Alan, Andres, CLO, Hawa, Dessi, Olivier
Author: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
Mary Wong, who participated on the IRT, reminded everyone at the beginning of the meeting that she was acting in this position as an individual, and not as an NCUC member. This was confirmed by Kristina Rosette.Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery ![]() http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-report-b-15may09.pdf ![]() Background: The IRTP is a consensus policy that was adopted in 2004 to provide a clear and transparent way on how registrants can transfer their domain names between registrars. ![]() Edmon Chung reported that there was concern among the IDN community that the IDN gTLD & IDN ccTLD should both be introduced at the same time. The concern is that introducing them at different times might introduce problems, possibly promoting the one first introduced, to the detriment of the other. Clearly, the two are linked since they potentially serve a similar purpose. | ]]></ac:plain-text-body></ac:structured-macro> |
Organisational Reviews - Coordination
Time: 09:00 - 10:30
Location: Function 2 (L2)
At-Large Delegates: Seb, Adam
Author: Sébastien Bachollet
FrançaisLa coordination des revues des différentes SO et AC est à la fois importante et complexe. ![]() Je vous encourage à la consulter. La page 6 sur les interrelations entre les revues est indispensable. ![]() Le animo a consultar. Página 6 sobre las relaciones entre las revistas es esencial. ![]() I encourage you to consult it. Page 6 on the interrelationships between the journals is essential. |
Workshop: Update Regarding ICANN's WHOIS data accuracy study
Time: 09:00 - 10:30
Location: Function 3 (L2)
At-Large Delegates: Beau, Wendy
Author:
Please write your report here |
Board Committee on Public Participation
Time: 09:00 - 10:30
Location: Function 1-2 (L4)
Author: Gareth Shearman
Board Committee on Public Participation2010 meetings - Nairobi, Europe, Latin America |
Workshop DNSSEC
Time: 09:00 - 12:30
Location: Function 1-2 (L4)
At-Large Delegates: Didier, Alan, Patrick
Author: Patrick Vande Walle
The meeting agenda and presentations are at http://syd.icann.org/node/3791 ![]() Several ccTLDs shared their experience on their DNSSEC testbeds. A major concern that was raised was the relationship between the registrant, registrar and registry in the DNSSEC context. Currently, the registrant does not communicate directly with the registry. However, to insert DNSSEC keys in the zone file, it may be necessary to have a direct link between the domain signer ( the registrant) and the upstream key provider (registry). How this needs to happens in practical terms is not yet clear. What is the role of the registrar, especially if the latter does not provide DNS services to the registrant ? |
Overall, the issue of skill building WRT DNSSEC was widely echoed. Neither registrants or registrars have a good knowledge of DNSSEC right now. The possibility that something goes wrong is real, with the result that the domain signatures may be invalid. Hence, extra check should be put in place. On the short term, education efforts are needed.
Workshop: ALAC Review
Time: 11:00 - 12:30
Location: Function 1-2 (L4) | Action Items: ENGLISH, FRANCAIS, ESPANOL |
Workshop: Improving Institutional Confidence
Time: 13:00 - 14:30
Location: Ballroom A (L3)
At-Large Delegates: Adam, Seb, CLO
Author:
Please write your report here |
New gTLD Program - IRT and malicious behavior
Time: 13:00 - 18:00
Location: Function 1-2 (L4)
At-Large Delegates: Dessi, Patrick, Andres, CLO
Author: Patrick Vande Walle
I made the following comment during the meeting: |
The other question is that –
...
So especially for these individual domain name registrants, there
should be a possibility to extend this delay. Because 14 days is just
unworkable.
Thank you.
.pre |
ICANN Security, Stability & Resiliency Plan Consultation
Time: 14:00 - 15:30
Location: Function 2 (L2)
At-Large Delegates: Hawa, Didier, Beau, Olivier
Author:
Please write your report here |
Workshop: Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery
Time: 14:00 - 16:00
Location: Function 5-6 (L2)
At-Large Delegates: Gareth, Alan, Vivek
Author:
Expired domain name problems - expired e-mail addresses etc.Some can be bought back |
Board Review: presentation final working group report
Time: 16:00 - 17:30
Location: Ballroom A (L3)
At-Large Delegates: Darlene, Adam, Seb
Author: Adam Peake
Presentation:http://syd.icann.org/files/meetings/sydney2009/presentation-board-review-gaetano-24jun09-en.pdf ![]() Transcripts: http://syd.icann.org/files/meetings/sydney2009/transcript-board-review-wg-24jun09-en.txt ![]() 6 issues are considered finalized: |
...
Please see the presentation for details. The
workshop focused on 3 open issues, summary
follows:
1. Should the size of the board be reduced?
The reviewers suggested the current board of 21
(15, plus 6 liaisons) was too large and most of
the working group members supported a reduction.
-Business constituency comments to the process
supported this view, mainly (I think) for the
sake of efficiency. There were probably more
comments during the meeting- Most comments made
during the meeting and in written submitted
comments strongly supported the status
quo: that current board has many tasks, many
committees and significant and often much
appreciated work in managing the review
processes. Also noted that Directors require a
high level of ICANN specific knowledge, this
takes a time to acquire and with the transitions
of incoming/outgoing members if the size of the
board was reduced the skill set could be lacking
for some period of time.
2. Remuneration. Should directors be paid in
some way for their time. Was made clear that the
board review could only address the board, not
the chairs of the SOs and others volunteers.
There is a need to check to see if a remunerated
board has different/higher liability under CA
laws.
If introduced then accepting any fee (or not)
would be the choice of the individual director
concerned.
Also asked to consider the special situation of
the Chair, with an exceptionally high workload
should be treated differently, perhaps on a fast
track.
General support seems to be for remuneration in
some way. But there were a couple if quite
passionate and well founded comments about the
nature of ICANN as a volunteer organization,
about how the board has been populated with fine
people so far, so is it really a problem. Would
the profile of candidates change if remuneration
were introduced?
3. Time of appointment. NomCom appointed
Directors join at the end of the AGM, Directors
appointed by the SOs joins 6 months after the
AGM. Some think this optimal, some do not (I am
personally not sure why this is a concern!) |
ccNSO Council Mtg
Time: 16:00 - 17:00
Location: Function 4-5 (L2)
At-Large Delegates: Rudi, Hawa
Author: Rudi Vansnick
The monthly conference calls are replaced by a face-to-face meeting during the ICANN meetings. So was also this time.On the agenda : |
Workshop: Registrar Best Practices Regarding the UDRP
Time: 16:00 - 17:30
Location: Function 3 (L2)
At-Large Delegate: CLO
Author:
...
My own view:
Sadly, the comment period had closed a couple of days prior to the plan being explained in Sydney, so no written feedback was possible after this meeting.
However, since this initiative is ongoing, I feel that there will be plenty of opportunities to provide feedback in the future, especially since, I repeat, this plan does not describe new initiatives, but is only a summary of all security and stability activities across ICANN.
Presentation on:http://syd.icann.org/files/meetings/sydney2009/presentation-ssr-plan-rattray-icann-24jun09-en.pdf
Full ICANN Security, Stability & Resiliency Plan Consultation plan:http://www.icann.org/en/topics/ssr/ssr-draft-plan-16may09-en.pdf
contributed by guest@socialtext.net on 2009-08-04 15:31:20 GMT
...