Alan Greenberg is the GNSO Liaison for 2010-11.
GNSO Meeting - 22 September 2011
Agenda: http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/agenda-council-22sep11-en.htm
Motions: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+22+September+2011
MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20110922-en.mp3
Minutes: To be posted
Overview: The agenda was quite heavy with perhaps a record number of motions. The meeting ended up being very effective, with all issues addressed and the meeting ending on time.Substantive issues on interest to At-Large included a proposal that originated in the IRTP-B PDP to investigate requiring think WHOIS from all registries, the JAS New gTLD Applicant Support Report and a proposal from the Registrar SG to change the RAA in line with a number of issues requested by Law Enforcement.
Thick Whois: All registries under the new gTLD program will require thick WHOIS (where the registry keep all of the data instead of most data residing at the Registrar). Most existing gTLDs also use think WHOIS, with the exception of the registries operated by Verisign. The IRTP-B PDP recommended that a PDP be initiated to require that thick WHOIS be used for these registries as well. The proposal is somewhat controversial because ther eis some objection to staging a full-blown PDP because of one organization's practices. However, it is felt by others that this is the only mechanism that could achieve the desired result. A motion was passed to request that ICANN staff create an Issue Report on requiring Thick WHOIS for all registries.An Issue Report is the first step in launching a Policy development Process (PDP).
IRTP-C: This is the third stage of the process to investigate a large number of issues related to Inter Registrar Transfer Processes (IRTP). IRTP-C involved three issues:
- Issues surrounding "change of control" - essentially the processes by which the registrant of record for a domain is changed. Although not an IRTP function (which is strictly the change of Registrar), change of registrant is often done in the same time-frame.
- Issues related to time-limiting a FORM of Authorization (FOA), the mechanism used to to effect IRTP transfers. If the FOA is not exercised immediately (for instance if the name is locked), it may be used at some undefined later time possibly resulting in a fraudulent transfer.
- IANA Registrar IDs: ICANN Registrars are assigned IANA IDs, but these IDs are not used for transfers, rather registry proprietary IDS are used, resulting in a number of potential and actual problems.
There are domain hijacking implications with the first two subjects.
The GNSO Council approved the initiation of a PDP and A Working Group will be convened. Once the solicitation is done, it should be widely distributed in At-Large. Although the issues are highly technical, involvement by At-Large would be beneficial.
JAS: The GNSO approved the transmission of the JAS Report to the Board. Due to the short time since the report had been issues, SG had not thoroughly studied the report and the motion gives the GNSO the right to forward comments on the report at a later time. This is essentially the same action that the ALAC took in forwarding the JAS 2nd milestone report to the Board.
Consumer Choice, Competition, and Innovation (CCI): This is an activity in response to the December 2010 Board motion requesting advice from the GNSO, ccNSO, ALAC and GAC on establishing the definition, measures, and three year targets for those measures, for competition, consumer trust and consumer choice in the context of the domain name system. A WG is now formally created. Charter: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/cci-charter-07sep11-en.pdf. This is intended to be a joint WG, but should no other SO.AC approve the charter, it will be a GNSO WG.Presumably, the ALAC will be invited to co-sponsor.
RAA Amendments for Law Enforcement: The RrSG have been discussion a number of possible RAA amendments. One set concerns registrars identifying themselves clearly and unequivocally. Although it is not entirely clear that a full-blown PDP is required, when a alternative faster-path alternative was proposed, there was much suspicion and worry. As a result, the RrSG decided to used the standard PDP process. This is unfortunate as it will take significantly longer. An Issue Report has been requested, which is the first step in a possible PDP.
WHOIS Tools Survey: There have been extensive discussions surrounding WHOIS tools and services. A WHOIS Survey WG is being convened to design a survey to further understand the needs.
November 2009
May 2009
March 2009
January 2009
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
Archive - June 2007
Test change
Change Test - CLO
Little of great public merit has happened since San Juan meeting.
There is an ongoing discussion of roles of the Chair and vice chair which may be of interest to the ALAC once completed. The Domain Tasting working group is just starting.