Re: [council] Chair's report from Stockholm

["Milton Mueller" <mueller@syr.edu>]

Philip and other Council members:
There are a couple of mistakes in here that need to be 
corrected.

1. Individuals' constituency, 

The report of the interim committee said: 

"There is strong support for an individuals constituency. The outstanding issue is next steps." 
That language must be retained; it is what we
agreed to.

The current language, which says that support "comes from a group within the GA," did not come out of the 
Council meeting and is in any event wrong. Support 
comes from many sources outside the GA, for example 
the non-commercial constituency passed a resolution 
supporting a IDNO at the Stockholm meeting.

2. Multiple roots
On the multiple roots resolution, I will have to 
request that the following emendatory language be deleted:

"By this the NC is signaling that the issue is for now technical. The NC may revisit the issue should multiple roots lead to significant collisions within the DNS."

That language was NOT proposed or discussed by the
Names Council at the time the resolution was passed.
It does not conform to my understanding of the original
resolution, nor would I or any other NCDNHC members
have voted for it had that language been included.

As an aside, I question whether the statement is 
even meaningful. The existence of multiple roots is 
primarily an economic phenomenon (e.g., New.net
competing with ICANN because of ICANN's slowness in
creating new TLDs). If it begins to cause collisions, 
the issue would become MORE, not less, technical.

3. IDNO resolution.
I believe the wording is wrong. The wording below 
asks "to delay the deployment of resolution of IDNs..."
I thought we asked "to stop resolving IDNs..." 
The former anguage is odd. 

--MM

>>> DNSO Secretariat <DNSO.Secretariat@dnso.org> 
Individuals Constituency. 6.4. 

ACTION: There is support from a group within the GA for an individuals constituency. Form a task force (7 constituencies) to set the criteria for a new constituency (reviewing work already done on the call for an individuals constituency and consolidating it into a proposal).

7. Multiple roots.

Decision 1. 

"The NC resolves that Multiple roots are outside the scope of the ICANN DNSO."

The resolution carried by 13 votes in favour, 1 against, 7 abstentions.

By this the NC is signaling that the issue is for now technical. The NC may revisit the issue should multiple roots lead to significant collisions within the DNS.

 

9. IDNs

Decision 2. 

"The NC Recommends that ICANN encourage ccTLD and gTLD Registries to delay the deployment of resolution of IDNs until such time as the IETF has met in August where it is expected a standards document for IDNs will be agreed."

The recommendation carried by 14 votes in favour, 1 against, 4 abstentions (and 2 missing votes).

 

10. Housekeeping.

The Budget Committee has completed the MOU with ICANN.

The Budget Committee will call for voluntary funds now.

The Search Committee will call for secretariat services (information management + technical support) against the following timeline: call June 5, preliminary evaluation June 25, recommendation to NC June 30, appointment July 7, signing July 14, transition by 30 August.

Decision 3.

The NC authorises the Budget Committee to pay AFNIC for secretarial services at the existing monthly rate for a period of up to a further three months.

The motion carried by 17 votes in favour, 0 against, 4 abstentions.

11. DNSO Board election.

Amadeu Abril i Abril's tenure ends in September. The NC is urged to propose candidates for the election which will take place in September with a view to the new member being in place for October. The Secretariat will make the formal call 

 

Philip Sheppard

NC Chair


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information from:
 © DNSO Names Council