ICANN/DNSO

DNSO Names Council Meeting in Marina del Rey on November 12, 2001 - minutes


21 November 2001.

The DNSO Names Council meeting in Marina del Rey, California held on Monday 12 November 2001, 14:00 - 17:00, [@ Marina Beach Marriott, Catalina Room] .

(14:00 Los Angeles, 17:00 New York, 22:00 UTC, 23:00 CET, 11:00 Auckland next day)
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Local time between 30 October 2001 and end March 2002.
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Reference (Coordinated Universal Time)     UTC         22:00
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    California, USA                            UTC-8+0DST  14:00
    Missouri, USA                              UTC-6+0DST  16:00
    Monterrey, Mexico                          UTC-6+0DST  16:00
    Panama, Panama                             UTC-5+0DST  17:00
    Washington DC, USA                   (EST) UTC-5+0DST  17:00
    St.Thomas, Virgin Islands                  UTC-4+0DST  18:00
    Santiago, Chile                            UTC-4+1DST  19:00
    Buenos Aires, Argentina                    UTC-3+0DST  19:00
    Nouakchott, Mauritania                     UTC+0+0DST  22:00
    London, United Kingdom                     UTC+0+0DST  22:00
    Brussels, Belgium                    (CET) UTC+1+0DST  23:00
    Barcelona, Spain                     (CET) UTC+1+0DST  23:00
    Frankfurt, Germany                   (CET) UTC+1+0DST  23:00
    Paris, France                        (CET) UTC+1+0DST  23:00
    Seoul, Korea                               UTC+9+0DST   7:00 next day
    Tokyo, Japan                               UTC+9+0DST   7:00 next day
    Hobart, Australia                         UTC+10+1DST   9:00 next day
    Auckland, New Zealand                     UTC+12+1DST  11:00 next day
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2002, 2:00 or 3:00 local time
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/

Agenda http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20011112.NCmdr-agenda.html

List of attendees:

  Peter de Blanc                 ccTLD
  Elisabeth Porteneuve           ccTLD
  Oscar Robles Garay             ccTLD      
  Philip Sheppard                Business
  Marilyn Cade                   Business     
  Antonio Harris                 ISPCP
  Greg Ruth                      ISPCP 
  Tony Holmes                    ISPCP
  Ken Stubbs                     Registrars      
  Roger Cochetti                 gTLD
  Cary Karp                      gTLD
  Richard Tindal                 gTLD        
  Axel Aus der Muhlen            IP          
  Caroline Chicoine              IP
  Youn Jung Park                 NCDNH
  Vany Martinez                  NCDNH       
  Milton Mueller                 NCDNNH 
  Glen de Saint Géry             Secretary

List of attendees online:

  Erica Roberts                  Registrars
  Paul Kane                      Registrars
  Grant Forsyth                  Business

Absent:

  Guillermo Carey                 IP constituency with apologies, proxy to Caroline Chicoine

Quorum (11) present at 14:00 Los Angeles time (UTC 22:00)

Ph. Sheppard chaired the NC meeting.

  1. Adoption of minutes of October 11, 2001 teleconference:

    A motion to adopt the minutes was moved by Ken Stubbs and seconded by Marilyn Cade.

    Decision D 1: All in favour of the motion and the minutes of the October 11 teleconference were adopted.

  2. Verification of telephone patch-in of remote Board Members

    Paul Kane, Erica Roberts and Grant Forsyth were on line.

  3. Agenda Item 3: At-Large - session with ALSC:

    The Chair welcomed Karl Bildt who gave the presentation of the ALSC final report:
    http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/mdr2001/archive/pres/bildt-alsc.html

    The recommendation is that an ALSO should be a self financing low-cost body to allow for maximum participation. One third of the ICANN board and two thirds of the membership would be required to make structural changes. The ALSC recommends an extension of its life until March 2002 to maintain momentum, seen as important for the stability of ICANN.

    The constituency conclusions:

    • The BC and the gTLDs and the ISPC are generally supportive.
    • The Registrars have made proposals that they are working on in parallel with the comments and are taking a closer look at the impact it will have on ICANN in 4/5 years.
    • The ccTLDs do not agree with the restriction of membership to DN holders.
    • The NCDNH believes there should be 9 At large directors.
    • The IPC said that verification could be used to improve the accuracy of the WHOIS and recommended 6 board seats.

    The chair concluded the discussions saying issues of detail were still pending and a further working relationship between the ALSC and the NC on these issues is foreseen.

  4. Agenda Item 4: Transfers - NC resolution

    Marilyn Cade, interim chair to the Transfers Task Force, reported on concerns within the Registrar constituency and that other constituencies were keen to see a rapid resolution of the issue.

    • it is estimated that 70% of domain name registrants are indirect and may be unaware of who their registrars are.
    • policies need to take this into account
    • the relationship between registrant and registrar needs to be thought through, whether or not the registrar gets power of attorney
    • there are concerns about delays when transfers do not work and inconsistency between registrars
    • there must be clarification that the issue under discussion is transfers between registrars
    • set milestones for the task Force and complete the work within 3 months.

    The following motion was proposed by Paul Kane and seconded by Grant Forsyth:

    That the NC shows its support for the Transfer Task Force and the importance of its work. The NC requests ICANN staff to assist the task force in any legal definitions and the identification of any contract modifications that may be needed. The NC looks forward to receiving a resolution of this important issue by the Ghana meeting (March 2002).
    Decision D2: The motion was voted on and passed unanimously

  5. Agenda Item 5: IDN - NC resolution:

    Elisabeth Porteneuve reported that progress had been made on better understanding of the issue. It is complicated by the fact that a variety of internet services rely on domain names. All services may not work with all implementations of IDNs. Modifications may be required on end-user software. A series of teleconferences are scheduled between 26 November and 4 December for information and clarification from IETF, Verisign and MINC. IETF work has been postponed slightly.

    • The IDNs will be part of the DNS thus part of ICANN's responsibility for overall reliability, stability and utility of the internet
    • IDN implementation will offer functionality and partial implementation may impose substantial costs on registrars.

    Action: Ken Stubbs suggested inviting an IETF representative to the next teleconference

  6. Agenda Item 8: GAC reaction to NC resolution - probable informal dialogue with GAC member: http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20011026.gac-answer-NCresol.html

    Christopher Wilkinson said:

    • that there had been support from the dot INFO registry and ICANN for a "holding phase" for the most sensitive strings
    • many countries would have preferred to protect more strings.
    • no decision has been made on future new TLDs
    • the GACs concern is not restricted to either deceptive trade practices or pure authority - countries vary.
    • names conflicts are a classic issue for the Names Council.

    R. Cochetti suggested that one of the task forces could take this issue on board.
    Philip Sheppard thanked the GAC vice-chair for the clarification that their request does not go beyond dot INFO and ISO 3166.

  7. Agenda Item 6: Adoption of final report from the Review Task Force:

    The gTLDs constituency introduced a last minute objective to one part of the report. The NC Chair expressed his regret about this as there had been a due process and timetable for such comments. In debate it emerged that there was no intent of the task force to change the DNSO consensus process - they had merely recommended a clarification.
    It was decided to defer a vote and further discussion to the Wednesday, 14 November meeting.

  8. Agenda Item 7: Dot Org interim report:
    http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/council/Arc06/msg00142.htm

    The final report will be sent to the Names Council by December following agreement by the task force. There was good participation.
    Although the task force would like to review the RFP drawn up by ICANN to make sure it reflects the policy, it will not live on beyond this point.

    Ken Stubbs announced the NC dinner on Tuesday night at the Chart House at 21.00

The meeting adjourned at 17.10. Los Angeles time


Information from:
DNSO Names Council