AMM / Notes from the GAC Briefing to ICANN 09.03.2001, 10:30 to 12:00 this meeting at friday morning is a briefing from icann to the gac. the gac to icann briefing is taking place tomorrow afternoon and will be reported seperately. sorry for typos due to transcripting during the session. ----- Mike Roberts Agenda: - Review of Melbourne Agenda - Review of Recent GAC Communicques - Presentation re ccTLD agreements - Preseantation re proposed Verisign agreements - other issues - Q & A ----- At Large Member Study (informal presenation from Pindar Wong) http://www.atlargestudy.org - setting up of the committee - diversity of the regions within the committee - questions of the study (should atlarge-directors be at the board etc.) - if and how should be elected, how be funded etc. - administrative issues - result must be available at icann-annual meeting 2002 - open for input from the governments, english language preferred - comments@atlargestudy.org - questions from the gac: ? what about the working group from the markle foundation ! there are lotīs of working groups, weīd like to include their results and coordinate acitivies. they might have different issues, but weīd like to include them in our study C comment from the Twomey/Australie: might be one of the hardest jobs to enshure that the diverse users interests are mentioned, consumer interests groups, user groups etc. ? (spain) language problem is serious, has not been taken into account ! we share the concern, but we have do be very practically ----- Root Management Procedures (Louis Touton) - Types of Changes Made / Nameservice reconfiguration - changes to contact information: changes to identity of sponsoring organization or contect - creation/deletion of zones. some changes from the 3166-1 to 3166-3 list? - major steps: receive requests / authentiacte requests. ----- (Roberts) ccTLDs and IANA in the Jon Postel era - Country TLDs originally granted for researchers - Jondelegated the registries based on peronsl acquiantance - with growth of internet, and more country registry requests, jon adopted some semi-formal practices, e.g. use of the ISO 3166-1 table - in 1994, with further growth, jon documenteds basic priniciples and practices in rfc-1591 - subsequent evtolution of policies described in cctld news memos icann histroy relevat to cctlds: - 7/97 us govīt devsion to privatize dns technical managemtn and iana - 6/98 - us govīt white paper - 11/98 - icann and us govīt sign mou - 6/99 icp-1 documents postelīs cctld delegation policy - 2/00 icann gac publishes statement of principles for cctld delegation and administration - 9/00 - mou amend 2 confirms icann must achieve stable agreement with cctld to complete tranisitions - 10/00 - icann reaches agreement with cira and canadian government on new structure for .ca principles for icann - cctld relationship - use original postel - iana cctld concept: - cctld manager is trustee for lic - competent operation of registry & nameservers - consensus efforts to resolve disputes - respect views of governments - recognize icann as global consensus forum - use flexible agrrement structure to accomodate varied circumstances - diffrent cctld tegistry models - different local needs - (mclaughlin) basis icann - cctld agreement structure - written agreement between icann and cctld manager - assist cctld manager in serving needs of local internet community - provide for appropriate monitoring of cctld managets trust obligation - enable icann to ensure global dns interests are protected technical stability, transpareny in registration etc. special concerncs to be addressed in icann cctld agreements - appropriate application of local and global policies - circumstances in which delegations are changed - icannīs performance of the iana function - contributions to funding icann activities documents for the two situations - legacy situation: agreement between icann and cctld manager - trilateral sitation: - cctld manager and natinal government agreement or equivalent (see .ca umbrella agreement) covering local interests - national government and icnan: letter or other communication - ccTLD manager and icann: agreement covering global interes - flexibility to accomodate other sitation (mclaughlin: someone needs to have ability for redelegation) icann & cctld manager responsibilities in trilateral situation - icann - maintain authoritative root server system - maintain authoriatative and puiblicy available cctld database - main audit trall regarding delegations - cctld manager - icann & cctld manager responsibilities in legacy sitatuion - commitment to operate cctld in trust for the interest of the local internet community - acknowledgement that no property rights are acquired in the cctld - compliance with icann-developed global policies - in open cctld registries, agreement to operate database ----- change of agenda cause of some questions (verysign later?!) ? (?) root name server agreement ! (touton) meeting next week will discuss details ! (france) each country needs national strategy for handling information technology according to itīs needs. one element would be how to use the cctld identification aspect. escpecially for developing countries this is very important. ! (australia) postelīs policies has brought situation that needs to be mentioned for various reasons. in some countries problems of corruption etc. ! (cerf) administation come and go, internet stays. internet must be stabile. formalizing makes things much more complicated. informal relationship sometimes work very well. ? how can icann handle national laws incompability with a situation ! (touton) re-delegation shall be possible if local governments wants icann to act on the base of the gac principles. a governments- relationship with the cctld also might be handled on the base of national law. ? (canada) mechanism to conversion ! (mclaughlin) if national governments make reasonsable agreement, icann and cctld will accept it. ! (touton) the gac principles making this possible where not made by icann, but from the gac ! (france) we are coming from a very informal situation to a more formalized. ? (uk) details of contracts between icann and cctld ! (touton) hope that governments take the delegation out ! (mclaughlin) how is doing delegation/redelegation, who takes care of public policy. away from the us government to this international situation. there are risks for icann to make this. finding out the local internet community wishes is hard, but maybe easier in the time jon postel was acting. the gac has to find ways; each country with itīs ways with the cctld ! (roberts) we had very specific disucssions on redelegation, the question what belongs where is on the table. ? (cerf) tri-literal agreement specification on redelegation ! (mclaughlin) the idea is, based on some principles, the sceme should be defined for re-delegation and define the circumstances and icannīs actions. the gac do not go into deep details but icann can act on this in individual communications. ! (touton) when a government wants to act, icann might give hints on the technical qualification of redelegation. ? (spain) effective operation of the root server by icann; effective power within icann for operation? governments are the only legitimate instition voted by the citizens. ! (australia) issue raised from commercial orientated cctld managers, that government, they have a lot of legal advice, insurance etc. so governments ways are not so easy even acting on the gac principles. ----- (joe sims) new verysign agreement - existing (default) situation - 1999 agremement covers .com/.net/.org - renewal provisions also cover all three - automatic renewal until 2007 for all three if divest registrar by 10 mar 2001 - renewal arguably must be for all three together - renewal standard gives some advantage to vrsn proposed changes (1) - separate agrrements for each registry - shorter terms for .org (EOY 2002) and .net (EOY 2005) - vrsn prohibited from renewing .org, .net renewal terms give more flexibility to icann; presumtopion of renewal for .com if adequately serving internet community (.org registry selected through the "icann consensus process") - reason for letting vrsn .com shall be technical stability cause of the huge amount of inquiries per day etc. proposed changes (conīt) - vrsn subject to icann policies like everyone else with .org .net and in most respects for .com - vrsn agrees to same commitments on fee contribution as all other registries - vrsn allowed to continue to operate registrar under same conditions as all other registries. reason for changes (1) - no need for registry/registrar seperation - crsns market share has fallen to 14% in most recent quartes, clearly no longer dominant - desire by both icann and crsn to more normalize contractual arrangemtns reason for chnages cont - sepeation of registry agrreements so each can be individually dealt with on its own mertis - crsn hasstated it will meet this standard and obtain automatic extention oif proposed timing - existing agreement provcide automatic extension for 4 years if registrar div ested by 10 may 2001 - vrsn has stated it will meet this standard and obtain automatic extension if proposed bew agreements not apporved - existingf agreemtn requires approval by cicann and us doc - new agreements thus need to be finalized prior 10 may 2001 ----- ? (wilkinson eu) who is proposing what to who? there is no board decision. the 100% market domination is a good reason for a complete seperation concerns where expressed earlier. questions into procedure, paper on the base of march 1 not satisfying for getting into a discussion. ! seperation of registry/registrar is an option to vrsn, not a must. the exiting agreement would automatically continue if not replaced by a new agreement. there is only chance on one of these two options.