Site Map

Please note:

You are viewing archival ICANN material. Links and information may be outdated or incorrect. Visit ICANN's main website for current information.

ICANN Meetings in Mar Del Plata

Public Forum, Part 2

Wednesday, April 7, 2005

Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the Public Forum, Part 2 held on 7 April, 2005 in Mar Del Plata, Argentina. 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.

>>VINT CERF: GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. WELCOME TO THE SECOND HALF OF THE PUBLIC FORUM. I HAVE SEVERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS I WANT TO MAKE BEFORE WE BEGIN THE REGULAR PROGRAM. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO REPORT THAT THE STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND LIAISONS SURVIVED THE SOCCER MATCH LAST NIGHT, ALTHOUGH NOT WITHOUT INJURY. SO I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE SUFFERING AND IN PAIN ARE HERE THIS MORNING ON TIME, READY TO PARTICIPATE. I'M SURE THAT WE LOOK FORWARD TO SOME WAY OF GETTING EVEN IN LUXEMBOURG. BUT I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WILL -- WHAT FORM THAT WILL TAKE. I'VE BEEN SUGGESTING A BLIND WINE TASTING AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO SOCCER. SECOND, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN -- IF THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN THE ROOM WHO WERE PLAYING POKER WITH ME LAST NIGHT, I NEED TO SEE THEM AT THE COFFEE BREAK. SO THIS IS -- THIS WAS, LIKE, 2:00 IN THE MORNING. SO PLEASE COME AND VISIT. AND IF YOU SEE OTHERS THAT WERE NOT HERE IN THE ROOM WHEN I MADE THAT REQUEST, PLEASE LET THEM KNOW. THIRD, TOMORROW MORNING, I GUESS I WILL MAKE THIS ANNOUNCEMENT LATER IN THE DAY AS WELL, BUT TOMORROW MORNING, WE ARE -- I THINK MANY OF YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE FUNERAL FOR POPE JOHN II IS SCHEDULED -- JOHN PAUL, THANK YOU -- IS SCHEDULED TO BEGIN OUR TIME AT 5:00 A.M. IN THE MORNING. AND IT IS THOUGHT TO LAST ABOUT THREE HOURS. SO WE WILL START OUR MEETING AT 9:00 TOMORROW RATHER THAN 8:30 IN ORDER TO ALLOW TIME FOR PEOPLE WHO MIGHT WANT TO WATCH THE CEREMONIES AND FUNERAL PROCEEDINGS TO COMPLETE THAT AND THEN COME HERE. OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK WE'RE READY TO GO. SO LET ME START BY ASKING THAT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE OFFER ITS REPORT, IF WE HAVE OUR FINANCE COMMITTEE CHAIR HERE. YES. THERE YOU ARE. OKAY. YOU HAVE A CHOICE OF MAKING YOUR REPORT FROM THE -- FROM WHERE YOU ARE SITTING OR THE PODIUM, EITHER ONE. >>HAGEN HULTZSCH: (INAUDIBLE). >>VINT CERF: IT'S FASTER IF YOU STAY SEATED, SO I WILL -- THE CHAIR ALSO NOTES THAT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN IS WELL-DRESSED IN A THREE-PIECE SUIT THIS MORNING. >>HAGEN HULTZSCH: YOU KNOW, IT'S -- (INAUDIBLE) I FOLLOW THE FORMALITIES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, FOR GIVING ME THE PERMISSION TO GIVE MY REPORT. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK TO HAVE THE SLIDES PROJECTED ON THE SCREEN. ARE THEY AVAILABLE? >>STEVE CONTE: YES. >>HAGEN HULTZSCH: I DON'T SEE THAT. IT WOULD BE BETTER IF THEY WOULD BE THERE. >>STEVE CONTE: WE'RE WORKING ON IT. >>VINT CERF: WE'RE STILL NOT SEEING -- OH, HERE WE GO. >>HAGEN HULTZSCH: SO THE FIRST SLIDE WAS THERE. AT LEAST THAT IS THE REPORT. AND IF YOU GO TO THE SECOND SLIDE, PLEASE, I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW THE MEMBERS OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, IT'S RAIMUNDO BECA, ONE OF THE SOCCER PLAYERS LAST NIGHT, JOICHI ITO, THOMAS NILES, MIKE PALAGE, ALEJANDRO PISANTY, AND MYSELF CHAIRING THE COMMITTEE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. JUST FOR THE ACTIONS WE HAD DONE, WE HAD -- AFTER THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING IN CAPE TOWN, WE HAD A TELEPHONE CONFERENCE IN FEBRUARY BESIDE THE SEQUENCE OF BILATERAL TALKS BETWEEN MYSELF, KURT PRITZ, AND PAUL TWOMEY, LOOKING INTO THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, THE BUDGET STATUS, AND THE REVENUES AND EXPENSES, AND FOUND OUT THAT THINGS WERE IN GOOD SHAPE. AND WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE PLANNING FOR THE COMING FISCAL YEAR. WE HAD ANOTHER FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING EARLY THIS WEEK WITH A REVIEW OF THE PRELIMINARY OPERATION PLAN, WHICH CERTAINLY WILL HAVE INFLUENCE, AS YOU KNOW, ON THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET. AND A PREVIEW OF THE PRELIMINARY EXPENSES FOR NEXT YEAR ASIDE THE STATUS REPORT ABOUT THE CURRENT FINANCIAL SITUATION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE RESULTS REGARDING THE FISCAL YEAR'S BUDGET STATUS IS THAT, FORTUNATELY, THE SPENDING IS UNDERRUNNING, BUT ALSO THE REVENUE IS UNDERRUNNING THE PLAN BY ABOUT 10%. THIS ORIGINATED FROM A THREE-MONTHS' LAG DUE TO, LET'S SAY, LATE INVOICING, BECAUSE WE WERE LATE ON THE DECISION OF THE -- THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. AND YOU REMEMBER THE SITUATION LAST YEAR. THE FINAL BUDGET ARRANGEMENTS WERE ONLY MADE IN -- WHEN THE BUDGET YEAR WAS ALREADY RUNNING. AND THE AGREEMENTS WITH OUR CONSTITUENCIES WERE ACHIEVED ONLY IN NOVEMBER LAST YEAR. THAT WAS THE REASON WHY SOME OF THE REVENUES CAME IN LATE. FORTUNATELY, AS I SAID ALREADY, THE SPENDINGS WERE ALSO REDUCED BY EXPECTED ABOUT 70% TO COMPENSATE FOR THE REVENUE SHORTFALLS. WE HAD A DELAYED HIRING IMPLEMENTED. WE HAD REDUCED COMMITMENTS ON TRAVEL AND OTHER THINGS. AND ALSO WE DEFERRED OUR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME, SO THAT IS PUTTING THE TOTAL BALANCE INTO GOOD SHAPE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE BUDGET PLANNING FOR THE COMING YEAR, SOME OF YOU HAVE HEARD THESE NUMBERS ALREADY AT THE ADVISORY MEETINGS FOR BUDGET PLANNING AND SO ON. THE EXPENSE PLAN FOR THE COMING YEAR IS $23 MILLION U.S. PART OF IT IS THE INCREASED STAFF, WHICH IS RELATED TO THE DUTIES WE HAVE TO TAKE AS PART OF THE OPERATION PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN DISCUSSED EARLIER THIS WEEK. WE HAVE THIS SECURITY AND STABILITY PROGRAM, VERY IMPORTANT, VERY SENSITIVE. IMAGINE THE CONSEQUENCES IF THE NETWORK, FOR WHATEVER REASON, WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RUN EFFECTIVELY FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS, WHAT THE WORLD WOULD DO. SO IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO REALLY HAVE HIGH ATTENTION TO THESE ISSUES. AND ALSO WE HAVE THE OUTREACH THINGS, DEVELOPMENT COUNTRY INTERNET COMMUNITY PROGRAM. THE CURRENT PLAN IS TO PUT THE REVENUES TO ABOUT 23.5 MILLION, SO A LITTLE HIGHER THAN THE PLANNED EXPENSES. THE REGISTRAR AND REGISTRY FEE WOULD STAY CONSTANT IN THE CURRENT PLAN, AND WE WOULD HAVE THE INCREASE BY THE NEW STLDS AND THE DOT NET AGREEMENT. CERTAINLY WITH THIS PLAN, WE DO NOT YET FULFILL MAJOR OBJECTIVES WHICH FOR THE LONG RUN HAVE TO BE REFERRED. ONE OBJECTIVE IS TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY, A RESERVE FUND, IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENS. AND CURRENTLY, WE ARE UNPROTECTED AGAINST SUCH AN EVENT, WHICH, FORTUNATELY, DOESN'T HAPPEN. ALSO, WE DON'T YET HAVE THE FUNDS FOR THINGS WHICH WE SHOULD DO, LIKE OUTREACH INTO DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, IT SHOULD BE ENHANCED, AND OTHER THINGS WHICH ICANN SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO ON A FUND BASIS. WE WILL GO INTO THAT ONE WHEN THE TIME COMES TO DISCUSS IT IN DETAIL. THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS IS ACTUALLY STANDING WITH ICANN'S COMMITMENTS. AS ICANN IS INCREASING ITS GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITIES, THE PLANNED BUDGET STRUCTURE COVERS A GOOD PART OF THE STRATEGIC AND MOST OF THE OPERATIONAL PLAN INITIATIVES. I SAY SOME OF IT IS NOT COVERED YET. THE PRIORITIZED TASKS ARE COVERED IN THIS BUDGET EVEN THOUGH SOME ELEMENTS, INCLUDING THE PROVISION OF RESERVES, HAD TO BE DEFERRED. THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TAKES THIS OPPORTUNITY TO STRESS THE IMPORTANCE ITS MEMBERS ATTACH TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROCESSES FOCUSED UPON ICANN'S STAKEHOLDER RELATIONS MANAGEMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, HAGEN. I WOULD NOTE THAT THE SLIDE THAT REFERS TO THE BUDGET FOR 2005/2006 HAS A SMALL TYPO IN IT. IT READS 2005 TO 2,206. I'M PRETTY SURE THIS IS NOT A 200-YEAR BUDGET. SO WE SHOULD MAKE THAT CORRECTION. >>HAGEN HULTZSCH: I'M SORRY, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I HAD A TYPO IN MY SLIDES. >>VINT CERF: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ONLY BUDGETING ONE YEAR, NOT 200. I CALL UPON THE VICE-CHAIRMAN, ALEJANDRO PISANTY, TO PRESENT THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE REPORT. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: GOOD MORNING. THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE HAS MET DURING THIS LAST PERIOD BY TELECONFERENCE -- NO, SORRY, BY PHYSICAL MEETINGS, FACE TO FACE, AND HAS HAD INTENSE E-MAIL EXCHANGES. OUR MAIN TASKS HAVE BEEN RECOMPOSITION OF THE BOARD COMMITTEES, WHICH WE HAVE DONE, WITH THE INGRESS OF NEW BOARD MEMBERS, IN PARTICULAR, THIS WAS DONE IN -- DURING THE LAST PHYSICAL MEETING -- THE LATEST PHYSICAL MEETING OF ICANN. FOR THIS TASK NOW WE ARE IN CONSULTATION, WE HAVE STARTED CONSULTATIONS WITH THE NEW BOARD MEMBERS DEMI GETSCHKO AND PETER DENGATE THRUSH, AND WE WILL BE DOING THIS -- WE HAVE AGREED WITH THEM WE WILL BE PROPOSING COMMITTEES TO WHICH THEY WILL BELONG AFTER THIS MEETING. SO WE WILL LOOK AT THAT IN THE COMING WEEKS. THE SECOND VERY IMPORTANT TASK THAT WE HAVE SET IS TO PROVIDE CONDUCT AND ETHICS GUIDELINES FOR BOARD MEMBERS, FOR DIRECTORS, WHICH ARE AN EMBODIMENT AND MORE DETAILED AND OBJECTIVE EXPRESSION OF PRINCIPLES AND CORE VALUES OF ICANN. THIS IS ALREADY OUT FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION. PEOPLE WHO HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND PEOPLE WHO ARE FOLLOWING IT WILL EASILY SEE THAT THIS IS A DELICATE TASK. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ENSURE PROPER CONDUCT, THAT THERE IS SOME MEANS OF ENFORCING IT AND THAT THESE DO NOT INTERFERE IN ANY WAY WITH HIGHER DUTIES OF BOARD MEMBERS OF BEING CRITICAL ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION, OF NOTICING THINGS THAT GO WRONG. AND THIS DELICATE BALANCE IS STILL IN FLUX IN THE DISCUSSION THAT WE ARE HAVING WITH SOME OF OUR DIRECTORS AND WITH THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE. I'M SURE THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO IN THE COMING WEEKS TO PROPOSE A NEW DRAFT OF THESE GUIDELINES AND THAT THIS WILL BE MUCH MORE SATISFACTORY. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO ENSURE THAT VERY HIGH ETHICAL STANDARDS ARE ADHERED TO, WHICH IS, AGAIN, AS I SAID, A COMPLEX SET OF SOMETIMES CONTRADICTORY ETHICAL STANDARDS, WHICH IS LOYALTY AND FULFILLMENT OF FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORPORATION, AND THE CRITICAL VIEW THAT MUST BE HAD FOR THE OPERATIONS ALL THE TIME. WE MUST MAKE SURE THAT THESE GUIDELINES ARE CLEAR, THAT THERE IS NO TEMPTATION FOR PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE BOARD TO TRY TO UNDULY INFLUENCE THE CONDUCT OF THE BUSINESS OF ICANN. WE MUST MAKE SURE HERE THAT ICANN IS NOT SET AS PREY FOR ANY TYPE OF EXTORTION CAPTURE OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF MISCONDUCT. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ALEX. I'D LIKE NOW TO CALL UPON VENI MARKOVSKI TO GIVE A REPORT OF THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE. VENI. >>VENI MARKOVSKI: SHALL I GO THERE OR CAN I SPEAK FROM -- >>VINT CERF: YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY SEATED. IF YOU'RE ONE OF THE INJURED, YOU CERTAINLY SHOULD NOT STRESS YOUR INJURY ANY FURTHER. >>VENI MARKOVSKI: THANK YOU. DEAR COLLEAGUES, DEAR GUESTS, WE NEED A LOT OF THANKS TO THE LOCAL HOSTS, CABASE, THE CITY OF MAR DEL PLATA, AND EVERYONE WHO MADE THIS MEETING HAPPEN. SPECIAL THANKS GO TO THE INTERPRETERS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO PLEASE APPLAUD THEM FOR THEIR WORK TRANSLATING IN SPANISH. (APPLAUSE.) >>VENI MARKOVSKI: WHO MAKE -- THEY MADE SURE THAT EVERY SPANISH-SPEAKER CAN USE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE. AND THAT WAS QUITE VISIBLE DURING THE WSIS WORKSHOP, WHEN THE WHOLE PANEL WAS ACTUALLY SPEAKING SPANISH. AND I HOPE IT ALSO SHOWS THE GLOBAL -- IT ALSO SHOWS THE GLOBAL INTERNET COMMUNITY THAT ICANN IS CHANGING POSITIVELY AND WITHOUT TOO MUCH NOISE AS PART OF THE MULTILINGUAL EMPHASIZE. THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE MET IN MAR DEL PLATA ON MONDAY APRIL 4TH IN THE PRESENCE OF THE CHAIRMAN, SENOR CERF. WE HAVE NOT DECIDED ON NEW CITIES FOR 2006. SO THE SCHEDULE NOW LOOKS LIKE: IN JULY WE MEET IN LUXEMBOURG; IN DECEMBER, IN VANCOUVER, CANADA; IN MARCH, IN WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND; AND NEXT JULY, IN MARRAKECH, MOROCCO. WE WILL STILL HAVE TO DECIDE WHERE WE SHALL MEET IN LATIN AMERICA FOR THE NOVEMBER 2006 MEETING. I THINK ALL PARTICIPANTS WOULD LOVE TO GO BACK TO LATIN AMERICA, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT NOVEMBER IS, AS PETER NOTED THE OTHER DAY, ACTUALLY THE SUMMER HERE. ALSO, THIS YEAR'S SOCCER CHAMPIONSHIP -- AND I'M WRITING THE REPORT BEFORE THE TOURNAMENT, SO I SHOULD BE EXCUSED, I GUESS -- HOPEFULLY CAN BE REPEATED IN THE NEXT MEETINGS SO THAT THE LOSING TEAM OF ICANN WILL HAVE THEIR CHANCES, TOO. AND IN CASE YOU DON'T KNOW, ICANN LOST WITH DIGNITY YESTERDAY. (LAUGHTER.) >>VENI MARKOVSKI: I MEAN WHEN I SAY "WITH DIGNITY," AND YOU SHOULD BE AWARE IF THERE WERE MORE GAMES, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN STARTING TO WIN, BECAUSE WE LOST 6-0, AND THEN 3-0, AND THEN ONLY 3-2. SO, YOU SEE, WE'RE GETTING BETTER. WE'D LIKE TO SAY THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS ENJOYED THE FACT THAT THE LOCAL HOST HAS ORGANIZED THE LUNCHES CATERED, AND THAT WAS A SUBSTANTIAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE BUDGETS OF ALL PARTICIPANTS. THE DINNERS WERE ALSO A GREAT PLACE NOT ONLY FOR TANGO, THE LOCAL SPECIALTIES, BUT ALSO THE NEED TO MEET AND CHAT WITH ALL PARTICIPANTS, AND OCCASIONALLY SEE VINT CERF DANCING TANGO. (APPLAUSE.) >>VENI MARKOVSKI: FURTHER, TO INCLUDE OUR MEETINGS AND TO RESPOND TO SOME CONCERNS RAISED IN CONVERSATION BETWEEN MEETING COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DIFFERENT CONSTITUENCIES, WE'D LIKE TO LAUNCH A SURVEY AMONG PAST AND PRESENT ICANN PARTICIPANTS ABOUT THE WAY THE MEETINGS ARE TAKING PLACE, WHAT THEY LIKED ABOUT THEM, AND WHAT THEY DIDN'T LIKE. WERE THEY UNHAPPY THAT THE MEETINGS DIDN'T LAST LONG ENOUGH, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. WE HOPE TO BE ABLE TO COME WITH A REPORT ON THAT TOPIC TO THE ICANN COMMUNITY BEFORE THE VANCOUVER MEETING. IN THE MEANTIME, WE (INAUDIBLE) CANDIDATES TO HOST US IN 2007 TO NOT APPLY FOR MEETINGS. SO DON'T APPLY FOR MEETINGS FOR 2007, BUT HAVE COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE STAFF ABOUT THE MEETINGS AND SHOW YOUR WILLINGNESS TO HOST THEM AS FOLLOWS: IN 2006, WE HAVE, AS I SAID, IN LATIN AMERICA, OCTOBER 30 TO NOVEMBER 3RD. IN 2007, THE MEETINGS ARE IN MARCH, 26 TO 30TH IN EUROPE. JUNE 25 TO 29TH IN NORTH AMERICA. AND OCTOBER 29TH TO NOVEMBER 2, ASIA-PACIFIC. WE DO NOT NEED PROPOSALS TODAY BECAUSE WE'D LIKE FIRST TO SEE WHAT THE PARTICIPANTS THINK SHOULD, COULD, OR MIGHT CHANGE. AND ONLY AFTER THAT, WE'LL BE ISSUING FORMAL REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS. SO THAT'S WHY IF YOU ARE A HOST -- WANT TO HOST AN ICANN MEETING, PLEASE APPROACH US. WE HAVE BEEN ALREADY APPROACHED, BY THE WAY, EVEN DURING THAT MEETING. AND STATE YOUR DESIRE. AND THEN WE'LL BE WORKING OUT THE REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS, AND THEN YOU CAN FORMALLY ISSUE YOUR DESIRE TO HAVE US. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VENI. I WOULD FIRST THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE KIND WORDS TO OUR HOSTS. I THINK WE ALL SHARE OUR APPRECIATION FOR THE HOSPITALITY HERE. SECOND, I WANT TO ENCOURAGE COLLECTION OF THE INFORMATION AS YOU SUGGEST ABOUT THE MEETINGS, THEIR FORMAT, AND SCHEDULE. WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE A BETTER SENSE FOR HOW ALL OF THE PARTICIPANTS VIEW THE LENGTH AND STRUCTURE OF THESE MEETINGS. SO THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING THAT IN THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE PLAN. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING THE REPORT THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, AND I'M SURE THAT ALL OF US WILL REFLECT ON IT WHEN IT'S AVAILABLE. LET ME NOW ASK THAT THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST COMMITTEE CHAIR READ THAT REPORT. THAT'S HAGEN AGAIN. >>HAGEN HULTZSCH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. COULD I PLEASE ASK FOR THE SLIDES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS THE REPORT, WHICH I THINK THE SECOND SLIDE HAS A DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTIVITIES ON THE SPECIAL REQUEST OF MY COLLEAGUE, NJERI, BECAUSE SHE WANTED TO HAVE INDICATED WHAT THE COMMITTEE IS ACTUALLY DOING, SO I READ THIS ON HER REQUEST TO YOU. THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD COMMITTEE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND ESPECIALLY THE CHAIRMAN, WERE CONTINUOUSLY INVOLVED IN RELEVANT DIALOGUE WITH THE FULL BOARD, AS WELL AS WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, THUS ENSURING THAT EITHER NO CONFLICT SITUATIONS WERE ARISING, OR, IF SO, WERE PROPERLY MANAGED. I INJECTED THIS SLIDE IN MY REPORT, AND NJERI HAS SENT ME A COMMENT ON MY DRAFT WITHOUT THIS REPORT THAT SHE ASKED FOR MORE FLESH INTO THE REPORT. THIS IS NOW MORE FLESH. THANK YOU, NJERI. THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES. COULD I HAVE THE NEXT SLIDE. AS YOU KNOW, THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST COMMITTEE IS -- HAS A TASK TO LOOK INTO POTENTIAL SITUATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AND ALSO TO SEE WHAT THESE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST COULD BE. SO EACH MEMBER OF THE BOARD AND OFFICERS ARE REQUESTED EACH YEAR TO PROVIDE A CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST STATEMENT TO THE CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST COMMITTEE WHICH DESCRIBES THE ACTIVITIES WHAT THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND THE DIRECTORS ARE DOING, SO THAT THE BOARD WITH THE CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST COMMITTEE CAN SEE WHETHER THERE ARE ANY SUCH SITUATIONS. THE EVALUATION OF THESE CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST STATEMENTS, WHICH WERE AVAILABLE EARLY THIS YEAR, WAS EVALUATED BY LEGAL COUNSEL, TOGETHER WITH MYSELF AND/OR THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. WE HAD A DETAILED DISCUSSION IN THE CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST COMMITTEE. WE REALIZE THAT NO MAJOR CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST SITUATION IN THE BOARD DID ARISE OR DID OCCUR. THE MINOR ISSUES WERE PROPERLY MANAGED WHERE THEY AROSE. AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION IN THE CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST COMMITTEE OF IMPROVEMENTS IN REPORTING SUCH CONFLICTS, SHOULD THEY ARISE SOMEWHERE. WE, THE CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST COMMITTEE, ALSO TOOK THE REPORT, AND APPROVED IT, OF LEGAL COUNSEL AND HIS STYLE TO MANAGE THE PROCESS AND MANAGEMENT IN RELATION WITH TELCORDIA ON POTENTIAL CONFLICTS WHICH COULD HAVE ARISEN IN THIS ARENA AND REALIZED THAT THIS PROCESS WAS WELL-MANAGED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, HAGEN. LET ME NOW CALL ON THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE CHAIR TO PRESENT THAT REPORT. AND THAT'S THOMAS NILES. >>THOMAS NILES: MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE IS NO REPORT TO PRESENT AS THERE WAS NO MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE. SO I WILL SPARE YOU THE REPORT ON NO MEETING. >>VINT CERF: LET ME MAKE SURE THAT IF THE COMMITTEE DID NOT MEET, IT WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS NOTHING TO RECONSIDER; IS THAT CORRECT? >>THOMAS NILES: THERE WERE NO REQUESTS PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE FOR RECONSIDERATION. SO THERE WAS NO MEETING. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU FOR CONFIRMING THAT. OTHERWISE, WE WOULD HAVE TO REFER YOU TO THE DERELICTION OF DUTY COMMITTEE. LET ME NOW CALL UPON NJERI RIONGE TO PRESENT THE AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT. >>NJERI RIONGE: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. DO WE HAVE THE SLIDE? GOOD. THANK YOU. THIS PARTICULAR REPORT FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE WILL BE A LITTLE LENGTHY, PURELY BECAUSE WE THIS TIME AROUND WILL BE REPORTING ON OUR FINDINGS OF THE VISIT TO MARINA DEL REY'S OFFICE. CAN I HAVE THE SECOND SLIDE. THE REPORT WILL -- WELL, THE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF RAIMUNDO BECA, JOICHI ITO, A NEW MEMBER WHO JOINED US IN THIS MEETING, VENI MARKOVSKI, THOMAS NILES, WHO'S AN EX OFFICIO MEMBER, AND MYSELF AS CHAIR. NEXT. I WILL TAKE YOU THROUGH THE REVIEW OF THE VISIT TO THE MARINA DEL REY OFFICE BY THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO WERE ABLE TO MAKE IT. THE ADEQUACY OF ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS AND FINANCIAL CONTROLS, THE ADEQUACY OF INSURANCE COVERAGE, SELECTION OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS AND BANKING, AND ALSO THE BANKING RELATIONSHIPS. THE AUDIT COMMITTEE REVIEW OF THE ICANN OFFICE CONSISTED OF THREE MEMBERS OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE WHO HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT THE MARINA DEL REY OFFICE LAST YEAR IN OCTOBER 2004 ON TWO DIFFERENT OCCASIONS. IN ADDITION TO SPEAKING WITH MEMBERS OF STAFF AND CEO AND PRESIDENT ON ISSUES SUCH AS THE FINANCIAL CONTROLS, IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE, AUDIT PROCEDURES, CASH FLOWS, AND REVENUES, THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS MET WITH BREMER & HOCKENBERG, ICANN'S ACCOUNTANTS, AS WELL WITH CHAPMAN, INSURANCE BROKER. AN INTERVIEW WAS ALSO CONDUCTED TO THE FORM UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR ENGAGEMENT AS ICANN'S AUDITORS FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. THE AUDIT COMMITTEE FOUND THAT IT WAS CLEAR THAT ALL OF THE CURRENT CONTROLS AND BUSINESS PROCESSES MET OR ADEQUATELY MET THE CURRENT ICANN STRUCTURE. IT WAS ALSO IDENTIFIED THAT THE CURRENT -- THE CURRENT STRUCTURE WITHIN ICANN HAS ALSO GONE THROUGH A LOT OF GROWTH IN TERMS OF EXPECTATIONS FOR PERFORMANCE WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION, AND THUS FAR, WE WANTED TO RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING AREAS FOR RECONSIDERATION BY BOARD MEMBERS TO BE ABLE TO ASSIST STAFF. AND WE LOOKED AT ACCOUNTING BUDGETS AND FINANCIAL CONTROLS AND IDENTIFIED THAT THE ICANN STAFF HAS IMPLEMENTED NEW ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE WHICH WILL ALLOW MORE DETAILED INTERNAL BUDGETING AND REPORTING TO BE ACCOMPLISHED. AS THE IMPLEMENTATION IS NOW COMPLETED, MANAGEMENT IS NOW ABLE TO MEET THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES THAT ARE TIMELY ON ALL FRONTS. HOWEVER, THE REPORT THAT THE SOFTWARE PRESENTLY PRODUCES NEEDS REFINEMENT IN ORDER TO SUCCESSFUL MEASURE PERFORMANCE AGAINST THE PROJECTS DEFINED IN THE BUDGET OF 2004/2005. IN ADDITION, THE TRAINING IS CURRENTLY ONGOING, AND THE SUCCESS OF THE TRAINING NEEDS TO BE MEASURED, NEED TO BE ADHERED TO, AND TO COMPLETE INFORMATION OF THE FINANCIAL REPORTING SYSTEM IN MORE COHESIVE PROCESS FOR RELATED BUSINESS UNITS. MANAGEMENT AND STAFF HAVE COME A LONG WAY FROM WHERE ICANN WAS A YEAR AGO. AND I THINK WE ALL ATTEST TO THIS, BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE ALL THE WORK THAT HAS ACTUALLY GONE INTO THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS RESPONSIBLE TO THE STAFF. THE MANAGEMENT AND STAFF HAVE -- WE AT THE BOARD LEVEL WANTED TO TAKE TIME TO SORT OF RE-EVALUATE ALL OF THE NEW STAFF THAT WERE ACTUALLY EMPLOYED, AND ALSO THE NEW CHANGES WITHIN THE BOARD, AND IDENTIFIED THAT WE NEEDED TO SPEND TIME WITHIN THE COMMITTEE STRUCTURES TO ASSIST AT ALL LEVELS. AND THEREFORE WE RECOMMENDED THE FOLLOWING IN RELATION TO THE SUB-SUBJECT ABOVE: ENHANCE THE SKILLS WITHIN ICANN OPERATIONS THROUGH TRAINING AND RESOURCES ALLOCATION TO IMPROVE THE COMPETENCE LEVELS OF ALL CURRENT SUPPORTING STAFF AND HIRE ADDITIONAL STAFF WHO MEET THE CAPACITY AND COMPETENCE (INAUDIBLE) IN SOME AREAS TO HELP BUILD THE BUSINESS STRUCTURE FOR THE NEXT LEVEL OF GROWTH AS REQUIRED TO MEET THE ICANN BUDGET AND BYLAWS IN A TIMELY FASHION. REINSTRUCT EXISTING BYLAWS THAT HAVE NOT GROWN THE ORGANIZATION -- THAT HAVE OUTGROWN THE ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY WITHIN ICANN PROCESSES AND DELIVERABLE OBJECTIVES, PARTICULARLY IN CHECK-SIGNING AND BUDGET ALLOCATION WITHIN THE ACTUAL UNITS. PROPOSAL TO IMPLEMENT ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING WOULD BE A USEFUL PROCESS TO ENGAGE IN AT THIS STAGE WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION, AS IT IS STILL YOUNG. ANALYZE THE REPORTS FOR USUAL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY. RETAIN THE ACCOUNTANTS, BUT DEFINE THE SUPPORT ROLE AND HAVE THEM ASSIST IN MORE HOLISTIC METHOD TO THE PROCESS, PARTICULARLY IN THE AREA OF REPORTING -- OF THE REPORTING MATRIX, AS WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE USERS OF THE FINANCIAL SOFTWARE, AND ALSO INVOLVE THE KEY STAFF IN IDENTIFYING THESE OBJECTIVES. ALSO TO DEFINE THE NEW AUDITOR'S ROLE IN THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT PROCESS PRIOR TO OUR INDUCTING THEM. THIS WILL ALLOW FOR A DEFINITE RETURN ON COST OF THE SAME. AND THIS SHOULD ACTUALLY APPLY ON ALL CONSULTANTS HIRED, AND, OF COURSE, ALL STAFF. AN EVALUATION OF THE SOFTWARE'S PERFORMANCE MUST BE DONE ONCE THE ENTIRE IMPLEMENTATION IS OVER, WITH A VIEW TO CONFIRM THAT ALL THE DATA HAS BEEN CAPTURED CORRECTLY AND IN LINE WITH THE BUDGET. WE ARE PLEASED TO REPORT THAT ADDITIONAL STAFF HAS BEEN ENGAGED IN THE FINANCIAL DEPARTMENT AND TRAINING HAS CONTINUED TO -- FOR BOTH NEW AND CURRENT STAFF. HIRING OF AN ADDITIONAL STAFF PERSON IS ANTICIPATED BEFORE THE LUXEMBOURG MEETING. AS DESCRIBED BELOW, A NEW AUDIT FIRM HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED, AND AN ENGAGEMENT LETTER SHOULD BE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD SHORTLY. WORK IS STILL ONGOING ON THE REPORTS BEING PREPARED FOR INTERNAL USE AND USE BY THE BOARD. A TIMETABLE FOR RECEIVING A DRAFT OF THE NEW FINANCIAL CONTROL PLAN HAS BEEN SET BY THE COMMITTEE. THE STAFF PRESENT THE DRAFT FOR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE LUXEMBOURG MEETING. ON THE INSURANCE, THE CHAIR COMMITTEE MET WITH MR. CHAPMAN, PROVIDER OF INSURANCE COVERAGE WITHIN ICANN. BUSINESS NEEDS HAVE BEEN MET AS PART OF QUERIES THAT HAD BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN THE ROME MEETING. IN ADDITION, I NOTED (INAUDIBLE) SATISFACTION WITH THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS ARE THE SAME. WE HAVE REQUESTED THAT THE INSURER LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF ENHANCING THE COVERAGE FOR PERSONNEL STAFF AND ON-SITE LOCATIONS. ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS ASK THAT THE STAFF REVIEW THE D & O COVERAGE FOR ADEQUACY IN VIEW OF GROWTH OF THE ORGANIZATION AND LITIGIOUS ENVIRONMENT. RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THE CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF BOARD GOVERNANCE AND THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE LOOK AT THESE COVERAGES AND CONFIRM THAT THEY ARE ADEQUATELY STRUCTURED. SELECTION OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS. AFTER THE COMMITTEE'S COLLABORATION IN MARINA DEL REY IT WAS DECIDED TO CHANGE THE EXISTING AUDITORS TO ALLOW FOR A NEW AUDITING PROCESS IN LINE WITH THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND DEFINE THE STANDARDS IN A HOLISTIC VIEW. THE COMMITTEE HAS NOW INTERVIEWED TWO AUDIT FIRMS AND ITS SEARCH FOR AUDITORS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR '04-'05. AFTER COMPLETION OF THESE INTERVIEWS, THE COMMITTEE HAS REQUESTED STAFF TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS TO PRESENT AN ENGAGEMENT LETTER TO THE BOARD WITH THE FIRM OF MOSS ADAMS, LLP. MOSS ADAMS HAS A SET OF SERVICES WHICH WE FEEL, GOING FORWARD, ICANN SHOULD ENGAGE OUTSIDE AUDITORS TO PERFORM. IN ADDITION, MOSS ADAMS ARE LOCAL, AND PROXIMITY IS AN ADVANTAGE TO ICANN'S PROCESS. THE BANKING RELATIONSHIP AND RELATIONSHIP TO THE BANKING RELATIONSHIP, GIVEN ITS GEOGRAPHICALLY DIVERSE LOCATIONS, DESIRED TO BETTER INVEST RESERVE FUNDS AND STRIKE BETTER DEALS IN THE CURRENCY EXCHANGE MARKETS, ICANN IS SEARCHING FOR A NEW BANKING PARTNER. THE COMMITTEE HAS ASKED STAFF TO WORK WITH ONE OF THE FOUR BANKS THAT HAVE BEEN INTERVIEWED TO REPLACE THE CURRENT BANK AND TO EXPLORE THE BANKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CANDIDATE BANKS CO-RESPONDENT PARTNER BANK IN BRAZIL -- SORRY, BRUSSELS. OUR RECOMMENDATION ON CHANGING ICANN'S CURRENT BANK WILL BE MADE TO THE COMMITTEE IN THE NEAR FUTURE. RECOMMENDATIONS ALSO ARE BEING MADE BY THE AUDIT COMMITTEE WHERE WE PROPOSE THAT THE BOARD ADDRESS THE INCLUSION OF AUDITING THE OPERATION OF FUNCTIONS WITHIN ICANN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE GUIDELINES. IN CONCLUSION, TO SUMMARIZE, THE AUDIT COMMITTEE HAS TASKED THE STAFF WITH CONTINUING TO WORK -- CONTINUING THE WORK TO HAVE ICANN'S MANY FINANCIAL PROCESSES REFLECT THE CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THE ORGANIZATION, TO BECOME MEASURABLE, REFLECTING THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC AND OPERATIONAL PLANS CURRENTLY BEING PREPARED WITH INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, NJERI. I WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR COMMITTEE FOR A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF WORK REVIEWING THE ACTIVITIES OF ICANN. I PARTICULARLY APPRECIATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE FOR IMPROVING OUR OPERATION. I WILL ACCEPT THE CHARGE TO EXAMINE THE D & O INSURANCE, RELATED MATTERS AS YOU HAVE SUGGESTED AND WE WILL REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD BEFORE THE LUXEMBOURG MEETING. LET ME NOW MOVE ON TO THE OMBUDSMAN REPORT, AND I WOULD CALL UPON FRANK FOWLIE TO MAKE THAT PRESENTATION. >>FRANK FOWLIE: MR. CHAIRMAN, VINT CERF, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND LIAISONS, STAFF, BUENOS DIAS. IT'S AN EXTREME PLEASURE FOR ME TO BE HERE THIS MORNING TO BRING YOU THIS THE FIRST UPDATE ON THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND ITS ACTIVITIES. IT'S BEEN A VERY BUSY TIME FOR THIS OFFICE SINCE WE LAST MET IN CAPE TOWN. AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF WORK TO DO TO SET UP THIS OFFICE, ESTABLISH WORKING RELATIONSHIPS AND CREATE THE NECESSARY WORKING WRITTEN FRAMEWORKS FOR THE GUIDANCE OF THE OFFICE AS WELL AS MEETING THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONAL NEEDS BY RESPONDING TO COMPLAINTS AND INQUIRIES BY MEMBERS OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY. MY APPROACH IN ESTABLISHING THIS OFFICE HAS BEEN TO TRY TO GET THE FUNDAMENTALS RIGHT SO IN TIME THE EMPHASIS CAN BE SPENT ON DOING WHAT I SEE AS CORE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE JOB, TO RECEIVE AND INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS, TO MAKE REFERRALS, TO USE BEST PRACTICES IN OMBUDSMANSHIP, TO CONDUCT OUTREACH, TO RAISE AWARENESS OF THE OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY AND DEVELOP AND USE APPROPRIATE COMMUNICATION TOOLS. BEHIND ME YOU CAN SEE THE VALUE STATEMENT THAT I'VE WRITTEN FOR THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN. THESE ARE THE CORE VALUES OF MY OFFICE. THEY'RE ON THE WEB PAGE, AND ON EVERY E-MAIL THAT IS SENT FROM THE OFFICE. THEY ARE A PUBLIC AND TRANSPARENT PRONOUNCEMENT OF HOW I INTEND TO CONDUCT THE BUSINESS OF OMBUDSMANSHIP ON BEHALF OF ICANN. THE OMBUDSMAN IS COMMITTED TO RECOGNIZING AND RESPECTING DIVERSITY OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY, TO ACHIEVING EXCELLENCE IN OMBUDSMANSHIP; NOT SIMPLY IN TERMS OF THE SERVICE PROVIDED TO THE COMMUNITY, BUT IN COMPARISON TO THE OMBUDSMAN UNIVERSE. TO EXHIBIT THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONALISM TOWARDS INDIVIDUALS CONTACTING THE OFFICE, ICANN, THE BOARD, AND THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE. TO CONDUCT ADR PROCESSES, PRIVATELY AND CONFIDENTIALLY. TO BE SEEN AS HAVING NO BIAS TO ANY PARTY, NOR ANY PREDISPOSITION TO THE OUTCOME OF ANY COMPLAINT. AND FINALLY, TO BE REGARDED BY ALL PARTIES, THE COMMUNITY, STAFF, THE BOARD, AND MYSELF AS AN INDEPENDENT OFFICER REMOTE FROM THE DAY-TO-DAY ACTIVITIES OF ICANN. THE MAIN COMMUNICATION VEHICLE, ESPECIALLY IN THIS COMMUNITY, IS THE OMBUDSMAN WEB PAGE. AND IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY VISITED THE SITE, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO SO. THE URL IS ON THE SLIDE. ON THE SITE THERE ARE TWO FUNDAMENTAL DOCUMENTS, THE OMBUDSMAN FRAMEWORK AND THE RESULTS-BASED MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK, OR RMAF. THE OMBUDSMAN FRAMEWORK IS BASICALLY A DOCUMENT WHICH DESCRIBES HOW THE OMBUDSMAN WILL RECEIVE AND DEAL WITH COMPLAINTS FROM THE ICANN COMMUNITY. THE RMAF CONTAINS A DESCRIPTION OF THE ROLE OF THE OFFICE, A LOGIC MODEL, AN EVALUATION STRATEGY, AND A REPORTING STRATEGY. THE LOGIC MODEL IS A KEY DOCUMENT AS IT DESCRIBES THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN'S PLANNED PROGRAM IN TERMS OF ITS ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS AND DESIRED OUTCOMES. IT ALSO DEMONSTRATES THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE OMBUDSMAN AND ICANN IN TERMS OF A STABLE, SECURE, AN UNIVERSAL INTERNET. THE OMBUDSMAN WEBSITE ALSO HAS A NUMBER OF TOOLS TO ASSIST MEMBERS OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY. THE PRINCIPAL TOOL IS AN ONLINE COMPLAINT FORM WHICH CAN BE SUBMITTED IN THE COMPLAINANTS LANGUAGE OF CHOICE. THERE'S ALSO A DIRECT LINK TO THE OMBUDSMAN AND A SET OF ASK THE OMBUDSMAN QUESTION ON ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE COMMUNITY OVER TIME. OVER THE NEXT FEW SLIDES I'D LIKE TO SUMMARIZE THE CONTACTS THAT THE OFFICE HAS HAD WITH THE ICANN COMMUNITY OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS. IN THE FIRST SLIDE, THERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF THE CONTACTS ON A MONTH-BY-MONTH BASIS, CURRENT UNTIL YESTERDAY. WHILE IT'S A LITTLE EARLY TO MAKE ANY FIRM PREDICTIONS ON VOLUME, I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED THAT THE NUMBER OF CONTACTS OVER A YEAR WILL BE IN THE 250 RANGE. THE SECOND SLIDE SHOWS A GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION BASED ON THE ORIGIN OF THE CONTACT. CONTACTS HAVE COME FROM NORTH AMERICA, EUROPE, AFRICA AND ASIA. WHILE THIS IS THAT RIGHT INDICATES TO ME THAT ALTHOUGH THE OFFICE IS BECOMING WIDELY KNOWN, THERE IS STILL OUTREACH WORK TO BE DONE IN SOME AREAS OF THE WORLD. I HOPE THAT MY PRESENCE HERE IN LATIN AMERICA THIS WEEK WILL BE A CATALYST TO OPEN LINES OF COMMUNICATION IN THIS PART OF THE GLOBE. I'LL JUST LEAVE THAT UP FOR A SECOND SO PEOPLE HAVE A CHANCE TO SEE ALL THE COUNTRIES. THE THIRD CHART SHOWS A BREAKDOWN OF THE TYPES OF ISSUES BROUGHT TO THE OFFICE. YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF CATEGORIES OF THE ISSUES THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS RAISED WITH ME. MANY OF THE COMPLAINTS I RECEIVED ARE NOT PURELY OMBUDSMAN ISSUES; THAT IS, THEY ARE NOT RELATED DIRECTLY TO AN ACTION, DECISION, OR INACTION BY ICANN BOARD, STAFF, OR SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, BUT AT LEAST 17 PERCENT OF THE 70 COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN WITHIN MY JURISDICTION AND HAVE BEEN OR ARE UNDER REVIEW. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT END USERS IN THE NETWORK VIEW ICANN AS A CREDIBLE SOURCE TO TURN TO WHEN THEY'RE HAVING DIFFICULTY AT SOME LEVEL. AND WHEN CONSUMERS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY REACH OUT TO ICANN FOR INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE, THIS OFFICE WILL ENDEAVOR TO ASSURE THAT THEY RECEIVE THE APPROPRIATE REFERRAL. EVEN THOSE ISSUES WHICH ARE NOT WITHIN MY JURISDICTION REQUIRE TIME AND CAREFULLY FORMULATED ASSISTANCE FOR THE CONSUMER. AN IMPORTANT RELATED ASPECT OF THIS OFFICE IS TO PROVIDE A SINGLE PORTAL FOR ALL CONSUMERS FOR ISSUES BROUGHT TO ME. I DON'T WANT TO FURTHER FRUSTRATE ALREADY FRUSTRATED CONSUMERS BY SIMPLY TELLING THEM "IT'S NOT MY JOB" AND CLOSING OFF COMMUNICATION. I WANT TO UNDERLINE THE ASSISTANCE OF ICANN STAFF IN RESPONDING TO THESE MANY COMPLAINTS AND INQUIRIES. I FOUND THEM TO BE GENUINELY INTERESTED AND ENGAGED IN RESOLVING CONFLICT ISSUES, WHILE NOT WANTING TO EXCLUDE THE STAFF OF OTHER STAFF MEMBERS I WANTED TO NOTE THE WORK OF TIM COLE, THE CHIEF REGISTRAR LIAISON, WHO HAS ACTIONED A LARGE NUMBER OF THESE ISSUES TO WHICH I HAVE REFERRED. THE FUTURE. A GOOD START HAS BEEN MADE BUT THERE'S STILL WORK TO BE DONE. IN CAPE TOWN, VINT HAD EXPRESSED THE HOPE THAT I WOULD BE AS LONELY AS THE MAYTAG REPAIRMAN SITTING ALL BY MYSELF IN VANCOUVER. I HATE TO DISAPPOINT HIM, BUT I THINK I'M GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT BUSIER TO THAT. TO THAT END I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING A CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN PLACE IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, NOW THAT WE'VE DECIDED ON WHAT ALL THE PARAMETERS NEED TO BE FOR THAT SYSTEM. OBVIOUSLY A PRIME TASK WILL BE TO CONTINUE WITH RECEIVING THE COMPLAINTS AND DEALING WITH REFERRALS AND RESOLUTIONS. I ALSO LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING WITH OUTREACH ACTIVITIES, TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN WITHIN THE ICANN COMMUNITY. FINALLY, I WILL CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE IN VARIOUS INTERNATIONAL OMBUDSMAN FORA TO ENSURE THAT THIS OFFICE OPERATES TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS IN THE FIELD OF OMBUDSMANSHIP. MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE PUBLIC FORUM THIS MORNING. GRACIAS, THANK YOU, MERCI BEAUCOUP. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. LET ME ASK A QUESTION, IS THE WEB PAGE WHICH CONTAINS ADVICE AND INSTRUCTIONS ABOUT THE OMBUDSMAN'S OFFICE AVAILABLE IN LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH? >>FRANK FOWLIE: NOT YET. THERE HASN'T BEEN A NEED. THE WEB PAGE IS ONLY IN ENGLISH. >>VINT CERF: SOMETHING TO CONSIDER, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE CHART WHICH YOU WERE SHOWING WITH THE DISTRIBUTION OF REQUESTS COMING FROM VARIOUS PLACES. SECOND QUESTION, I AM CONCERNED THAT YOU POTENTIALLY HAVE A BILLION CONSUMERS OUT THERE USING THE NETWORK, AND I HOPE THAT YOUR OFFICE DOES NOT TURN INTO THE CONSUMER COMPLAINT DESK, ALTHOUGH IT HAS ALREADY SHOWN SOME CHARACTER OF THAT TYPE. I THINK THAT WE, AS THE BOARD, NEED TO GIVE SOME FURTHER THOUGHT TO THAT COLLECTION OF COMPLAINTS FOR WHICH YOUR OFFICE IS INAPPROPRIATE TO DEAL WITH, AND PERHAPS LOOK FOR ALTERNATIVES OUTSIDE OF THE ICANN PROCESS IN WHICH TO ADDRESS THOSE PROBLEMS. ALTHOUGH I DON'T WANT TO DISCOURAGE YOU AT ALL FROM TRYING TO HELP THOSE PEOPLE WHO COME TO YOU INAPPROPRIATELY, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE POTENTIAL FOR SCALING IS SIGNIFICANT AND WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING TO ADDRESS THAT QUESTION IF ONLY TO DRAW ATTENTION TO IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>FRANK FOWLIE: THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: I'D LIKE TO NOW TURN TO POSTED PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM ISSUES, WHICH MANY PEOPLE ATTEND TO, TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE REACTIONS AND COMMENTARY WHICH HAVE BEEN PUT UP ON THAT SITE. SO LET ME ASK BARBARA ROSEMAN TO COME AND TELL US WHAT REACTIONS, COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED WITH REGARD TO THE IPV4 ALLOCATION POLICY, WHICH AS YOU KNOW, THE BOARD WILL BE CONSIDERING FOR ADOPTION TOMORROW. >>BARBARA ROSEMAN: GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU. THIS IS THE UPDATE ON THE IPV4 GLOBAL POLICY. IN SEPTEMBER OF 2004, THE ASO FORWARDED POLICY TO THE ICANN BOARD GOVERNING THE ALLOCATION OF IPV4 ADDRESSES FROM IANA TO THE RIRS. IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, THE ICANN BOARD ADOPTED A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AND IN MARCH 2005, THE PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM OPENED. THERE WERE MORE THAN THE FOUR COMMENTS LISTED HERE BUT MOST OF THEM WERE SPAM AND THEY WERE REMOVED FROM THE FORUM. THERE WERE THREE COMMENTS WITH OBJECTIONS AND ONE COMMENT SUPPORTING THE PROPOSAL WITH A MINOR REQUEST. THE SUBSTANCE OF THE OBJECTIONS RAISED TWO ISSUES IN DIFFERENT FORMS. THE FIRST WAS THAT THERE WAS NO MECHANISM FOR RECOVERING ADDRESS ALLOCATIONS, AND IANA'S ANALYSIS OF THIS WAS THAT THE PROVISIONS FOR SUBSEQUENT ADDRESS BLOCK ALLOCATIONS ALREADY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL ELEMENTS OF THE UTILIZATION OF THE ADDRESS SPACE. SO IF A GIVEN RIR IS NOT USING THEIR SPACE EFFECTIVELY, THAT WILL SHOW UP IN A SUBSEQUENT ALLOCATION REQUEST. THE SECOND FORM OF THE COMPLAINT IS THAT THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT OVERSIGHT OF THE RIRS. AND AGAIN, IANA HAS REVIEWED THIS AND SAID THAT THE IAB HAS DELEGATED RESPONSIBILITY FOR MANAGING THE IPV4 ADDRESS SPACE TO IANA; THEREFORE, IANA HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO WORK WITH THE RIRS TO RESOLVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT MAY ARISE FROM A PARTICULAR REQUEST. THE SUPPORTING ISSUE, WITH A MINOR REQUEST FOR CHANGE, HAS BEEN RESOLVED THROUGH ADDRESS ALLOCATION NOTIFICATION PRACTICES. SO IT'S NO LONGER AN OUTSTANDING REQUEST FOR A CHANGE. AND THAT'S ALL. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU FOR THAT TERSE REPORT, BARBARA. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO REVIEWING THE V4 POLICY TOMORROW. YOU CAN TAKE YOUR SEAT NOW. THANK YOU. THE NEXT REPORT COMES FROM MARIA FARRELL, AND THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE PROPOSED BYLAWS CHANGES WITH REGARD TO THE GNSO COUNCIL. >>BARBARA ROSEMAN: I THINK MARIA IS NOT IN THE ROOM JUST -- >>VINT CERF: SHE'S BEHIND YOU. >>BARBARA ROSEMAN: SORRY. >>VINT CERF: AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME MINOR CHANGES REQUIRED TO THE BYLAWS IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE GNSO OPERATIONS, AND SO I WANT TO FIND OUT WHETHER THERE WERE ANY COMMENTS DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AS WE WILL VOTING AGAIN TOMORROW ON THOSE BYLAW CHANGES. SO WE'LL PAUSE FOR A MOMENT WHILE MARIA COMES UP. >>MARIA FARRELL: THANKS, VINT. HELLO, EVERYONE. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A QUICK UPDATE ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ICANN BYLAWS. STEVE IS JUST GOING TO PUT UP ON THE SCREEN A REPRESENTATION OF THE PAGE ON THE ICANN WEB SITE WHICH DEALS WITH THIS PROPOSED CHANGE. IT IS A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT LEVEL OF THREE CONSTITUENCY REPRESENTATIVES, PER CONSTITUENCY, ON THE GNSO COUNCIL. I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU A SHORT HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ON THIS ISSUE. THE BACKGROUND IS THAT THE EVOLUTION AND REFORM PROCESS RECOMMENDED THAT AT THE END OF THE CARTHAGE MEETING IN OCTOBER 2003 THAT THE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES OF EACH CONSTITUENCY ON THE GNSO COUNCIL WOULD BE REDUCED FROM THREE TO TWO. THE GNSO COUNCIL ITSELF DISCUSSED THE ISSUE QUITE EXTENSIVELY AT THE TIME, I BELIEVE, AND THEY DID NOT SUPPORT THAT RECOMMENDATION. HOWEVER, THE BOARD DID VOTE IN CARTHAGE TO CHANGE TRANSITION ARTICLE 20 OF THE BYLAWS AND TO ALLOW THREE REPRESENTATIVES PER CONSTITUENCY UNTIL THE END OF THE ICANN GENERAL MEETING IN 2004. SO WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW AND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED NOW IS THAT THE BYLAWS BE CHANGED, IN FACT, TO CHANGE THAT TRANSITION ARTICLE OF THE BYLAWS AND TO MAKE MORE OR LESS PERMANENT THE EXISTENCE OF THREE REPRESENTATIVES PER CONSTITUENCY ON THE GNSO COUNCIL. AS TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THIS ISSUE, I BELIEVE THE ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR ARE THAT THREE REPRESENTATIVES PER CONSTITUENCY ALLOWS THE CONSTITUENCIES TO COVER THE ENTIRE SCOPE OF WORK OF THE GNSO COUNCIL. MANY OF YOU WILL UNDERSTAND, THERE'S QUITE A RANGE OF ISSUES, AND THE EXPERTISE INVOLVED CAN BE QUITE EXTENSIVE. ALSO UTILIZED FOR GEOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY. AS YOU ALL WELL KNOW, ONE OF ICANN'S MAIN OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES IS TO KEEP ON INCREASING THE GEOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY OF MEMBERSHIP AND PARTICIPATION IN OUR DECISION-MAKING PROCESS AND IT'S BELIEVED THAT THREE REPRESENTATIVES PER CONSTITUENCY AS OPPOSED TO TWO WILL KEEP ON ALLOWING US TO INCREASE THE PARTICIPATION FROM AROUND THE WORLD. FINALLY, THE OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE IS THE ABILITY TO REPRESENT THE CONSTITUENCIES. AGAIN, THIS IS A PRACTICAL CONCERN. IT'S NOT ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO HAVE PEOPLE, FOR EXAMPLE, ON CONFERENCE CALLS OR TO ATTEND MEETINGS SO HAVING ESSENTIALLY THREE PEOPLE TO COVER THE WORK OF THE GNSO CAN BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL AND MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE MAXIMUM EFFECTIVENESS AND MAXIMUM REPRESENTATIVENESS OF EACH CONSTITUENCY AT EACH RELEVANT MEETING. MORE BRIEFLY, THE HISTORICAL INFORMATION, WHICH IS OF RELEVANCE I THINK ON THIS ISSUE, IS THAT THERE HAVE BEEN TWO REVIEWS OF THE GNSO COUNCIL. THE FIRST WAS FOLLOWING A BOARD RESOLUTION TO PERFORM A REVIEW OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE GNSO COUNCIL. AMONGST OTHER THINGS, THIS REVIEW, WHICH WAS CARRIED OUT BY AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR, PATRICK SHARRY, THIS REVIEW RECOMMENDED THAT THREE REPRESENTATIVES PER CONSTITUENCY BE MADE PERMANENT. THE GNSO ITSELF ALSO PERFORMED A SELF-REVIEW AT THE TIME, MANY OF WHOSE RECOMMENDATIONS TRACK THOSE IN THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW. THE GNSO ITSELF RECOMMENDED THAT THREE REPRESENTATIVES PER CONSTITUENCY BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE. IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THIS ISSUE, THERE WAS A SUBSTANTIVE PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THE ISSUE IN GENERAL. THERE WERE VERY FEW COMMENTS RECEIVED; HOWEVER, THERE WAS ONE FROM DANNY YOUNGER WHO TOOK ISSUE WITH THE EXISTENCE IN ITS CURRENT FORM OF THE GNSO COUNCIL ALTOGETHER. HOWEVER, HAVING READ THAT PAPER, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS ANYTHING IN IT SPECIFICALLY WHICH TAKES ISSUE WITH THE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES PER CONSTITUENCY. THE PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE WAS PUT UP ON THE ICANN WEB SITE ON THE 18TH OF MARCH. THAT WAS FOR THE 21-DAY CONSULTATION PERIOD, WHICH ENDS, IN FACT, TOMORROW. TO DATE WE HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS ON THAT PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE; HOWEVER, IN THE PREVIOUS SUBSTANTIVE REVIEW OF THE ISSUE, COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL ITSELF, AND ALSO FROM THE REGISTRY CONSTITUENCY. SO I SUPPOSE TO SUM UP, WE'VE HAD THE HISTORY OF THE ISSUE, SOME OF THE SUBSTANTIVE CONCERNS, AND THE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE ISSUE, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PUBLIC COMMENTS HAS BEEN RECEIVED, AND OF THAT NUMBER, THEY'VE ALL BEEN IN FAVOR. FAR BE IT FROM ME TO PREEMPT ANY OF THE DECISIONS BUT IT DOES APPEAR THAT THIS IS A REASONABLY UNCONTROVERSIAL PROPOSAL AND ONE THAT APPEARS TO BE SUPPORTED BY MOST OF THE CONSTITUENCY, OR MOST OF THE COMMUNITIES. HOWEVER, THERE REMAINS APPROXIMATELY 24 HOURS FOR PEOPLE TO SUBMIT THEIR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE ICANN WEB SITE. SO IF ANYBODY DOES HAVE COMMENTS OR INPUT THEY WISH TO GIVE, NOW IS VERY MUCH THE TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, MARIA. LET ME ASK YOU TO PARTICULARLY BE ATTENTIVE TO THAT WEB SITE OVER THE NEXT 24 HOURS AND PRIOR TO THE BOARD MEETING. IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS THAT THE BOARD SHOULD KNOW ABOUT, KINDLY ASSURE THAT WE HEAR THEM. >>MARIA FARRELL: WE WILL DO. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I NOW WOULD LIKE TO CALL UPON TINA DAM AND JOHN KLENSIN, I'M NOT SURE IN WHAT ORDER, TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON IDNS. I SEE THERESA COMING UP SO I'M CONFUSED. >>THERESA SWINEHART: I'M GOING TO START WITH A BRIEF OVERVIEW AND JOHN AND TINA WILL MAKE COMMENTS IF THAT'S OKAY. >>VINT CERF: THAT'S OKAY. OBVIOUSLY MY NOTES DID NOT HAVE ALL THE PERSONI THAT WERE ENGAGED. THANK YOU. >>THERESA SWINEHART: JUST AN UPDATE ON THE IDN ARENA. ON THE STAFFING SIDE WE'RE PUTTING THE APPROPRIATE RESOURCES BEHIND IT. SOME OF TINA DAM'S TIME WILL BE FREED UP IN ORDER TO UNDERTAKE SOME WORK IN THAT AREA. AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF IETF EFFORTS UNDERWAY AND ICANN INITIATIVES, AND WE'RE COORDINATING AND CONTINUING WITH THE EFFORT OF MAKING SURE THAT THOSE ARE ALL IN SYNC. THE PRESIDENT'S COMMITTEE, THE INVITEES FOR THAT IS UNDERGOING A REVIEW, GIVEN SOME RECENT IDN DEVELOPMENTS AND SHOULD BE ANNOUNCED SHORTLY. WE VERY MUCH WELCOME THE GAC COMMUNIQUE ON SUPPORTING ICANN WORK IN THIS AREA, AND THEIR SUPPORT IN THEIR RECENT DOCUMENT. JOHN IS GOING TO REVIEW SOME OF THE IETF INITIATIVES, AND TINA IS GOING TO DISCUSS THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING MOVING FORWARD. JOHN. >>VINT CERF: MR. KLENSIN, ARE YOU PREPARING? >>JOHN KLENSIN: YES. I HAD HOPED TO GET SOME SLIDES UP, BUT I'M OBVIOUSLY NOT GOING TO DO THAT. I'M VERY IMPRESSED THAT THIS SESSION IS RUNNING AHEAD OF SCHEDULE BUT WE'VE BEEN DOING SOME REAL-TIME REVISION OF SOME DETAILS. I WANT TO REVIEW WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, MORE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE IETF AND THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY WHO IS INVOLVED WITH IDNS RATHER THAN AN ICANN ONE. AND THEN TINA WILL COME BACK AND PICK UP WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE ICANN AREA. BASICALLY, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T NOTICED, A NUMBER OF ISSUES WHICH ARE IDENTIFIED TO ICANN AND BY ICANN SEVERAL YEARS AGO HAVE NOW SURFACED AND GOTTEN A GREAT DEAL OF ATTENTION. WE'RE SEEING ISSUES ABOUT LOOKALIKE CHARACTERS IN DIFFERENT SCRIPTS. THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF FUSS ABOUT A DOMAIN THAT LOOKED LIKE PAYPAL.COM BUT HAD A LOT OF CYRILLIC CHARACTERS IN IT. AND THIS PARTICULAR SPOOFING ATTACK WHICH COULD BE USED FOR PHISHING OR PHARMING ACTIVITIES NOT ONLY CAME WITH A DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION BUT ALSO AN SSL CERTIFICATE WHICH -- >>VINT CERF: JOHN, IF I COULD INTERRUPT YOU FOR ONE MOMENT. THE TERMS PHISHING AND PHARMING IF THEY ARE BEING TRANSLATED MAY WELL BE TRANSLATED INTO THE AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES THEY SOUND LIKE. WOULD YOU BE SO KIND AS TO BE QUITE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THEY MEAN IN THIS CONTEXT. >>JOHN KLENSIN: YES. THESE TWO TERMS, APPROPRIATELY SPELLED WITH A P-H RATHER THAN "F," INVOLVE USE OF METHODS OFTEN BASED ON SPAM E-MAIL OR TRICK WEB PAGES TO CONFUSE PEOPLE INTO BELIEVING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT ACTUALLY, USUALLY AS A MEANS OF IDENTITY THEFT. THE MOST COMMON ATTACKS HAVE INVOLVED PAGES WHICH LOOK LIKE PAGES BELONGING TO BANKS, OR OTHER FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, ASKING PEOPLE TO REVERIFY THEIR INFORMATION OR CREDENTIALS AND IN THE PROCESS ASKING FOR CREDIT CARD NUMBERS, PINS, NATIONAL IDENTITY NUMBERS AND OTHER THINGS WHICH CAN THEN BE USED IN IDENTITY THEFT ATTACKS. THIS IS IMPORTANT BOTH IN THE -- THIS IS IMPORTANT WITH AND WITHOUT IDNS, AND WITH AND WITHOUT OTHER DNS TRICKS, INCLUDING SOME OF THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN TALKED ABOUT IN CONNECTION WITH DNSSEC. BUT THE IDN ISSUE IS THAT WHILE THE PROBLEMS ARE NOT NEW, THE NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES HAVE VASTLY INCREASED AS WE ADD TO THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS WHICH HAVE BEEN USED IN DOMAIN NAMES. HAVING SEEN THE PARTICULAR GROUP OF PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH INTERMIXING CYRILLIC AND ROMAN SCRIPTS, THE BROWSER VENDORS SUDDENLY DISCOVERED THAT WHEN WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES, WE'VE BEEN AVOIDING URLS. AND IT TURNS THOUGHT USERS DON'T, IN GENERAL, USE DOMAIN NAMES; THEY USE E-MAIL ADDRESSES, WHICH CONTAIN DOMAIN NAMES AND SOME OTHER THINGS, AND THEY USE URLS, WHICH CONTAIN DOMAIN NAMES AND SOME OTHER THINGS. AND A SECOND ATTACK HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED WHICH INVOLVES A CHARACTER WHICH LOOKS LIKE A SLASH. AND IF YOU HAVE A CHARACTER WHICH LOOKS LIKE A SLASH AND ISN'T, THEN YOU CAN CONSTRUCT A URL THAT CONTAINS SOMETHING WHICH LOOKS LIKE A DOMAIN NAME IN SOME FAMILIAR DOMAIN BUT IS ACTUALLY A DOMAIN NAME SOMEWHERE ELSE WHICH DOESN'T LOOK AT ALL LIKE THE DOMAIN NAME INVOLVED AND, AGAIN, CAN MISLEAD PEOPLE INTO GOING INTO STRANGE PLACES AND WHICH THEY WOULD NOT DO IF THEY KNEW WHO THEY WERE ACTUALLY TALKING WITH. WE'VE ALSO DISCOVERED, AGAIN -- REDISCOVERED WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE -- THE FACT THAT THE EXCHANGE OF DOMAIN NAMES AND URLS IN RADICALLY DIFFERENT SCRIPTS AMONG PEOPLE WHO USE OR UNDERSTAND ONE OF THOSE SCRIPTS AND PEOPLE WHO USE OR UNDERSTAND SOME OTHERS BUT NOT THAT ONE IS A MUCH MORE DIFFICULT PROBLEM THAN MANY OF THE ADVOCATES OF IDNS HAD UNDERSTOOD OR ACKNOWLEDGED. IT'S AN ISSUE. WE'LL EXPLORE THAT MORE IN THE FUTURE. BUT AS I SAY, THESE ARE RESURFACING OF PROBLEMS WE'VE IDENTIFIED BEFORE. WE PROBABLY STILL HAVEN'T IDENTIFIED ALL THE ISSUES. IT'S CLEAR THAT WE NEED TO PROCEED AS SWIFTLY AS POSSIBLE WITH IDN DEPLOYMENT, BUT THAT AS SWIFTLY AS POSSIBLE REQUIRES THAT WE EXERT CAUTION, INTELLIGENCE, AND CONCERN FOR THE USERS AND THE REGISTRANTS. WE'VE HAD SOME REACTIONS. WE'VE HAD SOME VERY STRONG REACTIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY AND FROM THE PRESS, AND WE'VE HAD SOME VERY STRONG REACTIONS FROM THE BROWSER VENDORS. ONE BROWSER VENDOR, WHO WILL GO UNNAMED, IMMEDIATELY ISSUED A PRESS STATEMENT WHICH SAID, "WELL, THE REASON WHY WE HAVEN'T IMPLEMENTED IDNS IS TO PROTECT ALL OUR USERS BECAUSE. AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN VICTIMS OF THIS ATTACK IS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T SUPPORT THIS FACILITY. THIS IS BAD NEWS FOR RAPID IDN DEPLOYMENT. SEVERAL OTHERS SAID IF IDNS IMPOSE THESE RISKS, UNTIL A BETTER STRATEGY CAN BE DEVISED, WE WILL SIMPLY AVOID PRESENTING CHARACTERS OUT OF IDNS IN NATIVE SCRIPTS AND START PRESENTING THEM ONLY IN THE INTERNAL ENCODER. THAT STRATEGY HAS EVOLVED NOTIONS ABOUT BLACK LISTS AND WHITE LISTS OF DOMAINS WHICH ARE BEING, IN THE JUDGMENT OF THE BROWSER VENDORS, CAREFUL ENOUGH ABOUT PROTECTING AGAINST NAMES WHICH LOOK THE SAME AND PROTECTING AGAINST NAMES WHICH ARE DANGEROUS IN OTHER WAYS. IT'S VERY CLEAR FROM THE BROWSER VENDOR SIDE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT THE USERS WILL BE PROTECTED AGAINST IDN-BASED ATTACKS; AND IF THEY CAN'T PROTECT THE USERS EFFECTIVELY IN ANY OTHER WAY, THERE WILL BE NO IDNS. ICANN, THE IETF, AND THE APPLICATIONS DEVELOPER COMMUNITIES ARE GOING TO NEED TO WORK TOGETHER FOR A SATISFACTORY SOLUTION WHICH REALLY PERMITS IDNS TO BE DEPLOYED IN AN EFFECTIVE WAY AND USABLE BY THE END USERS. REGISTERING THESE THINGS IS OF NO USE IF THE USERS CAN'T SEE THEM. IT'S GOING TO BE PARTICULARLY CRITICAL THAT WE HAVE REGISTRY ACTION TO PROTECT AGAINST SEPARATE REGISTRATIONS OF LOOK-ALIKE NAMES. SO WE'VE GOT SEVERAL SEPARATE THINGS GOING ON RIGHT NOW. THERE'S BEEN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF ACTIVITY IN THE LAST SIX WEEKS. THERESA INTRODUCED AND TINA WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT ICANN ACTIONS. I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT I'M EXTREMELY PLEASED TO SEE SIGNS OF REAL ICANN COMMITMENT TO WORK ON THESE ISSUES. I'M VERY EXCITED THAT WE'VE GOT SOME OF THERESA'S TIME. SHE'S VERY VALUABLE TO THE ORGANIZATION, AND THE ORGANIZATION STAFF COMMITMENT TO PUT HER INTO THIS, I THINK, IS EXTREMELY ENCOURAGING. I'M VERY PLEASED TO HAVE TINA ON BOARD. I THINK WE'LL BEGIN TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE ICANN PIECE OF THESE ISSUES VERY QUICKLY NOW. TINA WILL DISCUSS SOME ICANN AND CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE. I'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE BROWSER VENDORS ARE DOING. AND I WANT TO TALK NOW ABOUT WHAT THE IETF IS DOING. AT LAST MONTH'S MEETINGS, THE IETF HELD TWO MAJOR SESSIONS ON THIS IDN SITUATION. ONE INTERNAL TO THE INTERNET ARCHITECTURE BOARD AND ONE AT OPEN APPLICATIONS AREA MEETING. THE CONCLUSION OF THE TWO IS THAT AN IAB COMMITTEE HAS BEEN APPOINTED TO IDENTIFY ISSUES AND MAKE A PLAN. THE IAB REVIEWED THE SITUATION DURING ITS LAST FACE-TO-FACE MEETING AND HAS ESTABLISHED AN AD HOC COMMITTEE TO ORGANIZE THE DISCUSSION OF THE MATTER INTO A SET OF PROPOSALS AS INPUT TO THE APPROPRIATE ORGANIZATIONS. THEIR OUTPUT IS EXPECTED TO INCLUDE BUT MAY NOT BE LIMITED TO INPUT TO THE IETF FOR TECHNICAL STANDARDS WORK AND TO ICANN FOR TECHNICAL ISSUES RELATED TO POLICY. THIS IS ANTICIPATED TO PROVIDE AN ORGANIZED INITIATION OF PUBLIC DISCUSSION, AND THE COMMITTEE HAS BEEN ASKED TO DELIVER ITS REPORT IN A VERY SHORT TIME FRAME, WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE SUMMER IETF AND ICANN MEETINGS. I'M ON THAT COMMITTEE, AND IT IS GENERATING A LOT OF TRAFFIC. AND WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS. MY PERSONAL OPINION ABOUT WHERE THINGS ARE GOING, THE IAB COMMITTEE IS GOING TO CLARIFY EXPECTATIONS ABOUT AREAS IN WHICH ICANN SHOULD SET POLICIES. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE WELL AHEAD OF "WE DID THE CODING AND NOW IT'S YOUR PROBLEM," WHICH IS WHERE WE WERE TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO. THE IETF IS GOING TO REVISE THE NAMEPREP TABLES THAT SUPPORT IDNA TO NARROW THE SUBSET OF CHARACTERS PERMITTED. THAT'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE FOR ICANN. IT'S GOING TO MEAN THAT SOME NAMES WHICH ARE POSSIBLY RESOLVABLE TODAY MAY NOT BE RESOLVABLE SIX MONTHS FROM NOW. IDNA WILL BE UPDATED TO USE UNICODE 4.1, PERMITTING A WIDER RANGE OF SCRIPTS AND NEW CHARACTER CLASS DEFINITIONS. EVERY ONE OF THESE AREAS IS GOING TO REQUIRE ICANN ACTION OR RESPONSES. AND I'M HOPING THAT ICANN IS GOING TO RECIPROCATE BY GOING BACK TO THE IETF AND TELLING THEM WHAT THEY NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS WORK FROM AN ICANN AND COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE, WHICH IS THE OTHER PLACE WHERE, IN MY OPINION, THE BALL WAS DROPPED THE LAST TIME AROUND. THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT IDNS. WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DEPLOYMENT, BUT WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DUE CAUTION AND INTELLIGENCE OR WE WILL FIND OURSELVES IN DEEP TROUBLE AND WITH THE APPLICATIONS VENDORS RESPONDING IN A WAY WHICH WILL RESULT IN NO IDNS AT ALL. AND WE NEED A BETTER UNDERSTANDING ACROSS THE BOARD OF THE PROBLEMS THAT IDN DEPLOYMENT SOLVES AND DOESN'T SOLVE. AND THANK YOU, AND I'M GOING TO LET TINA TAKE OVER. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JOHN. >>TINA DAM: THANK YOU FOR THE INTRODUCTION, JOHN. SO I'M GOING TO COMPLETE THIS THREE-PART STATUS UPDATE ON HOW ICANN IS ORGANIZING INTO TAKING CARE OF THE IDN ISSUES, BASICALLY, BY GIVING YOU AN UPDATE ON HOW WE WORK FORWARD ON THE OPERATIONAL SIDE OF THESE PROBLEMS. WE HAVE A CLEAR NEED TO WORK THROUGH UPCOMING ISSUES OR PROBLEMS. CURRENTLY, THAT WILL BE THE PROBLEM OF SPOOFING OR PHISHING OF NAMES AND CHARACTERS BETWEEN SCRIPTS OR LANGUAGES, AS JOHN HAS ADDRESSED. AND THE WAY THAT WE INTEND TO DO THAT IS TO FORM AN ADDITIONAL IDN COMMITTEE WHO WILL BE TASKED INTO WORKING THROUGH CURRENT ISSUES. DUE TO THESE CURRENT ISSUES ABOUT PHISHING AND SPOOFING, ICANN WILL WORK TOGETHER WITH THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY, IETF, IAB, BROWSER, OTHER APPLICATION IMPLEMENTERS PART OF THE COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS, OF COURSE, REGISTRIES. AND THE FIRST STEP IN THAT WORK, DUE TO THIS EXISTING PROBLEM, IS TO REVISE THE IDN GUIDELINES. SO THAT WILL BE THE FIRST STEP YOU WILL SEE FROM US. THIS IS BASICALLY THE WAY THAT WE PLAN TO WORK WITH ALL THE PARTIES THAT ARE NEEDED TO COOPERATE AND MOVE FORWARD INTO MAKING IDNS AVAILABLE. AND WE'RE LOOKING VERY MUCH FORWARD TO DOING THAT WORK. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK EVERYONE APPRECIATES THAT IDNS HAVE BEEN AN ITEM OF GREAT INTEREST. AND NOW I THINK WE HAVE SOME PROGRESS, ALTHOUGH I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL HOLD THEM UNTIL WE GET TO THE REGULAR PUBLIC QUESTION PERIOD. SO YOU CAN STAND DOWN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TINA. AT THIS POINT, WE ARE SIGNIFICANTLY AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. WE ARE ABOUT -- HAVE EARNED ABOUT A HALF AN HOUR OF EXTRA TIME, WHICH I, FRANKLY, WOULD LIKE TO DEVOTE TO QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR AND FROM THE BOARD FOR ALL OF THE REPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED SO FAR. SO LET ME OPEN THE FLOOR FOR QUESTIONS. I SEE MY FRIEND AMADEU IS APPROACHING. AMADEU, MAY I REMIND YOU THAT THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THESE QUESTIONS IS TO BE CONFINED TO THE REPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN GIVEN THUS FAR. THERE WILL BE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR FURTHER OPEN QUESTIONS, JUST IN CASE YOU HAD SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN MIND. >>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: THIS IS A -- THANKS. VINT, IT WAS A COMMENT ON THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE AND ONE COMMENT ON IDN. I THINK THIS IS THE TIME; IS THAT CORRECT? >>VINT CERF: YES, IT IS. >>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: FIRST, REGARD -- ON. I PREFER SPANISH. I HOPE THE INTERPRETERS WON'T MIND MY ACCENT AND SPEED. I HAVE A REQUEST FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AS REGARDS THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT ON THE WEB. MY REQUEST IS NOT TO SIGN THEM, NOT TO ACCEPT THEM. THAT'S MY REQUEST. IT'S NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE TERRIBLY EVIL OR THEY ARE TERRIBLY GOOD; IT'S BECAUSE, IN MY OPINION, THEY ARE NOT MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. AS MANY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD THEY KNOW, I'VE BEEN VERY HEAVY DURING SEVERAL YEARS AT THE LEVEL OF THE -- VOLUME OF PUBLIC DEBATE BETWEEN THE BOARD AND THE STAFF AND THE PUBLIC, PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING USUALLY HERE, THE COMMUNITY OF STAKEHOLDERS, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, COMMUNITY OF STAKEHOLDERS, COMMUNITY, WHATEVER, A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO, BUT ESPECIALLY IN THIS ONE, WE'VE IMPROVED A LOT. WE HAVE MOVED IN THE RIGHT TRACK, BOTH IN THE PUBLIC FORUM, OPEN FORUM, THE PLAN, THE QUESTIONS, ALSO AS REGARDS THE GENERAL LAYOUT OR THE APPOINTMENT OF PEOPLE. SO WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT TRACK. HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THESE CORPORATE RULES ARE NOT GOING TO ENTER INTO A LEGAL EVALUATION. BUT I THINK THEY'RE MOVING IN THE WRONG TRACK. YOU JUST HAVE TO CONSIDER THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INVESTMENT FUNDS. THESE RULES ARE ADEQUATE, SOME OF THEM ESPECIALLY, FOR THOSE CORPORATIONS THAT HAVE TO MAINTAIN AS A SIMPLE PRIORITY, THEIR REPUTATION ON THE FINANCIAL MARKETS. FOREVER THESE CORPORATIONS, THERE ARE TWO BASICALLY PRINCIPLES. FIRST OF ALL, (INAUDIBLE) SHOULD BE IN-HOUSE; AND, SECOND, THERE ARE (INAUDIBLE). ALL OF US WERE (INAUDIBLE) AND -- I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN PROBLEMS, THERE ARE CERTAIN VERY GOOD ISSUES AMONG THOSE PRINCIPLES. BUT (INAUDIBLE) ICANN -- >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: I WONDER IF YOU COULD RELY THE SPEAKER TO SLOW DOWN. I AM RELYING ON THE TRANSCRIPT, NOT A TRANSLATION, AND WHEN WE'RE GETTING JUST SO MUCH OF IT THAT I CAN'T FOLLOW. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO PROBLEMS, AMADEU. ONE OF THEM IS THAT YOU ARE AUDIBLY OVERWHELMING THE OUTPUT OF THE TRANSLATION, AUDIO TRANSLATION. YOU'RE ALSO OVERWHELMING THE ABILITY OF THE MANUAL WRITTEN TRANSLATION IN YOUR USUAL AMAZING WAY. SO TWO SUGGESTIONS: ONE, SLOW DOWN. TAKE A DEEP BREATH. NO, NO, SLOW DOWN. AND, SECOND, IF YOU COULD REDUCE YOUR VOLUME A LITTLE BIT, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HEAR THE TRANSLATOR. BEAR IN MIND, I'M WORKING WITH ABOUT 50 DB OF LOSS AS IT IS. AND SO I REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. BUT, THANK YOU, PETER, FOR BRINGING THIS UP. OTHERWISE, THIS WOULD NOT BE -- IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF YOUR TIME. >>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: IT'S PART OF THE PASSION I FEEL FOR -- >>VINT CERF: I KNOW, I KNOW. THE BOARD CHAIR NOTES THE PASSION OF THE SPEAKER AND SUGGESTS THAT YOU MODERATE IT. >>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: OKAY. JUST ONE SIDE COMMENT IN ENGLISH. EIGHT YEARS AGO, SOME OF US WERE HERE FOR THE LAST IFWB INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR THE WHITE PAPER MEETING PRE-ICANN PREPARATION MEETINGS. THE INTERPRETERS ASKED ME AT THE FIRST POST TO SPEAK IN ENGLISH BECAUSE MY SPANISH WAS TOO FAST. AT THE SECOND POST, THEY ASKED ME NOT TO SPEAK. (LAUGHTER.) >>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: AND MY STUDENTS AT UNIVERSITY TEND TO AGREE WITH THAT. PLEASE REMIND ME AGAIN IF I GO TO FAST OR TOO HARD. WELL, I MOVE BACK, CHANGING INTO SPANISH NOW. SO MOVING BACK TO THE SUBJECT THAT WAS CONCERNING ME AS REGARDS MANAGEMENT. I INSIST THAT ADEQUATE MODELS FOR FINANCIAL ENTITIES THAT HAVE CERTAIN REPUTATION PROBLEMS OR ACCOUNTABILITY PROBLEMS OR THEY HAVE TO TARGET THEIR MESSAGE, BUT IN THE CASE OF ICANN, THERE ARE SEVERAL ISSUES. ICANN IS AN ENTITY THAT IS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING, AND IT REQUIRES AN ORGANIZATION, A CERTAIN TYPE OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATION, BECAUSE THEY'RE OFFERING SERVICES, THEY HAVE STAFF, THEY HAVE TO ORGANIZE THEIR OWN ACTIVITY. AND THIS FOLLOWS SPECIFIC RULES, OF COURSE. SECOND, IT'S A LEGAL ENTITY, HAS A LEGAL ENTITY, WE HAVE CONTRACTS, WE HAVE LEGAL OBLIGATIONS. SO WE HAVE THIS ASPECT THAT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT AS WELL. BUT THE EXAMPLES THAT APPEAR ON THE LITERATURE STOP HERE. ICANN IS ALSO SOMETHING ELSE. ICANN IS A PROCESS THAT IS PERMANENTLY SEARCHING FOR LEGITIMACY TO TAKE THE DECISION, IMPORTANT DECISIONS, IN CERTAIN CASES, CRITICAL POSITIONS AS REGARDS CERTAIN INTERNET ISSUES BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE, ANOTHER LEGITIMATE ALTERNATIVE. AND YOU CAN RESPOND TO IT, JUST LOOKING HERE. (INAUDIBLE) MOBILIZING FOR 100 PEOPLE TO COME HERE TO MAR DEL PLATA TO LISTEN TO A (INAUDIBLE) ABOUT IDNS. SO THESE RULES DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SPECIFICITY OF ICANN AS A PROCESS IN SEARCH OF LEGITIMACY THAT REQUIRES DEBATE, OPINION, BUT ALSO REQUIRES A PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF DEBATE OF OPENNESS, OF DIVERSITY OF INTERESTS. AND SOME THINGS ARE POINTING TO THE FACT THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO LIMIT. I'M SURE THIS IS NOT YOUR INTENTION. BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A CERTAIN. AND AS A PUBLIC ORGANIZATION, (INAUDIBLE) FROM PERCEPTION. SO, PLEASE, THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, IF THE MODELS YOU ARE LOOKING FOR ARE THE MOST ADEQUATE ONES FOR THE FUNCTION OF ICANN, THIS PROCESS IN SEARCH OF LEGITIMACY. THAT'S THE END OF MY COMMENT. AND NOW I'M GOING TO WEAR THE HAT OF DOT ORG, OKAY? I HAVE PREVIOUSLY THE ICANN HAT. I NOW HAVE THE HAT OF THE CHAIRMAN -- OF COMMITTEE, OF IDNS, DOT ORG, THE REGISTRY PIRS. I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT WE ARE PREPARING A STRATEGY TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE SUBJECT IDN ON SPECIFIC ISSUES. FIRST OF ALL, OBVIOUSLY, WE ARE GOING TO FOLLOW THE ICANN POLICIES, NOT JUST ICANN GUIDELINES, BUT ALSO THE ADVICE OF ICANN AND INDIVIDUAL ADVICE OF THOSE PEOPLE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY KNOW MORE ABOUT THE DANGERS, ADVENTURES, KNOW EXPERIENCES. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXPERIENCES CONCERNING US AS A REGISTRY, AS A REGISTRY, IT HAS THE VOCATION TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY, NONCOMMERCIAL COMMUNITY. FIRST OF ALL, CERTAIN LOGIC OF IDNS IN THE SPHERE OF GTLDS POINTS AT THE DIRECTION THAT CERTAIN LANGUAGES ARE NOT GOING TO RECEIVE A SERVICE, SO IDN IS GOING TO WORK LOOKING FOR PARTNERS OR -- WE HAVE TO MAKE AN IDN THE LARGEST AMOUNT OF LANGUAGES, WE'LL HAVE LANGUAGE TABLES, WE'LL HAVE NO RESOURCES TO DO IT. AND SECONDLY, WE'RE ALSO VERY CONCERNED BECAUSE WE'RE OFFERING A SERVICE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION FROM THE USERS, SO WE TAKE THE COMMITMENT TO TRY AND GENERATE MATERIAL THAT WILL EXPLAIN IN THE USER LANGUAGE, NOT AT THE LEVEL OF THE BOARD LANGUAGE, TO BE ABLE TO OBTAIN ALL THESE MATERIALS TRANSLATED IN THE LANGUAGES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SERVE. SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MOVING IN PARALLEL WITH OTHER ICANN COMMITTEES, AND IN COORDINATION WITH THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES, WE'RE TRYING TO BEGIN WHAT HASN'T BEEN DONE, THE SOCIAL WORK TO GO TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE THE LINGUISTIC KNOWLEDGE BUT DO NOT KNOW ABOUT IDNS TO BEGIN BUILDING A BRIDGE TO EXCHANGE KNOWLEDGE, TO ACHIEVE THESE LANGUAGE TABLES. I HOPE THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO PRESENT SOMETHING MORE CONCRETE IN LUXEMBOURG IN THE SECRETARIAL SUMMIT OF WSIS IN MALI IN MAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, INDEED. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AMADEU. I THINK THAT YOU JUST MANAGED TO STRETCH OUR LIMITS OF LANGUAGE AND TRANSLATION. SECONDLY, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS, PARTICULARLY WITH DOT ORG'S INITIATIVE CONCERNING IDNS. IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT WE NEED TO DRAW THE COMMUNITIES WHO ARE USERS OF THESE LANGUAGES AND THE COMMUNITIES THAT UNDERSTAND IN DETAIL WHAT THE INTERNET DOES AND HOW IT WORKS IN ORDER TO PRODUCE SOMETHING WHICH IS IN FACT WHAT EVERYONE NEEDS. I SEE A HAND UP, MIKE PALAGE. AND THEN I'LL TAKE THE NEXT PERSON FROM THE FLOOR. MICHAEL. >>MICHAEL PALAGE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE AMADEU'S PASSION AND CONCERN WITH REGARD TO THE DRAFT CORPORATE PRINCIPLES. AND PERHAPS THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE ATTORNEYS. AND THE NEXT -- IN THE ONGOING DEBATE, I'LL ESPECIALLY BE LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PETER, THE OTHER LAWYER ON THIS BOARD, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET IT RIGHT AND THAT THE ABILITY OF THE DIRECTOR TO ACT AND DO HIS JOB IS NOT IMPEDED. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: OKAY. LET ME TAKE THE NEXT -- OH, RAIMUNDO, I'M GOING TO SWITCH BACK AND FORTH IF IT'S OKAY. I CAN'T HEAR YOU. >>RAIMUNDO BECA: (INAUDIBLE). >>VINT CERF: IT'S ON THE SAME TOPIC? ALL RIGHT, PLEASE GO AHEAD. >>RAIMUNDO BECA: IN SPANISH. I FEAR WHAT MIKE HAS SAID AND WHAT AMADEU HAS SAID AS WELL AS REGARDS AT LEAST FOR THOSE LIKE ME THAT HAS BEEN APPOINTED BY THE AUDIT COUNCIL, I DON'T FEEL REPRESENTED BY THIS DOCUMENT, SO I CANNOT SIGN IT, MAINLY BECAUSE THIS DOCUMENT IS DRAFTED AS IF IN THIS BOARD WE JUST HAVE MEMBERS APPOINTED BY DOT COM. AND THAT'S NOT TRUE. THEY ARE GOING TO BE ASSESSED, THEIR CAREER IS GOING TO BE STUDIED WITHIN THE BOARD. SO THIS ASSESSMENT FOR SOMEBODY HAS BEEN APPOINTED BY THAT CONSTITUENCY CANNOT BE (INAUDIBLE) BY THEIR OWN CONSTITUENCY. IT CANNOT BE ASSESSED BY ANY OTHER ENTITIES APPOINTED BY THE BOARD. IT JUST CAN BE THE CONSTITUENCY THAT ASSESSES IT. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, RAIMUNDO. I DON'T (INAUDIBLE) AS BEING ASKED TO SIGN ANYTHING AT THIS POINT. AND THAT'S WHY WE CONTINUE TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF BOARD GOVERNANCE. ALEJANDRO, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP. WAS IT ON THIS TAKE A LOOK? ALL RIGHT. IF -- IF THE FLOOR WILL FORGIVE ME, I'M GOING TO TAKE ONE MORE COMMENT FROM THE BOARD, AND THEN WE'LL GO ON TO THE FLOOR. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I'LL SPEAK FOR MYSELF, BUT PROBABLY ALSO FOR ALSO OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE WILL, WHO WILL IDENTIFY THEMSELVES WITH RAIMUNDO. SPANISH SPEAKERS FORGIVE ME FOR SPEAKING IN ENGLISH THIS TIME. WE ARE IN A CONTINUOUS SEARCH FOR STRUCTURE FOR THIS TYPE OF DOCUMENT THAT WILL TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF THESE COMPLEX ASPECTS. WE DID TAKE A FIRST STAB AT MAKING SURE THAT THEY REFLECT A NONPROFIT. IN FACT, YOU WILL REALIZE FROM THE REFERENCES THAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT -- CAREFULLY AT THE NONPROFIT CHARACTER OF ICANN. AS I SAID, ONE OVERRIDING PRINCIPLE IS MAKING SURE THERE IS NO GAG RULE, THERE IS NOTHING IN THE PRINCIPLES THAT CAN BE USED OR ABUSED IN ORDER TO SILENCE AN IMPORTANT, INDEPENDENT OPINION. THERE IS VERY PROBABLY NOTHING GOING TO BE SIGNED BY DIRECTORS IN THE END. WE CERTAINLY HAVE TO HAVE THIS VETTED BY LAWYERS. BUT THIS IS NOT A LAWYER-DRIVEN DOCUMENT. THIS IS AN ETHICS-DRIVEN DOCUMENT. AND IT STRIVES TO GIVE FLESH, TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO ENSURE PROPER ETHICAL BEHAVIOR OF DIRECTORS, BALANCING THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES THEY HAVE AS INDIVIDUALS COMING FROM DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE SPECTRUM AND THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT ICANN HAS ALTOGETHER TO A VERY, VERY WIDE CONSTITUENCY. WE WILL CERTAINLY REWORK, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF THESE COMMENTS AND THE ONES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE IN THE PUBLIC FORUM. >>VINT CERF: OKAY. THANK YOU, ALEX. COMMENTS FROM -- I'M SORRY, I AM NOT TAKING ANOTHER COMMENT FROM THE BOARD ON THIS TOPIC. I AM GOING TO GO TO THE FLOOR. SO IZUMI, I THINK YOU'RE NEXT. >>IZUMI AIZU: BUENOS DIAS. SO THESE ARE THE KIND OF MULTILINGUAL OR IDN -- WHEN THE IDN IS IN PLACE, I THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EASIER BY DIFFERENT LANGUAGES, I HOPE. ANYWAY, BEFORE GOING TO MY QUESTION, EXCUSE ME, I'D LIKE TO JUST REPORT OR SHARE WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT THE ALAC MEMBER STARTED TO ORGANIZE THE FIRST GAME OF ICANN'S HISTORY AS SOMETHING NEW AND NOVEL, AND WHICH IS VERY END USER-ORIENTED PROGRAM WE HAD LAST NIGHT, CALLED SOCCER TOURNAMENT. EVERYONE, INCLUDING GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ALAC, AT-LARGE, WHICH I AM A MEMBER OF, AND -- PLAYED IN A REAL, TRUE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. THE ADVISORIES, THERE WERE SOME SOS, BUT WE WERE IN A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. AND I'M PLEASED AND EXTREMELY HAPPY TO REPORT THAT AT-LARGE WAS ABLE TO WIN OVER THE GAC, AND CCTLD FOLKS TO REACH THE THIRD PLACE OVERALL, WHICH IS ONLY AFTER THE HOST, CABASE, THE LOCAL TEAM. THEY HAVE THE HOME ADVANTAGE. WE HAD TO FLY 42 HOURS TO COME TO ARGENTINA TO PLAY AGAINST THE LOCALS. OKAY? BUT THIS REMINDS THAT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE USERS' INTEREST, AND WE HAD A VERY GREAT EXPERIENCE. SO I HAVE ONLY ONE REQUEST TO THE BOARD. NEXT TIME, YOU GUYS SHOULD ALSO SEND YOUR TEAM TO PLAY. WE DIDN'T SEE THE BOARD TEAM. WE SAW THREE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD PLAYED IN A DIFFERENT HAT AND FIELD, FROM GAC OR AT-LARGE OR WHATEVER. SO IT'S NOT THAT MUCH BAD. USING JUST FIVE PEOPLE TO PLAY, IT'S A SORT OF INDOOR, NOT REAL FIELD SOCCER. SO IT'S MUCH SAFER. NO PROBLEM. NOW, SEVERAL IMPORTANT END USER-RELATED ISSUES WERE MENTIONED IN THESE COMMITTEE REPORTS. BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY SPECIFIC MENTION OF AT-LARGE IN SOME OF THE REPORTS, AND I'D LIKE TO SORT OF REMIND THAT WE ARE THE USER COMPONENT OF ICANN. SO IF ANYTHING IS RELATING VERY SERIOUSLY TO THE END USERS, I WELCOME YOUR SORT OF ENGAGEMENT, OR WE WILL TRY HARDER TO BE ENGAGED WITH THESE ISSUES. MORE SPECIFICALLY, ONE IS THE OMBUDSMAN. I'M VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN HEARING THE ACTIVITIES YOU ARE WORKING WITH. AND WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A MUCH BETTER WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH YOURS FOR OUTREACH OR BRINGING ISSUES TO THE TABLE AND STUFF LIKE THAT. AND SIMILARLY, IDN WAS MENTIONED. AND WE WERE -- WE PARTICIPATED IN AN IDN WORKSHOP, AND WE WILL TRY TO BE WORKING MORE. SO PLEASE INCLUDE NOT ONLY THE TECHNICAL PEOPLE LIKE IETF AND THE LIKES, BUT PLEASE GO TO THE USERS, YOU ARE WORKING WITH VENDORS, FINE. BUT PLEASE ALSO DON'T FORGET THAT YOU HAVE THE USER COMPONENT WITHIN ICANN. SO WE ARE HAPPY TO WORK TOGETHER. THANK YOU VERY -- OH, ONE MORE QUESTION TO JOHN. YOU MENTIONED ABOUT PHISHING. IS IT -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG THAT THE MORE CHARACTERS YOU USE WILL OPEN UP THE MORE -- WIDER DOOR TO THE PHISHING. AM I CORRECT? SO -- MEANING THAT IT'S EASIER TO CONTROL THE ASCII-BASED PHISHING THAN THE NON-ASCII-BASED ONE? >>JOHN KLENSIN: IT'S CERTAINLY THE CASE THAT IF WE CONFINE THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS WE ARE USING TO A VERY SMALL SET, ANY VERY SMALL SET, ASCII INCLUDED, THAT IT REDUCES THE RISKS. THE RISKS ARE NOT ZERO WITH ASCII. IT'S ALSO THE CASE THAT IF WE PERMIT IN A GIVEN DOMAIN ONLY A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF NON-ASCII CHARACTERS AND ARE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT, WE CAN CONTROL IT ALMOST AS WELL AS WE CAN WITH ASCII ALONE. IT'S ALSO THE CASE IN A GIVEN DOMAIN THAT IF WE PREVENT A VERY LARGE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS WHICH ARE NONETHELESS READILY DISTINGUISHABLE FROM EACH OTHER AND FROM EVERYTHING ELSE, AS WOULD BE THE CASE, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH CHINESE CHARACTERS, THAT THERE'S VERY LITTLE PHISHING OPPORTUNITY AS LONG AS ONE UNDERSTANDS HOW TO READ A CHINESE CHARACTER. AND WE CAN KEEP GOING DOWN THAT PATH. THIS IS NOT HOPELESS. BUT IT'S CERTAINLY THE CASE THAT IF WE SAY WE'VE GOT A DOMAIN AND WE'RE GOING TO PERMIT ANY UNICODE CHARACTER TO BE USED IN IT, WE'RE SUDDENLY EXPANDING THE REPERTOIRE FROM 37 POSSIBILITIES TO TENS OF THOUSANDS. AND AT THAT POINT, WE'RE IN BAD TROUBLE. >>IZUMI AIZU: I SEE THE THEORETICAL THREAT. AND MAYBE THE PRAGMATIC REAL THREAT COULD BE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, THAT SOME LANGUAGES OR SOME CHARACTERS ARE USED VERY MUCH BY THE HUGE POPULATION, LIKE THE CHINESE CHARACTERS; OTHERS, LIKE MINORITY LANGUAGES, HAVE VERY FEW MEMBERS USING THAT. SO IT VARIES BY EACH SET OF CODES OR CHARACTERS; RIGHT? >>JOHN KLENSIN: THE WORST DIFFICULTIES, IN THEORY AND POSSIBLY IN PRACTICE, KEEPING IN MIND THAT THE CRIMINALS ARE VERY SMART ABOUT THIS SORT OF THING, SEEM TO BE IN MIXTURES OF SCRIPT, SOME OF WHICH WE DON'T UNDERSTAND VERY WELL. ONE OF THE EXAMPLES THAT INTERESTS ME IS THAT IN THE THAI SCRIPT, THERE ARE CHARACTERS WHICH LOOK LIKE ROMAN CHARACTERS IN SOME HIGHLY ORNAMENTED FONTS IN WHICH VARIOUS CURLICUES AND CIRCLES AND WAVY THINGS ARE AFFIXED TO CHARACTERS INSTEAD OF SERIFS. AND IF YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THAT VERY WELL AND A USER CAN BE TRICKED INTO RENDERING THINGS WITH THOSE RATHER EXTREME FONTS, THEN WE GET INTO A PROBLEM. BY CONTRAST, IF YOU HAVE A DOMAIN THAT ISN'T PERMITTING BOTH ROMAN AND THAI CHARACTERS, THEN THAT PARTICULAR THREAT DOESN'T EXIST. PRAGMATICALLY, I THINK WE CAN REDUCE THIS PROBLEM DOWN TO WHERE IT ISN'T MUCH WORSE THAN THE ASCII ALONE CASE BUT WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT IT. >>VINT CERF: I'D LIKE TO ADD ONE POINT AND ASK YOU, IZUMI FOR HELP. THIS PROBLEM IS ALL ABOUT AMBIGUITY. THE MORE WE OPEN THE DOOR TO DIFFERENT SCRIPTS AND REPRESENTATIONS, THE MORE POTENTIAL THERE IS FOR AMBIGUITY. AMBIGUITY IS WHAT PERMITS PHISHING AND PHARMING. SO THAT IS THE CHALLENGE, IS FINDING A WAY TO LIMIT THE AMBIGUITY IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE IMPLEMENT IDNS ACROSS ALL THE VARIOUS LANGUAGES THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED. LET ME ASK YOU, IZUMI, FOR SOME HELP. I AM VERY CONCERNED, AS I EXPRESSED EARLIER, ABOUT THE OMBUDSMAN'S OFFICE TURNING INTO THE CUSTOMER COMPLAINT DESK FOR THE INTERNET. WE NEED TO HAVE SOME MUCH MORE SENSIBLE WAY OF DEALING WITH THAT PROBLEM. SINCE YOU ARE STANDING BEFORE US AND REPRESENTING THE AT-LARGE USER COMMUNITY, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU AND YOUR COLLEAGUES TO GIVE SOME THOUGHT TO HOW WE COULD DO THAT. AND WHEN I SAY "WE," I DON'T MEAN ICANN NECESSARILY. I MEAN THE INTERNET COMMUNITY. I DOUBT SERIOUSLY THAT A SINGLE PLACE COULD SERVICE EVERYONE, BUT MAYBE A NUMBER OF PLACES COULD BE CONSIDERED. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. >>IZUMI AIZU: THANK YOU, VINT. THAT LEADS TO THE REMARKS I MADE BEFORE ABOUT THE OMBUDSMAN. I DON'T THINK THE SINGLE MAN WITH HANDLE AND SOLVE ALL THE ISSUES, BUT I SEE A VERY POSITIVE FACILITATING ROLE SO YOU CAN REFER TO THE OTHER COMMUNITIES OR OTHER BODIES SUCH AS HOPEFULLY MORE FUNCTIONAL AT LARGE OR THE ALSS OR THE LOCAL INTERESTED PARTIES, GROUPS. AND WE CAN PERHAPS TRY TO CONTACT OUR LOCAL COUNTERPARTS. SO IT'S SORT OF A COLLECTIVE EFFORT. IT'S BETTER, PERHAPS, TO DISTRIBUTE A NETWORK OF NETWORKS TO DEAL WITH THAN THE CENTRALIZING TO THE ICANN. AND SAME MAY GO TRUE WITH WHAT JOHN EXACTLY SAID. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THAI LANGUAGE, THEN WE BETTER INVOLVE THE PEOPLE FROM THAILAND, IN THEORY. AND IN PRACTICE, WE MAY HAVE SOME GOOD WAYS TO OUTREACH, BECAUSE AS NORBERT KLEIN, I HOPED HE COULD BE THERE, ALWAYS REMINDED THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN UNFORTUNATE INSTANCES THAT WHEN UNICODE CONSORTIUM DECIDED THE KYMER CODES INTO THE UNICODE SETS, THAT THEY JUST IGNORED THE VOICES OF LOCAL USERS AND LOCAL PEOPLE AT ALL, SO THEY PUT SOME NON-KYMER SCRIPTS INTO THE KYMER TABLE, WHICH LATER CANNOT CHANGE ONCE IT'S OFFICIALLY DECIDED SO YOU HAVE SOME REVIEWS. SO THESE ARE THE AREAS WHERE WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER. THAT'S MY COMMENT. >>VINT CERF:THANK YOU VERY MUCH, IZUMI. TWO COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD AND THEN AXEL. >>MOUHAMET DIOP: QUICKLY, IF YOU WANT TO AVOID THE AMBIGUITY TERM THAT VINT HAVE MENTION ABOUT THE -- THE FACT THAT USING THE UNICODE TABLE WITHOUT ANY DISTRACTION CAN LEAD US IN TERMS OF IDN, I THINK THE EXAMPLE GIVEN BY JOHN KLENSIN, IF PEOPLE WORKED TOGETHER IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT A GOOD POLICY, AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CJK GROUP, BETWEEN THE CHINESE, THE KOREAN AND THE JAPANESE. THEY COULD HAVE A VERY GOOD IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IDN IF THEY WORK VERY HARD ON A VERY COMPREHENSIVE AND LESS CONFUSING ENVIRONMENT FOR THE -- FOR THE VARIANT TABLE. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, IF ICANN CONTINUED TO BE ON A STANDBY POSITION, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE THE DOOR OPEN FOR MORE AMBIGUITY AND MORE CONFUSION, BECAUSE WE WILL SEE MUCH MORE IMPLEMENTATION THAT WAS NOT REALLY BASED ON A WELL STRUCTURED AND WELL COORDINATED POSITION LIKE WE GET IN THE CJK POLICY. AND SO THAT IS MY CONCERN. SO I THINK IF YOU REALLY TRY TO LEAD, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT I LEARNED FROM JOHN KLENSIN'S ADVICE, THAT ICANN HAVE TO DO A LOT, BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE IN THE PIPE, LIKE THE IAB OR THE IETF ALREADY HAVE DONE THEIR PART OF THE JOB. AND WE ARE IN THIS POSITION FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS AND WE CAN'T AFFORD THAT STAND, STANDING POSITION, AND TRY TO AVOID THE CONFUSION BEING BROADER AND BROADER. AND THE LAST COMMENT IS IF YOU HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SOME ISSUE AND YOU DID NOT MOVE, SO I SAY DON'T COMPLAIN IF SOMEBODY WANT TO JUMP AND TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY. >>VINT CERF: SHARIL. >>SHARIL TARMIZI: THANK YOU, VINT. I ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO ASK IZUMI WHETHER, ON YOUR AUDIT OF THE KYMER SCRIPTS AND UNICODE WHETHER YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW SOMETHING COULD BE DONE IN RELATION TO IMPROVING THE SITUATION, SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE HOW COMPLEX THIS IS. IT'S NOT QUITE AN ICANN CONSTRUCT. I'M WONDERING IF IT'S A GAC CONSTRUCT AND I WONDER IF YOU HAVE ANY (INAUDIBLE). >>IZUMI AIZU: MAY I? THANK YOU, SHARIL. PERHAPS NORBERT MAY ANSWER BETTER BUT ON THE ONE HAND IT'S NOT A REAL ICANN ISSUE. IT WAS THE UNICODE AREA, SO IT'S NOT OUR DIRECT SORT OF AREAS. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND, WHEN IT COMES TO IDN OR OTHER -- ANY OTHER THING, USING THE CODES OR CHARACTERS, YOU USUALLY GO TO THE -- AS A STANDARD UNICODE THING, WHERE, YES, THERE COULD BE SOME AREAS WE CAN WORK. BUT THEN -- BUT MAJORITY OF ALAC ARE NOT REALLY TOO MUCH INVOLVED WITH THESE VERY SPECIFIC THINGS. BUT YES, I THINK NORBERT CAN EXPLAIN HOW ALAC CAN HELP. >>VINT CERF: HANG ON JUST ONE SECOND, NORBERT. WE'VE GOTTEN PRETTY TANGLED UP HERE. LET ME DO THIS. SINCE NORBERT'S COMMENTS ARE SPECIFIC TO THIS IDN MATTER, AXEL, WILL YOU FORGIVE ME FOR ALLOWING PEOPLE TO COME IN IN FRONT OF YOU? I THINK IT'S BETTER TO KEEP THE CONVERSATION COHERENT. SO NORBERT, IF YOU COULD KEEP THIS BRIEF, I'D APPRECIATE IT. >>NORBERT KLEIN: AS IZUMI HAD SAID, THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THAT MANY OF THESE QUESTIONS ARE BEING DEALT WITH WITHOUT SMALL AND ECONOMICALLY NOT VERY STRONG LANGUAGE COMMUNITIES. WE HAD A LONG STRUGGLE BEFORE THE KYMER SCRIPT WAS FINALLY CODIFIED IN UNICODE BECAUSE AS IT WAS SAID BEFORE, IT WAS DONE WITHOUT CAMBODIAN PARTICIPATION. AND I THINK THIS IS PART, ALSO, OF THE DISCUSSION HERE. WE TALK ABOUT IDN, BUT BEFORE IDN CAN BE DISCUSSED FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT LANGUAGE GROUPS, THESE LANGUAGES, MANY OF THE SMALL LANGUAGES HAVE NOT BEEN CODIFIED IN UNICODE, AND THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT TASK WHICH REQUIRES TECHNICAL UNDERSTANDING WHICH VERY OFTEN IS NOT AVAILABLE EASILY IN THESE COMMUNITIES. AND SO IN A WAY, IT IS MANY PEOPLE'S CONCERN, THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THE WSIS DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLE SAYS EVERYBODY SHOULD BE ABLE TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES AND PARTICIPATE IN THE INFORMATION SOCIETY, BUT IF THE LANGUAGE QUESTION FOR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION IS NOT RECEIVING A LOT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO BE SOLVED, THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE HAPPENING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, NORBERT. POINT WELL MADE. JOHN, IF YOU DON'T MIND, WE NEED TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER TOPIC, AND I ASSUME AXEL IS NOT LIKELY TO BE SPEAK TO GO IDNS. AXEL. THE CHAIRMAN NOW EXPRESSES COMPLETE AND TOTAL FRUSTRATION WITH THIS ATTEMPT TO CONTROL THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS. RAM, IS THIS A COMMENT AGAIN ON IDNS? >>RAM MOHAN: YES. >>VINT CERF: AND JOHN HAS HIS HAND UP AS WELL. LET ME -- AXEL, WHAT IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF YOUR COMMENT? >>AXEL PAWLIK: I HAVE SOME COMMENTS ON SOME OF THE REPORT FROM THE COMMITTEES. NOTHING ON IDNS. NO, ONLY NUMBERS. >>VINT CERF: WELL, SINCE WE SEEM TO BE STUCK ON IDNS, I WOULD PERMIT THIS TO GO ON A BIT LONGER, BUT I WILL NOT ALLOW ANY MORE THAN TWO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, RAM AND JOHN, AND THEN WE FINISH WITH THIS AND WE GO ON TO AXEL; OKAY? RAM. >>RAM MOHAN: THANK YOU, VICINITY, MARK DAVIS, PRESIDENT OF THE UNICODE CONSORTIUM, HAS BEEN WATCHING THIS WEB CAST AND HE ASKED ME TO COMMUNICATE A MESSAGE TO THE BOARD AND TO THE COMMUNITY THAT'S GATHERED HERE. THAT'S THE FIRST PART, AND THEN I HAVE COMMENTS OF MY OWN. MARK SAYS JOHN KLENSIN HAS MADE SOME VERY GOOD COMMENTS IN HIS PRESENTATION. IT'S A LITTLE BIT EARLY TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT A RESTRICTION OF NAMES ON THE REGISTRY SIDE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO EXPLORE THE REAL USER INTERFACE ISSUES BEHIND SPOOFING WITH IDNS. THAT CONCLUDES MARK'S STATEMENT. MY OWN STATEMENT AND COMMENT AND SUGGESTION TO THE BOARD AND TO ICANN ITSELF TO CONSIDER, WE ALL UNDERSTAND IDNS ARE A GLOBAL PROBLEM, A GLOBAL ISSUE, YET I SEE SOMEWHAT DISJOINTED CONVERSATIONS OCCURRING EVEN INSIDE ICANN'S VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES. WHILE THIS IS NOT ICANN'S PROBLEM ALONE TO SOLVE, ICANN CAN CERTAINLY HELP BUILD A COALITION TO HELP UNDERSTAND THESE ISSUES AND PERHAPS TRY TO FIND SOME SOLUTIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S NOT EVEN A COMMON VOCABULARY THAT EXISTS ACROSS THE VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES OR VARIOUS PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ICANN'S ROLE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM, BUT MANY PEOPLE WITH MANY DIFFERENT, BUT USEFUL, PIECES OF KNOWLEDGE COME TOGETHER AT THESE MEETINGS AND THERE IS A TERRIFIC OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD SOMETHING WHILE WE'RE ALL HERE. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, RAM. JOHN. >>JOHN KLENSIN: I THINK PIECES OF THIS CONVERSATION DEMONSTRATE THE COMPLEXITY AND MULTI-ORGANIZATIONAL LAYER NATURE OF THIS ISSUE. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHILE IDNS ARE VITALLY IMPORTANT AND WE NEED TO BE WORKING ON THEM THAT WITHOUT CONTENT TO WHICH THOSE IDNS HELP POINT, THE IDNS ARE FAIRLY POINTLESS. IT'S THEN IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT WITHOUT THE APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE AND CODING INFORMATION TO GET THAT CONTENT OUT OF THE NETWORK, THE CONTENT IS POSSIBLE, AND THE IDNS ARE CONSEQUENTLY NOT IMPORTANT EVEN IF WE CAN HAVE THEM WITHOUT THE CODING INFORMATION. THESE ARE ISSUES THAT MAY INVOLVE THE WSIS PROCESS, MAY INVOLVE BOTH THE UNICODE CONSORTIUM AND ISO. WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO GET INPUT INTO THOSE ORGANIZATIONS. MANY OF THESE ISSUES ARE NOT ICANN PROBLEMS BUT THEY'RE PROBLEMS WITH WHICH ICANN NEEDS TO BE AWARE AND SYMPATHETIC. THE INTERNET SOCIETY IS INITIATING SOME EFFORTS TO BEGIN TO LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE CODING END OF THIS PROBLEM FOR A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT CASES. AGAIN, NOT AN ICANN ISSUE BUT AN ISSUE WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND AND NEED TO UNDERSTAND IN CONTEXT. BUT TO TRY TO FOCUS ALL OF THIS ON IDNS AND TO SAY THAT IDNS ARE THE PROBLEM, AND IF WE HAVE IDNS, ALL OF THE OTHER ISSUES WILL DISAPPEAR, THE CONTENT WILL APPEAR BY MAGIC, THE DIFFICULTIES ABOUT LANGUAGE CODING WILL DISAPPEAR BY MAGIC, MISTAKES WHICH THE UNICODE CONSORTIUM MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE MADE IN THE PAST AND HOW TO RECTIFY THOSE WILL VANISH, IS REALLY A VERY SERIOUS MISTAKE. IT OVERLOADS IDNS TOO MUCH AND IT SETS ICANN UP FOR BEING BLAMED FOR ALL OF THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS, INCLUDING PROBLEMS WITH THE INCOMMENSURABILITY OF LANGUAGE AND CODING PROBLEMS WHICH GO BACK PERHAPS THOUSANDS OF YEARS. >>VINT CERF:AXEL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. >>AXEL PAWLIK: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE REPORTS PRESENTED EARLIER. I DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE NRO. AND BY THE WAY, I'M THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE RIPENCC AND CHAIR OF THE MEMBER RESOURCE ORGANIZATION. REGARDING THE ICANN PLANNING PROCESS, WE DO STRONGLY SUPPORT THE IDEA OF PRESENTING STRATEGIC AND OPERATIONAL PLANS AS PRESENTED EARLIER THIS WEEK. WE WILL ADVISE ICANN BOARD AND STAFF TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY AND ICANN CONSTITUENCIES. HOWEVER, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE STRONGER INTERACTION WITH ICANN STAFF AND BOARD DURING THE DRAFTING PROCESS AS WE FEEL THAT AT LEAST FOR THE PREPARATION OF THIS FIRST STRATEGIC PLAN WE WERE NOT CONSULTED IN ANY SIGNIFICANT WAY PRIOR TO PUBLICATION OF THE DRAFT REPORT. WE WOULD LOOK FORWARD TO AN IMPROVED PROCESS OVER THE NEXT YEARS. REGARDING THE BUDGET PROCESS, CONTRARY TO WHAT WAS SAID DURING THE REPORT OF THE FINANCES COMMITTEE, WE REGRET TO SAY NO AGREEMENT HAS BEEN ACHIEVED WITH AT LEAST ONE CONSTITUENCY; NAMELY, THE RIRS. MORE WAIT AND ATTENTION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE PROCESS OF BUY-IN AND GETTING REAL AGREEMENT FROM THE CONSTITUENCIES OR THE CONTRIBUTORS FOR THE FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ICANN BUDGET. IT COMES AS NO SURPRISE THAT WE PARTICULARLY SUPPORT THE SUGGESTION OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE TO PRODUCE AN ACTIVITY-BASED PLAN, ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING, AS WE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR THIS FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, APPROXIMATELY. OVERALL WE DO OBSERVE ICANN TO TAKE ACTIONS THAT CLEARLY GO INTO THE RIGHT DIRECTION, AND WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE ON THE PATH AND WE WOULD LOVE TO WORK TOGETHER WITH YOU ON THIS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AXEL. I KNOW THAT WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. FRANK FOWLIE. >>FRANK FOWLIE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO IZUMI THAT I'VE BEEN INVITED AND ACCEPT THE INVITATION TO SPEAK WITH ALAC AT 2:00 THIS AFTERNOON. >>VINT CERF: THAT'S OUR FAST-ACTING OMBUDSMAN RESPONSE IN REAL TIME. OKAY. I DON'T SEE OTHER PEOPLE QUEUED UP FOR COMMENT. ARE YOU COMING TO THE MICROPHONE? >>BRET FAUSETT: YES, WE HAVE A QUEUE THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVING OUR NAMES TO THE TRANSCRIPTIONISTS. SO THERE'S A QUEUE, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE IN IT RIGHT NOW. >>VINT CERF: HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE WAITING TO SPEAK? ONE, TWO. TWO? OKAY. LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THE SITUATION IS. WE'RE JUST COMING UP TO WHERE WE WOULD NORMALLY TAKE A BREAK. BEFORE WE TAKE THE BREAK, I HAVE A LITTLE CEREMONIAL THING WE NEED TO DO. SO I'LL -- IF THE QUEUE IS TWO PEOPLE DEEP RIGHT NOW LET'S END THE QUEUE WITH THOSE TWO PEOPLE, GO THROUGH THOSE COMMENTS, DO OUR CEREMONIAL ACTIVITY AND THEN TAKE A BREAK; OKAY? >>BRET FAUSETT: I'M BRET FAUSETT, ALAC LIAISON TO THE GNSO. I POSTED SOME COMMENTS ON CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, SO I WON'T REPEAT THOSE HERE EXCEPT TO SAY I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES ARE GOING TO BE UNDER REVIEW, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH ANOTHER ITERATION. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU IN THAT PROCESS, WHATEVER YOU END UP WITH, TO ADOPT THEM AS A SET OF ASPIRATIONAL GOALS OR BEST PRACTICES BUT NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU SIGN AND AGREE TO BIND YOURSELF TO. I'M REMINDED NOW OF KARL AUERBACH'S LAWSUIT WHERE HE HAD A DISAGREEMENT WITH STAFF, HE WAS ULTIMATELY VOTED DOWN BY THE BOARD, BUT THEN VINDICATED BY A CALIFORNIA COURT. I WOULD HATE TO SEE THE BOARD DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD LIMIT BOARD MEMBER'S RIGHTS OR POTENTIALLY CHILL A BOARD MEMBER'S EXERCISE OF THEIR RIGHTS EVEN WHEN THEY WERE ACTING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW. >>VINT CERF: YES. IN FACT, I WAS VERY -- I CAME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION, PERSONALLY, AM MINDFUL OF THAT DEBATE. THE RIGHTS OF DIRECTORS ARE QUITE THOROUGHLY SPELLED OUT BOTH IN BYLAWS AND IN LAW OF INCORPORATION IN CALIFORNIA IN THIS CASE. SO THANK YOU, BRET. WE HAVE ONE MORE. MARILYN. >>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MARILYN CADE. I'M A MEMBER OF THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY. I WANT TO MAKE COMMENTS ON THREE OF THE REPORTS, AND THEY WILL ALL BE QUICK. FIRST, ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, I WELCOME THE REPORT AND I THINK ESPECIALLY THE COMMITTEE BENEFITS FROM HAVING INFORMATION ABOUT THE FINANCIAL STATUS OF ICANN, AND ABOUT THE PROPOSED DIRECTIONS THAT ICANN IS GOING IN FOR REVENUE SOURCES. I DO, HOWEVER, NOTE THAT THE COMMUNITY IS LEARNING ABOUT SOME OF THESE PROPOSED DIRECTIONS AND RATHER SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL DEPTH OF THOSE CHANGES BY READING DRAFT CONTRACTS; THAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW THEY SHOULD READ. AND I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST TO THE BOARD THAT THEY THINK ABOUT THE LONGER TERM PROCESSES FOR HOW TO ADVISE THE COMMUNITY OF THE FINANCIAL NEEDS OF ICANN, HOW TO PROPOSE TO THE COMMUNITY THE DIRECTIONS THEY PLAN TO GO IN IN PERHAPS DEEPENING OR SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGING FINANCIAL REVENUE -- THE REVENUE SOURCES OR HOW THE REVENUE SOURCES ARE COLLECTED. THESE ARE CHANGES THAT THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO SUPPORT IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE STABILITY OF ICANN'S FUNDING SOURCES. AND SUPPORT, AFTER ALL, IS WHAT WE SEEK. SECONDLY, ON THE ISSUE OF BOARD GOVERNANCE, PROBABLY THE COMMENTS I WAS GOING TO MAKE HAVE BEEN OVERTAKEN BY TIME AND EVENTS. I DID POST BUT I NOTICE MY COMMENTS AREN'T POSTED. I WOULD SAY I PARTICULARLY WELCOME THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE'S COMMENTS EARLIER. I, TOO, SUPPORT THE NOTION, VERY STRONGLY, OF GOVERNANCE GUIDELINES, BUT I BELIEVE THEY SHOULD BE ASPIRATIONAL, AND I BELIEVE ALSO THAT THEY SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF BOARD DIRECTORS TO ICANN, NOT ON BOARD DIRECTORS TO THE STAFF. AND I THINK THAT WITH THE -- AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU SHOULD BE SIGNING A DOCUMENT. BUT I THINK WITH THE CHANGES THAT I HEARD RECOMMENDED EARLIER AND THE RECEPTIVITY THAT I HEARD REFLECTED, I FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THE CONCERNS THAT I HAD POSTED ABOUT WILL AT LEAST BE UNDERSTOOD AND ADDRESSED. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE ONE FINAL COMMENT ABOUT IDNS. IN THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY AND CROSS-CONSTITUENCY MEETINGS THAT WE HELD THIS WEEK, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY STRONGLY EXPRESSED ITS CONCERNS IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH EACH OTHER ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF IDNS. AND I THINK THE DISCUSSION THAT HAS GONE ON BEFORE IS UNDOUBTEDLY VERY WELCOMED BY EVERY MEMBER OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND THE CROSS-CONSTITUENCY THAT WAS SITTING IN THOSE MEETINGS, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HOW WE MAY, AS THE BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVES, WORK WITH THE REST OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY IN AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO ADVANCE A GOOD SOLUTION IN THIS WAY. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MARILYN. OH, ELIOT. I THOUGHT THE QUEUE WAS ONLY TWO LONG BUT YOU CAN SNEAK IN AND THAT'S IT. >>ELLIOT NOSS: I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE MORE. >>VINT CERF: I ASKED FOR A SHOW OF HANDS. HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE STILL IN QUEUE. >>ELLIOT NOSS: THERE'S AT LEAST ONE MORE, I THINK. >>VINT CERF: AFTER YOU. >>ELLIOT NOSS: YEAH. I WILL ENDEAVOR TO BE BRIEF. IT'S A RELATIVE STATEMENT, OF COURSE. I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUE OF GOVERNANCE AND ETHICS, AND THERE'S THREE POINTS THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE. FIRST, AT A HIGHER LEVEL, I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT THE CHALLENGE THAT ICANN FACES WITH RESPECT TO GOVERNANCE AND ETHICS AND DISCLOSURE IS NOT FULLY APPRECIATED. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A UNIQUE ORGANIZATION FACING UNIQUE CHALLENGES. AS THE CEO OF A PUBLIC COMPANY THAT, IN MY OPINION, OPERATES A VERY CLEAN GAME, ONE THAT HAS A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF DISCLOSURE AND OPEN DISCOURSE WITH ITS CONSTITUENTS, I WOULD BE VERY EXPLICIT ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE LEVEL OF DISCLOSURE AND THE OPENNESS THAT ICANN ENGAGES IN IS MUCH GREATER THAN ANY PUBLIC COMPANY THAT I'VE SEEN, EVEN IN A SARBANES-OXLEY WORLD. AND I ALSO FEEL THERE'S NOT A LOT OF ANALOGS FOR THE LEVEL OF DISCLOSURE AND THE ETHICAL AND GOVERNANCE CHALLENGES THAT ICANN FACES. SO I THINK THAT YOU'VE GOT A HARD ROAD AHEAD OF YOU AND NOT A LOT OF COMPARABLES SO I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE CHALLENGE AND DON'T THINK PEOPLE GIVE ENOUGH CREDIT FOR THE EFFORTS IN THAT REGARD. I WANT TO MAKE THAT OVERRIDING STATEMENT BEFORE I GO TO TWO SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT I FIND SOMEWHAT TROUBLING IN THE CURRENT DRAFT APPROACH. FIRST IS THE ISSUE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT RELATE TO UNDERMINING THE CEO AND THE BOARD'S NEED TO BE CAREFUL IN THAT REGARD. I THINK THAT THOSE STATEMENTS, AS THEY LIVE IN THE DOCUMENT, SHOULD BE LOOKED AT VERY, VERY CAREFULLY. THE TWO POINTS I WOULD MAKE THERE, FIRST IT IS IN MY VIEW, AND AS SOMEBODY WHO HAS TO LIVE IN THAT ENVIRONMENT, THE BOARD'S PROBABLY FOREMOST OBLIGATION TO HAVE OVERSIGHT OVER THE CEO. TWO, THE BOARD IS REALLY, TRULY THE ONLY BODY THAT CAN MANAGE AND DRILL DOWN ON WHAT THE CEO'S ACTIONS ARE. YOU KNOW, MY CHILDREN ALWAYS ASK ME, YOU KNOW, WHO IS THE BOSS OF YOUR COMPANY? YOU KNOW, IS THIS PERSON THE BOSS OF THAT PERSON? IS THAT PERSON THE BOSS OF THAT PERSON? KIDS LIVE IN A SIMPLE WORLD. "DADDY, YOU'RE THE BOSS OF THEM ALL?" NO, I WORK FOR THEM ALL. BUT WHEN A BOARD MEMBER CALLS ME ON THE WEEKEND AND I AM SPEAKING TO THEM I SPECIFICALLY REFER TO THEM, TO MY CHILDREN, AS MY BOSS CALLING. AND THE SECOND POINT I MAKE ABOUT THAT IS I UNDERSTAND THAT STATEMENT AS IT LIVES. THERE WAS A SAYING IN LAW SCHOOL THAT I'VE ALWAYS REMEMBERED, WHICH IS BAD FACTS MAKE BAD LAW. AND I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT THAT STATEMENT LIVES IN THE DOCUMENT AS THE RESULT OF A VERY SPECIFIC SET OF Z THAT THE BOARD HAS HAD TO FACE. IT'S ALWAYS DANGEROUS WHEN EDGE CASES CREATE A STANDARD. SO I -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE THINKING WAS, AND I SEE THE SHAKING OF YOUR HEAD, BUT I WOULD CAUTION YOU TO THE EXTENT THAT STATEMENT LIVES IN THE DOCUMENT, IT SHOULD BE -- IF IT'S CHOSEN TO STAY, IT SHOULD BE QUALIFIED MORE CAREFULLY THAN IT IS. IT SHOULD BE VERY EXPLICIT AS TO WHAT THAT STATEMENT MEANS AND WHAT IT DOESN'T MEAN AND IT SHOULD EXPLICITLY CAPTURE THE BOARD'S OBLIGATION TO OVERSEE THE CEO ROLE. THE SECOND ELEMENT THAT I'M TROUBLED BY, AND I PUT THIS OUT THERE AS PERSONAL OPINION, I HAVE THE HONOR OF SITTING ON THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE THIS YEAR. IT HASN'T STARTED UNTIL TOMORROW SO I'M ABLE TO SHARE MY BIASES AT LEAST UNTIL TOMORROW EVENING, AND THAT OBLIGATION STARTS. THE DOCUMENT TALKS ABOUT, WHEN IT'S TALKING ABOUT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, IT TALKS ABOUT BOARD MEMBERS SHOULD NOT BE CONSULTANTS TO A CONSTITUENCY OR TO CONSTITUENCY MEMBERS, ET CETERA. I WOULD GO FURTHER THERE, BECAUSE THAT STILL LEAVES OPENINGS. I FUNDAMENTALLY DON'T BELIEVE THAT SOMEBODY WHO IS PART OF THE GOVERNED, PERSONALLY, I AM PART OF THE GOVERNED, MY ROLE IS TO COME TO THE PUBLIC FORUM, MY ROLE IS TO LIVE INSIDE THE REGISTRARS CONSTITUENCY, THE GNSO, POTENTIALLY SERVE ON THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT ANYBODY THAT IS ACTIVELY IN THAT SITUATION SHOULD IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM HAVE A BOARD SEAT. THAT'S A BIAS THAT I'LL BRING TO THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, AND IT'S A BIAS THAT I THINK SHOULD ALSO EXIST EVEN WITH RESPECT TO THE GNSO APPOINTMENTS. AND THE OTHER APPOINTMENTS, THE CCNSO APPOINTMENTS, ET CETERA. ICANN IS NOW A LITTLE OLDER, IS MATURING. THE ABILITY TO REACH OUT TO A BROAD POOL OF CANDIDATES IS INCREASING WITH EACH YEAR. WE DON'T, IN MY OPINION, NEED TO, WHERE WE MAY HAVE A LITTLE MORE IN THE PAST, RELIED ON INSIDERS AND PEOPLE WHO HAD SOME LEVEL OF FAMILIARITY WITH THIS. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT PEOPLE BRING A HIGH LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE SUBJECT MATTER, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THAT IS NOW AVAILABLE WELL OUTSIDE OF THE GOVERNED. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO BE POTENTIALLY EVEN STRICTER IN THAT REGARD. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ELLIOT. THOSE ARE ALL VERY HELPFUL AND I THINK THOUGHT-PROVOKING COMMENTS. IS THERE ONE MORE PERSON IN THE QUEUE? APPARENTLY NOT. SO WE ARE ABOUT TO MAKE THE BREAK -- I'M SORRY, TAKE A BREAK. BUT I'D LIKE TO ASK PATRICIO SEOANE TO JOIN ME ON THE STAGE, PLEASE. I HOPE YOU -- I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU SAW PATRICIO LAST NIGHT, BUT HE WAS FABULOUS ON THE SOCCER COURT. AND I'M SO GLAD THAT I WAS ABLE TO GET OFF BEFORE ANY DAMAGE WAS DONE TO MY BODY. FIRST OF ALL, PATRICIO HAS TO GO OFF BACK TO BUENOS AIRES, AND VERY SOON. AND SO I WANTED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE TIME WHEN A LOT OF US WERE IN THE ROOM TO PUBLICLY THANK HIM AND HIS TEAM, AND THE SPONSORS, FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO PROVIDING THIS FACILITY FOR US AND THE PHENOMENAL HOSPITALITY, AND THE ENABLING OF SO MUCH INTERACTION BETWEEN THE VARIOUS PARTS OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY. I THINK THERE HAS BEEN MORE MINGLING OF THE BOARD MEMBERS AND THE GAC AND THE PARTICIPANTS AND ALL OF THE OTHER CONSTITUENCIES THAN IN ANY OTHER MEETING WE'VE HAD. SO, OBVIOUSLY, IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATMOSPHERE THAT YOU HELPED TO CREATE HERE. SO WE APPRECIATE IT. WE WANT TO GIVE YOU A SMALL TOKEN OF OUR APPRECIATION FOR ALL OF THIS HARD WORK, WHICH THIS DOESN'T REALLY SUFFICIENTLY COMPENSATE. BUT IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN LOOK ON AND REMEMBER THAT YOU WOULD NEVER WANT TO DO THIS AGAIN. (LAUGHTER.) >>VINT CERF: IT'S GLASS, SO PLEASE BE CAREFUL. THIS IS A LITTLE CUBE THAT SAYS "ICANN" ON IT, AND THEN A GLOBE, WHICH WE CAN PUT ON THE TOP. AND YOU CAN THINK OF IT AS A SOCCER BALL. BUT PLEASE DON'T KICK IT THROUGH THE WINDOW. BUT, IN ANY CASE, I THINK I CAN SPEAK FOR ANYONE THE ROOM, PATRICIO, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EVERYTHING. (APPLAUSE.) >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: WELL, I THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT WAS AN HONOR FOR US TO RECEIVE ICANN HERE IN MAR DEL PLATA, ARGENTINA. AND I WILL MAKE THIS HALF IN SPANISH AND HALF IN ENGLISH. (NO INTERPRETATION.) AND -- THERE IS NO TRANSLATION? >>THE INTERPRETER: YES, THERE IS. YES, YES. >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: THERE'S TRANSLATION? >>THE INTERPRETER: YES. >>VINT CERF: OKAY. WE HAVE SOLVED THE PROBLEM HERE. OKAY. SHOOT. >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: OKAY. (INAUDIBLE) THESE TWO PEOPLE WHO HAVE WORKED WITH THE LAST COUNCIL AND THE LATIN COUNCIL HAVE WORKED VERY, VERY HARD TO ORGANIZE ALL OF THESE MEETINGS. SO THEY HAVE WORKED EXTRA TIME THIS WEEK. THOSE PEOPLE ARE SEBASTIAN BELLAGAMBA AND TONY HARRIS. PLEASE STAND UP. (APPLAUSE.) >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: AS REGARDS THE SOCCER MATCH YESTERDAY, WE WERE TOLD THAT AS WE ORGANIZED IT, THE COACHES WERE -- THE REFEREE WAS LOCAL, THE GUESTS HAD TO TRAVEL 48 HOURS TO REACH MAR DEL PLATA. BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT REASON THAT MADE -- WE HAVE ORGANIZED THAT SOCCER MATCH IS BECAUSE I HAVE HEARD ON ICANN AND THE SOCCER MATCH, THINGS HAVE TO REACH CONSENSUS AND COOPERATION. SO WE THINK THAT TO DEVELOP A FRIENDSHIP IS SOMETHING THAT WITH A SOCCER MATCH, WE HAVE STRENGTHENED AND MADE A STEP FORWARD FOR CONSENSUS, COOPERATION, AND FRIENDSHIP. SO I ALSO HAVE A PRESENT FOR VINT. THIS IS FOR YOU, VINT. >>VINT CERF: OH ! (APPLAUSE.) >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: THE INITIALS ARE THERE, VINT CERF? >>VINT CERF: YES. I CAN KEEP USING THIS. >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: THERE IS A SMALL CARD THERE. >>VINT CERF: I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH. >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: THANKS AGAIN. >>VINT CERF: OKAY. SAFE JOURNEYS. >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: SORRY? >>VINT CERF: SAFE JOURNEYS HOME. I HOPE YOU HAVE A SAFE -- >>MR. PATRICIO SEOANE: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND BYE BYE. (APPLAUSE.) >>VINT CERF: OH, YES, WAIT, TONY HAS -- >>TONY HARRIS: JUST TWO WORDS, PLEASE. I'D LIKE TO THANK MICHAEL EVANS AND STEVE CONTE, AND ESPECIALLY DIANE SCHROEDER. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH THEM. AND CONGRATULATE THEM FOR BEING SUCH EXCELLENT PROFESSIONALS. THANK YOU. (APPLAUSE.) >>VINT CERF: THERE IT GOES AGAIN. OKAY. SO WE WILL RESUME AT -- WE'RE RUNNING A LITTLE LATE NOW. SO LET'S RESUME AT 10:30 -- SORRY, 11:30. OKAY? (BREAK.) >>VINT CERF: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WOULD TAKE YOUR SEATS, WE'D LIKE TO RECONVENE. WE HAVE -- COULD I ASK THAT WE COME TO ORDER, PLEASE. KURT, THERE'S -- BEFORE YOU START, WE HAVE ONE OTHER CEREMONIAL THING TO DO. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET ME ASK YOU TO TAKE YOUR SEATS. WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY OF MAR DEL PLATA WHO WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT OF OUR TIME. SO LET ME ASK HIM TO JOIN ME ON THE STAGE. YES? ARE WE READY? PLEASE, IF YOU WOULD COME -- PLEASE COME UP -- COME UP ON THE STAGE. I DON'T KNOW THERE'S -- IF STAIR -- STAIRS ARE OVER THERE. SO LET ME EXPLAIN. THIS IS A VISIT BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY OF MAR DEL PLATA. AND I TURN THIS OVER TO YOU. >> ON BEHALF OF THE MAYOR OF MAR DEL PLATA, I AM GOING TO GIVE MR. VINT CERF THIS DECREE THAT DECLARES HIM A GUEST OF HONOR FOR OUR CITY, MAR DEL PLATA. IT'S A REAL HONOR TO HAVE YOU AMONG US. YOU KNOW THAT THE CITY OF MAR DEL PLATA IS THE CITY IN ARGENTINA THAT HAS THE LARGEST AMOUNT OF EDUCATION MUNICIPAL ESTABLISHMENTS HERE IN MAR DEL PLATA. AND ALL OF THEM HAVE AN INTERNET CONNECTION. AND IT'S A PERSONAL HONOR. I AM (INAUDIBLE) ECONOMICS AND I HAVE YOUR NAME AS THE FATHER OF THE INTERNET, AS YOU'RE CALLED IN DIFFERENT TEXTS. SO FOR ME, IT'S A REAL PLEASURE AS A TEACHER AND ALSO AS A MEMBER OF THE MUNICIPALITY. (APPLAUSE.) >>VINT CERF: I WILL MAKE THIS BRIEF BECAUSE WE HAVE MUCH WORK TO DO. BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT ALL OF US ARE HONORED TO BE HERE IN MAR DEL PLATA, WHERE THE CITY HAS REALLY HELPED US DO A GREAT DEAL OF WORK AND ALSO HAS HELPED US LEARN TO KNOW EACH OTHER BETTER. AND, OF COURSE, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT ABOUT OUR WORK, IS TO COORDINATE, TO COOPERATE, AND COLLABORATE. AND MAR DEL PLATA HAS HELPED US DO THAT, AND WE THANK YOU FOR THAT. (APPLAUSE.) >>TONY HARRIS: YES, WE'D LIKE TO PRESENT THE SOCCER CUP TO VINT. THIS NOW IS THE ICANN SOCCER CUP, SO YOU TAKE IT WITH YOU. AND IT GOES TO EVERY EVENT, SHOULD THEY WISH TO SUPPORT. (APPLAUSE.) >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENCE, KURT. AND NOW LET'S MOVE ON TO THE STLD STATUS. OH, SORRY, I'M SORRY, VENI HAS FOUND A LOST KEY. >>VENI MARKOVSKI: IF ANYONE HAS LOST A KEY, WHICH SEEMS LIKE A KEY FROM SOMETHING IMPORTANT AND HAS SOME NUMBERS ON IT, LET HIM OR SHE COME TO ME. I FOUND IT YESTERDAY SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT PART OF THE HALL. THANKS. >>VINT CERF: AND NJERI HAS A CORRECTION TO MAKE ON THE AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT. >>NJERI RIONGE: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. I MENTIONED THAT THOMAS NILES IS AN EX OFFICIO OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A CORRECTION. HE IS AND WHAT IS A MEMBER OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE DURING THE TIME THAT WE WERE DOING ALL THE DIFFERENT AUDITS FOR THE ICANN OFFICE. BUT HE'S NO LONGER A MEMBER OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, AND HE'S NOT AN EX OFFICIO. I JUST WANTED THAT TO BE NOTED AND RECORDED AS CORRECTED. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, NJERI. KURT, LET'S GO ON NOW WITH THE STLD STATUS. >>KURT PRITZ: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. IN TUNISIA, IT WAS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD THAT ICANN WOULD LAUNCH A ROUND TO SOLICIT APPLICATIONS FOR SPONSORED TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS, JUST FOR YOUR REFERENCE, BRING THE RESOLUTION HERE. ICANN POSTED A REQUEST FOR A PROPOSAL AFTER FORMULATING CRITERIA AND RECEIVED TEN APPLICATIONS FOR THE DESIGNATION OF SPONSORED TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS. THOSE ARE HERE, INDICATED ALSO BY -- ACCOMPANIED ALSO BY THE SPONSORING ORGANIZATION. THE PROCESS POSTED, ESSENTIALLY, WAS THIS: WE POSTED -- ICANN POSTED APPLICATION MATERIALS. THE APPLICANTS APPLIED FOR A USER NAME AND PASSWORD. AND USING THOSE TWO TOOLS, COMPLETED AN ONLINE APPLICATION. THERE WAS THEN AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION DONE BY A TEAM OF EVALUATORS. THERE WERE THREE TEAMS, A TECHNICAL TEAM, A BUSINESS/COMMERCIAL TEAM, AND A SPONSORSHIP TEAM. SO EACH ONE OF THOSE THREE TEAMS RESPECTIVELY EVALUATED THE APPLICATIONS AGAINST THOSE FAMILY OF CRITERIA AS THEY WERE DESCRIBED IN THE RFP. IF IT WAS DETERMINED THAT AN APPLICATION MET THOSE THREE SETS OF BASELINE CRITERIA, TECHNICAL, COMMERCIAL AND SPONSORSHIP COMMUNITY, THEY, THEN, WERE INFORMED THAT THEY WOULD ENTER INTO A PHASE OF COMMERCIAL AND TECHNICAL NEGOTIATION WITH ICANN, THE CULMINATION OF THOSE NEGOTIATIONS IS AND WAS INTENDED TO RESULT IN THE DESIGNATION OF THE NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THAT, WE WOULD SIGN AGREEMENTS THAT WOULD BE FORWARDED TO THE BOARD FOR THEIR APPROVAL. AND ON APPROVAL -- BY APPROVAL OF THE ICANN BOARD, THEN THOSE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS WOULD, IN FACT, BE DESIGNATED. I DESCRIBED MOST OF THIS ON THE PAST SLIDE. THE INDEPENDENT PANELS WERE AN INTERNATIONALLY-DIVERSE GROUP OF EXPERTS IN THEIR RESPECTIVE FIELDS. THE NINE PEOPLE, THREE ON EACH PANEL, REPRESENTED EIGHT COUNTRIES LOCATED IN ALL THE REGIONS OF THE GLOBE. ALSO PART OF THIS PROCESS WAS A PANEL PROGRAM MANAGER. THAT SUPPLIED AN ADDITIONAL QUANTUM OF ARMS'-LENGTH DEALING AND RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ICANN, THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS, AND THE APPLICANTS, IN ORDER TO KEEP THE EVALUATION PROCESS TOTALLY INDEPENDENT. THE PANELS WERE ESTABLISHED AND REVIEW WAS BEGUN IN 2004. LIKE I JUST SAID, THE EVALUATIONS WERE DONE IN A BLIND, INDEPENDENT MANNER. AND ALL COMMUNICATIONS WERE FUNNELED THROUGH THE PROJECT MANAGER. EACH TEAM MET SIX TO EIGHT TIMES BY TELECONFERENCE IN THE INITIAL PHASE OF THE EVALUATIONS. AND I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT LATER. AS PART OF THE EVALUATION, EACH PANEL POSED A SERIES OF QUESTIONS TO EACH APPLICANT TO SEEK CLARIFICATION INTO THE APPLICATION. THOSE QUESTIONS WERE THEN ANSWERED BY THE APPLICANT IN WRITING. EACH PANEL PROVIDED SEPARATE REPORTS COMPARING THE INFORMATION AGAINST -- IN THE APPLICATION AND MEASURING THAT AGAINST THE CRITERIA IN THE RFP. THE REPORTS WERE SENT TO EACH OF THE APPLICANTS. IN CASES WHERE THE APPLICANTS MET ALL THREE SETS OF CRITERIA, THE APPLICATION WENT IMMEDIATELY ON INTO THE NEGOTIATION PHASE. IN CASES WHERE THE CRITERIA WERE NOT MET YET, ICANN REQUESTED CLARIFYING DOCUMENTATION RELATING TO ANY DEFICIENCIES THAT WERE REPORTED. IN CERTAIN CASES, THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS THEN RECONVENED IN ORDER TO RECONSIDER THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND TEST WHETHER THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN FACT SATISFIED THE THREE SETS OF BASELINE CRITERIA. WE THOUGHT THIS WAS APPROPRIATE IN THAT THERE WAS NO LIMIT PLACED ON THE NUMBER OF TLDS TO BE DESIGNATED. SO WE WANTED TO FULLY UNDERSTAND ALL THE DETAIL BEHIND EACH APPLICATION AND WE DID NOT WANT TO DENY AN APPLICATION PERHAPS BECAUSE THERE WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION IN THE INITIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURE. THEN BY RECONSIDERING THE APPLICATIONS, WE WERE NOT DISADVANTAGING ANY OF THE OTHER APPLICANTS, BECAUSE, AS I SAID, THERE WAS NO LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS. THIS LED TO SORT OF AN ITERATIVE PROCESS TOWARDS THE END OF THE CONSIDERATION THAT STRETCHED OUT THE EVALUATION PROCESS SOMEWHAT. THE APPLICANTS RECEIVED THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATION IN WRITING. THEY RESPONDED IN WRITING. THERE WAS GENERALLY A TELECONFERENCE THEN BETWEEN THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATION TEAM AND THE APPLICANT. NOTES OF THAT MEETING WERE JOINTLY AGREED UPON AND THEN DISTRIBUTED, AND THE APPLICANT THEN RESPONDED IN WRITING AGAIN, ENABLING THE EVALUATOR TO ONCE AGAIN UNDERTAKE THE EVALUATION PROCESS. SO IN CERTAIN APPLICATIONS, WE WENT THROUGH THIS ITERATION ONE OR TWO TIMES IN ORDER TO FULLY FLESH OUT THE APPLICATIONS AND UNDERSTAND THEM. AT THE END OF THAT, IF THERE WERE STILL CONTINGENCIES REMAINING IN THE APPLICATION, THE ICANN BOARD, WITH FULL INFORMATION, I.E.,WITH ACCESS TO THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, THE QUESTIONS THAT WENT BACK AND FORTH, THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS' REPORT, AND SUBSEQUENT WRITINGS, TOOK ON TO CONFIRM WHETHER THE CONTINGENCIES IN THE APPLICATION HAD, IN FACT, BEEN REMOVED AND THE APPLICATION COULD GO ON TO THE NEGOTIATION PHASE, OR WHETHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS REQUIRED, OR, IN FACT, WHETHER THE APPLICATION WAS DEFICIENT AND SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED. SO AFTER ALL THAT ABOUT THE STATUS, AFTER ALL THAT ABOUT THE PROCESS, I HAVE ONE SLIDE ABOUT THE STATUS. TWO OF THE APPLICANTS, DOT JOBS AND DOT TRAVEL, HAVE SUCCESSFUL MET ALL THE BASELINE CRITERIA, COMPLETED NEGOTIATIONS WITH ICANN, AND AT THIS MEETING IN MAR DEL PLATA, WE HAVE PUT BEFORE THE BOARD THESE CONTRACTS FOR BOARD APPROVAL. IF THE BOARD APPROVES THEM, THAT WILL LEAD DIRECTLY TO THE DESIGNATION OF STLDS. THREE OTHER APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN FOUND TO SATISFY THE BASELINE CRITERIA AND ARE NOW IN ACTIVE NEGOTIATIONS WITH ICANN. WE HOPE TO BRING THOSE NEGOTIATIONS TO A CONCLUSION AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE AND ARE WORKING INTENSELY WITH EACH OF THESE APPLICANTS. THEY ARE DOT CAT, DOT MOBI, AND DOT POST. OTHER APPLICANTS HAVE NOT YET BEEN DETERMINED TO MEET THE BASELINE CRITERIA. WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM STILL ACTIVELY TO DETERMINE IF THE APPLICATION CAN BE CONFIGURED IN A WAY SO THAT BASELINE CRITERIA CAN BE MET. AND THOSE ARE DOT ASIA, DOT MAIL, TELNIC, AND DOT XXX. EACH -- AS EACH INDEPENDENT EVALUATION WAS COMPLETED, EACH APPLICATION TOOK OFF ON ITS OWN PATH. SO IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THESE THINGS IN AS TIMELY A BASIS AS POSSIBLE, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH EACH OF THE APPLICANTS INDIVIDUALLY AT THEIR PACE, AND THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THEM HAVE HAPPENED AT A PACE GOVERNED BY THE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN US. WE ANTICIPATE BEFORE THE LUXEMBOURG MEETING THAT ALL THE APPLICATIONS WILL BE THROUGH AT LEAST THIS EVALUATION PHASE AND THEN WILL BE DETERMINED IF THEY'RE GOING ON TO THE NEXT PHASE IN THE PROCESS. AND THAT'S MY REPORT, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, KURT. I RECOGNIZE A GREAT DEAL OF WORK BY THE STAFF IN GETTING TO THIS POINT. I'D LIKE TO CALL NOW UPON PAUL VERHOEF TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THE PROCESS FOR NEW GTLDS CREATION. >>PAUL VERHOEF: THANK YOU, VINT. I'LL BE BRIEF THIS MORNING ON WHERE WE ARE. AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LAST YEAR PUBLISHED THE REPORT TO COMPLY WITH THE BOARD RESOLUTION TO LOOK INTO THIS AREA. THE REPORT IS ON THE WEB SITE AND IT CONCERNS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW GTLDS. WE'RE CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF VARIOUS STEPS IN THAT PROCESS. WITH THE ADDITION OF NEW STAFF RESOURCES, WE HAVE STARTED TO MAP OUT THE ISSUES SO THAT WE CAN HAVE AN INFORMED DISCUSSION, ORGANIZED WITH AND BY THE COMMUNITY ON THIS MATTER. THE ISSUES ARE VERY WIDE AND COMPLEX. THEY GO FROM TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS TO ECONOMIC BUSINESS CONSIDERATIONS, AND VARIOUS BASIC CONSIDERATIONS ON THE USE OF NEW TLDS, THE LIMITS OF THE SCOPE OF NEW TLDS IN RELATION TO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE DNS TREE AND THE VARIOUS SECURITY AND STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS WHICH GO WITH THAT. SO AT THE MOMENT, THE STAFF IS, AS I SAID, MAPPING OUT THE ISSUES SO THAT WE HAVE SOME IDEA ON HOW WE CAN ORGANIZE THESE DISCUSSIONS RATHER THAN ACTUALLY SOLVING IT. FIRST OF ALL, TO MAKE SURE THAT A PROCESS CAN BE SET UP WHICH ALLOWS US TO HAVE SUCH AN INFORMED DISCUSSION. MY ANTICIPATION IS THAT BY THE LUXEMBOURG MEETING, WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE FINDINGS KNOWN AND TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP IN THE DISCUSSION PROCESS. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PAUL. THE NEXT REPORT IS AGAIN FROM KURT PRITZ, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH THE DOT NET BID PROCESS. JOHN JEFFREY, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING BEFORE WE DISCUSS THIS OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL WE GET TO PUBLIC COMMENT? >>JOHN JEFFREY: WE'LL WAIT UNTIL THE PUBLIC COMMENT IF THAT'S OKAY, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>VINT CERF: THAT'S FINE. PLEASE GO AHEAD, KURT. >>KURT PRITZ: THIS UPDATE CONCERNS THE SUCCESSOR SELECTION FOR THE DOT NET REGISTRY REQUIREMENT. THE LEGAL REQUIREMENT FOR THE BID AND THE SUCCESSOR OPERATOR COMES FROM THE EXISTING DOT NET CONTRACT THAT INDICATES THAT THE CONTRACT EXPIRES JULY 1ST, 2005, AND THAT A SUCCESSOR OPERATOR SHOULD BE SPECIFIED. THE PROCESS FOR SELECTING THE NEW OPERATOR, THE SUCCESSOR OPERATOR WAS DEVELOPED AND THEN PRESENTED TO THE ICANN BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL. THE CRITERIA THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS WERE BASED ON A GNSO RECOMMENDATION. AND AFTER THAT, AN RFP WAS PUBLISHED. AND I'M OBVIOUSLY PROVIDING THESE LINKS HERE WHEN WE SEND THE PRESENTATION OUT. THAT SHOULD FACILITATE YOUR FINDING THIS INFORMATION. BIDS WERE RECEIVED FROM FIVE APPLICANTS. ICANN RETAINED AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR TO HOLD THESE EVALUATIONS AT ARM'S LENGTH AND ALSO BLIND TO US. THIS EVALUATION WAS CONDUCTED BY THIS INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY, TELCORDIA. TELCORDIA ISSUED A REPORT THAT RANKED THE APPLICANTS. NOW, AS CONTEMPLATED, WE'RE RECEIVING QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS REGARDING THE EVALUATION AND ARE UNDERGOING A PROCESS WITH THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATION TEAM. COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS ARE BEING FORWARDED TO THEM IN WRITING. THEY ARE RESPONDING BACK TO US IN WRITING. ALL OF THESE COMMENTS WILL BE POSTED IN A PUBLIC MANNER. AT THE END OF THIS PROCESS, THE BOARDS WILL CONSIDER ALL THE ELEMENTS IN THIS PROCESS BEFORE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT. AS OPPOSED TO THE PROCESS, THESE ARE SOME OF THE RESULTS. ICANN RECEIVED FIVE APPLICATIONS. THE VERY GOOD NEWS IS, THE EVALUATOR FOUND THAT ALL FIVE APPLICANTS WERE CAPABLE OF RUNNING DOT NET. THEY FOUND THEY WERE ALL HIGHLY PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. AND WE THINK THIS IS A TRIBUTE TO THE WAY THE DNS HAS GROWN AND MATURED. AND THIS WILL ALSO INFORM THE POLICY DEVELOPED FOR THE FORMULATION OF NEW GTLDS AND THE DESIGNATION OF NEW GTLDS, THE PRESENTATION PAUL VERHOEF JUST MADE. NOW, BASED UPON THE RANKINGS PUBLISHED IN THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR'S REPORT, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCESS THAT WE HAD ALREADY PUBLISHED AND HAD BEEN APPROVED, ICANN'S COMMENCED NEGOTIATIONS WITH VERISIGN. IN THE MEANTIME, ICANN'S COORDINATING THE RESPONSES TO THE APPLICANT QUESTIONS. SO WE WILL FORWARD ON TO THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR, AS APPROPRIATE, THOSE QUESTIONS, AND THEY WILL RESPOND TO THEM. ALL THESE QUESTIONS WILL BE POSTED TO MAINTAIN THE TRANSPARENCY OF THE PROCESS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >>VINT CERF: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, KURT. NOW WE HAVE A REPORT FROM DOUG BARTON ON THE IANA PROCESS. SO, DOUG, LET ME ASK YOU TO TAKE THE LECTERN. >>DOUG BARTON: THANK YOU. MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, DISTINGUISHED GUESTS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IT IS ONCE AGAIN MY PLEASURE TO BE WITH YOU AND OFFER A REPORT ON THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE IANA PROCESS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS. I HAVE A BRIEF OUTLINE OF MY PRESENTATION. AND THEN IF WE COULD MOVE TO THE FIRST SLIDE, WHICH SHOWS THE PERFORMANCE OF THE ROOT MANAGEMENT FUNCTION FOR THE LAST THREE MONTHS, JANUARY 1ST THROUGH MARCH 31ST. AND I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WHILE OUR STATISTICS-GATHERING PROCESS IS STILL NOT AS EFFECTIVE AS WE WOULD LIKE IT TO BE, WE HAVE ONCE AGAIN INDICATED -- AND I'LL STEP ASIDE JUST A BIT -- THE DIFFERENCE -- OH, THAT'S A VERY FUZZY GRAPH, ISN'T IT? WELL, IF YOU COULD READ THIS GRAPH WELL, YOU WOULD SEE THAT THERE ARE BLUE BARS HERE THAT INDICATE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THE IANA STAFF -- EXCUSE ME -- HAS SPENT ACTUALLY PROCESSING AN APPLICATION OR A REQUEST, AND THE LARGER, MAGENTA, BARS INDICATE THE TIME SPENT WAITING ON OTHER PARTIES FOR RESPONSES. AND THAT INCLUDES OFTENTIMES THE TLD MANAGERS, SOMETIMES IT INCLUDES VERISIGN, WHO'S CURRENTLY PERFORMING THE ROOT MANAGEMENT EDITING FUNCTION FOR US. AND WHAT WE'VE DISCOVERED OVER TIME IS THAT AS WE IMPROVE OUR ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE TLD MANAGERS AND RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER, THAT THE RESPONSES OVERALL ARE BEING HANDLED -- OR THE REQUESTS, RATHER, OVERALL ARE BEING HANDLED MORE QUICKLY. BUT THERE'S STILL ROOM TO IMPROVE IN THAT PARTICULAR FUNCTION. AND THEN IF WE COULD MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH WILL BE NOW, I BELIEVE, EVEN MORE FUZZY, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BUT THIS IS -- THE PREVIOUS SLIDE INDICATED THE REQUESTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED FROM JANUARY 1ST THROUGH MARCH 31ST, AND THIS SLIDE INDICATES THE TOTAL NUMBER OF WORK ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. AND THE BARS HERE THAT DO NOT HAVE BLUE SECTIONS WHERE THE IANA TIME HAS BEEN FILLED IN INDICATE REQUESTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN PROCESS. AND BECAUSE, ONCE AGAIN, OUR STATISTICS GATHERING IS NOT PERFECT, THE IANA TIME FOR THOSE REQUESTS WILL NOT BE FILLED IN THAT SPREADSHEET UNTIL WE GET TO THE VERY END OF THAT PROCESS. SO WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH ALL THOSE REQUESTS WE'LL HAVE BETTER DATA FOR YOU. BUT IT DOES SHOW THAT THERE'S A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK THAT'S CURRENTLY ENTERING THE IANA QUEUE ON A QUARTERLY BASIS. THE NEXT SLIDE INDICATES IN A DIFFERENT MANNER WHAT THE OVERALL WORK FLOW HAS BEEN FOR THE IANA FROM ACTUALLY JANUARY 1ST OF 2004 THROUGH MARCH 31 OF THIS YEAR ONCE AGAIN. AND YOU CAN SEE A VERY DRAMATIC SPIKE HERE THAT IS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE ADDITION OF IPV6 GLUE FOR THE TLD NAME SERVERS. AND WE RECEIVED, IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE KUALA LUMPUR MEETING, A VERY LARGE NUMBER OF -- WELL OVER 30 REQUESTS FOR ADDING IPV6 GLUE TO THE ROOT NAME SERVERS THAT WERE OFTEN INTERCONNECTED AND REQUIRED COORDINATION BETWEEN MANY DIFFERENT TLD MANAGERS TO PROCESS THE SAME REQUEST. SO THERE WAS A TIME PERIOD THERE WHERE THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF WORK GOING THROUGH THE IANA TEAM, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, IT WAS HANDLED IN A FAIRLY TIMELY MANNER AND THEN THE WORKLOAD LEVELED OFF AGAIN. HOWEVER, AS YOU CAN SEE TOWARDS THE END OF THE CHART, IT HAS BEEN GOING BACK UP. AND THIS INDICATES A FAIRLY STEADY INCREASE IN THE VOLUME OF REQUESTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED. THE COLORS INDICATE THE AGE OF EACH ITEM IN THE QUEUE, AND IF YOU'RE VERY INTERESTED IN THIS DATA, I WOULD JUST ASK THAT IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BETTER FOR YOU TO LOOK AT IT ON THE WEB SITE AFTER IT'S POSTED GIVEN THE BLURRY NATURE OF THE PRESENTATION HERE, WHICH I APOLOGIZE FOR. THE NEXT SLIDE WILL BRIEFLY INDICATE THE PERFORMANCE OF ONE OF THE KEY ELEMENTS OF THE SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE TO THE IETF, WHICH IS PROCESSING OF INTERNET DRAFTS. AND THESE, ONCE AGAIN, ON THE FIRST SLIDE ARE COMPLETED WORK ITEMS, AND THE GOOD NEWS HERE IS THAT THE GREEN BARS INDICATE AREAS WHERE -- INDICATE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PROCESSED IN THE TIME PERIOD THAT HAS BEEN SET OUT FOR US BY THE IETF AS THE GOAL THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ACHIEVE. AND THERE ARE THREE ITEMS THERE THAT TOOK LONGER BASED ON THE NEED TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE AUTHORS OF THOSE PARTICULAR INTERNET DRAFTS. BUT I BELIEVE THAT THIS CHART, ESPECIALLY TOWARDS THE END, DEMONSTRATES THAT WE'RE MAKING VERY GOOD PROGRESS IN THIS AREA, AND THEN IF WE GO TO THE NEXT CHART, YOU CAN SEE THE TOTAL VOLUME OF WORK THAT HAS COME IN, IN THE INTERNET DRAFT AREA OVER THE QUARTER. AND I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE IS A LARGE NUMBER OF ITEMS DOWN HERE WITH A ONE-DAY PROCESSING PERIOD. THOSE ARE INTERNET DRAFTS WHICH WE RECEIVED, AND THE IANA STAFF SPENT TIME REVIEWING, BUT THAT CONTAINED NO IANA CONSIDERATIONS. AND THAT WORK IS NOT GENERALLY REFLECTED IN THE COMPLETED STATISTICS BUT IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK THAT THE IANA STAFF PERFORMS. AND SO WE'VE CHOSEN TO REPRESENT IT IN THIS FASHION. AND THEN IF WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS IS ONCE AGAIN THE QUEUE SIZE CHART OVER THE LAST 15 MONTHS. AND I BELIEVE IT DEMONSTRATES THAT THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT IN THIS FUNCTION (INDICATING) AS IT'S GOTTEN DOWN WELL BELOW 40 AND STAYED THERE FOR THE LAST FIVE MONTHS OR SO. AND THERE'S BEEN SOME SIGNIFICANT DIPS AS WE'VE HAD TIME AND PERSONNEL TO DEVOTE TO THIS RESOURCE THAT SHOW FURTHER IMPROVEMENT IN THAT FUNCTION. AND THEN MOVING FROM PERFORMANCE TO SIGNIFICANT ITEMS THAT HAVE OCCURRED SINCE WE LAST SPOKE IN CAPE TOWN, BY FAR THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT HAS HAPPENED IS THE HIRING OF BARBARA ROSEMAN AS THE NEW OPERATIONS MANAGER FOR IANA. AND THIS WAS AS A RESULT OF A CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF OUR STAFFING PLAN THAT WAS PERFORMED IN THE PROCESS OF TRAINING THE NEW EMPLOYEE THAT I MENTIONED TO YOU BACK IN CAPE TOWN. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BECAME VERY OBVIOUS AS PART OF THAT PROCESS WAS THAT THE DAY-TO-DAY FUNCTIONS OF THE IANA, WHICH ARE CLEARLY A VERY IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF OUR WORK, NEEDED SOMEONE WHO COULD HAVE AS THEIR FULL-TIME POSITION FOCUS AND ATTENTION DIRECTLY ON THOSE DAY-TO-DAY PROCESSES. AND THAT ANALYSIS RESULTED IN OUR HIRING BARBARA FOR THIS POSITION. SHE HELD A SIMILAR POSITION AT A MAJOR INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER AND HAS SPENT THE LAST PERIOD OF HER PROFESSIONAL CAREER WORKING WITH US HERE AT ICANN AS A CONSULTANT. AND MANY OF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH HER AS PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS, WHICH HAS REALLY GIVEN HER A UNIQUE INSIGHT INTO THE ICANN WORLD AND ALLOWED HER TO ENHANCE AND DEVELOP HER RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE ICANN STAKEHOLDERS. SO WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT HAVING BARBARA ON BOARD. SHE'S DONE A GREAT JOB ALREADY, AND WE'LL GET TO, IN A MOMENT, ONE OF THE KEY AREAS THAT SHE'S BEEN ABLE TO ASSIST US WITH, WHICH IS COMPLETING THE EXISTING STAFFING PLAN THAT WE HAVE. THE OTHER REALLY SIGNIFICANT ELEMENT FOR THE WORK DONE BY THE IANA TEAM IS IMPLEMENTATION OF A REQUEST TRACKING SYSTEM. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING TOWARDS FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW. AND WE HAVE A TEMPORARY OPEN SOURCE SOLUTION THAT HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE AS A WAY TO ALLOW THE STAFF TO GAIN EXPERIENCE WITH THIS IN A REAL WORKING ENVIRONMENT. AND THE NEXT STEP IN THIS PROCESS WILL BE INTEGRATION OF THE IANA WORK WITH THE OVERALL REQUEST AND WORK-FLOW SYSTEM THAT IS BEING DEVELOPED BY OUR I.T. TEAM. AND THE WAY THAT WE'VE DESIGNED THIS SYSTEM, WORKING CLOSELY WITH STEVE CONTE AND THE I.T. TEAM, IS THAT ALL OF THE EFFORT THAT'S GONE INTO REQUEST TRACKING AS IT EXISTS NOW WILL EASILY BE ABLE TO BE TRANSFERRED INTO THE NEW SYSTEM. SO NONE OF OUR WORK AND NONE OF OUR EXPERIENCE WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM WILL BE LOST. IN RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FROM THE TLD MANAGERS FOR IANA TO REESTABLISH A PRACTICE THAT HAD HAPPENED IN THE PAST, WE HAVE REESTABLISHED THE TLD MANAGER'S ANNOUNCEMENT MAILING LIST. AND THE FIRST MESSAGE FOR THIS LIST WENT OUT IN DECEMBER, SHORTLY AFTER THE CAPE TOWN MEETING, AND AT THE REQUEST OF THE TLD MANAGERS THAT WERE INTERESTED IN THIS ISSUE, ALLOCATION MESSAGES FOR NEW IP ADDRESS BLOCKS HAVE BEEN GOING TO THAT LIST ON A REGULAR BASIS IN ORDER TO ALLOW THEM TO BETTER PREPARE THEIR INTERNAL SOFTWARE AND UPDATE ANY SORT OF FILTERS OR RESTRICTIONS THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE BASED ON PREVIOUS VERSIONS OF THOSE LISTS. AND THEN NEW MESSAGES ARE BEING SENT TO THAT LIST AS APPROPRIATE. AND THERE'S VARIOUS TOPICS THAT THE TLD MANAGERS HAVE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THAT WE'VE ATTEMPTED TO COMMUNICATE WITH OUR COMMUNITY. AND THEN WE'VE ALSO SET UP, IN COOPERATION WITH AND UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF BERNIE TURCOTTE FROM THE CCNSO, SET UP A WORKING GROUP BETWEEN THE IANA AND THE CCNSO AND THE CCTLD COMMUNITY. AND THIS IS SIMILAR TO AN EXISTING GROUP THAT WE HAVE BETWEEN THE IANA AND THE IETF. AND THAT RELATIONSHIP HAS PROVEN EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE IN A NUMBER OF AREAS. AND WE'RE VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO A SIMILAR EXPERIENCE WITH THE CCNSO. AND, IN FACT, THE FIRST MEETING OF THAT GROUP HAS ALREADY OCCURRED, AND WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT MOVING FORWARD IN THAT AREA. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO -- THEY WILL BE RECOGNIZED FURTHER LATER IN THIS MEANING BUT I WOULD OFFER MY PERSONAL CONGRATULATIONS TO AFRINIC AS THE LATEST REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRY AND SAY ONCE AGAIN WE'RE VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THEM AS THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR NEW RECOGNITION. AND THEN WE HAVE A FEW PLANS FOR THE FUTURE. AS I MENTIONED, OUR RECRUITING PROCESSES ARE NOW MOVING ALONG AT A MUCH FASTER PACE. WE ANTICIPATE BEING ABLE TO COMPLETE OUR ANTICIPATED STAFFING PLANT THIS MONTH OR SHORTLY THEREAFTER AND ONCE AGAIN BARBARA IS TO BE COMMENDED ON HER EFFORTS THERE. WE'RE IMPLEMENTING A NEW TEMPLATE SYSTEM FOR THE TLD MANAGERS TO SUBMIT THEIR REQUESTS TO ROOT MANAGEMENT. THIS SYSTEM IS GOING TO BE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE THAN THE EXISTING ONE, AND WE'RE VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. AND THEN FINALLY, AS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE CC FOLKS HERE AND WITH OTHER FOLKS IN OTHER FORUMS, WE ARE LOOKING TOWARDS IMPLEMENTING PGP AS A METHOD OF AUTHENTICATION FOR REQUESTS THAT COME INTO ROOT MANAGEMENT IN ORDER TO HELP STREAMLINE THAT PROCESS AND MAKE IT EVEN MORE EFFICIENT. AND THEN LAST BUT NOT LEAST, WITH ANY KIND OF LUCK THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME FOR A WHILE THAT I WILL HAVE TO PUT THIS SLIDE UP FOR YOU. BUT THE TWO POSITIONS THAT WE HAVE OPEN ARE STILL OPEN, AND IF ANYBODY IS INTERESTED IN THOSE POSITIONS OR KNOWS SOMEONE WHO WOULD BE A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR THEM, I WOULD COMMEND YOU TO THE JOB DESCRIPTION THAT IS THERE AT THAT URL. AND WE HAVE TWO POSITIONS LISTED ON THAT PAGE AND WE ARE TRYING TO CAST AS WIDE AS POSSIBLE A NET FOR APPLICANTS FOR THOSE NEW POSITIONS JUST IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE WIDE VARIETY OF FOLKS THAT WE HAVE IN THE ICANN WORLD AND PARTICULARLY IN THE IANA STAKEHOLDER COMMUNITY. AND I HAVE ONE MORE THING THAT I'D LIKE TO MENTION AND THAT IS ON A PERSONAL NOTE I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MIKE PALAGE FOR ORGANIZING THE ICANN BOARD AND STAFF SOCCER TEAM THAT PLAYED YESTERDAY. AND ALTHOUGH OUR EFFORT WAS VALIANT, IT WAS ULTIMATELY DOOMED. BUT EVERYBODY HAD A GOOD TIME. AND IT DEMONSTRATED SOMETHING THAT I'VE ALWAYS BELIEVED ABOUT ICANN, WHICH IS THAT THERE ARE NO LOSERS IN ICANN. AND I NOW HAVE A MEDAL WHICH PROVES IT. (LAUGHTER.) (APPLAUSE.) >>VINT CERF: APPARENTLY WE HAVE AN INTERVENTION FROM THE FLOOR. AXEL. >>AXEL PAWLIK: A VERY SHORT ONE. I WAS SHORTLY DISTRACTED, I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE OF WHAT I'M SAYING HERE BUT I'M REALLY, REALLY GLAD YOU'RE GETTING THE REQUEST TRACKING SYSTEM BECAUSE YOU SEEMED TO HAVE LOST ALL RECORDS OF YOUR INTERACTION WITH US. BEING FACETIOUS HERE. SORRY. WE'VE SEEN THAT ALREADY IN CAPE TOWN THAT YOU DON'T MENTION THE WORK THAT YOU HAVE DONE WITH THE RIRS, AND THERE WAS QUITE A BIT AND I'M QUITE HAPPY ABOUT IT, SO YOU SHOULDN'T BE SHY ABOUT THAT. YOU DON'T MENTION THAT. THANK YOU. >>DOUG BARTON: THANK YOU, AXEL, FOR MENTIONING THAT. I HAD TO LEAN IN A BIT THAT THERE WAS SUCH AN ECHO IN THE ROOM FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE THAT IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR ME TO HEAR YOU AT FIRST. WE HAVE DONE A GREAT DEAL OF WORK WITH THE RIRS, OBVIOUSLY, OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, AND I -- ALL I WILL SAY IS THAT I APPRECIATE YOUR COMPLIMENT AND THE WORK THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH. SO THANK YOU. MR. CHAIRMAN. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ONE COMMENT FROM -- >>MOUHAMET DIOP:THANK YOU, DOUG. I WANT TO SAY I'M IMPRESSED ABOUT THE WONDERFUL JOB YOUR TEAM IS DOING, AND I WONDER SOMETIME IF BETWEEN THE POLICY, YOU ARE TRYING TO IMPLEMENT THE FOLLOW-UP ON THE OPERATION. AND EVEN ONE THING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT IS THE OUTREACH YOU'RE TRYING TO DO WITH ALL THE MEETINGS, LIKE THE IETF MEETING, THE NANOG, AFRINOG AND ALL THIS STUFF, WITH EVEN THE REGISTRY COORDINATION YOU ARE TRYING TO GET AND THE CC, I THINK THAT IF WE CAN (INAUDIBLE), THE ADDITIONAL STAFF WILL HELP YOU ACHIEVE THE GOAL THAT WE HAVE EXPRESSED IN CAPE TOWN. AND IF YOU TAKE THE EXAMPLE OF THERESA WHO IS SPENDING ALL THE TIME BETWEEN THE WSIS AND THE CC RELATIONSHIP, IT'S JUST A HEADACHE IF WE SEE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT OUTREACH IS TAKING AND THE FOLLOW-UP ON THE MEETING, ON THE OPERATION THAT WE PERFORM INSIDE ICANN. SO GO AHEAD. >>DOUG BARTON: THANK YOU. AND THAT ACTUALLY GIVES ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS ONE ADDITIONAL ITEM WHICH IS THAT I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT WHILE WE HAVE MADE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE IANA FUNCTION AND I DO BELIEVE WE ARE MOVING ON A CONSISTENT PATH TOWARDS ACHIEVING OUR GOALS THAT WE AREN'T THERE YET. AND THAT THERE IS MORE WORK TO DO. AND I TEND TO BE A SORT OF EXUBERANT, OPTIMISTIC PERSON AND ADD THAT TO BEING A BIG BRASH AMERICAN, AND CERTAIN FOLKS HAVE INTERPRETED MY OPTIMISM AND ENTHUSIASM AS SIGNIFYING THAT I FEEL WE'RE DONE AND EVERYTHING'S PERFECT AND WE'RE HAPPY, AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE. AND SO I APPRECIATE THAT OPPORTUNITY, MOUHAMET. AND ONE OF THE PROCESSES THAT WE'VE UNDERGONE IN THE PAST FEW MONTHS WHILE WE'VE BEEN TRAINING OUR NEW EMPLOYEE IS FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A VERY IN-DEPTH VIEW OF THE WORK THAT COMES INTO THE IANA ON A DAILY BASIS AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN ORDER FOR US TO, ONCE AND FOR ALL, GET OUR HEADS ABOVE WATER AND PERFORM THAT WORK ON AN ONGOING, REGULAR BASIS, IN A MANNER THAT MEETS THE EXPECTATIONS OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND THAT'S BEEN ONE OF THE VERY IMPORTANT ELEMENTS OF ATTENDING SOME OF THESE MEETINGS THAT YOU REFERENCED, WHICH IS LEARNING WHAT THOSE EXPECTATIONS ARE. SO THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DOUG, WE NEED TO MOVE QUICKLY ALONG NOW BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL SCHEDULE HAD US ENDING THIS MEETING AT 12:30. LET ME SUGGEST TWO THINGS. FIRST OF ALL, THERE UNDOUBTEDLY WILL BE MORE THAN 15 MINUTES WORTH OF COMMENTS. SECOND, I'M ASKING BOARD MEMBERS TO STAY AND CONTINUE THAT MEETING UNTIL A LITTLE BIT BEFORE 1:00. I'M HOPING THAT THAT WILL BE -- CAN BE ACCOMMODATED. I HAVE TO GO AND TAKE CARE OF AN URGENT MATTER AT 12:30 PERSONALLY. I'M ASKING VICE-CHAIRMAN PISANTY TO CONTINUE TO CONDUCT THE OPEN FORUM DURING THE TIME THAT I'M ABSENT. SO WE WILL CONTINUE THIS ACTIVITY UNTIL -- IF NECESSARY, UNTIL JUST BEFORE 1:00. SO LET ME RECOGNIZE BRET NOW. >>BRET FAUSETT: I UNDERSTOOD THAT -- >>JOHN JEFFREY: VINT, THIS IS JOHN. I WANTED TO OFFER A LEGAL COMMENT BEFORE WE BEGIN THE PUBLIC FORUM PART SINCE WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THE DOT NET PROCESS. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR READING THIS STATEMENT BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE VERY ACCURATE WITH IT. KURT PRITZ HAS PROVIDED AN UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE DOT NET RFP PROCESS. AS YOU ARE AWARE FROM HIS REPORT, ICANN HAS PUBLISHED THE REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS. SINCE THE PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL REPORT, ALL APPLICANTS HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY WILL BE SUBMITTING WRITTEN COMMENTS AND/OR QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE REPORT. WE'VE CURRENTLY RECEIVED THREE SUCH WRITINGS FROM CORE PLUS PLUS, DENIC AND SENTAN. WE HAVE BEEN FORMED WE'LL BE RECEIVING QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM AFILIAS AND VERISIGN IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS. AS THE DOT NET RFP PROCESS IS CONTINUING, ICANN HAS INDICATED TO THE APPLICANTS, THAT'S THE APPLICANTS, THAT THE ONLY APPROPRIATE FORMAT FOR ICANN TO RECEIVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS TO THE FINAL REPORT IS IN WRITING. AS THIS PARTICULAR PUBLIC FORUM WAS NOT A PART OF AN ANNOUNCED PROCEDURE FOR PRESENTATIONS FROM THE APPLICANTS, WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE FORUM FOR THE DOT NET APPLICANTS TO PLACE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION INTO THE RFP PROCESS. THEREFORE, IN ORDER FOR ICANN TO MAINTAIN FAIRNESS AND EQUAL TREATMENT FOR ALL APPLICANTS, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE FIVE APPLICANT ORGANIZATIONS RESERVE THEIR COMMENTS AT THIS PUBLIC FORUM AND CONTINUE TO RESPECT THE RULES REGARDING THE RFP PROCESS. FINALLY, WE CONTINUE TO WELCOME WRITTEN AND PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE ICANN COMMUNITY. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JOHN. ALEX, I HOPE THIS IS BRIEF. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: PROCEDURAL, VINT. I'M COUNTING PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY APPARENTLY IN THE QUEUE, AND EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE EXTENDED THE SESSION, WE BARELY HAVE A HALF HOUR, SO I WOULD SUGGEST LIMITING THE TIME TO PARTICIPATION POSSIBLY TO TWO MINUTES. THAT WOULD JUST FIT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE QUEUE. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. I THINK WE WILL HAVE TO DO THAT. ALSO, IF IT'S BEEN POSSIBLE TO SIGN UP ALREADY, MAYBE IT'S POSSIBLE ALSO FOR PEOPLE TO SIT DOWN IF THEY WANT TO AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO STAND ALL THIS TIME. BRET, GO AHEAD. >>BRET FAUSETT: I HAVE TWO COMMENTS TO MAKE BEFORE WE ADJOURN TODAY. ONE RELATES TO THE REPORTS WE JUST HEARD, ONE WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR A PUBLIC OPEN MIKE. I ASSUME THAT, GIVEN TIME, I SHOULD MAKE THEM BOTH NOW. >>VINT CERF: I'LL ACCEPT THAT. GO AHEAD. >>BRET FAUSETT: OKAY. THE FIRST POINT RELATES TO THE DOT NET REPORT, AND I'D LIKE TO JUST READ SOMETHING THAT THIS ORGANIZATION, ICANN, WROTE IN JUST NOVEMBER 2004. ICANN WROTE, THE MANNER IN WHICH VERISIGN HAS CHOSEN TO IMPLEMENT THE WILDCARD SERVICE, SITE FINDER, CONSOLIDATE, IDN, WLS AND THE 2001 VOLUME DISCOUNT PROGRAM AS WELL AS VERISIGN'S DELIBERATE FAILURE TO IMMEDIATELY PROCESS REGISTRY/REGISTRAR AGREEMENTS ALL DEMONSTRATE THAT VERISIGN HAS IGNORED THIS OBLIGATION. AND THIS OBLIGATION IS DEFINED A COUPLE PARAGRAPHS EARLIER AS MEANING ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CURRENT DOT NET AGREEMENT. I JUST FIND IT INCREDIBLE THAT GIVEN ICANN'S CONTENTION THAT VERISIGN HAS BREACHED THE DOT NET AGREEMENT AND THE WORK THAT THE SECURITY AND STABILITY COMMITTEE DID LAST YEAR ON SITE FINDER THAT THOSE WERE NOT TAKEN INTO ANY CONSIDERATION IN THE TELCORDIA REPORT. NOW, ONE POSSIBILITY IS THAT TELCORDIA LOOKED AT IT AND DECIDED WELL, IN SPITE OF ALL THAT WE'RE STILL GOING TO GIVE IT TO VERISIGN. THAT'S A POSSIBLE OUTCOME, BUT NOT TO HAVE CONSIDERED IT AT ALL TO ME SEEMS INCREDIBLE, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TO THINK ABOUT THAT WHEN IT LOOKS AT THE TELCORDIA REPORT AND DETERMINES WHETHER PERHAPS MORE WORK NEEDS TO BE DONE. MY SECOND COMMENT IS MUCH SHORTER. I AM A DOT PRO REGISTRANT. I AM A LICENSED LAWYER, LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I WENT THROUGH THE ACCREDITATION PROCESS TO BECOME A DOT PRO REGISTRANT, AND AS I'VE OBSERVED OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS, A RESTRICTED TLD IS ONLY AS RESTRICTIVE AS ITS MOST PERMISSIVE REGISTRAR. AND IF -- REGISTRATION PRACTICES WITH A COUPLE OF REGISTRARS HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THE RESTRICTIONS ARE NOT BEING ENFORCED AND I'M AFRAID THAT DOT PRO WILL SHORTLY LOSE ALL OF ITS IDENTITY AS A PLACE FOR ACCREDITED PROFESSIONALS. I ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TO LOOK AT THAT IN THE COMING WEEKS. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BRET. I'M GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS PAUSE TO ENTER INTO THE RECORD A WRITTEN COMMENT. RICHARD HENDERSON ON THE SAME SUBJECT OF DOT PRO. IT WAS AN E-MAIL I RECEIVED. HE SAYS IN THE VIEW OF THE BOARD AND THOSE PRESENT AT THE MEETING, HAS THE DOT PRO REGISTRY ACTED RESPONSIBLY IN ALLOWING MASS REGISTRATIONS ON BEHALF OF UNCERTIFIED CUSTOMERS USING ENCIRCA'S PROXY REGISTRATION PROCESS TO BYPASS THE REGISTRY AGREEMENTS IN MAIN INTENTION OF CREATING A TLD EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF VERIFIED PROFESSIONALS? CAN AND WILL ICANN ENFORCE AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT TO CLARIFY ACCEPTABLE PRACTICE, AND WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE INTEGRITY OF FUTURE RESTRICTED TLDS? IT'S SIGNED RICHARD HENDERSON AND I'LL ENTER THAT INTO THE RECORD AND I THINK THE BOARD AND STAFF HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO EXAMINE THIS SITUATION AND COME BACK WITH SOME POTENTIAL ACTIONS. AMADEU. >>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: THANKS. THE FIRST THING, I JUST CAME HERE TO REASSURE THAT RUMORS SAYING THAT WE WILL APPLY FOR THIS IANA PACKAGES ARE FALSE. WE WILL CREATE A REALLY HEAVYWEIGHT TEAM, BUT I DON'T WANT TO CREATE THAT MUCH PROBLEMS FOR THE FUNCTIONING OF THE INTERNET. IN THE SAME SPIRIT OF NOT CREATING ANY PROBLEMS TO THE INTERNET AND ICANN IN GENERAL, I WILL NOT TRY TO CHALLENGE JOHN'S REQUEST FOR NOT MAKING COMMENTS REGARDING DOT NET. I HAVE BEEN ADVISING ONE OF THE APPLICANTS, I WON'T SAY ANYTHING BUT I WOULD LIKE THE RECORD SAYING THAT I THINK THIS RULE IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE CURRENT PROCESS AND FOR THIS STRUCTURE. AND THAT'S ALL. AND THIRDLY, I WOULD JUST SAY SOMETHING REGARDING THE STLD PROCESS. AND I SHOULD SAY ALL THE GOOD THINGS BUT I ONLY HAVE TWO MINUTES. THE GOOD THINGS ARE THERE. AND MY THANKS FOR ALL, ESPECIALLY THE STAFF FOR HOW THEY HAVE DEALT WITH THIS. BUT THERE IS SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU. I WILL NOT CLAIM THAT THIS IS NOT DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY WEARING THE HAT OF DOT CAT. I'M NOT TELLING YOU THAT THIS HAS BEEN SIMPLE. WE KNOW THAT WE WERE NOT THE SIMPLEST OF THE CASE. BUT NOW, JUST AGAIN, WEARING THE HAT OF ICANN, WE ARE TELLING YOU THAT IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD FOR US AS A PROCESS, THAT 13 MONTHS LATER WE STILL HAVE NOT APPROVED OR REJECTED FORMALLY ANY OF THE TEN APPLICATIONS, AND LOTS OF THEM ARE STILL PENDING. I REPEAT, ALL SYMPATHY FOR THE DIFFICULTY, BUT IF WE TAKE A RETREAT AND LOOK TO THE FOREST AND NOT TO THE TREES, WE ARE NOT BEING PERCEIVED AS THAT EFFICIENT AND WE SHOULD ALSO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT. THANK YOU, AMADEU. I'M NOT SURE WHO IS IN QUEUE NEXT.IS IT PAUL KANE? >>PAUL KANE: THANK YOU, VINT. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK DOUG BARTON FOR HIS PRESENTATION. I ALSO CONCUR THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CHANGES AT THE IANA AND THEY ARE WELCOME. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CENTR COMMUNITY AND THE CCTLD COMMUNITY STAND READY TO HELP THE IANA IN THE FULL AUTOMATION OF THE PROCESS THAT WILL ENABLE US TO DEMONSTRATE HOW EFFICIENT THINGS CAN BE RUN. I PARTICIPATED AT THE AMSTERDAM STRATEGIC REVIEW MEETING. I HAVE TO SAY IT WAS A CROSS-CONSTITUENCY GATHERING. IT WAS A VERY SUCCESSFUL MEETING IN MY OPINION, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THE REVISION THAT HAS COME OUT FOLLOWING THAT MEETING STILL DOES NOT ADDRESS MANY OF OUR CONCERNS. THE CENTR XCOM MET THIS MORNING TO DISCUSS THE LATEST VERSION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN. WE BELIEVE THAT THE STRATEGIC PLAN SHOULD FOCUS ON ICANN'S CORE MISSION, PRIORITIZING SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES AND FACILITATING SPECIFIC INPUTS INTO THE DEVELOPMENTS OF THE PLAN WHICH WILL IMPACT ICANN OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS. THE CENTR COMMUNITY STANDS READY TO ASSIST ICANN, BUT FOLLOWING CENTR'S XCOM MEETING TODAY, THE CENTR BOARD MANAGEMENT DOES NOT ENDORSE THE CURRENT VERSION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN. THANK YOU. >>VINT CERF:THANK YOU FOR YOUR BREVITY, PAUL. NEXT TOPIC. >>TIM RUIZ: TIM RUIZ, VICE CHAIR AND CTO OF THE REGISTRARS CONSTITUENCY. AND ACTUALLY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR KURT AND PERHAPS JOHN, IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE. IT'S IN REGARDS TO THE DOT NET AGREEMENT THAT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AND THE FACT THAT THE REGISTRAR/REGISTRY AGREEMENT PART OF THAT WAS NOT POSTED WITH IT. SO ONE QUESTION IS, CAN WE ASSUME FROM THAT FACT THAT THERE IS NO CHANGES PROPOSED TO THE REGISTRAR/REGISTRY AGREEMENT? AND IF THAT'S NOT THE CASE, CAN YOU GUARANTEE US THE REGISTRARS WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW ANY CHANGES AND MAKE COMMENTS ON THOSE BEFORE FINAL BOARD APPROVAL? >>KURT PRITZ: THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES. ANYTHING CHANGES THAT OCCUR TO THAT PORTION OF THE AGREEMENT WILL UNDERGO A PERIOD OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND THEN REVIEW, AND NECESSARILY AS PART OF THAT WE WILL CONSULT DIRECTLY WITH THE REGISTRARS CONSTITUENCY. >>VINT CERF: BEFORE WE TAKE THE NEXT QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE ANOTHER VERY LENGTHY COMMUNICATION FROM A GENTLEMAN NAMED EDWARD HASBROOKE WHO SPEAKS IN MANY, MANY PAGES ABOUT THE DOT TRAVEL STLD. I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO ENTER THIS INTO THE RECORD ORALLY. I WILL HAVE THIS PLACED ON THE WEB SITE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTARY. SO I WANT HIM, IF HE'S LISTENING, TO BE AWARE THAT WE ARE TAKING THAT ACTION. THANK YOU. PLEASE, NEXT QUESTION. >>RAY FASSETT: HELLO. MY NAME IS RAY FASSETT. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE DOT JOBS APPLICATION. I WAS GOING TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT LONGER OF A TALK, BUT BECAUSE WE ARE SHORT ON TIME, I'M GOING TO KIND OF CUT RIGHT TO THE CHASE, WHICH INVOLVES A PARTICULAR PART OF OUR CONTRACT OR PROPOSED CONTRACT THAT HAS BEEN MADE PUBLIC ON THE ICANN WEB SITE, PARTICULARLY THAT OF THE VARIABLE FEE PORTION BEING THE $2 PER UNIT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE CLEAR FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT THIS WAS AN AMOUNT THAT THE DOT JOBS APPLICANT WILLINGLY PROPOSED TO THE ICANN STAFF AND REQUESTED FOR THEM TO ACCEPT ON OUR BEHALF. THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH MORE TO IT THAN THAT, BUT THERE HAS BEEN SOME INTEREST I FOUND THIS WEEK ON HOW THAT AMOUNT WAS ARRIVED AT. AND I WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR NOT JUST SPEAKING TO THE BOARD, BUT TO USING THE PUBLIC MICROPHONE, SPEAKING TO THE ENTIRE INTERESTED AUDIENCE, THAT THIS CAME ABOUT AS PART OF THE MODELING AND MISSION AND STRATEGY OF THE DOT JOBS APPLICATION MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE. THERE IS REALLY NOTHING MORE TO IT THAN THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>VINT CERF: THANK YOU FOR THE BREVITY AND FOR MAKING THAT PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD. PHILIP, BEFORE YOU START, I NEED TO DEPART FOR ANOTHER MATTER. SO I FORMALLY HAND OVER RESPONSIBILITY TO MANAGE THE REST OF THIS SESSION TO ALEJANDRO PISANTY. ALEX, PLEASE TAKE OVER. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU, VINT. >>PHILIP SHEPPARD: THANK YOU, VINT, ALEJANDRO. PHILIP SHEPPARD. JUST A COMMENT ON DOT NET. JUST TO LET THE BOARD KNOW THAT I HAVE SUBMITTED COMMENTS TO THE DOT NET PUBLIC COMMENTS PROCESS IN WHICH I POINTED OUT THERE APPEARED TO BE A FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE GNSO REPORT AND THE METHODOLOGY APPLIED BY TELCORDIA. AND I APPRECIATE HEARING EARLIER THAT SUCH COMMENTS ARE GOING TO BE LOOKED AT WITH DUE DILIGENCE. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. SECONDLY, A COMMENT ON STLDS. AND THIS TIME SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY. WE ALSO APPRECIATE HEARING VERY MUCH THAT THERE IS STRINGENT STANDARDS BEING APPLIED IN TERMS OF THE DEFINITIONS OF SPONSORED COMMUNITY AND SPONSOR. AS I THINK MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD BEFORE, THE BC BELIEVES, AS INDEED DO THE COMMERCIAL-ORIENTED CONSTITUENCIES WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE CROSS-CONSTITUENCY MEETINGS, THAT'S THE IPC AND THE ISPS, THAT SPONSORED GTLDS ARE VERY MUCH THE WAY FORWARD, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT SYSTEM MAINTAINED IN A VERY ROBUST AND MEANINGFUL FASHION SO THAT ALL THE ADVANTAGES INHERENT IN SPONSORSHIP CAN BE SUCCESSFULLY LEVERAGED. SO THANK YOU ALSO FOR APPLYING DUE DILIGENCE AND CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THOSE REMAINING APPLICATIONS WHERE I BELIEVE THERE'S STILL SOME OPEN QUESTIONS. AND JUST PERHAPS A SHORT ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THOSE THREE CONSTITUENCIES I MENTIONED EARLIER ARE ALSO WORKING ON A WHITE PAPER ON TLDS, AND WE HOPE TO GET THAT TO YOU VERY SHORTLY TO HELP IN YOUR CONSIDERATIONS, AND PARTICULARLY THE WORK THE ICANN STAFF IS DOING IN GENERAL ON THE PROCESS FOR NEW NAMES. THANK YOU. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: CAN I ASK A QUESTION, PHILIP, WAS THAT ALL TLDS, GTLDS, CCTLDS, STLDS? >>PHILIP SHEPPARD: THE PAPER WE'RE WRITING IS INTENDED TO ADDRESS THE OVERALL -- ALL GTLDS. BUT WE IN IT ALSO EXPRESS PREFERENCES, AS DID WE (INAUDIBLE). >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: MR. NOSS. >>ELLIOT NOSS: THANK YOU. TWO COMMENTS, IF I MAY. FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND THE DOT JOBS APPLICANTS FOR OFFERING ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO ICANN. I WAS ALSO QUITE SUPPORTIVE OF THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN THE DOT NET APPLICATION. EARLIER, I REFERRED TO THE BOARD'S SINGLE LARGEST OBLIGATION AS OVERSIGHT OF THE CEO. I'M GOING TO AMEND THAT TO SAY THAT IS A BOARD -- A BOARD'S SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT STRATEGIC OBLIGATION. PROBABLY A BOARD'S SINGLE MOST TACTICAL OBLIGATION IS APPROVING A BUDGET. I'VE BEEN A BIG SUPPORTER OF ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF FUNDING. I'VE BEEN VERY PUBLIC ABOUT THAT. AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT FUNDING SHOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE USED TO INCREASE THE BUDGET, BUT SHOULD BE USED TO SPREAD THE BURDEN OF THE BUDGET. SO I URGE THE BOARD TO LOOK AT THOSE -- THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES IN THAT REGARD. THE SECOND COMMENT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS ALSO WITH REGARDS TO SOME OF THE RECENT PRACTICES IN THE DOT PRO STLD. I WOULD NOTE THAT MY INTERPRETATION OF THE RECENT ACTIONS CAN ONLY BE DESCRIBED AS THE REGISTRY OPERATORS THUMBING THEIR NOSE AT THE SPIRIT AND LETTER OF THE CONTRACT THAT THEY HAVE SIGNED. A CONTINUOUS PROBLEM OVER ALL THE YEARS OF ICANN OPERATION HAS BEEN THE RELUCTANCE TO ENFORCE THE EXISTING OBLIGATIONS IN THE CONTRACT. AS SOMEBODY WHO TRIES TO OPERATE THE BUSINESS IN A STRAIGHT MANNER AND TO HONOR MY OBLIGATIONS AND MY COMPANY'S OBLIGATIONS IN THE CONTRACTS, I CAN ONLY DESCRIBE INSTANCES LIKE THIS AS EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING AND AS SOMETHING THAT CAUSES US TO QUESTION WHY WE'RE DOING THAT. IT CAUSES US TO RE-LOOK AT OUR PRACTICES AND ACTIONS. I URGE THE ICANN STAFF TO TAKE THIS ISSUE EXTREMELY SERIOUSLY AND TO ENFORCE THE OBLIGATIONS IN THE AGREEMENTS. AND THE BOARD'S ROLE THERE IS, OF COURSE, TO ENSURE THAT THEY DO THAT. THANK YOU. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: MR. BERTOLA. >>VITTORIO BERTOLA: THANK YOU. AND I'M SORRY, I DON'T THINK I CAN MAKE IT IN TWO MINUTES. I WILL TRY. BUT, IN ANY CASE, MY FIRST COMMENT IS THAT YOU SHOULD REALLY ALLOCATE MORE TIME FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK SO THE PUBLIC FORUM IS ACTUALLY MEANT TO BE A DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY, NOT JUST A SERIES OF PRESENTATIONS AND THEN YOU TRY TO FIT EVERYONE IN 15 MINUTES. SO, OKAY, FIRST, I WILL START BY READING A STATEMENT THAT THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS RELEASING ABOUT THE REDELEGATION OF THE DOT NET GTLD. SO THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE VIEWS WITH CONCERN THE PROGRESS OF THE DOT NET REDELEGATION PROCESS. OUR PARTICULAR CONCERN IS THAT THE INTERESTS OF REGISTRARS AND INTERNET USERS HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN SUFFICIENT WEIGHT IN THE PROCESS TO DATE. THE EXISTING PROCESS HAS GIVEN LITTLE WEIGHT OR HAS UNREASONABLY EVALUATED SEVERAL CRITERIA OF IMPORTANCE TO THE AT-LARGE COMMUNITY. FIRST, ASSESSMENT OF PAST COMPLIANCE OF THE APPLICANTS. IN PARTICULAR, WE, AS WELL AS MANY OTHER PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY, ACCORDING TO THE NUMEROUS PUBLIC COMMENTS MADE THROUGHOUT ALL THE PROCESS, ARE TROUBLED BY VERISIGN'S HISTORY OF UNILATERAL CHANGES, AND NOTABLY, THEIR SITEFINDER PRODUCT, AND THEIR QUICK RESORT TO LAWSUITS WHEN DIFFERENCES ARISE WITH ICANN. WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE REGISTRY WOULD BE REWARDED FOR A SMOOTH AND COOPERATIVE RELATIONSHIP RATHER THAN THE OPPOSITE. WE NOTE THAT NO COMPANY WOULD EVER AWARD A NEW CONTRACT TO A SUPPLIER THAT HAS REPEATEDLY TRIED TO ESCAPE OR BYPASS ITS CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS UP TO THE POINT OF SUING ITS CUSTOMER. SECOND, DIVERSITY OF NETWORK RESOURCES AND FACILITIES. WE BELIEVE THAT ONE OF THE GREAT STRENGTHS OF THE INTERNET IS THE WIDE DIVERSITY OF ORGANIZATIONS AND PHYSICAL FACILITIES THAT CONSTITUTE ITS INFRASTRUCTURE. FOR THIS REASON, GIVEN A CHOICE OF QUALIFIED CANDIDATES, THE PRUDENT COURSE WOULD BE TO MAXIMIZE THE DIVERSITY BY SELECTING A CANDIDATE THAT DOES NOT ALREADY OPERATE ANOTHER GTLD REGISTRY. THIS COURSE ALSO MAXIMIZES THE ARRAY OF CHOICES AVAILABLE TO REGISTRANTS. GEOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY. FOR MANY VALID REASONS, ICANN HAS GONE TO GREAT EFFORT TO AFFECT A TRANSFORMATION FROM ITS U.S. ORIGINS INTO AN ORGANIZATION WITH GLOBAL SCOPE AND REPRESENTATION. FOR THIS REASON, GIVEN A CHOICE OF QUALIFIED CANDIDATES, ICANN SHOULD SELECT ONE WITH FACILITIES AND OWNERSHIP IN COUNTRIES THAT DO NOT YET HOST GTLD REGISTRIES. WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT SEVERAL CRITERIA IMPORTANT TO USERS NEED MORE EMPHASIS, CUSTOMER SUPPORT. QUALITY OF SUPPORT IS KEY TO USERS, PARTICULARLY QUALITY OF SUPPORT FOR NON-ENGLISH SPEAKERS. FOR EXAMPLE, A CANDIDATE SHOULD HAVE MULTILINGUAL STAFF TO SUPPORT THEIR MULTILINGUAL CLIENTELE. AND WHOIS AND PRIVACY PROTECTION. MANY USERS ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRIVACY OF THEIR WHOIS DATA. A REGISTRY SHOULD BE PREPARED TO PROVIDE THE MAXIMUM PRIVACY CONSISTENT WITH THE LAWS OF ITS HOME COUNTRY. FORTUNATELY, THE PROCESS TODAY HAS FOUND THAT ALL FIVE APPLICANTS ARE TECHNICALLY QUALIFIED TO RUN THE DOT NET REGISTRY WITH LITTLE DIFFERENCE EVEN BETWEEN THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST RANKED. FOR THIS REASON, WE URGE THE ICANN BOARD TO DECLARE THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION TO BE A TIE AND TO PROCEED TO SELECT THE NEW DOT NET REGISTRY BASED ON THIS IMPORTANT AT-LARGE END USER CRITERIA. SO I WILL NOW REMOVE MY ALAC HAT AND MAKE, REALLY, A PERSONAL COMMENT. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THIRTY SECONDS. >>VITTORIO BERTOLA: IF I WERE SOMEONE -- AS IT HAPPENED TO ME, IF I WERE SOMEONE TO -- JUST STARTING TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS AND IS BEING TOLD THAT YOU SHOULD DENOUNCE YOUR TRADITIONAL WAY OF DOING THINGS, AND I MEAN IN TERMS OF GOVERNMENTS ESPECIALLY, AND STOP TO ACCEPT THIS MODEL OF PRIVATE/PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP, MULTISTAKEHOLDER, AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, AND THEN I COME HERE, I LOOK WHAT HAPPENS, AND AFTER EIGHT YEARS, ICANN DIDN'T EVEN MANAGE TO INTRODUCE PROPER COMPETITION IN THE REGISTRY MARKET. IF YOU TAKE THE THREE BIGGEST GTLDS, THEY ARE STILL RUN -- THE BIGGEST TWO ARE STILL RUN BY THE ORIGINAL INCUMBENT OPERATOR AND THE THIRD ONE HAS BEEN MOVED FOUR MILES, FROM HERNDON, VIRGINIA, TO RESTON, VIRGINIA. AND SO I THINK I WOULD TAKE MY CONSEQUENCES. I THINK THAT THIS IS REALLY AN IMPORTANT STEP IN SHOWING THAT ICANN CAN, A, REALLY ACT AS A GLOBAL OPERATOR AND NOT JUST BE TIED TO THE ORIGINS AND INCUMBENT -- >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: VITTORIO, YOU HAVE TO ARRANGE FOR EXTRA TIME WITH THE SPEAKERS BEHIND YOU IN THE QUEUE. >>VITTORIO BERTOLA: OKAY. I HAVE -- I HAVE ANOTHER STATEMENT, BUT IT'S RELATED TO WHOIS. SO IF YOU WANT ME TO READ IT AT THE END. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: YOU HAVE TO ARRANGE FOR THE TIME WITH THE SPEAKERS IN THE QUEUE BEHIND YOU. >>VITTORIO BERTOLA: YEAH, COULD BE ANOTHER OPTION. OKAY. MAYBE I CAN LEAVE SOMEONE ELSE TO SPEAK. >>MARCUS FAURE: HI. I AM MARCUS FAURE, AND I AM WITH CORE COUNCIL OF REGISTRARS. AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE DOT NET EVALUATION PROCESS. WHEN WE FIRST LEARNED THAT TELCORDIA WAS CHOSEN AS THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR BY ICANN, WE WERE A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED, BECAUSE THERE ARE KNOWN FINANCIAL AND PERSONAL TIES BETWEEN TELCORDIA AND TWO OF THE APPLICANTS. WE WERE THEN ASSURED THAT THIS WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM. WE THEN SAW THE REPORT, AND, ACTUALLY, EXACTLY THOSE TWO BIDDERS WERE RANKED MUCH HIGHER THAN THE OTHER ONES. OUR FIRST THOUGHT WAS THAT THEY HAD DONE A BETTER JOB THAN WE DID. SO WE TOOK A CLOSER LOOK AT THE REPORT. AND WE DETECTED A SERIES OF FLAWS IN IT. I WILL NOT BORE YOU WITH THE DETAILS RIGHT NOW. THERE'S A PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM TO DO THAT. BUT THERE'S ONE THING THAT STRUCK ME IN PARTICULAR AND THAT RAISES A QUESTION FOR ALL OF WHO YOU ARE IN THE BOARD HERE. HOW CAN VERISIGN HAVE A TOP RANKING IN ICANN COMPLIANCE? AND I AM AFRAID YOU WILL HAVE TO SPEND SOME TIME THINKING ABOUT THAT. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. >>JOHN LEVINE: I'M JOHN LEVINE, AND I'M A MEMBER OF THE ALAC, BUT I'M SPEAKING HERE ON MY OWN BEHALF. AND I WISH TO ADDRESS ICANN GOVERNANCE IN GENERAL AND PARTICULARLY HOW IT AFFECTS THE DOT TRAVEL STLD. I AM A MEMBER -- A BOARD MEMBER BOTH OF A NASDAQ-LISTED SOFTWARE COMPANY, WHERE I KNOW ALL ABOUT SARBANES-OXLEY COMPLIANCE, AND I ALSO HAPPEN TO BE THE MAYOR OF A MUNICIPALITY. AND I AGREE THAT COMPARED TO A TYPICAL CORPORATION, ICANN'S GOVERNANCE IS QUITE -- IS RELATIVELY TRANSPARENT. BUT COMPARED TO AN ORGANIZATION THAT ACTUALLY DOES GOVERNANCE, ICANN IS HOPELESSLY OPAQUE. AND YOU HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO. AND ALTHOUGH I REALIZE THAT ICANN IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT AND DOES NOT WISH TO BE THE GOVERNMENT, I THINK THAT IF YOU WISH TO ACT IN AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT WAY, YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE PROCESSES THAT GOVERNMENTS USE IN ORDER TO BE SURE THAT THEY REMAIN ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS. WITH THIS IN MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE COMMENTS BY ED HASBROOKE THAT VINT REFERRED TO A LITTLE EARLIER. ED FORWARDED ME A COPY OF THEM. AND ALTHOUGH HE CAN BE A LITTLE STRIDENT, I BELIEVE HE RAISED SOME VALID AND IMPORTANT POINTS ABOUT WHETHER THE BOARD COMPLIED WITH ITS OWN PROCESSES ABOUT NOTICES AND MEETING MINUTES AND THESE OTHER PROCESSES THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR A TRANSPARENT BOARD. AND I THINK, IN FAIRNESS TO THE COMMUNITY, YOU NEED TO ADDRESS THEM TO REASSURE US ALL THAT THE PROCESS IS AS YOU HOPED THAT IT WAS. AND I HAVE A FINAL COMMENT, WHICH IS, I'M COMPARING DOT TRAVEL WITH THE EXISTING DOT AERO, BECAUSE THEY HAVE FAIRLY SIMILAR CHARTERS. AND I HAVE TO SAY THAT, IN PRACTICE, ALTHOUGH AERO HAS NOT FAILED AS SPECTACULARLY AS DOT PRO, IN PRACTICE, IT HAS FAILED. AND THE REASON I KNOW THAT IS BECAUSE LAST SUMMER, IT TOOK ME ONLY TWO DAYS TO GET MYSELF A DOT AERO DOMAIN FOR A TRIVIAL HOBBY WEB SITE THAT I MAINTAIN. AND THIS IS NOT A REGISTRAR ISSUE, BECAUSE I ACTUALLY GOT THE NECESSARY REGISTRATION CODES FROM THE REGISTRY, WHO SEEMED TO THINK THAT IF IT HAD THE WORD "AIRPLANE" ON IT, IT WAS OKAY. AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS -- I DON'T THINK IT'S A TRAGEDY THAT DOT AERO HAS FAILED, BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S SOMETHING THE BOARD NEEDS TO CONSIDER. AND I SEE NO REASON TO EXPECT THAT DOT TRAVEL WON'T FAIL, TOO. NOW, IF THE MESSAGE FROM THE PRESENTATION ABOUT STLDS THAT I GOT WAS CORRECT, THAT THE BOARD'S INTENTION IS BASICALLY TO APPROVE EVERY STLD THAT MEETS YOUR TECHNICAL CRITERIA, THEN IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER WHETHER A DOMAIN IS LIKELY TO BE SUCCESSFUL OR NOT, BECAUSE THERE WILL BE OTHER DOMAINS THAT ARE SUCCESSFUL, BUT IF THIS IS INDEED YOUR PLAN, WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD ONE, I THINK YOU SHOULD MAKE IT EXPLICIT THAT YOU ACTUALLY DO PLAN TO APPROVE EVERY DOMAIN THAT MEETS YOUR CRITERIA, WITH THE SPECIFIC UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY MAY SUCCEED AND THEY MAY FAIL, BUT THE DIVERSITY WILL BE GREAT ENOUGH THAT THE FAILURES WILL NOT BE A PROBLEM. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: BRIEFLY, IF YOU CAN, PLEASE, MIKE PALAGE. >>MICHAEL PALAGE: I'LL TRY TO KEEP IT BRIEF. JEFF, IF YOU COULD -- I'D LIKE TO COMMENT -- RESPOND. FIRST, I AGREE THAT WE REALLY DO NEED TO SIT THERE AND LOOK AT OUR ACCOUNTABILITY. I RECENTLY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY ABOUT A WEEK AGO, A WEEK AND A HALF AGO IN CHICAGO TO ATTEND A TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. AND ONE OF THE PLENARY SPEAKERS WAS ESTHER DYSON. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SHE TALKED ABOUT WAS THE ABILITY OF NONPROFITS TO HAVE METRICS BY WHICH THEY COULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR. AND SHE ALSO SAID THAT JEFF WOULD BE SOMEONE THAT WOULD, IF YOU WILL, BE ENSURING THAT WE WERE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. SO, AGAIN, I LOOK FORWARD TO HIS CONTINUED CONTRIBUTIONS. THE ONE POINT THAT I DID -- THE ONE FINAL POINT I WANTED TO MAKE IS WITH REGARD TO THE SUCCESS OR FAILURE OF TLDS. JUST BECAUSE A TLD MAY HAVE A SMALL NUMBER OF REGISTRATIONS DOES NOT IN AND OF ITSELF MAKE THAT TLD A FAILURE. AS I SAY TO A NUMBER OF PEOPLE, DOT EDU HAS APPROXIMATELY 10,000 DOMAIN NAMES AND IT HAS A STRONG BRAND, A STRONG IDENTITY. I DO BELIEVE THAT DOT AERO AND THE PEOPLE BEHIND IT ARE SEEKING TO MAKE IT A VALUABLE CONTRIBUTION TO THE NAME SPACE. AND, AGAIN, JUST CAUTION PEOPLE THAT THE VOLUME OF REGISTRATIONS IS IN AND OF ITSELF NOT AN INDICATOR OF SUCCESS OR FAILURE. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, MIKE. JORDYN. >>JORDYN BUCHANAN: THANK YOU, ALEJANDRO. I'D LIKE TO MAKE TWO HOPEFULLY BRIEF COMMENTS ABOUT THE DOT NET CONTRACT FOR THE -- OR THE FORM CONTRACT THAT WE'VE SEEN TO THIS POINT. AND TO THAT END, THE FIRST POINT THAT I NOTE, TAKE NOTE OF, IS THAT THE DOT NET CONTRACT SEEMS TO PROVIDE A RIGHT OF PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL TO THE REGISTRY OPERATOR. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S NOT A GOOD THING. THERE ARE TWO REASONS FOR THAT. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THE DIALOGUE WE SEE AROUND DOT NET TODAY DEMONSTRATES THAT, AS A COMMUNITY, WE OFTEN HAVE INPUT RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF THESE TLDS. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FROM TIME TO TIME TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THE OPERATION IN ORDER TO ASSESS HOW WELL THE INCUMBENT OPERATOR IS DOING AND IN ORDER TO EVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT THERE MIGHT BE BETTER OPERATORS IN THE SPACE WHO WERE MORE CAPABLE OR MORE WILLING TO PERFORM -- TO MANAGE THE RESOURCE. BUT I THINK EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN THAT IS THAT -- THE KNOWLEDGE THAT FROM TIME TO TIME, AN OPERATOR'S PERFORMANCE WILL BE EVALUATED BY THE COMMUNITY, BY THE BOARD, AND BY THE STAFF PROVIDES AN IMPORTANT INCENTIVE TO NOT ONLY MEET THE BARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS THAT MAY EXIST IN THE CONTRACT, BUT TO PERFORM AT A HIGHER LEVEL AND PERFORM AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF EXCELLENCE IN TERMS OF MANAGING THE RESOURCE. SO I THINK BOTH OF THOSE THINGS ARE LOST IF WE PROVIDE A RIGHT OF PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL WITH A RELATIVELY HIGH THRESHOLD FOR TERMINATING THE CONTRACT OR FOR DENYING AN ONGOING RENEWAL. SO I WOULD CERTAINLY URGE THAT THE BOARD NOT APPROVE A CONTRACT THAT CONTAINS SUCH A PROVISION. NOW, I KNOW I'VE HEARD THAT MANY REGISTRIES, ESPECIALLY NEW REGISTRIES ATTEMPTING TO GAIN FUNDING AND ATTRACT INVESTMENT, NEED TO HAVE LONGER REGISTRY TERMS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE RETURN ON INVESTMENT. THAT'S A VALID ARGUMENT. AND THAT'S AN ARGUMENT PERHAPS IN FAVOR OF LONGER REGISTRY TERMS FOR NEW TLDS. BUT THAT IS NOT THE CASE IN DOT NET. THERE IS ALREADY AN ESTABLISHED USER BASE AND A HIGH LIKELIHOOD OF A STRONG REVENUE BASE FOR THE OPERATOR. AND IT SIMPLY DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO APPLY THE SAME RULES FOR NEW TLDS AS TO THE INCUMBENT ONES. THE SECOND POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, AND I'LL TRY TO KEEP IT BRIEF, BUT I'LL NOTE THAT THE CONTRACT PROVIDES A MUCH-IMPROVED PROCESS FOR EVALUATING REGISTRY SERVICES. BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER GOING ONE STEP FURTHER, OR ENCOURAGING AT LEAST THE STAFF TO, IN PERHAPS THINKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO GIVE A FREE HAND TO REGISTRY OPERATORS IN TERMS OF PROVIDING NON-REGISTRY SERVICES. AND I THINK THAT'S PERHAPS A SOMEWHAT UNOBVIOUS ARGUMENT. BUT -- OR NOT WHAT YOU'RE USED TO, AT LEAST. BUT OFTEN, WE AS REGISTRARS HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO BUY FROM REGISTRIES. SO IF THEY DO THINGS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY REGISTRY SERVICES BUT COMPETE WITH US, IN A NORMAL WORLD, WE WOULD GO TO ANOTHER SUPPLIER OR MANUFACTURER. WE CAN'T DO THAT HERE. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT WHAT SORTS OF LIMITS SHOULD BE PLACED ON THE REGISTRY OPERATOR IN TERMS OF COMPETING WITH THEIR CHANNEL. BUT THERE'S A SECOND AND MORE IMPORTANT POINT HERE WHICH RELATES TO SECURITY AND STABILITY IN A SUBTLE WAY. BECAUSE I NOTE THAT SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WITHIN THE DOT NET FORUM HAVE NOTED THAT THERE IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BETWEEN, FOR EXAMPLE, VERISIGN'S CERTIFICATE BUSINESS AND THE OPERATION OF THE DOT COM AND DOT NET TLDS. SO OFTEN THESE SEEMINGLY UNRELATED SERVICES CAN CREATE A SECURITY AND STABILITY CONCERN. AND I THINK IT MAY BE THE BEST AND EASIEST THING FOR THE BOARD TO DO TO SIMPLY SAY, "RUN THE REGISTRY, RUN IT WELL, PROVIDE THE SERVICES THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE BY DINT OF HAVING THE UNIQUE MONOPOLY ON THE REGISTRY, AND DON'T DO ANYTHING ELSE." THANK YOU. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, JORDYN. THE NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. MS. CADE. >>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MARILYN CADE. I AM GOING TO SPEAK AS AN INDIVIDUAL, AND I AM GOING TO SPEAK ON TWO TOPICS. FIRST OF ALL, THE IANA PROCESS. I WELCOME THE REPORT THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE STAFF ON THE PROGRESS IN THE IANA PROCESS. I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO PROGRESS EVEN FURTHER THAN WE HAVE SO FAR, AND I WELCOME THE STATED COMMITMENTS OF BOTH THE STAFF AND THE BOARD TO ACHIEVE THAT PROGRESS. I COMMENT BECAUSE IT IS SOMETIMES NOT SO CLEAR ABOUT WHO CAN SUFFER THE MOST IF WE FAIL IN ANY WAY IN THE CORE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE INTERNET. IT IS, IN FACT, AFTER ALL, THE USERS. AND I THINK WE ALL SAY THAT, BUT I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT AS BUSINESS USERS, WE TAKE ALL OF THE WORK THAT IS BEING DONE IN THE IANA AREA VERY SERIOUSLY AND WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE SUPPORT THIS, BUT DO THINK THAT FURTHER PROGRESS IN ADDRESSING SOME OF THE EXPRESSED CONCERNS MUST CONTINUE TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT OTHERS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE IANA PROCESS REGAIN THEIR OR INCREASE THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE WORK THAT IS GOING ON HERE. MY SECOND COMMENT IS ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLAN. I VERY MUCH WELCOME THE PROCESS OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN. AS MOST OF YOU KNOW AND AS MANY IN THE COMMUNITY KNOW, I PLAYED A CATALYZING ROLE IN ORGANIZING THE AMSTERDAM CONSULTATION ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN. IT WAS NOT IN MY PERSONAL BUDGET NOR MY PERSONAL TIME PLAN WHEN I SAW THE FIRST VERSION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO UNDERTAKE SUCH AN EFFORT. HOWEVER, IT WAS VERY CLEAR FROM EXPRESSIONS OF CONCERN AND MY OWN PERSONAL VIEW THAT THAT KIND OF CONSULTATION HAD TO TAKE PLACE. WORKING WITH OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY, WE ACHIEVED A BROADLY SUPPORTED -- I CAN'T SAY IT WAS AS REPRESENTATIVE AS IT NEEDED TO BE, BUT WE DID RECEIVE AN OUTCOME AND AN EXPRESSION OF SUPPORT AND PARTICIPATION THAT CUT ACROSS ALL OF ICANN'S STAKEHOLDERS. AND WE WERE SUPPORTED BY THE PARTICIPATION OF THE STAFF AT THE AMSTERDAM EVENT. I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT WAS DEVOTED TO ESTABLISH THE CONSULTATION PERIODS HERE AT THE ICANN MEETING. WE SPENT A TOTAL OF FIVE AND A HALF HOURS IN THREE SEPARATE MEETINGS ADDRESSING INPUT ON THE OPERATIONAL PLAN AND BUDGET ON MONDAY, ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN 7.0 ON TUESDAY, AND AN HOUR AND A HALF ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MORE ROBUST, MORE PARTICIPATORY CONSULTATION PROCESS GOING FORWARD. WE HAVE AHEAD OF US NOW A TOUGH QUESTION. THERE IS SO MUCH IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT IS SUPPORTED. THERE ARE TWO OR THREE AREAS WHICH REMAIN HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW THEY'RE DONE. I DON'T THINK SO MUCH ABOUT WHETHER THEY'RE DONE. I WOULD PROPOSE TO THE BOARD THAT YOU CONSIDER AS YOU SEEK TO APPROVE THE STRATEGIC PLAN APPROVING SOME PARTS OF IT AND PUTTING THOSE AREAS WHERE MORE BUY-IN IS NEEDED INTO AN INTERACTIVE FAST-TRACK FORUM AND TRY TO GAIN MORE SUPPORT FOR HOW THINGS ARE DONE, NOT WHETHER THEY'RE DONE. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, MARILYN. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: MARILYN, COULD I JUST ASK A QUESTION, COULD YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY WHAT YOU THINK ARE THE TWO OR THREE AREAS THAT ARE SO CONTENTIOUS THAT THEY SHOULD BE SIDE LINED? >>MARILYN CADE: I AM VERY ACTIVE, AS MOST OF YOU KNOW, IN THE WSIS PROCESS. AND I DO CONSIDER ICANN IN A POST-WSIS WORLD A PRIORITY FOR ALL OF US TO THINK ABOUT. IN THE PLAN, THE PLAN ITSELF TAKES ICANN VERY AGGRESSIVELY INTO A POST-WSIS ENVIRONMENT. BUT IT ALSO BRINGS SOME WORK AREAS TO ICANN THAT TODAY ICANN IS NOT INVOLVED IN. SO THERE'S THE QUESTION OF, SHOULD ICANN BE ORGANIZING WORKSHOPS ON ITS OWN? SHOULD IT BE MOVING INTO THE COMMUNITY? AND HOW IT SHOULD MOVE INTO THE COMMUNITY, THROUGH PHYSICAL OFFICES OR THROUGH ESTABLISHING OUTREACH THROUGH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE, WORKING WITH THE RIRS, WITH THE REGIONAL CCTLDS, ET CETERA. I DON'T THINK THE QUESTION OF BROADENING PARTICIPATION -- >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: CAN I BEG YOU TO ABBREVIATE? THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A -- PARTICIPATION RECOGNIZED FROM E-MAIL. JOHN KLENSIN, CAN YOU EITHER DESCRIBE IT BRIEFLY SO THAT IT GOES ON RECORD OR SOMETHING ELSE. >>JOHN KLENSIN: WE RECEIVED A NOTE FROM WILLIAM TAN, WHO WAS BUT IS NO LONGER ASSOCIATED WITH NEULEVEL. I'LL TRY TO SUMMARIZE AND THEN WE'LL ENTER IT INTO THE RECORD. HE'S QUITE CONCERNED THAT IN THE NET EVALUATION THERE WAS LITTLE ATTENTION PAID TO IDN ISSUES AND VIRTUALLY NO WEIGHT WAS PUT ON THAT CATEGORY. HE ALSO SAYS THAT VERISIGN'S OVERLY OPTIMISTIC IDN POLICY HAS CREATED A BUNCH OF LEGACY NAMES THAT WILL CONTINUE TO OPEN UP THE DOORS FOR PHISHING ATTACKS AND CONFUSION. ONE COULD ARGUE IT COULD LEAD TO USERS LOSING CONFIDENCE IN IDN. AS YOU KNOW, VERISIGN'S CURRENT IDN IMPLEMENTATION ALLOWS ANY NAMES TO BE REGISTERED AS LONG AS THE REGISTRANT SUBMITS A TAG FOR WHICH VERISIGN DOES NOT HAVE A CHARACTER INCLUSION TABLE. IT IS EXACTLY THIS POLICY THAT MADE IT POSSIBLE FOR ERIC JOHANSEN TO REGISTER HIS PROOF OF CONCEPT DOMAIN, PAYPAL.COM WITH A CYRILLIC A, AND THEN HE GOES ON TO SOME DETAILS ABOUT THE OTHER APPLICATIONS AND THE APPROACH WHICH COULD BE TAKEN, AND INDICATES THE EVALUATORS MISSED THIS MAJOR POINT. AND GOES ON TO DISCUSS COMPLIANCE WITH THE IDN GUIDELINES. HIS CLOSING COMMENT ASKS IS THIS AN EXAMPLE OF THE COMMUNITY CLOSING ONE EYE ON IMPORTANT ISSUES OR A CASE OF NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF TELCORDIA OR JUST ME WHINING TOO MUCH? BEST REGARDS. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANKS, JOHN. WE'LL KEEP THIS ON THE RECORD. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. I'M GOING TO TRY TO ENFORCE MORE STRICTLY THE TWO MINUTE LIMIT SO WE DON'T HAVE THE LAST SPEAKER.... >>GREG RUTH: I'M GREG RUTH AND I'D LIKE TO OFFER A STATEMENT FROM THE ISPCP CONSTITUENCY REGARDING THE STRATEGIC PLAN. THE ISPCP CONSTITUENCY WELCOMES THE REVISED STRATEGIC PLAN PUBLISHED IN MARCH 2005. WE ESPECIALLY APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS OF ICANN STAFF TO REVISE THE REPORT IN SUCH SHORT TIME FRAMES. HOWEVER, THOSE TIME FRAMES HAVE MADE IT ALSO DIFFICULT FOR ANY CONSTITUENCY TO CONSIDER, REFLECT -- WHOOPS. AND RESPOND TO THE NEW DRAFT. WE JOIN WITH THOSE OTHER CONSTITUENCIES WHO HAVE NOTED OUR CONCERNS THAT THE PUBLISHING OF IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS IN THE DAYS JUST PRIOR TO ICANN MEETINGS MAKES THINGS DIFFICULT FOR US. OUR CONSTITUENCY ALSO BELIEVES THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO MAKE INSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLAN IN THE ABSENCE OF A MATCHING OPERATIONAL PLAN. WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE OPERATIONAL PLAN AND BUDGET FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. WHEN THAT MOMENT COMES THE ICANN COMMUNITY WILL, WITH US, BE IN A MUCH BETTER POSITION TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTIVE INPUT TO THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS. IN THE MEANTIME WE WILL ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE COMMUNITY PROCESS THAT WILL DEFINE THE MECHANISMS FOR BUILDING FUTURE STRATEGIC AND OPERATIONAL PLANS. THANK YOU. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, GREG. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. MR. TONKIN. >>BRUCE TONKIN: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I HAVE TWO TOPICS. MAY I HAVE TWO MINUTES ON BOTH OF THOSE TOPICS? >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: YOU MEAN -- >>BRUCE TONKIN: SORRY? I'LL JUST KEEP GOING. THE FIRST TOPIC IS THE GNSO COUNCIL AND THE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES ON THE COUNCIL. I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS WORTH MAKING A COMMENT WEARING MY HAT AS THE CHAIR OF THE GNSO COUNCIL THAT THE COUNCIL HAS CONSIDERED THIS TO BE A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, AND I THINK THE -- I KNOW THE BOARD LOOKED AT THIS SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS LOOKING AT THE EVOLUTION REFORM PROCESS AND THOUGHT THAT THE COUNCIL MIGHT GET TOO BIG IF WE HAD THREE REPRESENTATIVES PER FOR THE COUNCIL. BUT WE CONSIDER IT TO BE A KEY PART OF GLOBAL REPRESENTATION FOR THE COUNCIL AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT AND IT DOES HAVE UNANIMOUS SUPPORT OF THE COUNCIL. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT VERY CLEAR. THE SECOND TOPIC IS DOT NET. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TO ANY OF THE PROPOSALS OR THE PROS AND CONS OF THOSE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE, I GUESS, A PERSONAL ADVICE ON THIS. YOU HAVE AN EVALUATOR'S REPORT. I REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO ACTUALLY READ THE PROPOSALS SO THAT YOU'RE READING THE PROPOSALS AND THE EVALUATOR'S REPORT, AND I REALLY DO ENCOURAGE YOU TO ACTUALLY READ THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. DON'T JUST RELY ON A SUMMARY. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, BRUCE. THE NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. I WILL GRANT TWO MINUTES MORE TO MR. BERTOLA WHO HAD REQUESTED THEM UNLESS I HEAR A LOUD OBJECTION. >>VITTORIO BERTOLA: OKAY, THANK YOU. I WANTED TO READ A STATEMENT THAT WE ARE RELEASING ON WHOIS. WE WILL ANYWAY SUBMIT THEM IN WRITING SO YOU CAN READ THEM. SO THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE THE CONCERNS OF THE CURRENT AND PROPOSED POLICIES RELATING TO THE WHOIS DATABASES ALREADY EXPRESSED OVER TWO YEARS AGO IN OUR COMMENTS ON THE WHOIS TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT. THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS ALSO CONCERNED THAT THE PROCESS FOR THE (INAUDIBLE) WHOIS ISSUES NOW UNDER REVIEW BY THE GNSO IS FLAWED. IN NOVEMBER 2003, THE GNSO CREATED THREE TASK FORCES FOR THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF WHOIS, AND THE PARTICIPANTS IN THOSE TASK FORCES AND THE SINGLE TASK FORCE INTO WHICH THEY MERGED HAVE YET TO REACH CONSENSUS ON THE MAJOR ISSUES BEFORE THEM. AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THESE PROCESS ISSUES, WE SEE THAT AFTER YEARS OF WORK ICANN STILL SEEMS UNABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUESTS OF THE USERS COMMUNITY, PARTICULARLY WITH REGARDS TO MEASURES TO PROTECT THE PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUAL REGISTRANTS, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT SUCH MEASURES ARE ACTUALLY COMPULSORY BY LAW FOR REGISTRANTS AND REGISTRARS AND DEEPLY EMBEDDED IN COMMON PRACTICE AND CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD. THUS, WE THINK THAT THIS PROCESS FAILED TO ACCOMPLISH ITS DUTY TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC OF BALANCED GLOBAL POLICY MAKING IN THE INTEREST OF ALL INTERNET COMMUNITIES AROUND THE WORLD. THE ALAC ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE (INAUDIBLE) WHOIS TASK FORCES HAVE WORKED HARD ON SOME OF THE MOST DIFFICULT AND (INAUDIBLE) ISSUES FACING THE GNSO AND IMPORTANTLY HAVE MADE PROGRESS IN SOME AREAS. AT THE SAME TIME, THE ALAC BELIEVES THAT REACHING A CONSENSUS ON OTHER WHOIS RELATED ISSUES MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE IN EITHER THE NEAR OR LONG TERM IF THE GNSO CONTINUES TO FOLLOW ITS PRESENT COURSE OF DISCUSSIONS, CONSULTATIONS AND DEBATE. THE ALAC ENCOURAGES THE GNSO WITH APPROPRIATE SUPPORT FROM THE ICANN STAFF AND/OR PROFESSIONAL MEDIATION SERVICES TO EXPLORE NEW METHODS OF BROKERING COMPROMISES BY ALL GNSO STAKEHOLDERS IN ORDER TO REACH A RESOLUTION ON THE ONGOING WHOIS WORK. AT THE SAME TIME, WE REMIND ICANN AS A WHOLE, AND ESPECIALLY ITS BOARD AND MANAGEMENT, OF THE DUTY TO ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES SUCH AS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BASIC RIGHTS RECOGNIZED BY THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS THAT IS PRIVACY, ARE ADDRESSED PROMPTLY IN THE DIRECTION OF GLOBAL PUBLIC INTEREST AND IN HARMONY WITH ALL BROADER POLICY TRENDS AND FRAMEWORKS. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, VITTORIO. MR. THRUSH. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: IS PAUL KANE STILL IN THE ROOM? IS ANYBODY FROM CENTR MANAGEMENT -- I CAN'T ASK THAT. GIOVANNI, PAUL READ TO US BRIEFLY FROM A STATEMENT FROM THE CENTR BOARD OR THE CENTR COMMITTEE. IS THAT STATEMENT GOING TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO US? >>GIOVANNI SEPPIA: YES, I WILL FORWARD IT. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: AND SECONDLY, HE ENDED UP BY SAYING THAT CENTR DOESN'T ENDORSE THE CURRENT PLAN BUT IS THERE ANYTHING MORE CONSTRUCTIVE THAT CENTR CAN SAY ABOUT THE PLAN? IS THERE ANY INDICATIONS TO ANY PART OF IT THAT YOU APPROVE OR DO YOU DISAPPROVE THE THING IN ITS ENTIRETY? SORRY, COULD YOU, FOR EXAMPLE, RESPOND BY THINKING ABOUT MARILYN CADE'S SUGGESTION THAT THERE ARE SOME PIECES YOU DO AGREE WITH AND TO TAKE THE DIFFICULT ONES AND PUT THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE, I'M TRYING TO GET SOME KIND OF SENSE, OR DO YOU THINK THE ENTIRE THING NEEDS TO BE REDONE? >>GIOVANNI SEPPIA: I THINK WHAT I CAN SAY IS THE CENTR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MET THIS MORNING AND THEY DECIDED TO MAKE THE STATEMENT DURING THE PUBLIC FORUM. CENTR SUBMITTED ON 24TH OF FEBRUARY SOME COMMENTS, SOME INPUTS TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN WHICH HAS NOW BEEN REVISED, AND THERE ARE SOME PARTS OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT HAVE BEEN IMPROVED, AND CENTR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ENDORSED THIS. AT THE SAME TIME, CENTR COMMUNITY POSED SOME QUESTIONS TO ICANN, AND ACCORDING TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR SOME REPLIES TO THOSE QUESTIONS. WHAT WAS THE MAIN CONCERN OF CENTR COMMUNITY WAS TO SUGGEST ICANN FOCUS ITS TARGETS ON ITS CORE FUNCTIONS, LIKE THE MANAGEMENT OF THE IANA DATABASE. AND CENTR HAS ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED THE FACT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE IANA DATABASE, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE CENTR COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE SPECIFIC TARGET ADDRESSED IN THE ICANN STRATEGIC PLAN. I BELIEVE THAT ALL OUR MAIN CONCERNS HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE LETTER THAT WAS ADDRESSED TO PAUL TWOMEY ON THE 24TH OF FEBRUARY. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? WE WILL CLOSE THE SESSION ON THE FOLLOWING NOTE. WOULD YOU LIKE ONE MINUTE? REIDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE. >>JOHN LEVINE: HMM? I'M JOHN LEVINE AGAIN. I'D LIKE ONE MINUTE TO CLARIFY MY CONCERNS ABOUT DOT AERO AND, BY IMPLICATION, DOT TRAVEL. MY CONCERN ABOUT -- I'LL TALK FAST. MY CONCERN ABOUT DOT AERO IS NOT THE NUMBER OF DOMAINS. I AGREE THAT EDU IS A VERY VIABLE DOMAIN AND DOT INT, WHICH HAS ONLY A HANDFUL, IS VIABLE. MY CONCERN ABOUT DOT AERO IS THAT THE STANDARDS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSISTENT. WHEN DOT AERO WAS NEW, IN FACT THE SAME ED HASBROOKE WHO I REFERRED TO EARLIER TRIED TO REGISTER AS A TRAVEL JOURNALIST, WHICH HE IS, AND THEY TURNED HIM DOWN. BUT THIS YEAR, I, WHO AM NOWHERE NEAR AS OF A TRAVEL JOURNALIST AS ED IS, SAILED RIGHT IN. IT MAY WELL MAKE SENSE FOR THEM TO HAVE CHANGED THE RULES BUT I DON'T RECALL SEEING ANY CHANGES TO THEIR POLICY OR THE REGISTRATION AGREEMENT. SO MY CONCERN IS THAT THERE IS NO WAY TO VERIFY THAT WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS WHAT THEY SAID THEY WOULD DO AND, CONVERSELY, THAT WHAT THEY SAID THEY WOULD DO IS WHAT THEY SHOULD BE DOING. AND I SEE EXACTLY THE SAME PROBLEM FOR DOT TRAVEL. MY COMMENT IS EITHER YOU NEED TO REGULATE THEM ALL OR OPEN IT ALL UP. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO OPEN IT ALL UP. BUT I DO THINK IT'S A DECISION YOU NEED TO MAKE. >>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU. WE WILL RECONVENE TOMORROW. THE BOARD WILL CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS OF THE INPUT IT HAS RECEIVED, FEEDBACK IT HAS RECEIVED ON MANY SUBJECTS ACCORDING TO THE POSTED AGENDA. I MAY REMIND YOU THAT AN ANNOUNCEMENT WAS MADE EARLY THIS MORNING THAT THERE WILL BE A SLIGHT ADJUSTMENT IN THE TIME FOR BEGINNING TOMORROW'S SESSION IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE WATCHING THE POPE JOHN PAUL II'S FUNERAL TO BE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE RESPECTFUL OF THE STRONG SENTIMENTS THIS RAISES IN MANY COMMUNITIES. WE WILL CONSIDER THE INPUT AND FEEDBACK AS I MENTIONED. MUCH OF IT WILL TAKE US TO CHANGES IN PROCEDURES. AND I MAY END WITH THE NOTE THAT WE WILL CONCENTRATE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE ON SUBSTANCE, TRY TO CREATE AS TRANSPARENT AND LIGHTWEIGHT PROCEDURES. AS I HAVE HEARD MANY OF THE PROPOSALS MADE DURING THE LAST FEW DAYS FOR DEVELOPING THINGS LIKE THE STRATEGIC PLAN, FOR EXAMPLE, AND A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN HEARING TODAY. I AM REMINDED OF STUART LYNN'S WORDS DESCRIBING AN ICANN OF SEVERAL YEARS AGO AS AN ORGANIZATION CONSUMED BY PROCESS. IF WE AGAIN ARE NOT CAREFUL IN THESE RESPONSES WE WILL BE MAKING A FAST BACKWARDS TO THE STONE AGE OF ICANN WHICH WAS CONSUMED BY PROCESS. I THINK THE PROGRESS WE ARE MAKING ON SUBSTANCE AND THE VERY TRANSPARENT PROCEEDINGS HERE HAS TO BE SUSTAINED AND I'M SURE YOU WILL SEE A SHOW OF THAT TOMORROW BY THE BOARD IN THIS OPEN AND INTENSE DISCUSSION TO CONTINUE THIS AGENDA. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. (APPLAUSE.) (1:12 P.M.)

© Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers