Page History
1. Question for the Candidates: The Root Scaling Study Team wrote: "Beyond the very near term, we can’t know in advance exactly how many TLDs can be added to the root, or how fast they can be added, because as soon as you start to add entries to the root each of the root system components adapts and changes in ways that cannot be predicted or effectively coordinated. That’s why it’s so important to build an “early warning system” that can (a) detect signs that one or more of the root system actors is reaching its limit for absorbing changes without major replanning, and (b) take effective mitigating action when those signs are detected."
As an ICANN director, would you approve the launch of new gTLDs prior to having this "early warning system" built?
Thanks,
Danny Younger
Answers from Candidates (in order of the candidates' surname)
Sebastien Bachollet
I hope that parallel work will be possible. And to build such system and some other needed to follow the repercussion of this new introduction into the root.
Pierre Dandjinou
As a Board Director, I will certainly heed the advice of the technical components of the ICANN; thus, for sake of security and reliance of the system,I will certainly wait till the ‘early warning system ‘ be built.
Alan Greenberg
Although it is quite possible that the launch of the process will be approved prior to the At-Large Director being on the Board, I would approve the launch. However, I would consider it mandatory to start looking at possible tools or combinations of tools to create such an “early warning system”. Moreover, I would advocate that the details of the solicitation for applications does not commit ICANN to inserting successful TLD in the root unless and until the technical infrastructure to do it prudently is available.
2. Question for the Candidates: The IGF process effectively uses "remote hubs" for participation. These hubs are the focal point of local discourse and workshops. While some remote hubs were established on an ad-hoc basis for the ICANN Nairobi meeting (in Bangladesh, Virginia & San Francisco), there has been no institutional support to encourage and develop a sustainable approach to further such efforts. As activities within ALAC's remit include "Establishing an outreach strategy about ICANN issues in each RALO's Region", will you, as a Board director, see to it that a program is established by the ALAC to support an ongoing regional "remote hub" outreach strategy?
Thanks,
Danny Younger
Answers from Candidates (in order of the candidates' surname)
Sebastien Bachollet
I agree that it is one possibility to enhance participation, outreach and inreach.
ICANN must show that by allowing specific budget and to open all their offices to allow members for the community nearby to participate.
Pierre Dandjinou
Yes, I will see to it that a program is established by the ALAC to support an on going regional ‘remote hub; but of course , considerations should be given to the cost effectiveness of such a project!
Alan Greenberg
I would support such a system, but I am not at all sure that it should be limited to At-Large. ICANN has a great need to be represented throughout the world with regard to many of its facilities and if such a regional hub is warranted for At-Large, there may be other applications as well.
To the extent that this is limited to At-Large, the initiative should really come FROM At-large and not top-down from the Board.
3. Question for the Candidates: The ICANN Board's decision with respect to Vertical Integration has the potential to negatively impact the registrant community. Registrants "may be harmed by an integrated registry/registrar operation’s ability to identify high value domains, hold those domains off the market (either directly or through affiliates) and to then monetize them at a premium price. These practices render the domain name unavailable to the “first-come” registrant or force that registrant to pay a higher price than the standard retail offer." What action will you take as a board director to monitor the domain name marketplace so as to ensure that registrants aren't abused by domain name scalping?
Thanks,
Danny Younger
Answers from Candidates (in order of the candidates' surname)
Sebastien Bachollet
As for your question one.
Pierre Dandjinou
Danny, this is a very important issue you are raising here. I know the GNSO has not yet come to a conclusion on this, but one way of mitigating the risks should be the conduct of regular evaluation of the process so that abuses could be rectified. This evaluation calls for a large inclusion on the views of the consumer at large. The evaluation, most probably an annual one, should be done by neutral institutions/experts.
Thanks for those interesting questions and for your attention
Alan Greenberg
Please see my reply to APRALO Question 5. I believe that whole-heartedly embracing Vertical Integration was premature and your scenarios are just one set of examples of possible harms. As a Director, I would want to be informed about how ICANN would be monitoring a whole host of such scenarios and what actions will be taken if they occur (I think the entire community should be aware of how it is being handled, not just the Board). The proposed Registry Contract does include VI issues as being eligible for Consensus Policy, be we all know that the PDP as now implemented is a lengthy one. So I would push for expedited processes as well (there is currently some discussion of these in the PDP Work Team).
