DNSO Working Group E Report - Global Awareness and Outreach

           4 July 2000
           The charter of DNSO Working Group E was to develop a
           recommendation in response to specific questions raised
           in regard to three categories of issues: (1) generic
           issues, (2) General Assembly specific issues and (3)
           constituency specific issues. In each of the three
           categories, questions were organized into three
           subcategories: (1) target audience, (2) awareness and (3)
           Because there is considerable overlap between the issues
           and questions raised in the three major categories, the
           recommendations in this report are combined into one set
           of recommendations for all three categories under the
           three subcategory headings (target audience, awareness
           and outreach). Under each of the subcategories, the
           specific questions are listed first followed by working
           group conclusions and finally working group
           recommendations. Not all questions were directly answered
           in Working Group E's efforts, but it is believed that the
           conclusions and recommendations following the questions
           in each section provide a reasonable framework for moving
           In preparing the recommendations the following two
           assumptions were made:
            Significant outreach should occur before the first
           at-large elections. To make this happen, implementation
           of outreach activities needs to happen as soon as
           possible after the ICANN meetings in Japan in July 2000.
            Funding for outreach may be limited. If this is true,
           cost-effective methods should be a high priority.
           After the three sections of the report written in
           response to the charter questions, three additional
           sections follow. Section 4 contains implementation
           recommendations. Section 5 summarizes awareness and
           outreach activities already underway. And Section 6
           discusses the level of consensus achieved in Working
           Group E.
           1. Target Audience
           1.1 Questions
           1.1.1 Who are we looking for, professional and/or
           netizen? Who do we not want? Who are we addressing,
           potential General Assembly member or wider Internet
           1.1.2 Why should one join? What benefits will members
           receive? What is lost if one does not join?
           1.1.3 Who can be a member? Is there a potential members
           1.2 Working Group Conclusions
           1.2.1 Any person or organization that is interested in
           Internet issues under ICANN's realm of responsibility
           should be encouraged to participate.
           1.2.2 Membership benefits include the ability to
           participate in the ICANN decision-making process, the
           right to vote for ICANN board of directors candidates,
           the opportunity to be a part of working groups or
           committees, the chance to be included on discussion
           lists, etc.
           1.2.3 Membership qualifications vary with the ICANN
           organizational element involved. ICANN At Large
           membership is open to anyone who is interested in and
           willing to devote time to study important issues
           concerning the Internet's Domain Name System. Membership
           qualifications in supporting organizations are determined
           by each supporting organization. Membership
           qualifications in supporting organization constituencies
           are determined by the respective constituencies.
           1.3 Working Group Recommendations
           1.3.1 People who are currently impacted by ICANN
           activities should be targeted first. It is very difficult
           to motivate participation by those who do not currently
           have any real need. It will be more effective to first
           focus on those who already have a need and then later
           target those who may be affected in the future.
           1.3.2 Geographical and cultural diversity should be
           strongly emphasized.
           1.3.3 One audience that should always be targeted is that
           of newcomers (e.g., IETF Newcomer Orientation). In
           particular, newcomer orientation sessions should be
           offered at all ICANN public meetings.
           1.3.4 Target audience priorities:
  Priority # 1: ICANN at-large members. (It is
           assumed that ICANN at-large members would be amenable to
           receive and use information because of the upcoming ICANN
           at-large director elections.)
  Priority # 2: Potential ICANN at-large members.
  Priority # 3: Users of the ICANN web site.
  Priority # 4: Under-represented regions of the
           world (based on at-large membership demographics).
           Special emphasis should be placed on regions where ICANN
           involvement is minimal such as Central and South Asia,
           the Middle East and certain parts of Africa.
  Other priorities should be added that are less
           time sensitive and as funds allow.
           1.3.5 Incentives may be needed to encourage ongoing
           involvement. For example, being able to vote once a year
           may not be enough motivation for many people so other
           reasons for involvement may need to be established (e.g.,
           participation in polls, newsletter, etc.). A pilot study
           and/or investigation of existing research related to this
           area might be useful in determining what types of
           incentives would be effective.
   A further incentive that is needed is the sense by 
           International participants that ongoing involvement has an impact, 
           particularly as a participant in the timeconsuming DNSO working 
           group process.  The working groups handle the review and debate 
           on substantive policy making matters within the DNSO.  The sense 
           based on recent DNSO Names Council actions is that the Working
           Working Groups may be ignored at whim.  This attitude is not 
           conducive to the type of grassroots and international involvment 
           being sought within the working group process. 
           2. Awareness
           2.1 Questions
           2.1.1 What is the message? What information do we want to
           be known? What messages are sent to audience?
           2.1.2 What publication media shall we use?
           2.1.3 What public relations activities are needed?
           2.1.4 Is face-to-face presentation necessary in addition
           to contact through the Internet?
           2.1.5 How do we measure progress in awareness?
           2.1.6 What are geographic objectives?
           2.1.7 Is there a critical mass goal?
           2.2 Working Group Conclusions
           2.2.1 The goal should be to create materials that address
           particular needs of those who are prepared to receive and
           use the information. Different materials should be
           developed for different audiences.
           2.2.2 Simplicity will facilitate the widest possible
           distribution across the very diverse population to be
           reached. Simplicity will make it easier to translate
           materials into different languages as well as to
           distribute them via various means of communication.
           Simplicity will also facilitate the processes of
           distributing information quickly and making it easily
           understood and absorbed.
           2.2.3 Customization of information material to local
           community needs will improve the effectiveness of
           outreach. Customization can include translation into
           native languages, integration of information into
           familiar settings (e.g., web pages, local newsletters,
           etc.), etc.
           2.2.4 Central control of the content of information
           materials will reduce the likelihood of intended messages
           being distorted as they are distributed to different
           audiences and via different modes of communication.
           2.2.5 Outreach materials will be ignored if the content
           is not reliable and accurate.
           2.3 Working Group Recommendations
           2.3.1 Continuation of awareness activities already
           underway should be encouraged (see Section 5).
           2.3.2 There should be good educational programs at every
           ICANN meeting, including programs offered in the local
           language. These could be patterned after the Berkman
           Center workshops and/or the Joint ccTLD Workshops
           referred to in Section 5.1.1.
           2.3.3 Regional workshops including local language-based
           workshops should be encouraged.
           2.3.4 Cross-fertilization of workshops including
           knowledge and technology transfer should be encouraged.
           Personnel exchange is one of the most effective ways to
           do this. Also, the simple task of publishing meeting
           schedules to broader audiences could be helpful in this
           2.3.5 The possibility of enhancing Web-casting of ICANN
           Meetings and workshops to encourage increased
           participation should be investigated.
           2.3.6 Collaboration with some publishing houses to
           publish ICANN activities should be explored.
           2.3.7 Information materials should be designed with
           specific target audiences in mind.
           2.3.8 Information materials should be designed as simply
           as possible.
           2.3.9 Information material should be customized to local
           community needs (e.g., translated into native languages,
           integrated into familiar settings, etc.).
           2.3.10 Content of information materials should be
           centrally controlled.
           2.3.11 A process should be put into place to ensure that
           information materials are kept up-to-date.
           2.3.12 If information is provided via a website, it
           should be provided in a layered format so that recipients
           can select to view the content that is meaningful to
           them. For example, web-based information could have links
           for domain name holders, for trademark holders, for users
           of e-commerce, for ISPs, for members of standards
           organizations, etc.
           2.3.13 Information content for at-large members (Priority
           # 1 above) should include: Possible content: 1. Status of
           election process for five directors; 2. Information about
           the nomination process; 3. Information about nominees; 4.
           Election details.
           2.3.14 Content for potential at-large members should
           include: 1. What is ICANN? 2. How might ICANN impact the
           Internet community? 3. What is the value of individual
           participation in ICANN? 4. What opportunities for
           individual participation are scheduled in the near term?
           (At large elections, working groups, ICANN meetings,
           3. Outreach
           3.1 Questions
           3.1.1 What does it require to become a member?
           3.1.2 How do we make it easy to become a member? How do
           we simplify the application process?
           3.1.3 How do we attract the interest of potential
           members? How do we make membership attractive?
           3.1.4 What would potential members want?
           3.1.5 What verification do we want for members?
           3.1.6 What obligations do members have?
           3.1.7 How do we communicate, advertise? Direct contacts?
           3.1.8 How do we leverage the cooperation of other
           organizations? Which organizations?
           3.1.9 How do we handle multilingual issues?
           3.1.10 What additional efforts do we need for developing
           3.2 Working Group Conclusions
           3.2.1 Outreach activities are an essential need with
           regard to the ICANN at-large membership activities.
           Consequently, it is very important that any efforts
           resulting from Working Group E recommendations are
           coordinated with those related to at-large membership and
           the associated at-large director elections.
           3.2.2 Using existing channels within ICANN to reach the
           community is the most expedient way to distribute
           information and thereby encourage involvement. ICANN
           channels include: IP registries, name registries, name
           registrars, supporting organizations (ASO, DNSO, PSO),
           supporting organization constituencies, etc. Each of
           these channels represents various parts of the Internet
           community and each of them (to varying degrees) have
           existing ways to communicate with their customers. Using
           these channels to reach out to the community provides the
           fastest access to community members, is the most
           cost-efficient and most readily lends itself to local
           customization of the information. Using existing channels
           also has a greater probability of capturing the people
           who have a need to be involved with ICANN.
           3.2.3 Efforts should be made to distribute information
           via previously scheduled Internet events such as
           conferences, workshops, seminars, etc. Such events
           provide additional channels to reach the community.
           3.2.4 Information should be distributed in alternative
           formats to accommodate varying technical requirements.
           Information should always be available in text format for
           those who have low bandwidth connections.
           3.2.5 Distribution methods and channels should be
           documented to facilitate evaluation of effectiveness.
           Quantitative data should be obtained and analyzed.
           3.3 Working Group Recommendations
           3.3.1 Encourage continuation of outreach activities
           already underway (see Section 5).
           3.3.2 Encourage organizations in all parts of the world
           to implement outreach programs similar to those
           implemented by the regional Top Level Domain organizations;
           the African Top Level Domain Association(AFTLD), the Asia 
           Pacific TLD Forum(APTLD), the Council of European National 
           Top Level Registries(CENTR), and Latin America and Caribbean 
           Top Level Domain Association(LACTLD) (refer to Section 5.1).
           3.3.3 Coordinate awareness and outreach activities with
           at-large membership drive and at-large board director
           3.3.4 Distribute information via existing ICANN channels
           on web sites, via email, etc.
           3.3.5 Reach out to the community through Internet related
           conferences, workshops, seminars, etc.
           3.3.6 Enlist the cooperation of the owners of the
           channels used with the understanding that content needs
           to remain consistent.
           3.3.7 Ensure that electronic information is available in
           alternative formats to accommodate varying technical
           requirements. Text format should always be an option.
           3.3.8 Consider the possibility of establishing regional
           ICANN offices. These could be based in the geographical
           regions and/or cultural/language regions. One way to
           facilitate this would be to enlist the cooperation of
           existing regional organizations such as regional ccTLD
           group secretariats, registrars, ISPs, and RIRs.
           3.3.9 Consider the possibility of providing special
           personnel and/or funding support to increase outreach
           efforts in geographical and/or cultural regions where
           knowledge of ICANN activities is not prevalent (e.g.,
           Central and South Asia, Middle East, and some parts of
           3.3.10 Document outreach efforts and evaluate their
           effectiveness so that the process can be improved going
           4. Implementation Recommendations
           It is recommended that a team of volunteers be formed to
           work with ICANN in implementing Working Group E
           recommendations. This team could be a new DNSO working
           group, a continuation of Working Group E or simply an
           implementation team. Because working groups are intended
           to develop consensus positions, it seems to make sense
           that this be an implementation team. Characteristics of
           the team should be geographically and culturally diverse,
           should include representatives from Working Group E and
           should have multilingual skills if possible.
           Team responsibilities could include:
           1. Development and implementation of a short-term
           outreach and awareness plan in support of the at large
           membership drive and at large director elections
           2. Development of a detailed implementation plan
           3. Development of information content
           4. Identification of and coordination with distribution
           5. Development of procedures for ensuring content
           6. Development of guidelines for content customization
           7. Solicitation of volunteers for translation services
           8. Solicitation of volunteers for other needed services
           such as web-site development expertise, etc.
           9. Development of quality control guidelines.
           5. Awareness and Outreach Activities Already Underway
           In terms of awareness levels, ICANN members can be
           grouped into two broad categories: those who participate
           in ICANN meetings and those who do not. The latter group
           is typically unable to participate in meetings because of
           geographical location and financial limitations. At the
           same time, it is very important that all ICANN members
           stay informed about current ICANN developments. Those who
           participate in meetings tend to be extremely well
           informed but they only represent a very small sample of
           the Internet community even when web-casting participants
           are included. Therefore it is critical to increase
           awareness in other ways such as making written materials
           available through various media.
           To expand awareness levels beyond what is possible in
           ICANN meetings, several awareness and outreach efforts
           have been organized around the world. These include
           workshops and seminars and other efforts such as the at
           large membership drive. Some of these are described
           5.1 Workshops and Seminars
           5.1.1 Berkman Center Workshops
           The Berkman Center at Harvard University held several
           ICANN related workshops in 1998 and 1999. It is expected
           that the Berkman Center will hold one workshop per year.
           Similar efforts by other organizations should be
           encouraged, especially outside of North America. The
           Berkman Center has web-cast all ICANN meetings in the
           past, not only providing the capability for remote
           participation in ICANN meetings but also providing audio
           and text archives of those meetings.
           5.1.2 ccTLD Joint Workshops
           The ccTLD constituency has sponsored Joint TLD Workshops
           starting from June 1999. The workshops have been
           self-supported with volunteer efforts. With better
           funding and staffing, these workshops could be enhanced
           and expanded.
           5.1.3 Regional ccTLD Workshops
           The Asia Pacific TLD organization (APTLD) and the Council
           of European National Top Level Domain Registries (CENTR)
           hold workshops several times a year. They cover various
           topics. Other regions such as Latin America(LACTLD) and 
           Africa(AFTLD) also hold workshops, but less often. 
           Cross-fertilizaiton among these workshop activities might 
           be useful.
           5.1.4 APTLD Internet Seminar Tour
           The APTLD in cooperation with the Asia Pacific Internet
           Association (APIA) established an Internet Seminar Tour
           in Asia in 1999, visiting five countries to give seminars
           on Internet governance and Y2K. Some of these countries
           formed committees and groups to work on Internet
           governance issues and to participate in ICANN activities.
           Three African countries were also visited in late 1999.
           To date in 2000, the seminars have been held in two
           additional countries and plans are in place to hold them
           in six more countries together with APNIC. The major
           issue being addressed in 2000 is ICANN participation
           through the at-large membership and other forums.
           The APTLD and the volunteers who serve as speakers have
           funded the seminar tour. The APTLD has paid speakers'
           airfare and the speakers donate their time. Local
           arrangements are handled by the hosting country
           organization. The APTLD set a goal to reach as many
           countries as possible in Asia. Education about ICANN
           activities could be expanded considerably if
           organizations in other parts of the world followed this
           same model.
           5.1.5 Harvard Internet Infrastructure Program
           Harvard Internet Infrastructure Program (HIIP) holds
           workshop once or twice a year on the Internet and Society
           as well as on other topics.
           5.1.6 Others
           Many countries offers seminars and workshops on the
           Internet governance and related subjects lately.  They
           include Germany, Japan, and Korea among others.
           5.2 ICANN At Large Membership Drive
           As stated on its website, "ICANN's goal is to enlist
           members of the Internet community in its consensus-based
           processes and supporting organizations, committees and
           working groups, including the At Large Membership. By
           joining the At Large Membership, [one] become[s] a part
           of ICANN's "bottom up" approach to making policy
           concerning Internet Names and Addresses."
           To achieve this goal as related to the At Large
           Membership, ICANN initially formed a Membership Advisory
           Committee (MAC). After the completion of the MAC's work,
           a Membership Implementation Task Force was formed that
           led to the current At Large Membership Drive.
           There are currently over 15,000 at large members, and
           ICANN expects to have between 20,000 and 30,000 when it
           closes the membership drive at the end of July 2000. A
           very high percentage of these members are from the
           developed countries, in particular from USA and Germany. 
           To achieve the goal of having good geographical diversity 
           as well as cultural diversity, particular efforts are 
           needed among developing and emerging countries as well as
           non-English speaking countries. Notable efforts have
           occurred in Asia where the membership drive has been a
           topic of focus in regional meetings being held there (see
           Section 5.1 above). Similar efforts are needed in other
           parts of the world including Central and South Asia,
           Latin America, Africa and Middle East.
           6. Level of Consensus Reached
           It is not possible to conclude that this report is based
           on the consensus of all participants of Working Group E.
           Nor would it be possible to objectively demonstrate that
           the recommendations in the report represent consensus
           positions of the Internet community as a whole. There are
           several reasons for this:
           - The number of participants in Working Group E was
           relatively small.
           - The success of getting Working Group E members to
           respond to calls for review of portions of the report was
           very unsatisfactory.
           - The topic of "Global Awareness and Outreach" was not one 
           that generated high interest.
           There was good participation in the Los Angeles and Cairo 
           Working Group E meeting and various members volunteered to 
           assist in working on the finalization of the report. But 
           very few of the volunteers were responsive after that 
           A case can be made that the topic of "Global Awareness and
           Outreach" is not well suited for a consensus-building
           approach. It seems reasonable to assume that a large
           majority of the community supports the need to reach out
           to as many people and organizations as possible to make
           them aware of ICANN activities and the importance of
           their participation.
           In the absence of a clear definition of consensus,
           Working Group E recommends to the DNSO Names Council that
           it review the report and determine if there is consensus
           support among the Names Council members. If so, the report 
           could then be given to the ICANN board for its consideration.
           A summary of Working Group activities including a list of
           participants listed by region is provided in Appendix.
           Appendix 1: Summary of DNSO WG-E Activities
           1999.06    WG-E Formation
           1999.08    WG-E Charter Statement
           1999.08    Santiago Meeting
           1999.10    Draft Overview Report
           1999.11    Los Angeles Meeting 
           2000.02    Final Overview Report
           2000.03    Cairo Meeting
           2000.06    Draft Final Report for Public Comment 
                      (Edited by Chuck Gomes and Kilnam Chon)
           2000.07    Final Report to DNSO (expected)
           All public comments and email exchanges are archived at
           Appendix 2: WG-E Member Distribution
           There are 40 members from the following regions:
           Africa           3
           Asia-Pacific    11
           Europe           7
           Latin America    2
           North America   17
           Appendix 3: Document Translation
           Many important documents of ICANN should be translated to
           popular languages.  It is recommended to trnaslate all
           popular languages which are spoken by 4% of the world
           population with ICANN coordination with possible funding.
           The languages include Arabic, Chinese, French, Hindu, 
           Russian, and Spanish.  
           Other popular languages such as the ones spoken by 1% of
           the world population may also be coordinated by ICANN on
           the translation.