Meeting of the Names Council conference call on July 27 1999
7/27/99 Names Council Meeting
Fay Howard — elected Chair of meeting
Jonathan Cohen (partial)
Richard Lindsay (partial)
Amadeu Abril i Abril (joining later)
Andrew McClaughlan (ICANN representative)
- 1. Andrew McClaughlan from ICANN had a time sensitive announcement regarding
- ICANN’s proposal to expedite recognition of the DNSO and election
of full term Names Council members and Directors to the Board
- Currently, elections for permanent Names Council members are scheduled
for November 4 Los Angeles meeting
- Possible revised schedule for DNSO Constituency group recognition
5/27 6 constituencies provisionally recognized until 11/4
8/24 Constituency meetings in Santiago
- Work on any revisions to constituency procedures
- Prepare outreach plans, as appropriate
- Draft and prepare amended constituency proposals
for Board approval
- Develop plan for "permanent" Names Council elections
8/26 Provisional recognition of non-commercial constituency
(if submitted and approved)
9/15 Deadline for amended constituency proposals to be
submitted to Board
9/16 Final recognition: Board teleconference to approve
and recognize amended constituency proposals
10/8 Deadline for constituencies to elect Names Council members
10/19 Deadline for Names Council selection of ICANN Board members
(15 days in advance of 11/3/99)
11/2 - 11/4 ICANN Los Angeles meeting
2. Working Group A (Jonathan Cohen, Amadeu Abril i Abril)
Given that Jonathan needed to be in a hearing, discussion of the
report on Dispute Resolution Policy was moved to top of the agenda without
First draft of WG-A Final Report to Names Council completed. NC members
are urged to go back to their respective constituencies and provide comments
to Jonathan NO LATER THAN JULY 31, 1999.
Recommended that WGA Report be submitted to ICANN with caveat that due
to time constraints imposed by ICANN, there was not a lot of time for it
to be circulated widely and recommending that ICANN reach out accordingly.
At the end of the NC teleconference Amadeu requests that the vote on WG A report be taken on the mailing list, as it had not been taken during the teleconf as previously scheduled.
3. Approved agenda
4. Discussion and vote on Ted Shapiro’s proposal
- Consensus to postpone vote since missing feedback from Registrars
- New Schedule
8/5 - deadline to prepare "full" report
8/6 — 8/23 submission to constituencies for consideration
vote in Santiago
5.Working Group C (Javier Sola)
In summary, "it’s a mess". While many people (52 people) have signed
up, Constituencies (vs. General Assembly) not well represented, and many
people inactive. Also, the majority of the effort to date has been on "procedural"
matters versus substantive matters — Example: (1) Should N.C. member chair
or should WG self organize? (2) Should there be subgroups within WG?
6. Elisabeth Porteneuve indicated that she received emails from Jean —Michel
Becar proposing the WG have a strong moderator, and avoid use of "dominant"
titles like "Chair".
N.C. has duty to manage the process, whatever title you want to give him
Realized urgent need for WG procedures (see WGD discussion below).
More active participation and leadership by constituencies.
Need to balance need for open and transparent process vs. getting the work
Suggestion for a second mailing list to diffuse problem with "noise" on
the main listserve. Potential problem: who decides what content gets filtered?
Consensus that a weekly listing by chair could help people focus on substantive
issues (with copy to Secretariat).
Need to extend August 9th deadline. Javier will email new deadline.
Recognized need to use this experience to help prepare WG procedures (see
WGD discussion below).
7. Working Group D
Some people felt that while changing names for the title may initially
help, it would not hide the fact that there needs to be one or two people
"in charge" of the WG.
-Charter posted 7/23
-Approximately five people expressed interest prior to posting of charter,
and approximately five to six since then.
(1)Process/Procedure(2)Business plan for DNSO
8. Budget for Santiago Meeting (Theresa Swinehart’s email)
-How to pay for expenses of webcasting
mixed feedback received
Sponsorship (problems with this)
Corporations fronting $ (get refund) (problems with this)
No one pays
Broadcast vs. web cast
Funding from local participants (University?)
expected cost: $2 — 3,000
Perhaps have at University to keep costs down
Agreed; once we know dollar amount and details (which will be posted
online by Andrew shortly) we will determine a way to pay for it after the
9. Changing Santiago Schedule
-Most agreed too late at this stage to change, but acknowledged that
GA may need more time (one comment — let’s wait and see how Santiago goes)
-An individual, Dennis Jennings, requested lengthening of GA meeting,
and Fay volunteered to contact him (not on behalf of NC but as a friend)
regarding our position.
10. NC thought it might be good idea to try to meet informally Monday night.
If interested, email Javier with your hotel information.