RE: [council] Key Challenges and Opportunities for the GNSO
I would object to including anything about ENUM in a description about the
GNSO's activities. I personally do not believe that at this junction ENUM
falls anywhere in the scope of the GNSO's jurisdiction. The rollout of ENUM
may or may not include registries and registrars as we know them today. In
addition, although there may be privacy impacts of ENUM on consumers, they
do not relate to the management of the generic top-level domain name space.
ENUM relates to the mapping of telephone numbers to IP addresses. Such IP
addresses may involve gTLDs, ccTLDs, or may not involve "domain names" at
all. At this point in time, there are other more appropriate organizations
that are examining these issues.
From: Antonio Harris [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 10:44 AM
To: Bruce Tonkin; email@example.com
Subject: Re: [council] Key Challenges and Opportunities for the GNSO
Perhaps it might be advisable to include ENUM in the
list, since the rollout of ENUM involves registry/registrar
activities and also will impact on privacy of personal data.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 11:41 PM
Subject: [council] Key Challenges and Opportunities for the GNSO
> Hello All,
> I have been contacted by the Chair of the Nominating Committee to provide
a statement on the key challenges and opportunities for the GNSO over the
next 1.5 to 2.5 years.
> This statement will be posted on the nominating committee webpage and used
to help with the selection process for the 3 additional members of the GNSO
> Here are what I think the challenges/issues are. I would welcome input
before I forward to the nominating committee:
> - maintain a competitive environment for the provision of gtld domain name
> - ensure appropriate privacy and accuracy policies for the collection,
distribution and public display of registrant contact information
> - provide consumer protection mechanisms for gtld domain name holders
(such as the redemption grace period)
> - provide low cost dispute resolution mechanisms for the allocation of
gtld domain names (such as UDRP)
> - introduction of internationalised domain names
> - introduction of new tlds
> - roll out of IPv6 addresses for use with domain names
> - support innovation in domain name services (such as different mechanisms
to allocate domain names after expiry) whilst operational stability,
reliability, security, and global interoperability, maintenance of a
competitive environment for domain name services, and consumer protection of
domain name holders
> - encourage the use of IETF standards for registry-registrar protocols
(such as EPP), internationalised domain names, DNS name resolution, and
registrant contact data formats
> I think the above is consistent with the ICANN Core values from:
> 1. Preserving and enhancing the operational stability, reliability,
security, and global interoperability of the Internet.
> 2. Respecting the creativity, innovation, and flow of information made
possible by the Internet by limiting ICANN's activities to those matters
within ICANN's mission requiring or significantly benefiting from global
> 3. To the extent feasible and appropriate, delegating coordination
functions to or recognizing the policy role of other responsible entities
that reflect the interests of affected parties.
> 4. Seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting the
functional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levels
of policy development and decision-making.
> 5. Where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms to
promote and sustain a competitive environment.
> 6. Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain
names where practicable and beneficial in the public interest.
> 7. Employing open and transparent policy development mechanisms that (i)
promote well-informed decisions based on expert advice, and (ii) ensure that
those entities most affected can assist in the policy development process.
> 8. Making decisions by applying documented policies neutrally and
objectively, with integrity and fairness.
> 9. Acting with a speed that is responsive to the needs of the Internet
while, as part of the decision-making process, obtaining informed input from
those entities most affected.
> 10. Remaining accountable to the Internet community through mechanisms
that enhance ICANN's effectiveness.
> 11. While remaining rooted in the private sector, recognizing that
governments and public authorities are responsible for public policy and
duly taking into account governments' or public authorities'
> Bruce Tonkin