ICANN Capetown December 2004 Report
Monday was originally scheduled for a meeting of the ccNSO / GAC Liaison Working Group, but due to non-availability of some GAC representatives the meeting was postponed until Tuesday. The meeting was most productive, and a framework for a GAC / ccNSO Liaison Committee was jointly created. The framework was adopted by the GAC on Tuesday, and by the ccNSO members on Wednesday, with a recommendation from the ccNSO members for the ccNSO Council to adopt the framework. Part of the recommendation is that the Working Group representatives from both GAC and ccNSO continue as the inaugural Liaison Committee, at least until the ICANN meeting in Argentina, April 2005. The framework provides for mailing lists between the 5 regional representatives each for GAC and ccNSO to use to promote issues believed to be of mutual concern to GAC and ccNSO, with all of the ccTLD GAC committee, and all members of the ccNSO mailing lists being able to subscribe on a "read-only" basis. Agendas for the joint GAC / ccNSO meetings will fall out of the mail list discussions, through input from the chairs of the Liaison Committees within GAC and the ccNSO. The GAC / ccNSO combined meetings will be co-chaired by the Liaison Committee chairs.
The WSIS workshop was a panel discussion comprising roughly equal numbers of panel members from WSIS and ICANN, several of whom wear both hats. Details of the session will soon be available at http://icann.org/meetings/capetown/icann-wsis-workshop-01dec04.htm. There seemed to be a general recognition by WSIS of the expertise of ICANN and its associated bodies in dealing with the fundamental Internet infrastructure, and that there was no express desire from WSIS to usurp the ICANN function.
Peter Dengate Thrush, Marilyn Cade and myself were fortunate to have a private session with Nitin Desai, WGIG Chair, and Special Adviser to the WSIS Secretary-General and Markus Kummer, Executive Coordinator, Secretariat of the WGIG (whom Frank March will be working alongside in Geneva). Again there seemed to be a degree of clarification of expectation of involvement of WGIG in the ICANN functions, although the ITU agenda may differ somewhat. Unfortunately this meeting clashed with workshop on the re-registration of deleted domain names, so I missed attending one of the sessions I had been most keen to attend.The IDN workshop was a long session, and details of the sessions can be found at http://icann.org/meetings/capetown/idn-workshop-01dec04.htm. Solid progress continues globally in resolving issues relating to IDN character sets and Domain Name resolution, and increasing numbers of languages are engaging. The final speaker at the workshop was Liz Longworth, who was a Domainz director a few years ago, but has been working for UNESCO in Paris since leaving New Zealand.
ccNSO AspectsThe first session was primarily housekeeping and rule tidying, with no significant controversy, followed by a report on the WSIS workshop, which was attended by Markus Kummer.
Next session was a discussion on the ICANN Strategic Plan. Generally the ccNSO believed the Strategic Plan was a sound and useful plan, and input will be ongoing for a period of time. Our International Affairs Committee and Council should consider
In the ICANN budget, ICANN currently receives around US$600,000 per year from the ccTLD community. Paul Verhoeff appears to have taken on board the earlier requests from the ccNSO suggesting that the ccTLD allocation of ICANN's total budget needs to be based on the actual usage of ICANN services by the ccTLD community, rather than an arbitrary share. The suggestion is that the ccTLD's share of the budget will be in the vicinity of US$1 to 1.1 million. The ccNSO will appoint 3 people to the ICANN Budget Advisory Group - likely to be Young Em Lee, Bart Vastenburg and Dotty le Blanc.
The joint GAC / ccNSO meeting was brief, with only 4 items on the agenda. The major issue was GAC's advice that their WG4 has completed its reworking of the GAC Principles, and that it will available on the GAC website after the conclusion of the Cape Town meeting, for a period of consultation and an intention of adoption at the April 2005 ICANN Meeting.
I have been approached by the GAC / ccNSO Liaison Group, to act as Joint Chair of this committee, for the period through to the April 2005 ICANN meeting. This would require my physical attendance at the April meeting, so I seek International Affairs Committee approval urgently to attend the next meeting, so that I can confirm this appointment.
The ccNSO advised of its ongoing work on its Accountability Framework, seeking to establish guidelines for ccTLD's on items they may wish to include in an a Framework agreement with ICANN. - The GAC / ccNSO Liaison Committee decision reported in detail elsewhere - The agreement between the Government of Holland and the .nl Registry Company, which essentially was a formal recognition by the Government of SIDN as the authoritative registry operator for the ccTLD and otherwise generally contains some requirements for the registry to comply with best practice.
gain, clashes of times with the ccNSO meeting and the African At Large Users meeting, so missed fulfilling some of my obligations as our African / Arab regional representative.
Attended the gNSO Whois session, seems like the same discussions that occurred in KL, Rome and Tunis are continuing, but that over the next few weeks the Task Force will be concluding its draft recommendations for a final consultation leading to final policy potentially by April 2005 ICANN Meeting.
The ccNSO meeting is giving some considerable debate on the issue of "Accountability Frameworks" (read "contracts") and .nl appears to be the only ccTLD to be actively and voluntarily pursuing an agreement with ICANN, following on from its Government / ccTLD agreement. InternetNZ should internally debate the desirability of engaging more formally with Government and/or ICANN.
There appears to be a slight softening of attitude from some CENTR members in terms of possible joining the ccNSO, so we can remain hopeful that some of the large European ccTLD's might end up contributing from within this forum.
Unfortunately I missed the session on the IANA function, as PDT and myself were called to the Meetings Committee meeting, to re-discuss some of the issues relating to our bid to host the March 2006 ICANN meeting. After further clarifications, we were advised a decision would be forthcoming shortly, which indeed it was, in our favour.
The hosting of the meeting will require some rapid preparatory work over the next few weeks, both for staff, and the hosting working group currently comprising PDT, DPF and myself.
The public session of the ICANN Board is primarily administrative on day one, with many of the new staff, council and board appointees being introduced.
Of course, the highlight of the ICANN meeting has been the news that New Zealand will host the March 2006 meeting in Wellington. It is noted too with regret that our friends at TWNIC were unsuccessful in their bid for this meeting.
Recommendations:
1. That this report be received by International Affairs Committee for presentation to Council on 18 December.
2. That early approval be granted for my attendance to the April 2005 ICANN meeting.
