ICANN Meetings in Cape Town
ccNSO Council Meeting
Saturday, December 4, 2004
Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the ccNSO Council Meeting held on 4 December, 2004 in Cape Town, South Africa . Although the captioning output is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the session, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: If everybody is ready, we may start. So I guess I
should declare the ccNSO council meeting open, and the first item on the agenda
is introductions. So what I'd like to do is go around the table and have everybody
say who they are.
There are a couple of councillors who are here but not present at the moment, and hopefully they'll be joining us in a little while. And we have two councillors who are not here who may be going to be able to phone in, Oscar and Victor and John is working on THE bridge right now. I'll start. I'm Chris Disspain from dot AU.
>>YANN KWOK: Yann Kwok from Mauritius dot AU.
>>FERNANDO ESPAÑA: Fernando España from dot US.
>>EVA FRÖLICH: Eva Frölich elected by NOMCOM of ICANN and formally not a member until the end of this meeting. So I'm not going to vote today if there will be any voting.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Bart Boswinkel linked with dot NL.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: I'm Dotty Sparks de Blanc from the VI registry, U.S. virgin islands.
>>PETR KRAL: Petr Kral coming from Europe, dot CZ.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: Olivier Guillard here in my personal capacity but working with dot FR.
>>PAULOS NYIRENDA: Paulos Nyirenda, dot NW Africa.
>>HIRO HOTTA: Hiro Hotta from dot JP.
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: Young Eum Lee from dot KR.
>>CHARLES SHA'BAN: Charles Sha'ban from talal abu-ghazeleh organization, new rep on the council this meeting.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, Charles. Everyone, these microphones are considerably more powerful than the ones we used in the ccNSO meeting, so you can actually sit back a bit and relax.
Just before we go to the first item on the agenda, I just want to make clear that pursuant to the rules and procedures of the ccNSO, decisions made at this meeting are published within five days, and the members of the ccNSO have an opportunity to object to any of the decisions that are made if they wish.
So they don't technically become live decisions until seven days after they have been published, assuming that there are no objections; okay?
So the first item on the agenda is appointment of officers for a one-year term.
Now, what we did in KL was we appointed an interim chair, which is me, and now that the rules and procedures have been agreed, we need to actually move forward and appoint formally a chair. And we agreed also there would be one vice chair.
So if everyone is all right with this, my proposal would be that we call for nominations for the position first of chair. And if there are more than one nomination for that, we will then have a vote. And then we'll move on to the vice chair.
Is everyone okay with that? Okay.
So in that case, I formally call for nominations to the position of chair of ICANN. Yes, BART.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I want to nominate Chris Disspain as chair for the next year of the ccNSO. Any seconds?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, BART.
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: I would like to second.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you very much. Does anyone else wish to nominate themselves or somebody else to be the chair of the council?
Well, I guess, then, I can now stop calling myself the interim chair and refer to myself as the chair.
Thank you very, very much. I will do my best.
Now, the next position is the position of vice chair. And basically, it's a role of sitting as chair in the event that the chair can't chair.
Does anyone have -- Olivier.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: I would like to nominate Bart Boswinkel as vice chair of this group.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay. Is there a second?
>>PETR KRAL: I second.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to nominate themselves or someone else to be vice chair?
Well, I guess that means you're the vice chair, BART. Thank you.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Thank you.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: The next item on the agenda is really just an explanation item, unless there is any discussion on it, and that is in respect to the councillors terms of office.
In the bylaws, in the transition article, there is -- when the council was elected, in each region one counselor would have been elected for one year -- a one-year term, one for a two-year term and one for a three-year term, so that the -- their terms were staggered and so that we didn't lose all three councillors at the same time.
For the first council, there was actually no election because there were only three nominees in each region.
So the agreement was with John Jeffrey the legal general counsel of ICANN agreed that it wasn't necessary for us to run an election to see which councillor would have one year, which councillor two, which three, but we could agree amongst ourselves who would have one year and so on.
The first councillors, the first -- the one-year councillors' terms expire at the end of this meeting. And they would step down, resign, and of course are able to nominate again.
So the intent -- our intention is that each region will decide over the next few weeks which one of the councillors from their region will stand down and we will then launch an election process for those single seats in each region at some time in February, so that the new councillors can take their seats for future meetings and for Argentina.
And the purpose of this being on the agenda is just to read -- basically read that into the record and then of course if there's any discussion or any comment on that, that's fine.
So does anyone have anything they want to say about that?
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: I have a question. Does that mean that those positions are vacant from the end of this meeting until February?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: No; my understanding, and I will check this, my understanding is that you -- if you are the -- if you decide to be the one that resigns that you actually stay in the position until the election.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Okay.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes, Hiro.
>>HIRO HOTTA: Yes, I have a question about this. You mean at this moment, one is going to step down?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Not at this moment.
>>HIRO HOTTA: Yeah, yeah. In a few weeks.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>HIRO HOTTA: Yes. And how about the two-year term councillor and three-year term councillor?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yeah, what I -- if we do nothing, then at this time next year another councillor will need to step down, resign, and be reelected or stand for election.
Our intention is to prepare a paper to go to members about the whole principle of terms and election methods to see if we can find a better way of dealing with the situation.
But if we do nothing, then that's what will happen in a year's time.
The next item is a formal item. At the members' meeting, the rules and procedures document was approved by members present, and it was previously discussed on the list and has been accepted. So we need to formally approve the rules and procedures document.
So could I call for a proposal for that resolution, please?
BART, thank you very much.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I propose to have the rules and procedures set forward by the members during the meeting here in cape town to be formally adopted by the council, so we work according to these rules and procedures.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, BART. Is there a seconder for that?
Young EUM? Thank you very much.
So before we go any further -- we have nothing?
Okay. We're still struggling to get the others online, but that's okay.
I just want to say one other thing before we actually have a formal vote, and that is that I've asked Ian from Taiwan if he would be kind enough to take notes of this meeting and minutes. So there is actually somebody here doing that. And also the scribes, of course, are doing exactly that.
So thank you, Ian.
So we have a proposer and a seconder, so I'll formally put the resolution that the rules and procedures document be formally adopted.
All those in favor?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Are there any abstentions? I can't hear you.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: The process of formalizing the adoption now or adopting the procedure now?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Adopting the rules and procedures now. Did you want to say something about it before we have a vote?
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: I just abstain on this one.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: You're going to abstain.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: Yeah.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Do you want to say anything about that or do you just want to abstain?
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: To comment on the abstention? Yeah, if I may.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Go ahead.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: I believe that the rules and procedure that are proposed are consistent with the ICANN bylaws, first. And also that they leave opportunity for the member to work and exchange in let's say a democratic way. The procedures, for example, say an electronic vote of the members can be initiated by any of the following: The ccNSO council, the chair of the ccNSO council, or 10% of the members.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: So it means this leaves a sideways for all members to participate.
It's also possible for members to trigger a veto procedure if 10% of members or more notify the council chair of the objection to any decision of the board within seven days.
However, I believe that the efficiency of this procedure will be very dependent on the way that they are concretely implemented. We don't have yet a clear view on the long-term Secretariat implementation, for example, and we have no clear plans about the concrete means and information that will be offered to members with regard to those procedure.
So with many other manager that have followed the debates of the meetings, ccNSO meeting, and as a participant of the ccNSO formation, I reaffirm my support to the ccNSO building process, and would like to ensure that my abstention on this resolution should be seen as a mark of confidence in the present, and also as a mark of attention to the success of the ccNSO in the future.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Olivier, could I -- would you mind if I -- to make sure I understand, that I summarize what you just said so I'm clear that I understand?
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: Please.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: What I think you're saying is that you think that the rules and procedures are fine, but that the logistics of some of them have not been worked out yet, and until they are you don't want to vote in favor. You just abstain. Is that basically correct?
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: Yeah. Anyway, we have to fix --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: -- rules and procedure anyway before implementing. I agree with that. But --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: That's fine.
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: -- in summary, that's what -- yeah.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN:So we had -- let's do that again. Let's have a vote again. All those in favor?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay. Abstentions? Olivier. And is there anyone against?
Okay. Well, I declare the resolution is passed.
Now, the -- we've lost the agenda.
We talked so long the screen saver came on.
The next item is the at-large liaison. We need to do two things. We need to formally agree that we will appoint a liaison to the ALAC. And we have currently got two people who have expressed an interest in being the ALAC liaison. And my proposal would be that we ask them -- we write to them and ask them to provide us with a paper, a document on explaining why they think that they would be ALAC liaison and what they think they bring to that role. And then we can make a decision either on our electronic or telephone meeting or we could even wait until Argentina, if we wanted to.
So the first one is the actual decision to appoint an ALAC liaison. So can I have a proposer for that motion, please.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I propose the council, in principle, appoint a liaison to the ALAC.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you. Seconder? Yes, young EUM, thank you very much.
So can I call -- the motion is put. Is there any discussion before we vote?
Can we have a show of hands, those in favor of appointing a liaison to the ALAC.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: That's passed unanimously. The next, it doesn't have to be a motion, is there anyone who objects if I send a note to the two people and ask them for the reasons why they wish to be the ALAC liaison? Any objection to that? I don't see any so I will do that.
The next item is the --
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: I'm sorry, Chris, before we move on if you could tell us who those people are.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes. They are Ron SHERwood from dot VI. Does he actually work at dot VI?
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Trustee.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Trustee of the VI, and Mohammed in ISOC.
The next is the WSIS working group. With this one, what we'll do is you'll remember at the last meeting the members basically instructed us to mandate the WSIS working group to start preparing a paper in consultation with the members, the paper to go by any method we can organize TO THE WGIG. BART is a member of that working group and so he is prepared to go with his colleagues on that working group and prepare that paper.
So again, I don't think we need a formal resolution. The working group exists. All we need to do is to say that we agree that that's what the working group should do.
So does anyone object to that or does anyone have any comment to make at all on this particular matter?
Okay. Yes, Paulos.
>>PAULOS NYIRENDA: Again, I just wanted to know the members of the working group.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: The members. BART, the members of your working group?
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I've been terribly lazy about this, I know. It was -- I know from the list there are about nine members to this working group. I will send an e-mail around to these members and announce them as soon as possible.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay. Peter has just pointed out to me, and he's quite right, that there were actually three things that we talked about. One was the paper for the WGIG, so we've cleared that. You can go off and start working on that.
The second one was to respond to the white paper. And what was the third one?
>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: White paper and the resolution that the working group is preparing.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: The ICANN working group. So the big WSIS working group in ICANN is preparing a white paper and a resolution, and we discussed in the members meeting that we would take part in that process. So again, I think that's something for the WSIS working group to liaise with the ICANN WSIS group and create that. Okay?
And the third one was that we talked about a formal response to the Zhao paper.
I think we need to think about this really carefully, the Zhao paper.
My question would be, if we respond formally to it, are we vesting it with more wait and authority than it actually has?
So I though it open for discussion.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: In my view, it is clear this Zhao paper is out and probably next time there will be another Zhao paper as well. And at that time, the period for comments on the second Zhao paper has closed a couple weeks ago. We need to see as a working group if and how we are going to respond on that. If there are some very serious changes on the past one, yes or no. But I would like to leave this to the working group and come up with a proposal to the members if and how we're going to respond to that.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: So your proposal is we should ask the working group whether or not we should respond to the Zhao paper and make a recommendation?
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Yes.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Does anyone object to that way of dealing with it? Okay, BART. So you've got three jobs to do, then n the WSIS working group.
I've just been told that Oscar is unavailable on the phone. I actually have some comments from him on a particular resolution. And Victor has just arrived home in Burundi and he's going to watch the web cast and he will e-mail us if he has any comments.
The next one is the GAC/ ccNSO liaison. And that is formal approval of the agreement between the GAC and the ccNSO, of the method for liaison. We all had a presentation on that from the GAC/ ccNSO working group. In fact, I think most of us had a presentation at least three times because we went to various meetings at which it was presented.
So is there any discussion about us formally adopting that method of liaison?
Okay. So I think we formally need to vote on this one because it's a change, effectively, in what the working group does.
So the resolution would be that we endorse the GAC/ ccNSO liaison methodology that's been shown to us, and I suggest that what we also do is we resolve to ask the current five members of that working group to remain as the five people who will be liaising with the GAC on our behalf, at least for now.
So I'd seek a proposer for that particular resolution. BART, you just need to say you propose it.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: So the first proposal is that the working group, or the methodology proposed by the working group is adopted formally by the council as the method to move things forward.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yeah. So can I call for a seconder for that?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Olivier. Thank you. A formal vote, then. Those in favor?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Is there anyone against? Are there any abstentions?
And the second part of the resolution, BART.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: The second proposal regarding the ccNSO/GAC working group is that we ask the current members of the -- members of the current working group to take over the role in the new working group to coordinate our meetings with the GAC.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: And a proposer -- I'm sorry, seconder for that motion. Olivier, you have a question?
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: Just a question. Do we have any information about the members of the GAC?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: I believe it's the same five people.
>>FERNANDO ESPAÑA: It's also five.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: So I'll need a seconder for that proposal, please.
Thank you, young EUM. And all those in favor, raise your hand?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Anyone against? Any abstentions?
Patricio. It's okay.
Since you've been away you've been nominated onto 17 different committees.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay. We'll move on, then, to the interim Secretariat for the ccNSO. Now, the discussion that we had at the members meeting was that the working group would continue to work through the process of coming up with some models and funding suggestions and would get that to members as quickly as possible.
I think we pretty much reached agreement on the list of jobs, and we pretty much reached agreement on what we wanted to do ourselves and on what ICANN would do for us.
So this is about an interim arrangement.
We called for volunteers at the meeting, and Taiwan, who had, for the last four years, provided the Secretariat services to the AP TLD, Asia-Pacific Top-Level Domain -- I'm looking at you because I just realized this whole meeting has been full of acronyms. The AP TLD Secretariat services and they're just passing those now across to New Zealand.
Now, I've had an e-mail from Oscar about this and I'd like to read that to you.
Oscar says, "May I express my concern about the offer.
"Although Taiwan's offer is a greatly appreciated one, I can recall the time of the ccTLD constituency when we used to have a voluntary, or almost voluntary, Secretariat and the difficulties that it brought.
"I prefer to wait six months more and have a formal and professional Secretariat after that, where we as employers of this function may expect and strongly request a professional service."
He's not suggesting that Taiwan wouldn't provide one of those.
"Probably those ex-com members present may support my concern."
I responded to Oscar and what I said is I understand your concern. We discussed this matter fully at the members meeting, and it was felt that we definitely needed some help with Secretariat matters.
Taiwan has for over four years provided Secretariat services to the APTLD and are now handing over that role to New Zealand so they know what they are doing. Anyway, we can raise your issue at the council meeting.
So I guess it's open for discussion, if anybody would like to comment.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: I can appreciate the desire to have people working in the Secretariat that you can give commands to and expect a response, but I don't think we should wait for six months to have people assigned to help us in whatever way they can.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Does anybody else want -- yes, young EUM?
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: I would like to basically support what Dotty has just said, and state that although dot TW has been providing Secretariat services to the APTLD on a similarly a voluntary basis, they have been doing an excellent job. And I think that is a reason why many of the members of the APTLD region almost unanimously support this idea.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Patricio.
>>PATRICIO POBLETE: Yeah, I think the same. I believe that the services that dot TW has been providing to APTLD are a very good basis to entrust them with this responsibility that they have so kindly offered to take.
And since this is for a limited time, I believe that we're very -- we can be very sure that things will be okay for the time being until we can have more permanent arrangements.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you. Fernando.
>>FERNANDO ESPAÑA: Yeah, I'd like to say that I also support TW's assistance in the Secretariat role. In the past last couple of ccNSO meetings, they have assisted us greatly. And so I support their....
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you. Paulos.
>>PAULOS NYIRENDA: Thank you. I also support the arrangement, but I would like to maybe just raise that since we are in the process of doing rules and procedures that for the interim period, we have a set of guidelines for the Secretariat.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, Paulos. That's an excellent point. If we proceed with this resolution and make the interim appointment, one of -- the first thing we will do is sit down with Joanna and Ian and work through a set of guidelines, what it is exactly we want them to do for us and so on.
So yes, absolutely.
Does anyone else want to comment?
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: I would also like to stress that this is an interim solution, and that we, as a group, try to resolve this situation in a more permanent manner in the near future.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes. Absolutely right.
Okay. Well, given that, as I said at the beginning of this meeting, the decision that we make will go out to the list and there's opportunity to object, I suggest we proceed with the vote. And if Oscar or anyone else wants to, they can post to the list.
So I'll propose this one. I propose that we appoint dot TW or Taiwan or, actually, Ian and Joanna to be the interim Secretariat for the ccNSO.
Do we have a seconder for that, please?
Petr, thank you.
Will all those in favor, please raise your hand.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Are there any abstentions? Is there anyone against?
So Ian and Joanna, I'd personally like to say thank you very, very much, and I'll talk to you soon about what we're going to do.
Now, the next one is the BAG, the Budget Advisory Group.
It's probably the worst acronym in ICANN.
We -- the ccNSO, under the bylaws, I think it's under the bylaws, but, anyway, we have three appointees to the Budget Advisory Group.
The members -- we had three volunteers in the members meeting.
They've actually already attended a meeting today.
But we need to formally approve their elevation to the Budget Advisory Group.
The three people who we need to approve is Young Eum Lee, Dotty Sparks De Blanc, and BART FOSTENBERG, who, unfortunately, can't be with us.
But those are the three nominees.
Could someone apart from Dotty and Young Eum propose that?
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I just have a question, for those who are not into the acronyms we use, is the Budget Advisory Group, is this the one for the ICANN budget --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Or for the ccNSO budget?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: No.
This is the full ICANN budget.
And so you get to sit down with the gTLDs and everyone else, yes.
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: Just a clarification.
We were at the meeting of the Budget Advisory Group just before this meeting, and apparently this advisory group is advising matters related to the 2005/2006 budget, not the current '04/'05 budget.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: That's correct.
The current budget's been adopted.
This is now looking forward to the next one.
So could someone other than Dotty and Young Eum please propose the motion.
BART's going to do it again.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I propose that Dotty, Young Eum, and BART FOSTENberg are nominated by the ccNSO council to participate in the budget advisory committee.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you.
Thank you, HIRO.
All those in favor, please raise your hand.
You sure you don't want to vote against it, Dotty?
And any abstentions?
So we now have our three nominees.
And I will formally write to ICANN to confirm that.
The next item is the budget working group.
Again, this is an existing working group.
And Young Eum is the chair of that.
And with this, all we need to do is to -- again, I don't think it's a formal resolution because it exists.
But, basically, we need to confirm them, their mandate to proceed to work with ICANN staff to ascertain models, to work on models for the payment of ICANN fees from the CC community.
Does anyone want to discuss that?
Or have any comments to make?
Well, I think we can just say that your group is -- Now, how are you doing for volunteers?
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: So far, we have six.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
So it's going to be okay.
Even if it was just that six, it would be all right.
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: Yes.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
Okay, now it's the accountability frameworks working group.
And, again, this is a -- this group exists and already has a mandate.
So all we need to do is confirm that at the members meeting, the members instructed us to charge the working group with coming up with a set of guidelines for accountability frameworks.
Obviously, the working group's going to do that in consultation with the members and, in fact, in consultation with nonmembers as well.
So is there any comment or discussion on that particular point?
>>HIRO HOTTA: Yes.
Thank you, chair.
How the contributed frameworks should be treated in ccNSO was discussed in ccNSO meeting following two working group meetings.
That working group and member discussion was very well populated.
In the meetings, the development of a framework guidelines by ccNSO was agreed, and those all ccTLDs participation in the development process was encouraged.
As the chair of the working group, I think that, as Chris said, what council is asking now is just to note the status and let WGIG pursue its charter.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, HIRO.
So anyone else want to comment?
Yes, Young Eum.
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: I just wanted to comment that many other constituencies are also very interested in our accountability framework, and so maybe it would be a good idea to maybe occasionally post maybe not a formal resolution, but some kind of a --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Like a progress report.
>>YOUNG EUM LEE: Right.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes, it was interesting that that was one of the topics that the GAC wanted to discuss.
So, yes, absolutely.
Okay, so HIRO, you don't need anything from us formally?
You're clear, and go ahead and start working on those guidelines.
>>HIRO HOTTA: Yeah.
I think we need no formal resolution.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
The next item is the ICANN strategic plan.
We have been asked by the members to seek feedback from them on the ICANN strategic plan and to provide comment to ICANN by the deadline.
Now, as I understand it, the deadline's been changed.
Is that right?
>>THERESA SWINEHART: It's been moved to February.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: To February.
So there is more time.
15th of February.
So that's an extra month.
What we do need is we need someone to be the -- we don't need a working group on this, but we just need someone to be the person who sends out E-mail to the members list and asks for feedback and sorts through the feedback and basically handles that process.
I wonder whether anyone is prepared to volunteer to do that.
>>PATRICIO POBLETE: Does it have to be a council member?
Because Peter has worked on that.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: On the strategic plan?
The problem is that -- excuse me.
(Off the record.)
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Off the record, yeah.
I just -- what I said was that we could ask -- we could ask Peter to do it, but Peter is standing for election to the board.
So therefore he won't be able to do that, if he's successful.
Is there anyone on the council who is prepared to volunteer simply to be, effectively, the coordinator of the feedback on the ICANN strategic plan to actually send out the note to ask for -- to coordinate it.
I'm not seeing a hurried rush of hands here.
And BART's just sat right back, so....
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Can you -- could you describe what you think the actual activities of that position are.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: It's -- I think what it is is that someone just needs to actually start by sending a note out to the members list by saying, hello, I'm actually asking you to provide the council, through me, whoever the person is, with feedback on the strategic plan.
And then that person will collate that feedback and the council will need to discuss that on our list so that we can actually prepare a report.
So what we need is somebody to actually just drive that process and act as the sort of center person, the point man, for want of a better term.
Am I not making myself clear, Dottie?
Can you --
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: You're saying that the information from the strategic plan should be fed back to the ccNSO Council as it affects the ccNSO?
>> The other way around.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: No.
The other way around.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Oh, we provide input on our opinion --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: -- of the strategic plan.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Okay.
Well, that would involve us having an opinion and developing an opinion.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Which we don't seem to have addressed, really.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: No.
That's what this process is about.
It's about us actually saying to the council -- to all of the members, let us have your -- your feedback on the strategic plan, and we will create a document that actually provides that feedback, if we can produce a consensus view.
So just to take a really simple example, if we feel, if the consensus is that the budget clauses in the strategic plan that relate to ccTLDs, which set a target of $800,000 for this next year and $1.1 million for the year after, if we feel, as was the general feeling in the members meeting, that that was actually a good estimate and much better than it used to be, et cetera, we should probably find a way of saying that to -- formally to ICANN.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Well, the strategic plan is very closely allied to the budget, because the budget is developed based on the strategic plan.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: That is correct.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: So maybe someone -- those of us who are involved --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: On the Budget Advisory Group.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: -- on the BAG should be the ones to solicit feedback --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: -- and write a paper.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: I think that's --
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: -- of response.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: If you're prepared to do that.
Young Eum, are you prepared to be involved on that as well is Dotty and BART Fostenberg.
>> And BART's not on the council.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: And that's great, because that means we have a member as well.
So in that case, what we'll do is ask our appointees to the Budget Advisory Group to be the conduit for feedback from the members so that we can prepare a response.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: I think that's a very logical way to organize it.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thanks, Dotty.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: First of all, it's -- it's very good that we have appointed somebody.
But we have a problem now at our hands, is that we have some new council members as of tomorrow.
And the question is, maybe with regard to particularly this issue, do we allow these new members to be -- participate in this group?
Because I know some -- at least one of them is willing to participate in this group.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Willingness is something that we should always allow.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Okay.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: And, absolutely, yes, there's absolutely no problem with that at all.
So who is that particular person.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I want to nominate eva Frölich as part of this.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: That's great.
Thank you very much, eva.
We're coming towards the end of this now.
This one is a new one.
We are going to set up a new working group.
And following our session with Doug Barton on the IANA, the members asked us to set up an IANA working group.
BART, can I ask you to talk to this particular point.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: It is clear that the members want us to install a new working group regarding the IANA function of ICANN.
I think what was not discussed properly, and I think we should give this new working group some direction, is that we give this group, first, a mandate, and, secondly, that we elect one of the councillors to chair this group.
The first thing I think we need to do is go through what we think is the appropriate mandate of this group.
And I think, in my view, there are two elements which are important.
The first is defining the working procedures of this group.
And secondly is, what are the subjects of this working group?
What are they supposed to do?
What are they supposed to talk about with IANA.
Now, regarding defining the working groups, I think one of the issues we have to solve and make a proposal for it is what is the size of this working group.
It is clear from the discussions we have all heard at the members meeting, it should be open to members and nonmembers alike.
But as the IANA function is crucial to all of us, we run the danger of an unmanageable group.
So I propose that the chair of this group comes up with a reasonable figure of, say, maximum of ten, 12 persons to be the working persons in this group.
Now, if you have this, then there are two other items involved, is working procedures of this group itself and the involvement of the whole constituency we have, the whole members and nonmembers of the ccNSO alike.
So these are two separate issues that this working group should address.
The next stage is how does it function so its own working procedures, set up its own working procedures, and including in that is how they want to involve what is the interaction with the constituency.
And the last part of it is the working procedure or the interaction or the communication with the IANA staff themselves.
I think this should be part of setting up the procedures as well.
This is part of the first element.
The second element is, what is the focus of this group?
What are the subjects this group needs to discuss?
And it is clear -- I think, first of all, what is very important to all CCs is the interaction mechanisms we have in our daily operations with IANA.
And this includes interaction with others, and we have seen the invitation from Paul Verhoef to discuss the -- mechanism.
I think this should be one of the focus points of this working group.
Secondly, I think IANA procedures in general might be an element in this group to discuss with IANA how this can be improved.
And as we talk about improvement of the IANA procedures, I think this group should try or should discuss with IANA the possibility of service levels and the metrics involved to see how the service level are dealt with.
So finally we have what we all these years wanted, a channel of communications with IANA, and to improve the services of IANA to the ccTLD community.
I think this should be more or less the mandate of this group.
That was my proposal.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
And that's great.
We've got that.
So that's written into the record now.
So if we agree to form this group, then whoever is going to chair it can refer back to that and craft from that a formal mandate for approval by the council.
Does anyone else want to comment before I move on to actually creating the working group?
Does anyone want to comment about what BART said or anything else?
BART wants to comment on himself.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: No, no, no.
I propose -- what I propose for this formally is that the mandate of this working group is it should focus on IANA and its procedures and work out the working procedures for the group themselves, as defined.
So that is --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
So -- okay, yes, Dotty.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: I'd just like to ask BART, is there anything that ICANN itself has suggested as a mandate for that group that is not included in your description?
>>BART BOSWINKEL: As far as I know, there was -- there were some suggestions by Paul Verhoef.
But it was -- what we came -- what I came up with just now is, I think, what we, as CC our self want.
So it is not to accommodate ICANN; it's to accommodate the CCs.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: But what was left out?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: I've got it here.
In the letter from -- original letter from Paul Verhoef, the section on accountability frameworks referred to -- sorry, not accountability frameworks, IANA -- referred to structuring and organizing a ccNSO platform to discuss with ICANN staff possible improvements of practices and procedures of IANA functionality, including authentication methods and their risk management, a framework for the use of secure communications technology, PGP, et cetera, and emergency access to IANA.
And those were the -- which is pretty much covered by what BART said.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: In order to make this clear, what is -- I think this captures more or less what I defined as IANA procedures and interaction mechanisms.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: What is added is service levels, discuss service levels and the metrics to monitor these service levels.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yeah.
>>PAULOS NYIRENDA: I think there will be some duplication between the accountability frameworks group and this working group.
Is there going to be an interface between the two?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: I'm sure that if it needs -- if there needs to be an interface between the two groups, that will not be a problem.
And, yes, you're right, some of the IANA staff will obviously be relevant to the accountability framework group.
Because I should imagine a significant amount of staff that goes into accountability framework will be about IANA.
So it may be that the work of the IANA working group will be of great assistance to HIRO and his accountability framework working group.
Can I formally, then, put the proposal that we set -- set up a working group on IANA?
All those in favor.
Now, the next thing we need to do is to find a chair for that working group.
And I happen to know that Bernie, who, unfortunately, couldn't be with us, would be very happy to be appointed the chair of this particular working group.
And I personally would endorse that appointment.
Does anyone else want to nominate for the chair of that group or make any comment?
So can I ask that we formally appointed -- I don't know that we need to resolve it -- but if we can just formally agree that we appoint Bernie as the chair and at some point someone will let him know?
Have we anything else to do on that particular working group or is that everything?
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Yes.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
The last item before we move on to our presentations from respective directors is the regional organizations.
Under the bylaws, the council can designate a regional organization for each of the five ICANN regions.
And designation of that regional organization means that that regional organization can nominate a person to sit on the council as liaison.
So they don't vote, but they can sit as liaison.
I'm delighted to say that we have had three approaches to become regional organizations on the ccNSO council.
We've had an approach from the APTLD, which is the organization that represents ccTLDs in the Asia-Pacific region; we've had an approach from LAC TLD, which is, obviously, for Latin America and the Caribbean.
And we've also had an approach from CENTR on behalf of the European ccTLDs.
Each one of those is a simple E-mail to us saying, "We would like you to designate us as the regional organization" for that particular region.
And I would propose that we formally resolve that those three organizations be designated regional organizations and that we can then contact them afterwards and ask them to appoint liaisons to the council.
Is there any discussion on that?
>>PATRICIO POBLETE: Yeah, you may have been informed about this earlier, and if I missed it, I apologize.
There was some doubt about the observership status that CENTR was requesting.
Did they clarify that?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes, they did.
I received a note from Giovanni this morning, and if I can find it.
It says: As you know, CENTR is a regional organization for ccTLD registry managers, and we invite the ccNSO to recognize and welcome CENTR's participation as the regional ccTLD organization based in Europe.
And the E-mail then goes on to say that there was a resolution passed in Zurich, and that there is a point about -- well, I'll read T you'll be aware that many CENTR members have problems with the current legal construct of the ccNSO and have requested amendments.
But in the spirit of outreach and communication, CENTR are willing to appoint a liaison officer designated to the ccNSO Council in accordance with the resolution.
So I think that's -- the issue we had was that the original approach didn't ask to be designated a regional organization; it asked to be -- to have observer status.
So we've now gotten clear on what the words are and have a letter saying, "Please make us the regional organization."
Is there any other discussion?
>>HIRO HOTTA: Yes, thank you.
I have a concern here, or a question here.
If another candidate or organization comes from the same region later, is there any mechanisms to resolve it?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: That's an extremely good question.
I have absolutely no idea.
I can't recall anything in the bylaws about a regional organization being designated for a term.
And I can't recall anything in the bylaws that says the council can sack, if you like, or remove -- yes, is there?
Decisions to designate or de-designate.
So undesignate a regional organization requires a 66% vote of the council.
So if we wanted to, we could have a vote, and 66% of us in favor, someone could be de-designated and somebody else could be designated.
>>PAULOS NYIRENDA: On the same lines, I'm not sure, I had an alternative to HIRO's question.
Is it that we can have two or we can only have one?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Only one.
Well -- Yann.
>>YANN KWOK: I'd like to know how council know which one is the correct organization if there's more than one request.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay.
I think it's -- I think it's relatively easy at the moment, because all three of the people -- the organizations that have asked us to designate them are well known to us and clearly representative of ccTLDs in each of the regions.
I was asked the question yesterday whether if VeriSign applied to be the regional organization for the North American region, how would that work.
There is a clause -- it says in the article that the regional organization must be open to full membership by all ccNSO members within the geographic region.
So I guess, Yann, the answer is if in Asia -- in the Asia-Pacific region a new organization was formed that was open to all ccTLD members in the Asia-Pacific region and they applied to be the regional organization, we would have to make a choice.
And I suppose to some extent that choice would be based on how many people belonged to one as opposed to the other and so on.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: I think in these cases, especially in the CC area, we have a very good mechanism of sort it out yourselves.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Following the ICANN line, "Go ahead and sort it out yourselves and then let us know what you decide."
Well, I propose that we formally designate APTLD organization as the regional organization for the Asia-Pacific region.
All those in favor?
I propose that we formally designate LACTLD as the regional organization for the Latin American and Caribbean region.
I should have gotten a seconder for the last one.
Can someone second this one for me.
Thank you, HIRO.
All those in favor?
And, finally, I propose that we designate CENTR as the regional organization for the European region.
May I have a seconder for that, please.
Thank you, BART.
And all those in favor?
Well, in that case, -- yes, Dotty.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: Can Olivier explain why he is --
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: If he's willing to, yes.
>>DOTTY SPARKS DE BLANC: -- abstaining?
>>OLIVIER GUILLARD: I can comment more, but I have a problem with the recognition process which is included with this appointment.
So that's just....
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Fair enough.
I'll write to the relevant parties as soon as I can to notify them formally and ask them to appoint liaisons at their leisure to the council.
>>PAULOS NYIRENDA: My understanding, maybe if you can correct it, is that these resolutions will go to the members first before we write the organizations?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes, yes. When I SAY i'LL DO THAT, THAT'S SUBJECT TO IT BEING PUBLISHED AND THE SEVEN DAYS EXPIRING AND SO FORTH, WHICH IS FORTUNATE, BECAUSE THAT MEANS i DON'T HAVE TO DO IT FOR ABOUT A WEEK AND A HALF.
Okay. We have one more item on the agenda. Before I go to that item, is there any other business that anyone wants to talk about or anything anybody wants to raise?
Do we want, before -- the final item is a presentation from each of the nominees to the ICANN board. We've had four nominations to the ICANN board, and we've asked each of them to come and make a very short presentation.
Before we do that -- yes, BART.
Before we do that, do we want to ask our audience if there are any questions or comments and maybe ask them if they have anything they'd like to say?
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Just one question. If you -- just before the presentation, just for the record, could you point out what the procedure is, how the ccNSO will appoint the ICANN members?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Yes.
The procedures document is posted on our Web site, but in outline, nominations close at midnight UTC tonight, which is 2:00 in the morning here. So if you're in the bar at 1:00 in the morning, you can make a sudden decision to nominate for the board, send us an e-mail.
>>PATRICIO POBLETE: (inaudible).
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Absolutely.
And once nominations close, the electoral list is closed, and ballots will be sent out.
And there will then be an -- assuming that there are more than two candidates, which currently there are, there will be an election, and that election will be on the basis that each member of the ccNSO has two votes, because there are two seats to the board. And then once we've gone through that process, the results will be announced.
The electoral list closed on the 1st of December, so the applications received for membership prior to that approved will be on the electORAL list and they will be receiving ballot papers. Okay?
>>BART BOSWINKEL: And when is the voting closed?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: The voting closes on the -- good question.
15th of December?
I'll just check.
16th of December, midnight, UTC, the voting closes. Results to be announced by the 22nd.
Just in time for Christmas.
>>BART BOSWINKEL: Just one more question. And when will the -- when will the nominees be appointed to the board? Is it prior or during the Argentina meeting?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: I'm not entirely sure. I'm actually having a meeting with John Jeffrey later on to get the full details of that. My understanding is effectively straight away.
So for telephone board meetings.
Okay. So if there's anyone in the room who would like to make a comment or ask a question or anything at all, or have we stunned you into complete silence?
MarGARITE, are you coming to ask a question?
So that brings us, then, to the final item, and it's presentation from the four nominees.
Are they all here?
I can see Peter. Demi.
Yann, are you on? You are.
Since Peter was the first one to be nominated, perhaps we'll start with Peter.
>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: How's that for visibility? Are you getting that on your -- okay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I've been trying to e-mail this to the list for some time but I don't seem to be able to get access to the list.
I'm currently the chair of Internet New Zealand's Internet affairs committee and chair of the Asia-Pacific Top-Level Domain association, and I am a lawyer in private practice in New Zealand specializing in Internet, intellectual property and competition law.
I began my involvement with Internet Governance as the legal advisor to InternetNZ in 1995, monitoring the IAHC proposals in the gTLD MOU we also monitored the green and white paper in 1998.
As a member of the Boston working group which was formed ad hoc in 1998 at the final wrap-up of the international forum, I participated in a critique of the first draft of the bylaws of the company known as newCO.
I attended the first public meeting of ICANN in Singapore in February in 1999 and have attended every ICANN meeting since. My interest has always been the preservation of the rights of national self-determination of the national ccTLDs, which we have often referred to in these meetings colloquially as sovereignty. And associated with that has been an interest in the preservation of the private property rights associated with those ccTLDs that were not governmental.
I believed in and supported the concept of an ICANN based on the white paper principles of open, transparent, geodiverse bottom-up processes, with private sector regulation of the Internet in cooperation with national governments.
I was a member of ICANN's working group A which drafted the UDRP, that's the compulsory arbitration, in the case of trademark domain name collisions in the dot come dot net doing org spaces. One of my concerns was to ensure that it was understood by ICANN that the policies made at ICANN for the gTLDs would not apply to gTLDs. That intellectual property issues, naming policies, WHOIS, et cetera, were entirely a matter for the local Internet community of each ccTLD. And people present at that time may remember the WORRIES that seemed apparent at the time that some of these policies were just going to be rolled out across the ccTLDs without consultation.
In November 2000 in Marina del Rey I suggested to the ccTLDs that the proper place for the ccTLDs in ICANN would be in our own Supporting Organization and not within the DNSO. Our issues were substantive and were different from the gTLD issues with which the GNSO was occupied.
For the next three years as a member of the ccTLD AdCom I chaired the difficult and contentious sessions in our meetings devoted to this issue. I withdraw from the DNSO drafting the first (INAUDIBLE) bylaws, negotiating with the Evolution and Reform Committee, working on the launching group until the ccNSO was born having its first members meeting in Tunisia at the end of 2003.
I inaugurated the practice and drafted many communications from the ccTLD, and chaired our meetings and have reached out to all other constituents of ICANN on behalf of ccTLDs. I have a broad range of interests in addition to ccTLD things including governments, WSIS, budget and a number of issues associated with gTLD registry, registrar contracts.
If elected to the board by the ccNSO, I would expect to work closely with the council, to ensure that its views, concerns, and activities were communicated to the board and the staff, and equally that board's use views and programs were communicated to the ccNSO.
I would expect to focus in my first year on meetings with non-member ccTLD managers and seeking ways, including, you guessed it, further bylaw amendments to encourage the widest membership possible of the ccNSO.
I'd expect to monitor the development of accountability frameworks carefully, and other ways of strengthening the legal position of ccTLD managers.
I'm interested in the development of the financial contributions by ccTLDs to the Kane budget and the ICANN budget as a whole.
And I expect to participate further in the Internet Governance debate, including within the working group and elsewhere.
I should be proud to be elected by the ccNSO as one of its appointees, and look forward to an opportunity to serve the ccTLD community further.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, Peter.
Are there any questions for Peter?
>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Would you like to hear from all of them first, and then....
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Okay. So the -- thank you, Peter.
The second person who nominated or was nominated was Demi Getschko. Demi, would you like to come down.
>>DEMI GETSCHKO: It was a long way to the microphone here.
My name is Demi Getschko, and initially I want to thank the people who nominated and seconded my name to this election.
I am an electronic engineer and I have a master's and Ph.D. degree in electronic engineering and I teach some classes also in the university in networking and computer architecture.
I have been around, involved with the Internet since '89, more or less, and since that time involved in the Brazilian registry, setup and functioning.
It has been a long way since the first and, in my opinion, flawed approach when the CC was just a constituency under the umbrella of DNSO, and also with some unrealistic numbers in budget that ICANN expected from the CCs. Now the things I think are in the right way. We have the -- the CC community has done a very, very good job establishing the ccNSO. I suppose the ccNSO is the real environment where we can do the things we want to do. And our goal is to make the ccNSO much inclusive, a very strong representative organization of the CCs. I suppose we, the CCs, have to collaborate inside the environment of the ccNSO.
My computer just went out.
I have to stress that in my view the GNSO and ccNSO are two completely different things, and the relations between ICANN and GNSO is a strong relation. We have contracts with stronger hands, and in other way the relation between ICANN and CC have to be a much more lighter relation with collaborative work and with distributed administration.
We believe that there will be no binding procedures between the ICANN and the CCs as a whole, and all the process development policy has to be done inside the ccNSO.
We -- I think that one of the key issues here is the collaboration. If you think about the Internet from the beginning, we saw that there was the special environment that Internet brought to the society that permitted, for example, the open and free software initiatives that permitted the freedom of speech, that permitted the collaborative administration, distribute administration, and permitted the collaborative work that is beneficial to all of us.
Then we will try to keep alive this original Internet spirit of freedom, of distributed administration and of collaborative work. These would be my main goals if I succeed to be appointed to the board, and in any case, I wish the best luck to the ccNSO. It was really a big accomplishment to see the second meeting here, and I applaud all of you.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, Demi. Does anyone want to ask Demi anything?
Thank you, Demi.
Yann, you're next.
>>YANN KWOK: Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Yann Kwok. I'm involved with the MU registry, and I've been in I.T. and telecom industry for the past ten years. I've been involved in ICANN since the Berlin meeting in 1998 and was previously a board member of afrinic. I've been a United Nations consultant for African countries to advise them on Internet connectivity and I.T. strategy. I just finished my MBA from MIT in June and I'm currently a digital vision fellow at Stanford where I'm leading a project to help fight against HIV/AIDS in Africa.
I was elected at the afTLD chair in 2002, and have been using AfTLD as a forum for a forum for technical cooperation for African ccTLDs. We have been helped by our colleagues from Latin America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.
I'm honored to have been nominated as a candidate for the board. I'll be glad to represent the views of the ccTLD community and the global Internet users within ICANN.
I think ICANN is a bit after a reflection point where MOU is ending in 2006. Having been involved in AfriNIC, I was glad to see the ASO going forward with the NRO. We have two years to go and we don't know where ICANN is heading. I believe if the ccNSO could achieve something like that, that would be much laudable, because we don't know where the future is.
As a previous AdCom member, I've seen endless -- I've been to endless meetings of the CCs and it's been sad to see every time we meet here we don't have that much access to the board. I hope to get the chance to be on the board and to keep my doors open to be a representative of the ccTLD community. Thank you.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, Yann. Anyone want to ask Yann a question?
>>Anders Janson: Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Anders Janson, and my nomination, as you all know, come quite lately, so I haven't been able to prepare a full statement.
I hope I will, in the next couple of days, be able to produce such on the list.
We started with a lawyer and we are ending with a lawyer. However, there are some differences between us. I come from a civil law country, and Peter comes from a common law country.
I started, however, off in a somewhat other perspective because I started to read science on the technical institute -- on the royal Institute of Technology in STOCKHOLM. However, as things changed I decided to read law and after graduating I served in courts and in several governmental positions, but after a couple of years, I left for being a lawyer in private practice.
And as such, I was approached in 1996 by the Swedish academic network to have the task to set up the legal framework for the Internet exchange points in Sweden.
And as often when you are asked to do something, you also end up in the board, and so did I. And I'm still a board member of the Swedish Internet exchange points.
A year later, I was approached by the Swedish chapter of ISOC that wanted me to sort out the legal framework for the Swedish registry. That was done in January 1998, when I was also appointed as a board member of the Swedish registry.
I served as board member until May this year, as chairman in the registry.
Part of the time I also did serve as general manager of the registry.
That means that I have, for being a lawyer, quite insightful -- insightful skills about how a registry is run.
I started to represent the Swedish registry in 1998 in the CENTR and ICANN process, and I have been around this environment since then.
Now, since two year, I am also serving as a board member in URID, which is the appointed registry for a dot EU domain that hopefully, and I stress hopefully, will be able to launch the domain late next year.
Finally, I have also, since a couple of years, served as a WIPO panelist. That means that I have quite a broad experience about this area, not only as a lawyer but also in other practical matters.
When I was approached the day before yesterday by my colleagues from the netherlands, I of course was flattered. And one can't resist such an opportunity to be able to represent one's colleagues.
However, I have a huge problem. I come from a region and represent a registry that hasn't still joined the ccNSO. And therefore, you can of course ask yourself why should you appoint a person like that? And.
My simple answer to that is hopefully could I bring the European countries and the ccNSO closer together.
And I think that if the CCs, as such, should have aS strong influence as possible in the ICANN process, we both need each other.
And I cannot of course promise you because I can't even deliver my own registry, but as I said, I think what I've seen these two days of the ccNSO meeting, much progress has been done, and I'm quite sure that some of the European registries will see this as positive and hopefully join.
When I serve, if that will be the case, in the ICANN board, I of course have to stick to what the ICANN bylaws says. They give me the limitation for my assignment. But of course I will always try to look upon all matters from a CCs point of view. Thank you.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you, Anders. Does anybody have any questions?
>>PATRICIO POBLETE: Yeah.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Patricio has a question. Hold on.
>>PATRICIO POBLETE: What you say about the possibility of helping bring the European registries and the ccNSO closer together sounds very interesting. Some of the Europeans have, even today in the letter received from CENTR, stated that they see problems in the legal contract of the ccNSO, and some even have said that the bylaws are flawed.
Do you share those views and could you comment on that?
>>>: Anders Janson: I mean, you can look at things from a legal perspective and you can always find flaws and you can find risks. But often it's a question about risk analysis. And of course you have the pro and cons. And I think that we are all aware of that. We have, how shall I say? A common responsibility to make this work. And I DOUBT if there are any legal flaws in the bylaws as such, that someone would ever dare to actually use them TO jeopardize the ability or system as such.
The reason I think I was nominated, of course you should ask the ones who had nominated me, is that I come from a very small country in Europe, and due to that, we are always seeking pragmatic solutions. And I think what the ICANN process is very much about to try to find the pragmatic solutions, and not all the time stick to every little word in the legal documents.
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you.
Patricio, did you want to -- no.
Thank you, Anders.
Okay. Well, that is the end of the four presentations. I would like to thank the four of you for being prepared to give up the time and come. And on with the election, I guess.
We've come to the end of the formal business of the meeting, unless anyone has, one last chance, anything that needs to be dealt with.
I think we should -- one thing we should do is pass a formal resolution of thanks to the organizing committee, to uniforum, ZADNA, ICANN staff and the people in the bar for making this happen
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: So I propose that the ccNSO council express their warm appreciation to the organizing committee of the meeting, to uniform, ZADNA, the ICANN staff and everybody else involved in the meeting. Can I have a seconder for that, please?
Can I propose that in the time honored ICANN tradition, we vote on the resolution by acclamation?
>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: Thank you. It's onwards to work now.
Thank you, everybody, and thanks very much for coming.