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 Links and information may be outdated or incorrect.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 São Paulo, Brazil

Captioning - ICANN Public Forum Part 2

7 December 2006

Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the ICANN Public Forum Part 2 held on 7 December 2006 in São Paulo, Brazil. 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: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, SORRY FOR THE DELAY.

WE'RE HAVING SOME DIFFICULTIES WITH THE SOUND SYSTEM.

I'D LIKE TO CONVENE THIS SECOND PORTION OF THE PUBLIC FORUM.

IN THE PREVIOUS SESSION, WE DID NOT COMPLETE ALL OF THE REPORTS, SO WE'RE PICKING UP SOME OF THOSE THAT WE MISSED.

IN ADDITION, THE ROOT SERVER ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVE NEEDED TO LEAVE BEFORE TODAY, AND WE DIDN'T GET TO HER REPORT IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING.

SO WE'LL JUST HAVE TO POST THAT AS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN READ LATER.

I'D LIKE TO CALL ON GEORGE SADOWSKY NOW TO GIVE A REPORT FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

>>GEORGE SADOWSKY: GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE REPORT OF THE 2006 NOMINATING COMMITTEE TO YOU.

A QUICK OUTLINE OF THE REPORT.

I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE COMMITTEE, GIVE YOU THE RESULTS, WHICH YOU PRESUMABLY ALREADY KNOW, MAKE SOME REMARKS ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT THE NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE UNDERGOES, AND THEN FINISH WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, MOST OF WHICH ARE TO THE COMMITTEE, BUT SOME OF WHICH ARE TO THE BOARD.

SO THE COMMITTEE IS LARGE, 23 MEMBERS, 17 OF WHOM VOTE.

THEY COME FROM THE CONSTITUENCIES, THE LIAISON ORGANIZATIONS, THERE'S AN CHAIR AND AN ASSOCIATE CHAIR WHO ASSISTS THE CHAIR.

THEY CARRY NO PERSONAL COMMITMENTS ONCE THEY ARE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.

THEY COMMIT TO A CODE OF ETHICS WHICH HAS IN IT PROVISIONS ON INTEGRITY, DECLARING CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND ASSURING THAT THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE REMAINS CONFIDENTIAL.

IT -- THE COMMITTEE OPERATES, BY THE WAY, IN PARALLEL WITH OTHER SELECTION PROCESSES.

THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD, OVER A THREE-YEAR CYCLE, IS SELECTED BY THE COMMITTEE, AND IT ALSO ADDS A FEW MEMBERS TO EACH OF THE OTHER CONSTITUENCIES.

WE FUNCTION INDEPENDENTLY OF ICANN.

HERE IS THE COMPOSITION OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

OOPS.

EXCUSE ME.

MY SOUND IS ON HERE.

I WON'T READ THESE NAMES.

THAT WOULD BE LONG AND BORING.

BUT JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THEM.

I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ANY MEMBERS OF THE 2006 NOMINATING COMMITTEE WHO ARE IN THE AUDIENCE TO STAND AND IDENTIFY THEMSELVES BY SO STANDING.

THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED LONG AND HARD TO PROVIDE THE NOMINATIONS YOU'RE HEARING ABOUT NOW.

I WON'T GO OVER THIS ENTIRE PICTURE.

THIS PRESENTATION WILL BE ON THE WEB, AS OTHERS WILL BE.

BUT THIS IS JUST TO REMIND YOU THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS COMES FROM SEVERAL DIFFERENT SOURCES TO EACH -- FROM EACH OF THE CONSTITUENCIES, AND EIGHT OVER A THREE-YEAR CYCLE FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

AND THE FIFTEENTH IS THE CEO.

SO, FOR THE ICANN BOARD, WE HAVE CHOSEN ROBERTO GAETANO, FROM ITALY, STEVEN GOLDSTEIN FROM THE UNITED STATES, AND RAJASHEKAR RAMARAJ FROM INDIA.

MR. RAMARAJ HAD TO LEAVE EARLY.

HIS SON IS BEING MARRIED IN INDIA THIS WEEKEND, AND APPARENTLY INDIAN WEDDINGS ARE A REALLY BIG THING.

SO HE LEFT MONDAY NIGHT TO OFFICIATE AT THAT.

THESE APPOINTMENTS ARE FOR THREE YEARS.

THE GNSO COUNCIL IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL.

THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE NOMINATES THREE PEOPLE OVERALL FOR THE COUNCIL.

AND THIS YEAR, OUR NOMINEE IS JON BING, FROM NORWAY.

AND DR. BING WILL SERVE A TWO YEARS TERM TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE 2008 ANNUAL MEETING.

THE INTERIM ALAC, AT THE MOMENT, THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE NOMINATES FIVE PEOPLE ON A ROTATING BASIS FOR THE ALAC.

THIS IS -- THE APPOINTMENTS ARE REGIONALLY CONSTRAINED.

AND THIS YEAR, WE HAVE NOMINATED ALAN GREENBERG FROM CANADA TO FILL THE NORTH AMERICAN SLOT, AND ANNETTE MUEHLBERG, FROM GERMANY, TO FILL THE EUROPEAN SLOT.

AND THEIR TERMS ARE FROM THE CONCLUSION OF THIS ANNUAL MEETING TO THE END OF THE 2008 ANNUAL MEETING, A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS.

AND, FINALLY, THE CCNSO COUNCIL RECEIVES THREE NOMINEES OVER A THREE-YEAR PERIOD FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

AND OUR NOMINEE THIS YEAR IS BECKY BURR FROM THE UNITED STATES.

AND SHE SERVES A THREE-YEAR TERM TO THE END OF THE ANNUAL MEETING FROM 2009.

THERE ARE SOME STATISTICS WHICH HAVE BEEN, BY THE WAY, ANNOUNCED A NUMBER OF MONTHS AGO ON THE ICANN WEB SITE.

WE LOOK AT THE DISTRIBUTION BY REGION AND BY GENDER YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THIS YEAR, FOR EXAMPLE -- THESE -- I SHOULD MAKE THE COMMENT THAT THESE STATISTICS VARY RATHER WILDLY FROM YEAR TO YEAR, BECAUSE THE GRANULARITY OF THE PROCESS IS SO SMALL, THAT IS, WE CAN IDENTIFY AND NOMINATE ONLY A VERY FEW PEOPLE FOR EACH POSITION.

SO LAST YEAR, FOR EXAMPLE, WE NOMINATED -- SIX OF THE EIGHT NOMINEES WERE WOMEN.

THIS YEAR, LESS -- 28% OF THE NOMINEES WERE WOMEN.

THE CANDIDATES COME FROM DIFFERENT PLACES, 32 COUNTRIES AND AREAS THIS TIME.

I WON'T READ THESE NAMES.

BUT YOU'LL GET A -- YOU GET A SENSE THAT THE CANVASSING FOR CANDIDATES COVERED THE ENTIRE WORLD.

AND WE ALL -- ALL REGIONS ARE REPRESENTED, AND MANY COUNTRIES WITHIN EACH REGION.

THIS IS TYPICAL OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.

THE NOMCOM HAS A TIMETABLE, WHICH STARTED AFTER -- IMMEDIATE AFTER THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF LAST YEAR.

WE MET TWICE FACE TO FACE, ONCE IN WELLINGTON AND ONCE IN FRANKFURT IN THE MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER TO COMPLETE THE NOMINATIONS PROCESS.

AFTER THE NOMINATIONS PROCESS HAD OCCURRED, THERE'S A PERIOD OF DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE OUR NOMINEES ARE WHO THEY SAY THEY ARE.

AND, FORTUNATELY, THEY ALL PASSED THIS YEAR.

AND THE RESULTS WERE ANNOUNCED, AS REFLECTED IN THE BYLAWS, AT LEAST ONE MONTH BEFORE THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING, WHICH IS WHERE WE ARE NOW.

WE USE THE ICANN FAMILY VERY HEAVILY FOR RECRUITING.

WE TRIED ADVERTISING THIS YEAR, AND IT DIDN'T PAY OFF.

WE ATTENDED A NUMBER OF MEETINGS, BOTH ICANN AND RELATED MEETINGS, AND WERE VOCAL AND PRESENT -- VISIBLE IN ADVERTISING OPPORTUNITIES FOR LEADERSHIP WITHIN ICANN.

WE DISTRIBUTED WIDELY A FLIER DESCRIBING THE POSITIONS.

AND INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THE DISCOURAGED CANDIDATE EFFECT WHICH I REPORTED UPON LAST YEAR DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE SURFACED THIS YEAR, ALTHOUGH PERHAPS ONE CAN'T TELL ABOUT THE DISCOURAGED CANDIDATES, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SEE THEM IF THEY DROP OUT ENTIRELY.

THE EVALUATION PROCESS DEPENDS UPON THREE SUBCOMMITTEES FROM THE NOMCOM.

WE EVALUATED ALL CANDIDATES IN DEPTH, INCLUDING REFERENCES, PHONE CALLS, WHERE NEEDED.

WE USED THIRD-PARTY CONTACTS MORE PROACTIVELY THIS YEAR, UNDER A BLANKET OF CONFIDENTIALITY, TO SUPPLEMENT THE INFORMATION THAT WAS VOLUNTEERED BY THE CANDIDATES.

AND WE TRIED SOMETHING NEW, WE HAD TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH SOME OF THE CANDIDATES TO EXPLORE THEIR CAPABILITIES FURTHER.

IT WAS UNFORTUNATE, AT ONE POINT I REFERRED TO THE CANDIDATES WE WERE TALKING TO AS A SHORT LIST, AND IT WASN'T A SHORT LIST IN THE CLASSICAL SENSE OF THE FINAL LISTS; IT WAS A LIST OF PEOPLE WHOM WE FELT WE NEEDED MORE INFORMATION IN ORDER TO DO THE EVALUATION PROPERLY.

I HAVE FIVE CLASSES OF RECOMMENDATIONS HERE: SCHEDULING, PROCESS, RECRUITMENT, EVALUATION, AND, FINALLY, GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION.

WE -- WE BELIEVE THAT ACCELERATING THE FUTURE CHAIR'S INVOLVEMENT, STARTING WITH ATTENDANCE OR PERHAPS TOTAL OVERLAP WITH THE PREVIOUS YEAR, IT WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO DO.

SOME OF THESE -- BY THE WAY, SOME OF THESE CHANGES WILL REQUIRE BYLAWS CHANGES IF THEY ARE IMPLEMENTED.

BUT RIGHT NOW, THE EXISTING CHAIR SERVES AS THE ADVISOR TO THE NEXT CHAIR, WHO COMES IN COLD, AND THE ALTERNATIVE MODEL IS FOR THE NEXT CHAIR TO COME IN AS AN APPRENTICE THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND LEARN, AND THE CURRENT CHAIR TO DROP OUT AT THE END OF THE YEAR.

WE HAVE NOW SUCCEEDED IN ACCELERATING THE FIRST MEETING OF THE NEW COMMITTEE, TO BE HELD IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING, AND WE'VE ALSO, I THINK, PRETTY MUCH SUCCEEDED IN HAVING PRETTY MUCH EARLY EXCHANGES OF VIEWS BETWEEN THE ENTIRE NEW NOMCOM AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE BOARD AND CONSTITUENCIES.

AND THAT'S OCCURRING AT THIS MEETING.

WE ALSO HOPE TO ACCELERATE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE RESULTS, WHICH TOOK PROBABLY AN INORDINATELY LONG TIME THIS YEAR.

WITH RESPECT TO PROCESS, WE'RE STILL IMPROVING THE TECHNOLOGY WE USE FOR HANDLING THE INFORMATION WE GET FROM CANDIDATES AND REFERENCES.

WE'RE CONTINUING TO IMPROVE THE WAY IN WHICH CANDIDATES STATE THEIR INTEREST IN LEADERSHIP POSITIONS.

WE NEED TO IMPROVE AND EDUCATE EVERY NOMCOM OF THE -- WITH THE NEEDS OF THE CONSTITUENCIES.

IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE ORGANIZATIONS, THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE ROLES IN WHICH THESE PEOPLE SERVE SO THAT WE CAN MAKE THE BEST POSSIBLE SELECTIONS.

AND WE'RE WORKING TO IMPROVE THE LEVERAGING OF CONSTITUENCY MEMBERS IN GETTING CANDIDATES.

WE'VE VISITED -- ADAM PEAKE, WHO'S BEEN MY ASSOCIATE CHAIR, THIS YEAR, AND I HAVE VISITED THE CONSTITUENCIES.

AND SOME OF THEM WE'LL BE VISITING, THE REST OF THEM, THIS MEETING, AND TALKING FACE TO FACE SO WE GET A GOOD SENSE OF WHAT WE -- WOULD BE REQUIRED AND DESIRABLE.

WITH REGARD TO RECRUITMENT, IT'S ALWAYS DIFFICULT.

WE RECRUIT ABOUT TEN TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE AS WE CAN PLACE IN POSITIONS.

THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS THAT THE NOMCOM LOSES ITS MEMORY AT THE END OF THE YEAR.

RECORDS ARE DESTROYED.

THERE IS A CARRYOVER OF MEMBERS FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT, BUT THE PREVIOUS YEAR'S PROCESSES ARE NOT REFERRED TO.

WE REALLY NEED TO, I THINK, DEVELOP AN INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT WITHIN THE NOMCOM, RESPECTING THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE APPLICANTS.

WE'VE HAD A BATTLE OVER THE USE OF PROFESSIONAL SEARCH HELP IN THE PAST.

MY SENSE IS THAT STILL SHOULD BE UP FOR REEVALUATION EVERY YEAR.

THE ISSUE OF HOW TO IMPROVE ENTRY POINTS INTO INVOLVEMENT IN ICANN IS AN IMPORTANT ONE.

IF YOU THINK OF ICANN AS HAVING SOMETHING LIKE A CAREER LADDER, IT'S VERY TALL AND NARROW.

IT'S DIFFICULT TO GET INVOLVED IN ICANN IN A MEANINGFUL WAY WITHOUT REALLY GETTING INVOLVED IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.

THERE'S -- THE THRESHOLD IS HIGH.

THAT'S BEEN REMARKED ON BY SOME OF THE OTHER PEOPLE SPEAKING AT THIS MEETING.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT, BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT WAYS OF DOING IT, IF ONLY FOR CANDIDATES -- THE CANDIDATE POOL BECOMING RICHER ENTERING ICANN.

AND THEN WE'LL HAVE CLEARLY -- CLEARLY RECOMMEND CONSIDERING ADVERTISING AGAIN, BUT MAYBE IN A DIFFERENT WAY, AND FIGURING OUT A WAY TO INCREASE THE GENERAL AWARENESS OF ICANN AMONG PEOPLE WHO SHOULD KNOW ABOUT IT.

WITH REGARD TO EVALUATION, WE PROBABLY SHOULD CONTINUE TO INCREASE OUR SEARCH FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT CANDIDATES.

WE NEED -- I BELIEVE SHOULD EXPAND THE USE OF TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH CANDIDATES, WHERE WE FIND WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION.

THE MORE WE HAVE, THE BETTER JUDGMENTS I THINK WE CAN MAKE.

AND THIS YEAR'S EXPERIMENT WITH INTERVIEWS ON THE TELEPHONE PAID OFF IN A VARIETY OF WAYS.

AND THEN, FINALLY, AT THE MOMENT, WE EVALUATE ALL CANDIDATES AS A GROUP.

IT'S A FLAT UNIVERSE.

AND THERE HAS BEEN SOME TALK ABOUT CONSIDERING A TWO-STAGE EVALUATION PROCESS WHERE WE USE LESS DEPTH THAN STAGE ONE AND A GREAT DEAL MORE DEPTH IN STAGE TWO.

FINALLY, WITH RESPECT TO GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION, THE NOMCOM AT THE MOMENT HAS NO QUORUM REQUIREMENT, IT WAS POINTED OUT BUT NEVER BECAME A PROBLEM, AND WE PROBABLY SHOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.

THERE IS AN ISSUE OF INACTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, NOT THIS YEAR, BUT LAST YEAR.

AND WE HAVE NO PROCESS FOR CORRECTING THAT QUICKLY ON THE FLY.

THERE'S AN ADJUSTMENT OF THE BUDGET.

THE NOMCOM RUNS FROM JANUARY TO DECEMBER.

THE ICANN FISCAL YEAR RUNS FROM JULY TO JUNE.

WE'VE ALREADY WORKED WITH THE CFO TO GET THE REPORTS FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR FOR WHICH THE CHAIR IS RESPONSIBLE.

THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH REGARD TO THE NEXT BULLET, THE DISPROPORTIONATE POWER WHEN SITTING CONSTITUENCY MEMBERS SERVE ON THE NOMCOM.

THEY REALLY HAVE MORE ABILITY THAN THE AVERAGE NOMCOM MEMBER OR THE AVERAGE ICANN MEMBER TO INFLUENCE WHO GOES ON THE VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES.

THIS WAS NOT AN ISSUE THIS YEAR, BUT THERE IS NO PROHIBITION AGAINST IT, AND THERE'S BEEN ESSENTIALLY VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE.

BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IF THERE IS ANY KIND OF A BYLAW REVISION, THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.

THERE'S AN ISSUE OF A TRAVEL POLICY, WHICH I THINK THE ICANN STAFF IS CONVERGING ON NOW, BUT THE ABSENCE OF A FORMAL STATED TRAVEL POLICY HAS GIVEN US PROBLEMS WITH REGARD TO EQUITY OF TREATMENT OF VOLUNTEERS.

AND, FINALLY, IN BOLD, LAST LINE, WE REALLY -- WE REQUEST THAT THE BOARD INITIATE THE NOMCOM REVIEW PROCESS, WHICH IS MANDATED BY THE BYLAWS, AND GIVEN THE -- WE WILL HAVE -- WE NOW HAVE FOUR YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WITH THE CURRENT NOMCOM STRUCTURE AND WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE A FIFTH BEFORE THINGS ARE CHANGED, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THIS START.

SO THAT COMPLETES MY REPORT, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GEORGE.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN OBSERVATION THAT GEORGE HAS SERVED IN THIS ROLE FOR TWO YEARS RUNNING, AND WE'VE ASKED HIM AND HE HAS AGREED TO SERVE ONE MORE YEAR AS CHAIR OF THE NOMCOM.

IT'S A THANKLESS TASK, BUT I'D LIKE TO THANK HIM FOR THAT AND FOR THE WORK OF HIS COLLEAGUES IN THE COMMITTEE.

THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE WILL ABSOLUTELY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.

AND I'M PLEASED TO TELL YOU THAT TOMORROW, ON THE BOARD'S AGENDA, IS A LIST OF -- SCHEDULE OF REVIEWS OF THE VARIOUS PARTS OF ICANN.

ONE OF THOSE WILL BE THE NOMCOM.

IT'S AT THE TOP OF THE LIST.

SO WE HAVE HEARD THE NOMCOM'S COMMITTEE AND, OF COURSE, THE BYLAWS REQUIRE THAT WE DO IT IN ANY CASE.

SO LET ME NOW -- UNLESS THERE ARE -- I DON'T SEE ANY COMMENTS.

ALL RIGHT.

DAVID, LET ME ASK YOU TO PRESENT THE REPORT OF IANA.

>>DAVID CONRAD: HELLO, EVERYONE.

I'M DAVID CONRAD, GENERAL MANAGER OF IANA, HERE TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE OF IANA.

OVERVIEW, GIVING A BRIEF UPDATE OF THE CURRENT STATUS, DESCRIBE A BIT OF WHAT'S IMPROVED, WHAT I BELIEVE STILL NEEDS IMPROVEMENT, AND WHAT OUR PLANS ARE.

THE CURRENT STATUS.

IANA SIGNED -- OR A NEW CONTRACT WAS SIGNED FOR IANA FUNCTIONS ON 14 AUGUST OF 2006.

THIS CONTRACT IS A ONE-YEAR CONTRACT WITH FOUR OPTIONAL EXTENSIONS.

RUNS FROM OCTOBER 1ST, 2006, UP TO SEPTEMBER 2011, DEPENDING IF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BELIEVES WE SHOULD GET THE OPTIONS.

IN TERMS OF ROOT ZONE MANAGEMENT, I WAS RECENTLY AT THE CENTR GA MEETING IN TORONTO AND OVERHEARD A COMMENT, "IANA ISN'T THE PROBLEM ANYMORE."

AND I DIDN'T ACTUALLY PAY ANYONE TO SAY THAT.

WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR A PERSON TO FILL THE ROLE OF NAME MANAGEMENT PROJECT SPECIALIST.

AND IF YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW ANYBODY WHO HAPPENS TO WANT TO LIVE IN LOVELY DOWNTOWN MARINA DEL REY, PLEASE HAVE THEM CONTACT ME.

IN TERMS OF I.P. ADDRESSING SERVICES, THE GLOBAL IPV6 POLICY WAS EXECUTED.

WE HAVE ALLOCATED /12S TO ALL THE RIRS.

WE'VE ALSO ALLOCATED 32-BIT AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM NUMBERS, THAT'S TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF RUNNING OUT OF THE 16-BIT AUTONOMOUS NUMBERS.

ICANN AND THE RIRS ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON AN AGREEMENT THAT DEFINES THE SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENTS FOR THE IANA, AMONG OTHER THINGS.

AND WE ALSO HIRED LEO VEGODA AS THE IANA NUMBERS LIAISON.

LEO, COULD YOU STAND UP AND WAVE.

THAT'S LEO.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT NUMBERING, ADDRESSING, ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES, FEEL FREE TO HUNT HIM DOWN AND ASK HIM QUESTIONS.

IN TERMS OF IETF REGISTRY SERVICES, WE PROMOTED MICHELLE COTTON TO BE THE IETF LIAISON.

HER JOB IS TO ENSURE THAT THE IETF IS HAPPIER THAN THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE PAST.

AND WE HAVE ACTUALLY JUST SIGNED A SERVICE-LEVEL AGREEMENT WITH THE IETF THAT DEFINES THE TIMES AND SERVICES THAT IANA NEEDS TO PERFORM FOR THE IETF COMMUNITY.

THIS IS ACTUALLY MY THIRD ICANN MEETING SINCE BEING AN ICANN EMPLOYEE.

I ACTUALLY STARTED ALMOST EXACTLY A YEAR AGO.

AND JUST A LITTLE RETROSPECTIVE OF THE WAY THINGS HAVE CHANGED IN IANA OVER THAT YEAR.

IN TERMS OF STAFF, WE'VE GONE FROM FIVE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES TO TEN FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES.

THE MEDIAN PROCESS TIME AVERAGE ACROSS ALL OF THE QUEUES HAS GONE FROM 82, 83 DAYS DOWN TO EIGHT DAYS.

THE MEDIAN QUEUE DEPTH ACROSS ALL QUEUES, ALL IANA WORK QUEUES, HAS GONE FROM 21 REQUESTS DOWN TO FOUR REQUESTS.

WE'VE SET UP A 24 BY 7 BY 365 HOT LINE SO PEOPLE IF THEY HAVE AN EMERGENCY REQUIREMENT FOR IANA SERVICE CAN CALL.

AND THERE WILL BE SOMEONE TO ANSWER THAT CALL.

AND, IN GENERAL, THE SCREAMS OF OUTRAGE THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE PAST HAVE GONE FROM QUITE A FEW DOWN TO FEWER, AT LEAST IN MY ESTIMATION.

WHAT'S IMPROVED.

MOSTLY, ALL THE SERVICES HAVE GOTTEN BETTER.

WE HAVE HAD SOME BACKSLIDING IN A COUPLE OF AREAS.

BUT, IN GENERAL, ALMOST ALL SERVICES THAT IANA PROVIDES TO THE COMMUNITY HAVE IMPROVED.

AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE SUFFICIENT OPERATIONAL STAFFING.

WE CAN GET BY WITH WHAT WE HAVE.

WE ARE LOOKING TO FILL A COUPLE OF MORE SLOTS.

AS PART OF THE GENERAL THEME WITHIN ICANN, IANA HAS UNDERTAKEN THE FORMALIZATION OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE 48 PROJECTS IN VARIOUS STAGES OF THAT PLANNING.

SOME HAVE BEEN INITIATED; SOME ARE IN JUST THE STARTUP PHASE.

AND WE'VE ACTUALLY DOCUMENTED ALL OUR INTERNAL PROCESSES TO ONE LEVEL OR ANOTHER, AND WE HAVE COOKBOOKS FOR BASICALLY EVERYTHING THAT IANA DOES.

THESE TWO GRAPHS PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND ON THE IMPROVEMENT SINCE DECEMBER 2005 OR WHEN WE HAVE DATA AVAILABLE.

WE INITIATED COLLECTING THE DATA WHEN WE MOVED ALL OUR QUEUES OVER TO OUR TICKETING SYSTEM.

IN GENERAL, YOU'LL SEE A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT PRETTY MUCH ACROSS THE BOARD.

THE ONE OUTLIER IS PROCESSING OF INTERNET DRAFTS.

THE QUEUE DEPTH FOR INTERNET DRAFTS HAS GONE UP SIGNIFICANTLY.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE DRAFTS ARE ACTUALLY WAITING ON EXTERNAL ENTITIES, THE AUTHOR OR THE IESG OR SOME OTHER PARTY OUTSIDE OF IANA.

BUT THAT IS AN AREA OF CONCERN FOR US.

AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE, WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATISTICS.

AND THE -- IN THE FUTURE, WE WILL BE PROVIDING BASICALLY STATISTICS OF THIS FORM, WHERE THERE'S A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THE STATS ARE, A GRAPH OVER TIME OF THE -- THE QUEUE DEPTH, THE PROCESSING TIME WITHIN IANA, BROKEN INTO 0 TO 7 DAYS, 7 TO 30 DAYS, AND OVER 30 DAYS, AND THEN A TABLE SHOWING THE PERCENTAGE CHANGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED OVER THE TIME PERIODS.

THIS IS BASICALLY AN EXPERIMENT TO SEE IF PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN THIS FORM OF DATA.

IF ANYONE HAS ANY COMMENTS, FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US.

WHAT NEEDS IMPROVEMENT.

THERE IS THE AREAS THAT IANA STILL NEEDS WORK ON INCLUDES VISIBILITY INTO IANA PROCESSES.

WE NEED TO PUBLISH THE STATISTICS AUTOMATICALLY.

RIGHT NOW IT'S A MANUAL PROCESS AND SOMETIMES WE FALL BEHIND BECAUSE OF OTHER PRIORITIES.

WE NEED TO MAKE THE PROCESS DOCUMENTATION THAT WE HAVE, WE NEED TO CLEAN IT UP A LITTLE BIT AND MAKE IT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.

IANA PROCESSES RIGHT NOW ARE STILL TOO MANUAL, IN MY ESTIMATION. WE NEED TO SIMPLIFY THEM AND NORMALIZE THEM IN THE ATTEMPT TO ACTUALLY AUTOMATE THEM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

WE HAVE SOME PROJECTS UNDERWAY TO AUTOMATE SOME OF IANA'S ACTIVITIES; HOWEVER, THE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT IS ACTUALLY TAKING SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER THAN WE ANTICIPATED.

THE OTHER AREA THAT WE REALLY WANT TO WORK ON IS CLEANING UP THE REGISTRY DATA. IANA HAS ABOUT 800 -- 700 DIFFERENT REGISTRIES THAT HAVE DATA OF VARIOUS FORMS, INCLUDING CONTACT INFORMATION. MUCH OF THAT CONTACT INFORMATION IS STALE, AND WE WANT TO CLEAN THAT UP.

SOME OF THE NEAR-TERM ISSUES THAT WE ARE FACING, THE IETF SLAS ACTUALLY IMPLY A GREATER NEED FOR AUTOMATION. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE TO ADDRESS THAT IS TO ACTUALLY BEGIN XML-IZING ALL OF OUR DATA, MAKING IT MUCH MORE COMPUTER READABLE.

AS I MENTIONED, THE REGISTRIES NEED TO BE CLEANED AND CONTACTS VALIDATED. WE HAVE INITIATED A PROJECT, BASICALLY I TAGGED LEO WITH THE JOB OF CLEANING UP THE IPV4 REGISTRY.

ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE CONTRACT THAT WE SIGNED IS THAT WE NEED STRONGER AUTHENTICATION AND AUTHORIZATION FOR IANA SERVICES, AND THAT IS UNDERWAY WITH THE AUTOMATED ROOT MANAGEMENT PROJECT THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. WE INTEND ON HAVING A STRONG FORM OF AUTHENTICATION AVAILABLE AS AN OPTION.

WE HAVE BEEN TASKED WITH IMPLEMENTING A COMPREHENSIVE COMPUTER SECURITY PLAN, THAT'S AIMED AT IMPROVING THE -- ALL ASPECTS OF SECURITY WITHIN IANA.

WE ARE REQUESTED BY THE IAB TO SIGN DOT ARPA BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. WE HAVE TO DEPLOY THE ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THE NEW AND IMPROVED IANA WEB SITE. AND AS I MENTIONED, THE EIANA SOFTWARE.

SO IN SUM, THERE IS A LOT OF SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT THAT NEEDS DONE.

MIDTERM ISSUES. AGAIN, AUTOMATION. WE ARE PLANNING ON DEPLOYING THE ROOT ZONE MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE SOMETIME NEXT YEAR. AND WE'RE PLANNING ON AUTOMATING THE IETF-RELATED REGISTRY CREATION AND MODIFICATION PROCESSES.

ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS IN PART DUE TO THE COMPUTER SECURITY PLAN, BUT ALSO JUST IN TERMS OF ENSURING PROCESSES ARE DONE WELL, IS TO ADDRESS ANY OF THE SINGLE POINTS OF FAILURE THAT EXIST, EITHER WITHIN PERSONNEL OR WITHIN INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN IANA.

INCREASING THE AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION ABOUT IANA, HAVING REALTIME STATISTIC, TICKET STATUS, INTERACTION HISTORY, THAT SORT OF THING. AND ALSO MAKING THE XML AVAILABLE FOR -- FOR THE REGISTRIES AVAILABLE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN WRITE PROGRAMS TO ACTUALLY DERIVE INFORMATION FROM THE IANA REGISTRIES WITHOUT HAVING TO APPLY ARTIFICIAL OR REAL INTELLIGENCE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REGISTRIES SAY.

AND SORT OF ONE OF THE ONGOING THEMES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FACING IS DEALING WITH THE TRANSITION FROM THE CURRENT MODEL, WHICH HAS THE U.S. GOVERNMENT INVOLVED IN APPROVING MODIFICATIONS TO THE ROOT ZONE, MOVING AWAY FROM THAT SO THAT WE NO LONGER HAVE TO OBTAIN CLEARANCE FROM THE U.S. GOVERNMENT TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS FOR DAY-TO-DAY TYPE CHANGES.

LOOKING FORWARD, SOME OF THE AREAS THAT IANA IS SORT OF -- THE THINGS THAT KEEP US UP AT NIGHT. ROOT DNSSEC DEPLOYMENT. WE ARE WORKING WITH VARIOUS FOLKS, INCLUDING THE SSAC AND THE ROOT SERVER SECURITY AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO WORK ON THE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES.

THE EXHAUSTION OF THE IPV4 ADDRESS POOL IS AN AREA THAT LEO IS GOING TO BE TASKED WITH, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO, IF ANYTHING.

ROUTING SYSTEM SECURITY AND STABILITY. SHOULD IANA BECOME INVOLVED WITH THE EFFORTS UNDERWAY CURRENTLY WITHIN THE RIRS REGARDING X.509 ADDRESS SPACE CERTIFICATION AUTHORITIES, AND WHAT CAN IANA DO TO HELP CONSTRAIN SOME OF THE EXPLOSIVE GROWTH THAT'S OCCURRING WITHIN THE ROUTING SYSTEM TODAY.

BASICALLY IANA WILL BE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ROLE WE HAVE, IF ANY, IN THESE AREAS.

SO CONCLUSIONS. ESSENTIALLY FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE CRISIS PERIOD FOR IANA IS OVER NOW. THERE IS STILL WORK TO BE DONE BUT WE NOW HAVE THE LUXURY OF BEING ABLE TO INCREMENTALLY IMPROVE THINGS OVER TIME.

MANY OF THE IANA PROCESSES ARE GOING TO BE AUTOMATED, AND THE GOAL OF THAT IS TO CONTINUE TO IMPROVE IANA SERVICES. AND ONE OF THE KEY AREAS THAT WE REALLY NEED TO FOCUS ON IS IMPROVING THE VISIBILITY OF IANA PROCESSES TO THE ICANN COMMUNITY AT LARGE.

SO WITH THAT, I HAND IT BACK TO YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DAVID.

I HAVE TO SAY THAT SOFTWARE ALWAYS HAS THE HABIT OF TAKING LONGER -- THE STANDARD MEASURE IS THAT THE FIRST 90% OF THE SOFTWARE TAKES 90% OF THE TIME. THE LAST 10% OF THE SOFTWARE TAKES THE OTHER 90% OF THE TIME TO COMPLETE.

>>DAVID CONRAD: SO TRUE.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DAVID.

YES, PETER.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: JUST A QUICK COMMENT. DAVID YOU SAID IN YOUR REPORT, YOU HAD HEARD AT CENTR THAT IANA WAS NO LONGER THE PROBLEM.

>>DAVID CONRAD: YES.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: LET ME ADD TO THAT. AT THE CCNSO MEETING YESTERDAY I THINK IT WAS CONFIRMED IN WRITING BY THE CCTLDS, AT LEAST, THAT IANA IS NO LONGER THE PROBLEM.

>>DAVID CONRAD: THAT'S VERY GOOD TO HEAR.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: SO CONGRATULATIONS ON MOVING THAT PARTICULARLY DIFFICULT GROUP THAT I KNOW VERY WELL FORWARD ON THAT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, PETER. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL ON FRANK FOWLIE NOW WHO IS THE OMBUDSMAN -- DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, STEVE? THIS WASN'T NEARLY OPEN MICROPHONE, BUT GO AHEAD.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: I AM TERRIBLY SORRY AND THIS IS OUT OF ORDER, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE I WANTED TO ADDRESS GEORGE AND THE NOMCOM, AND I KNOW THIS COULD SOUND TERRIBLY SELF-SERVING, BUT THE NOMCOM WAS ACTUALLY MY FIRST RE-INTRODUCTION TO ANYTHING TO DO WITH ICANN. AND I MUST SAY THAT I WAS THOROUGHLY, THOROUGHLY IMPRESSED WITH THE WAY THEY DID THEIR BUSINESS. IT MADE ME FEEL EXCEEDINGLY GOOD ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION.

SO TO GEORGE AND TO THE NOMCOM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>VINT CERF: I'M SURE WE ALL APPRECIATE THAT, STEVE.

THE INTERESTING OBSERVATION IS THAT YOU WERE SELECTED, WHICH PROBABLY BIASES YOUR VIEW A LITTLE BIT

[ LAUGHTER ]

>>VINT CERF: FRANK FOWLIE IS THE OMBUDSMAN FOR ICANN AND I CALL ON HIM TO GIVE HIS ANNUAL REPORT.

>>FRANK FOWLIE: GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND LIAISONS, AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. AS REQUESTED, I HAVE POSTED MY REPORT TO THIS PUBLIC FORUM ON THE WEB. IT'S BEEN UP FOR ABOUT TEN DAYS.

I HAVE ALSO POSTED THE DOCUMENTS WHICH SUPPORT THIS REPORT. SO I WILL ABRIDGE MY COMMENTS FROM THE SCRIPT THAT I HAVE.

MY FIRST DUTY THIS MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WILL DEPOSIT WITH THE CORPORATE SECRETARY A COPY OF THE SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF MY OFFICE AS IS REQUIRED BY BYLAW 5. THIS REPORT IS UP AND AVAILABLE ON THE OMBUDSMAN WEB SITE, AND WILL BE AVAILABLE IN THE SIX NORMALLY USED LANGUAGES IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY.

I WON'T REITERATE THE STATISTICS WHICH ARE FOUND IN THE ANNUAL REPORT, BECAUSE THE ANNUAL REPORT PROVIDES BETTER EVIDENCE OF THEM THAN I COULD TO IN TWOER THREE MINUTES OF TIME.

THERE HAS BEEN A RELATIVELY STABLE INTAKE OF COMPLAINTS THUS FAR THIS YEAR. WE ARE LOOKING AT AROUND 300, 325 BY YEAR'S END.

SO IT IS A RELATIVELY BUSY OFFICE.

I HAVE IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS SINCE WE MET IN MARRAKECH, COMPLETED THREE EVALUATION STUDIES FOR MY OFFICE. THESE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE RESULTS-BASED MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK, AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE AUDIT COMMITTEE.

I HAVE COMPLETED A LONGITUDINAL COMPARISON BETWEEN MY OFFICE AND THREE OTHER OMBUDSMAN'S OFFICES. I HAVE COMPLETED WHAT I BELIEVE IS A RELATIVELY CUTTING-EDGE LITERATURE-BASED REVIEW. AND IF I COULD, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO BRING A COMMENT FROM THE EXTERNAL REVIEWER WHO DID THE FACT CHECKING AND INTEGRITY CHECKING ON THAT LITERATURE-BASED REVIEW THAT THE ICANN OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN HAS DEVELOPED AND INITIATED THE SINGLE MOST COMPLETE, DELIBERATE, AND MEANINGFUL ASSESSMENT DEPLOYED IN THE OMBUDSMAN FIELD TO DATE.

THIS PROCESS ALLOWS THE OFFICE TO ACCURATELY DECLARE IT IS STRUCTURED TO AND APPEARS TO FUNCTION AS AN IDEAL EXECUTIVE OMBUDSMAN ON BEHALF OF THE ICANN REGULATED COMMUNITY.

THE THIRD EVALUATION THAT I HAVE COMPLETED IS A CLIENT SURVEY OF ALL THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE EACH CONTACTED OR MADE A COMPLAINT TO THE OFFICE SINCE ITS INCEPTION. AND IT, AS WELL, CAN BE FOUND ON THE OMBUDSMAN PAGE.

SINCE THE LAST TIME WE MET IN MARRAKECH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE TAKEN THE UNUSUAL STEP OF POSTING ONE OF MY REPORTS ON THE ICANN WEB SITE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO GAIN SOME INSIGHT INTO THE PROCESSES OF MY OFFICE, AND I AM HAPPY TO REPORT THAT THAT POSTING HAS BEEN WELL RECEIVED, BOTH BY THE COMMUNITY AND WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT ALL OF THESE PROCESSES HAS SHOWN ME, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS THAT I THINK THAT THE ICANN COMMUNITY, THE BOARD AND THE STAFF, GOT IT RIGHT WHEN THEY ESTABLISHED THE MODEL FOR THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN.

THE PROCESSES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE MEAN THAT THE COMMUNITY IS SERVED BY A COST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM AS OPPOSED TO SEEKING OUT MORE TIME CONSUMING, COSTLY, AND FORMAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEMS.

AND I THINK, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT IS A SYNOPSIS OF WHAT MY REPORT IS. AND AGAIN, IT CAN BE FOUND ON THE MEETING WEB SITE AS WELL AS THE OMBUDSMAN WEB SITE.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, FRANK, FOR YOUR BREVITY AND SUCCINCTNESS. I THINK AS WE GO ON WITH THESE PRACTICES OF POSTING THINGS AHEAD OF TIME, THE REST OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY WILL APPRECIATE, AS THEY APPRECIATE YOUR ROLE AS THE OMBUDSMAN.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, FRANK.

>>FRANK FOWLIE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>>VINT CERF: I'D LIKE TO CALL ON DENISE MICHEL NOW TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE GNSO IMPROVEMENT PROCESS AND THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW SCHEDULE. THE IMPROVEMENT PROCESS, AS YOU KNOW, IS KICKED OFF WITH AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE GNSO OPERATION, AND SO WE ARE BEGINNING NOW A SERIES OF THESE EVALUATIONS, AND DENISE'S REPORT WILL GIVE US SOME INSIGHT INTO THE LIKELY SEQUENCE OF EVENTS.

>>DENISE MICHEL: THANK YOU. SORRY FOR THE DELAY. NEW LAPTOP.

I'LL BE COVERING BOTH THE COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE FOR THE INDEPENDENT REVIEWS AS WELL AS GIVING YOU A BRIEF UPDATE ON THE GNSO IMPROVEMENT PROCESS.

THE ICANN BYLAWS CALL FOR A PERIODIC INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF ICANN'S SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION COUNCILS, ADVISORY COMMITTEES, EXCEPT FOR THE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, AND THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

THESE REVIEWS ARE INTENDED TO ENSURE AN INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION OF ICANN'S STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS, AND THEY ARE PART OF ICANN'S ONGOING COMMITMENT TO ITS EVOLUTION AND IMPROVEMENT.

THE REVIEWS ARE CONDUCTED IN AN OBJECTIVE WAY BY INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS. THEY ARE DONE UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE BOARD. AND ALSO WITH PUBLIC INPUT THROUGH POSTING FOR COMMENT OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR EACH REVIEW, AS WELL AS A POSTING OF THE FINAL REVIEW FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

THE FIRST REVIEWS UNDER THESE BECAUSE WERE CONDUCTED FIRST IN DECEMBER OF 2004, THE REVIEW OF THE GNSO COUNCIL WAS FINALIZED.

AND THEN IN SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR, THE REVIEW OF THE WHOLE GNSO WAS FILED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

THE ELEMENTS OF THE GNSO REVIEW WHICH WILL SERVE AS A BASIC TEMPLATE FOR FUTURE REVIEWS INCLUDED ESTABLISHING THE TERMS OF REFERENCE, AGAIN WITH PUBLIC COMMENTS, ISSUING A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR SOLICITING INDEPENDENT CONSULTANTS TO CONDUCT THE REVIEW, SELECTING THE CONSULTANT, MANAGING AND PROVIDING INFORMATION FOR THE CONSULTANT'S WORK, AND THEN ARRANGING FOR INFORMATION SHARING AND BRIEFINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE FINAL REPORT.

THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IN CONSIDERING A COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE FOR ALL OF THE REMAINING INDEPENDENT REVIEWS CONSIDERED FOR EACH OF THE ICANN ENTITIES TO BE REVIEWED THE AGE, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND ACTIVITIES, AND ALSO CONSIDERED THE COST AND THE OPERATIONAL LIMITATIONS FOR BOTH MANAGING AND IMPLEMENTING THESE REVIEWS.

THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED INCREASING THE BUDGET FOR EACH REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT THE RESOURCES FOR THE REVIEW MATCHES THE NEED FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS AND OTHER REVIEW ACTIVITIES.

THE COMMITTEE AGREED TO A COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE FOR ALL REVIEWS, AND THIS SCHEDULE WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE NEXT YEAR TO ASSESS THE PROGRESS AND MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS THAT THEY FEEL ARE NECESSARY TO THE SCHEDULE.

THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE ALSO AGREED TO ADD A REVIEW OF THE BOARD TO THE COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE. THIS IS NOT REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, BUT THE BOARD FELT THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE.

SO THE COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW SCHEDULE IS NOW ON THE BOARD'S AGENDA FOR THEIR AGREEMENT.

THE SCHEDULE THAT THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE APPROVED IS THIS. THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE WOULD BE NEXT, WITH AN ESTIMATED LAUNCH THIS MONTH, IF APPROVED BY THE BOARD.

NEXT WOULD BE THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH AN ESTIMATED LAUNCH IN FEBRUARY OF 2007, FOLLOWED BY THE BOARD WITH AN ESTIMATED LAUNCH OF OCTOBER 2007. NEXT WOULD BE THE DNS ROOT SERVER SYSTEM'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH AN ESTIMATED START OF JULY 2007.

THEN THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR JANUARY 2008 START, AND THEN THE CCNSO IN JULY OF 2008, AND FINALLY THE ADDRESS SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION IN DECEMBER OF 2008.

MOVING ON NOW TO THE GNSO REVIEW, THIS REVIEW WAS CONDUCTED BY THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS. THEIR REVIEW WAS POSTED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON SEPTEMBER 15TH.

THE REVIEW ADDRESSED THE REPRESENTATIVENESS, EFFECTIVENESS, TRANSPARENCY, AND COMPLIANCE.

IT WAS GUIDED BY TERMS OF REFERENCE THAT WERE POSTED EARLIER THIS YEAR FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, FINALIZED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD.

THE LSE USED OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS, STATISTICS, QUANTIFYING FOCUS AREAS, MAPPING RELATIONSHIPS AND INTERACTIONS THEY RECEIVED FROM INTERVIEWS AND CAPTURING AND MAPPING PERCEPTIONS.

THEIR FINAL REVIEW AND EXPLANATORY SLIDES ARE ALL POSTED ON THE WEB SITE AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM REMAINS OPEN ON THIS REVIEW.

THE LSE REVIEW CONTAINED 24 RECOMMENDATIONS IN FOUR BROAD AREAS. THESE AREAS INCLUDED CHANGES NEED TO ENHANCE THE REPRESENTATIVENESS OF THE COUNCIL AND ITS CONSTITUENCIES. GNSO OPERATIONS THAT NEED TO BE MORE VISIBLE, TRANSPARENT TO A WIDER RANGE OF STAKEHOLDERS. THIRD, THE GNSO STRUCTURES NEED TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE, ADAPTABLE, ABLE TO RESPOND MORE DIRECTLY TO CHANGING STAKEHOLDER NEEDS IN THE INTERNET COMMUNITY.

AND THE FOURTH CATEGORY IS CHANGES IN COUNCIL'S OPERATIONS THAT ARE NEEDED TO ENHANCE ITS ABILITY TO GENUINELY REACH CONSENSUS ON ITS POLICY DEVELOPMENT POSITIONS.

SO THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROVING THE GNSO IMPROVEMENT PROCESS FOR THE BOARD'S AGREEMENT.

SO THE GNSO IMPROVEMENT PROCESS IS NOT ONLY A PROCESS THAT WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LSE REPORT BUT ALSO THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE ISSUED IN THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE GNSO COUNCIL, AS WELL AS INPUT FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS AND THE BROADER ICANN COMMUNITY.

THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IS CONSIDERING APPROACHES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND ADOPTION OF SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GNSO'S POLICY ACTIVITIES, STRUCTURE, OPERATIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS. IT'S IN DIALOGUE WITH THE GNSO COUNCIL, CONSTITUENCY MEMBERS, AND THE BROADER COMMUNITY, AND WILL CONTINUE ITS DELIBERATIONS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE BEST APPROACH TO IMPLEMENT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GNSO.

I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DENISE. WE WILL COME TO Q&A IN A FEW MOMENTS AFTER WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE REPORTS.

I'D LIKE TO ASK TINA DAM NOW TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE IDN PROCESS, INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES. LOTS HAS BEEN GOING ON IN THIS AREA FOR THE LAST SEVERAL MEETINGS, AND ALSO IN BETWEEN WITH SOME TESTING TO DETERMINE THE EFFECTS OF PLACING TOP-LEVEL INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAINS IN THE ROOT ZONE FILE.

TINA.

>>TINA DAM: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VINT. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT GOING ON THIS WEEK, AND ALSO SINCE THE LAST MEETING WHEN IT COMES TO IDNS. I'M GOING TO DO THIS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY THAN I USUALLY DO, SO WE'LL SEE HOW IT GOES.

FIRST OF ALL, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOW DOMAIN NAMES ARE NOT GENERALLY LANGUAGE EXPRESSIONS. AND WHAT THAT BASICALLY MEANS IS THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE EVERY WORD AND EVERY LANGUAGE IN A DOMAIN NAME. THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE. DOMAIN NAMES WERE NOT -- AND THE DNS WAS NOT DEVELOPED FOR THAT, AND IT WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE.

YET WE DO HAVE TO TRY TO GET AS MANY CHARACTERS USABLE IN DOMAIN NAMES AS POSSIBLE.

WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOW IDNS CHANGES THE WAY THAT DOMAIN NAMES HAVE BEEN VIEWED HISTORICALLY. THERE IS THE DISPLAYED NAME, AND THEN THERE IS THE STORED NAME. AND THE DISPLAYED NAME IS THE UNICODE VERSION YOU SEE UP THERE, AND THE STORED NAME IS THE XN DASH DASH VERSION OF THAT.

THE REASON FOR IT IS THAT THE DNS CAN ONLY HANDLE ASCII CHARACTERS, AND SO YOU REALLY NEED TO TAKE THOSE UNICODE CHARACTERS AND TURN THEM INTO SOMETHING THAT'S ASCII ONLY.

WE HAVE TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOW THE PROTOCOL IS REALLY WORKING AND THE FACT THAT IT IS WORKING AT THE APPLICATION LEVEL.

THAT MEANS THAT IT SITS ON THE CLIENT AND IT NEEDS TO BE BUILT INTO ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS, INCLUDING WEB BROWSERS AND SO FORTH.

THE PROTOCOL IS WHAT USING THIS PUNYCODE, THE XN DASH DASH VERSION OF THE NAME.

THAT HAS SOME CONSEQUENCES AROUND INCREASED USER CONFUSION, WHEN THE XN DASH DASH VERSION IS DISPLAYED TO THE END USER.

SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T MEAN -- THE XN DASH DASH VERSION DOESN'T HAVE ANY MEANING, AND THAT'S LIKE YOU SEE THE EXAMPLE UP THERE. OTHER TIMES, IT WILL HAVE THE UNFORTUNATE EFFECT OF DISPLAYING SOMETHING THAT COULD BE A TRADEMARK OR HAS SOME OTHER MEANING THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO WHAT WAS REALLY REGISTERED IN THE UNICODE VERSION OF THAT NAME.

WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE FACT THAT IDNS ARE NOT THE SAME THING AS INTERNATIONALIZING THE INTERNET. THERE IS MANY OTHER THINGS THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, BUT SURELY WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IDNS ARE IMPLEMENTED IN THE RIGHT -- AND DEVELOPED IN THE RIGHT WAY.

BUT IT'S A SMALL PART OF THE MAIN GOAL, AND THE MAIN GOAL BEING THAT THE INTERNET IS EQUALLY ACCESSIBLE FROM ALL LANGUAGES AND ALL SCRIPTS, SO THAT IT WILL MEET THE GEOGRAPHIC EXPANSION OF THE USE OF THE INTERNET.

THERE ARE SOME TECHNICAL TESTS UNDERWAY TO HELP OUT AND MAKE SURE THAT THESE THINGS ARE ACTUALLY WORKING THE RIGHT WAY.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DNS CAN HANDLE THESE IDNS, AND THERE IS SOME TEST DESIGN AND SOME MORE MATERIAL THAT WAS POSTED THIS WEEK FOR COMMENT.

THERE ARE SOME IDNA PROTOCOL REVISIONS UNDERWAY, AND THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THE FIRST VERSION OF THE PROTOCOL WAS BASED ON UNICODE 3.2, AND OF COURSE IT'S NOT VERY GOOD TO HAVE A PROTOCOL THAT IS DEPENDENT ON BEING UPGRADED EVERY TIME THERE IS A NEW VERSION OF UNICODE.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT JUST WORKS, YOU KNOW, NO MATTER WHAT CHARACTERS ARE ADDED TO UNICODE. AND WE NEED A PROCESS FOR THAT.

AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S LOOKING AT SOLVING SOME ISSUES RELATED TO WHAT CHARACTERS ARE BEING USED AND SOME OF THE FUNCTIONALITY IN BIDIRECTIONAL SCRIPTS.

THE IDN GUIDELINES CONTINUE TO BE REVISED. THAT SOLVES SOME OF THE USER CONFUSION THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT.

IT DOESN'T SOLVE ALL OF IT.

THE REST WILL BE DONE AT REGISTRY LEVEL, AND SOME REGISTRIES OBVIOUSLY ALREADY HAVE POLICIES IMPLEMENTED THAT HELP WITH THIS.

AND THEN WE DO HAVE TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT AT SOME LEVEL OF CONFUSION WILL ALWAYS REMAIN THERE. JUST LIKE BEFORE, BEFORE WE HAD IDNS, THE DIGIT 1 AND THE LETTER "L" ARE CONFUSABLE, SIMILAR, AND THERE WILL BE THINGS LIKE THAT WITH IDNS AS WELL.

THEN THERE IS A LOT OF IDN POLICY WORK UNDERWAY, AND IT'S GOING ON SEPARATELY WITHIN THE CCNSO, THE GNSO, AND THE GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND THERE IS A WIDE VARIETY OF JOINT WORK BEING FORMED ACROSS THE DIFFERENT IDN WORKING GROUPS WITHIN THESE THREE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMITTEES.

ALL OF THIS WORK IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO CONTINUE FORWARD IN PARALLEL.

THE TECHNICAL SIDE AND THE POLICY SIDE.

THERE IS SOME LEVEL OF OVERLAPPING THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO MANAGE, BUT THE GROUPS ARE WORKING, I THINK, FAIRLY WELL TOGETHER AT THIS POINT IN TIME, AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT CONTINUES HAPPENING.

AND THAT IS MY PRESENTATION FOR TODAY. I HAVE PUT IN A COUPLE OF LINKS, AND THE SLIDES, OBVIOUSLY, AS USUAL, WILL BE POSTED ONLINE SO THAT THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED CAN GET AN EASY GRASP OF SOME OF THE READING MATERIAL THAT RELATES TO ALL OF THIS WORK THAT'S GOING ON.

THANKS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TINA. I CAN SAY FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE SINCE I AM ON THE MAILING LIST FOR THE IDN TECHNICAL WORK AT THE IETF THAT THIS IS REALLY COMPLEX STUFF.

SO GETTING IT RIGHT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT FOR EVERYONE.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TINA, FOR YOUR ROLE IN MAKING THAT HAPPEN.

I'D LIKE IT CALL NOW ON STEVE CROCKER TO GIVE THE REPORT OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

>>STEVE CROCKER: LET'S SEE.

IS THIS GOING TO WORK?

NOPE.

ONE SECOND HERE.

THANK YOU.

THAT IS LOUD ENOUGH.

THANK YOU.

THIS IS THE REPORT OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND ONE OR TWO OTHER THINGS THAT ARE CLOSELY RELATED HERE.

THIS WEEK, WE HAD A PUBLIC PRESENTATION OF WORK THAT OUR COMMITTEE HAS BEEN DOING.

WE ALSO HAVE A DNSSEC WORKSHOP, WHICH IS NESTLED WITHIN THE -- A NEW PHENOMENON THIS SESSION, THIS ICANN MEETING.

THE CCTLD COMMUNITY HAS ORGANIZED A DAY-LONG TECHNICAL WORKSHOP ON DNS THAT IS RUNNING CONCURRENTLY WITH OUR ACTIVITIES HERE TODAY.

AND OUR USUAL DNSSEC WORKSHOP THAT WE HAVE BEEN RUNNING IN PAST MEETINGS IS NOW SCHEDULED -- NESTLED WITHIN THAT WORKSHOP.

AND ON THAT ACCOUNT, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO EXIT FROM HERE AFTER THE BREAK.

SO I APOLOGIZE, BUT I'LL BE AROUND FOR THE QUESTIONS, IF THERE ARE ANY.

AND ALSO, IN THE PAST FEW MEETINGS, WE HAVE COORDINATED PRESENTATIONS WITH THE NEW RSTEP PROCESS.

AND LYMAN CHAPIN PRESENTED THE RESULTS OF HIS RECENT ACTIVITIES.

AND I'LL BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE THAT HERE.

SO THOSE ARE THE SORT OF THREE MAIN THREADS.

JUST A QUICK REVIEW.

I ALWAYS ENJOY PUTTING UP THE NAMES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.

THIS IS A VOLUNTEER OPERATION OF EXPERTS WHO ARE FULLY OCCUPIED AND OVERLOADED, IN FACT, IN THEIR USUAL DAY JOBS.

THEY BRING EXPERTISE ACROSS THE FULL RANGE OF ICANN-RELATED EXPERIENCES, REGISTRY, REGISTRARS, ADDRESS REGISTRIES, SECURITY, ROOT SERVER OPERATIONS, AND SO FORTH.

SOME HAVE MULTIPLE CAPABILITIES.

SOME OF THE PEOPLE ALSO ARE MEMBERS OF SEVERAL OTHER CONSTITUENCIES.

WE HAVE SEVERAL ROOT SERVER PEOPLE, FOR EXAMPLE.

SO THIS IS THE -- THE LIST OF PEOPLE.

IT'S BEEN A REAL PRIVILEGE TO WORK WITH THEM OVER THE YEARS.

WE REFRESH THIS COMMITTEE ON AN OCCASIONAL BASIS.

WE'RE -- HOW SHOULD I PUT IT? -- UNENCUMBERED WITH A FORMAL SET OF BYLAWS.

THIS HAS NOT FELT LIKE MUCH OF A PROBLEM.

I SUPPOSE WHEN THE REVIEW COMES UP IN ABOUT A YEAR, THAT WILL GET LOOKED AT.

BUT WE MANAGED TO GO ALONG PRETTY WELL TRYING TO STAY FOCUSED ON SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES.

HERE'S A -- ANOTHER SET OF PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPORTING AND COORDINATING WITH US.

SOME ARE GUESTS.

DAVID CONRAD, THE IANA GENERAL MANAGER, SITS IN ON SOME MEETINGS.

DAVE PISCITELLO, ICANN FELLOW, HAS BEEN ON BOARD FOR A BIT MORE THAN A YEAR, I THINK.

I'VE LOST TRACK.

HAS MADE AN ENORMOUS DIFFERENCE BY PROVIDING CONTINUITY AND CAPABILITY OF WRITING REPORTS AND GETTING THEM OUT AFTER WE'VE HAD DELIBERATIONS.

AND A NUMBER OF OTHERS.

OUR ROLE IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY AND STABILITY EXPERTISE.

WE PROVIDE, AS WE'RE CHARTERED, ADVICE TO THE BOARD, BUT ALSO ADVICE TO THE STAFF, TO THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, AND, MOST IMPORTANTLY FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, TO THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.

WE OPERATE WITH A FAIR AMOUNT OF AUTONOMY.

WE'RE VIEWED IN SOME QUARTERS AS AN ORGAN OF ICANN.

BUT FROM OUR OWN POINT OF VIEW, WE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT ON VIRTUALLY ANYTHING, SORT OF NO MATTER WHERE THE CHIPS FALL.

ONE VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THE WAY WE'RE ORGANIZED IS THAT WE HAVE NO PARTICULAR AUTHORITY EXCEPT THE CREDIBILITY THAT WE BRING TO THE PROCESS.

WE GIVE ADVICE.

IT'S UP TO OTHERS TO ACCEPT OR NOT TO ACCEPT THAT ADVICE OR TO INTERPRET IT FOR THEIR PURPOSE.

AND I THINK THAT'S AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THE WAY THAT WE'RE STRUCTURED.

USUALLY, OUR REPORTS ARE RELATED TO PARTICULAR INCIDENTS OR ISSUES, AND THEN STRUCTURED WITH FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

WE ALSO TRY, AS BEST WE CAN, WHEN WE WRITE THESE REPORTS TO USE IT AS A BIT OF AN OPPORTUNITY FOR EDUCATION FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LESS FAMILIAR WITH THE TECHNICAL DETAILS OF THE PARTICULAR TOPIC AND EXPAND THE UNDERSTANDING.

WE TAKE SECURITY AND STABILITY IN THE -- IN A BROAD SENSE TO INCLUDE PROTECTION OF REGISTRANTS AND USERS AND END SYSTEMS TO THE EXTENT THAT IT'S APPLICABLE, WITHOUT GOING TOO FAR AFIELD, BUT NOT JUST TO THE NARROW TECHNICAL OPERATION OF THE MACHINES THEMSELVES, SO TO SPEAK.

I MENTIONED RSTEP.

THIS IS THE REGISTRY SERVICES TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL.

THIS WAS SET UP TO PROVIDE AN ORGANIZED AND RELATIVELY QUICK RESPONSE TO CHANGES, REQUESTS BY REGISTRIES TO ADD OR CHANGE THEIR SERVICES WHERE STAFF DETERMINES THAT THERE IS A POSSIBLE SECURITY OR STABILITY CONSIDERATION.

THIS IS AN INDEPENDENT OPERATION FROM SSAC, BUT BECAUSE THE TOPIC AREAS OVERLAP, WE MAINTAIN FAIRLY CLOSE CONTACT.

AND, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE ADOPTED AS AN INFORMAL PRACTICE THAT -- TO ALLOCATE SOME TIME WITHIN OUR PUBLIC MEETINGS SO THAT LYMAN CAN PRESENT HIS RESULTS.

AND THIS IS, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, WORKING OUT QUITE SMOOTHLY.

THE WORK THAT WE PRESENTED THIS WEEK IS ON TWO PARTICULAR MATTERS, A STUDY ON WHOIS PRIVACY, AND A STUDY OF ROOT SERVER I.P. ADDRESSES.

I'LL EXPLAIN ABOUT THESE IN A MINUTE.

ON THE WHOIS PRIVACY, DAVE PISCITELLO DID A VERY NICE PIECE OF WORK TRACKING DOWN -- GETTING SOME DATABASES OF -- TRYING TO SIMULATE WHAT TARGETED PRIVACY VIOLATIONS MIGHT LOOK LIKE AND HOW EFFECTIVE THEY WOULD BE AND HOW THEY COMPARE TO OTHER MODES OF FINDING OUT INFORMATION ABOUT PEOPLE.

PART OF THE DIALOGUE IN THE WHOIS DEBATES ABOUT HOW MUCH ACCESS THERE SHOULD BE IS THAT SOMETIMES THERE ARE INCIDENTS OF STALKING OR HARASSMENT, AND IT'S A QUESTION OF HOW IMPORTANT ALL OF THAT IS IN THE OVERALL SCHEME OF THINGS.

WE DON'T HAVE AN OPINION, A STRONG OPINION, ABOUT IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

BUT WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO GET AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT OF VERIFIABLE DATA.

THE -- THE INFORMATION BASED UPON DAVE'S WORK IS THAT, TAKING A CERTAIN SLICE OF ENTRIES AND TRACKING THEM DOWN, TRYING TO FIND OUT IF YOU COULD ACTUALLY FIND HOME ADDRESSES AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR INDIVIDUALS LISTED IN THE WHOIS DATABASE, THAT ABOUT ONE IN SEVEN ENTRIES CONTAINED INFORMATION SUFFICIENT TO IDENTIFY PEOPLE AT THAT LEVEL.

THIS COMPARES WITH CONSIDERABLY MORE INFORMATION AVAILABLE THROUGH OTHER COMMON SOURCES.

AS I SAY, WE DON'T HAVE A STRONG CONCLUSION AS TO WHAT THE IMPACT OF THAT IS.

BUT IT'S USEFUL TO BRING THAT DATA TO LIGHT.

THIS REPORT HAS ALSO BEEN GIVEN TO -- IN THE WHOIS TASK FORCES AND IN VARIOUS OTHER FORUMS AND WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE PUBLICLY.

IN QUITE A DIFFERENT AREA, WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AHEAD AT THE QUESTION OF A COMPLETELY SELF-SUFFICIENT IPV6 INTERNET.

THAT IS, CAN YOU HAVE 100% IPV6 COMPONENTS, END SYSTEMS, SERVERS, TRANSPORT, EVERYTHING.

AND, OF COURSE, WITHIN THAT, ONE NEEDS IPV6 DNS SERVICE.

AND WITHIN IPV6 DNS SERVICE, THE QUESTION FOCUS IS EVENTUALLY TO, IS THE ROOT AVAILABLE VIA IPV6, AND DOES -- AND DO YOU -- WHEN YOU ASK FOR ADDRESSES, DO YOU GET BACK IPV6 ADDRESSES? IT TURNS OUT THAT THE ROOT SERVERS, THE 13 ROOT SERVERS, ARE PARTWAY DOWN THAT PATH, AND FIVE OF THEM TO DATE AND THE REST RELATIVELY SOON, ARE IN FACT ACCESSIBLE OVER IPV6 TRANSPORT.

HOWEVER, THE ADDRESSES, THEIR IPV6 ADDRESSES, ARE NOT YET LISTED IN THE ROOT ZONE, AND, IN FACT, THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS SINCE THE ADDRESSES WERE AVAILABLE AND REQUESTS HAVE GONE INTO IANA.

THE -- THERE ARE SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES INVOLVED.

HISTORICALLY, PACKET SIZES HAVE BEEN LIMITED TO 512 BYTES.

THE LIST OF ROOT SERVERS AND THEIR ADDRESSES, WHICH IS WIDELY UNDERSTOOD TO BE LIMITED AT 13, THAT NUMBER, 13, IS RELATED TO THE SIZE OF THE PACKET THAT LISTS THEM ALL.

SO ADDING IPV6 ADDRESSES, WHICH ARE CONSIDERABLY LONGER THAN IPV4 ADDRESSES, BREAKS THAT LIMIT QUITE SUBSTANTIALLY.

SO THAT'S SORT OF THE BEGINNING OF A THOUGHT PROCESS.

UPON CLOSER EXAMINATION, IN ADDITION TO THE PACKET SIZE, THERE'S ALSO A QUESTION OF WHETHER OLD SOFTWARE MIGHT BREAK IF IT EVER SEES IPV6 ADDRESSES, AND A MORE RECENTLY RECOGNIZED CONCERN THAT EVEN IF THE REQUESTER, THE LAPTOP COMPUTER OR THE END SYSTEMS, REQUEST IPV6 ADDRESSES AND ARE ABLE TO TAKE VERY LONG PACKETS THAT CONTAIN THEM, AND EVEN IF THE NAME SERVERS CAN SEND THOSE BACK, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT FIREWALLS AND OTHER MIDDLEWARE SITTING IN THERE THAT ARE ATTEMPTING TO BE EXTREMELY CLEVER AND BRIGHT MAY KNOW TOO MUCH BUT NOT CURRENT INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT A DNS RESPONSE LOOKS LIKE AND FILTER OUT THESE MORE MODERN RESPONSES.

THE NIGHTMARE SCENARIO IS THAT WE TURN ON IPV6 RESPONSES FROM THE ROOT AND A NUMBER OF FIREWALLS THROUGHOUT THE NETWORK FILTER THOSE OUT, MANY THINGS BREAK, AND IT IS NOT THE FAULT -- IT'S THE FAULT PRIMARILY OF MISCONFIGURED FIREWALLS, BUT ICANN GETS BLAMED, SINCE THAT'S THE LAST THING THAT GOT CHANGED.

SO THERE'S A DESIRE TO BE EXTREMELY CAREFUL IN THIS PROCESS.

THIS PIECE OF WORK IS NOTABLE FROM A PROCESS POINT OF VIEW IN THAT WE'VE CARRIED IT OUT JOINTLY WITH THE ROOT SERVER ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

A LITTLE WHILE LATER TODAY, BILL MANNING, SUBSTITUTING FOR SUZANNE WOOLF, WILL PRESENT THE RSSAC REPORT.

AND I THINK HE'LL MENTION THIS FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE AS WELL.

THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT A SAFE COURSE IS EMERGING, WE'VE BEEN CAREFUL ABOUT THIS.

I HOPED TO HAVE THIS OUT BY TODAY, BUT IT WILL TAKE A WHILE LONGER WHILE WE TRACK THIS AND HAVE ALL THE PIECES.

IT WILL BE OUT CERTAINLY BY LISBON.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BUT NOT EXTREMELY URGENT MATTER IN THE SENSE THAT THERE'S NOTHING BROKEN RIGHT NOW OR STRONGLY DEPENDENT UPON IT, BUT IT WILL -- IT'S AN IMPORTANT PIECE TO GET IN PLACE FOR THE FUTURE.

LET ME MENTION, ON -- LET ME SWITCH OVER TO RSTEP AND MENTION ON LYMAN'S BEHALF, IS LYMAN HERE?

OKAY.

WELL, THEN I'M SAFE HERE.

GOOD.

-- THAT THE -- THE BASIC CYCLE IS THAT WHEN AN ISSUE IS RAISED AND DETERMINED TO REQUIRE RSTEP ATTENTION, A PANEL OF FIVE EXPERTS IS ASSEMBLED OUT OF A STANDING POOL SET FORTH WITH A VERY WELL-DEFINED -- WELL-FRAMED QUESTION AND A 45-DAY CLOCK.

TWO OF THESE PROCESSES HAVE NOW RUN TO COMPLETION.

ONE WAS A REQUEST TO HAVE WILDCARDS IN DOT TRAVEL, AND THE OTHER IS A REQUEST FOR TWO-LETTER SECOND-LEVEL NAMES WITHIN THE DOT NAME.

AND AS THE ARROWS ON THE SLIDE INDICATE, THE SHORT ANSWERS ARE, A RECOMMENDATION AGAINST ON THE FIRST ONE, AND A RECOMMENDATION IN FAVOR ON THE SECOND ONE, WITH CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF ANALYSIS AND DETAILS TRACKING DOWN DIFFERENT ASPECTS AND DIFFERENT NUANCES IN THESE AREAS, NOT AT ALL SUPERFICIAL.

AND I MUST SAY -- I READ THE FIRST REPORT.

I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO READ THE SECOND ONE.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU FROM READING THE FIRST REPORT -- AND AS MANY OF YOU WILL KNOW, I HAVE A QUITE STRONG UNDERSTANDING OF THOSE ISSUES, SO I READ IT AVIDLY, WITH A LOT OF INTEREST IN HOW THE MATTER WOULD BE TREATED -- THE QUALITY OF THE WRITING IS QUITE GOOD, AND I THOUGHT IT WAS A FAIR AND THOROUGH AND VERY WELL WRITTEN REPORT.

AND I EXPECT EXACTLY THE SAME OUT OF THE SECOND REPORT.

THE DNSSEC WORKSHOP, DNSSEC IS LOGICALLY A SUBJECT THAT FALLS DIRECTLY WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SSAC.

AND SOME YEARS AGO, IT WAS ONE OF OUR PRIMARY ACTIVITIES.

IT BECAME SO DOMINANT THAT IT ACTUALLY GOT SPLIT OFF AND RUN ALONG A PARALLEL TRACK.

BUT IN TERMS OF WHERE IT FITS WITHIN THE ICANN AMBIT AND WITH RESPECT TO TREATMENT WITHIN ORGANIZATIONS HERE, IT'S A NATURAL PART OF SSAC'S ACTIVITY.

THE WORKSHOP THAT'S TAKING PLACE SHORTLY ACROSS THE HALL, NESTLED WITHIN THIS CCTLD DNS WORKSHOP, WE'RE GOING TO BE PRESENTING ON TOOLS AND ON REGISTRY EXPERIENCE.

AND THINGS ARE MOVING ALONG.

SWEDEN HAS AN A SIGNED ZONE, PUERTO RICO HAS A SIGNED ZONE.

I BELIEVE MEXICO HAS PARTS UP AND RUNNING.

BRAZIL IS GOING TO BE OPERATIONAL WITH AT LEAST PART OF ITS ZONE OPERATIONALLY SIGNED NEXT MONTH.

A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, WE WERE IN A MEETING AT MICROSOFT, AND THEY MADE A FORMAL ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THEY WILL BE INCLUDING DNSSEC SUPPORT IN UPCOMING PRODUCTS AND COMMITTED TO A PARTICULAR RELEASE CYCLE.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF MOVING THINGS ALONG. SO THAT'S THE BASIC REPORT.

THERE'S MORE ACTIVITY SCHEDULED FOR THE FUTURE.

AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, STEVE.

ALL OF THOSE TOPICS ARE OF CONSIDERABLE INTEREST TO -- CERTAINLY TO ICANN'S MISSION.

SO I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU AND YOUR COMMITTEE HAVE UNDERTAKEN.

WE HAVE SOME TIME NOW TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT ALL THE REPORTS THAT HAVE JUST BEEN GIVEN OR THE REPORTS WHICH HAVE BEEN POSTED PREVIOUS TO THIS MEETING, FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST COMMITTEE, THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE, AND THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE, AND SO ON.

IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS THAT WANT TO COME FROM THE ONLINE COMMUNITY THAT IS PARTICIPATING TODAY, THOSE QUESTIONS CAN BE SENT AS E-MAIL TO SAO PAULO, THAT'S SAOPAULO@ICANN.ORG.

AND THEY'LL BE RELAYED TO ME, AND I'LL TRY TO INJECT THEM INTO THE CONVERSATION AT THE APPROPRIATE TIMES.

THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES MIKE PALAGE, FORMER BOARD MEMBER, AS THE FIRST PERSON TO SPEAK.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

I'D LIKE TO START OFF BY THANKING MANY OF THE PRESENTERS TODAY WHO WERE ABLE TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATIONS ONLINE.

AFTER RETURNING FROM THE HOST EVENT LAST NIGHT, I WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO GO THROUGH MOST OF THE PRESENTATIONS.

I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK PARTICULARLY SUSAN YESTERDAY FOR YOUR EVENT ON IMPROVING FUTURE MEETINGS.

I THINK THESE ARE STEPS THAT ARE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND HOPEFULLY WILL CONTINUE.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, THE FIRST TO GEORGE, IF YOU COULD.

ONE OF YOUR SLIDES TALKED ABOUT ELIMINATING DISPROPORTIONATE POWER WHEN SITTING CONSTITUENCY MEMBERS SERVE ON THE NOMCOM.

AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THAT PARTICULAR ELEMENT, BECAUSE I THINK THIS GOES BACK TO A QUESTION THAT WAS RAISED LAST YEAR DURING THE ANNUAL MEETING BY AMADEU ABRIL CONCERNING COUNCIL MEMBERS SITTING ON A NOMINATING COMMITTEE AND SELECTING, IF YOU WILL, THEIR PEERS.

>>GEORGE SADOWSKY: WHEN SOMEBODY IS ON A COUNCIL, SUCH AS THE GNSO COUNCIL, AND ALSO ON THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, THEY ARE ABLE TO MAKE VOTING DECISIONS REGARDING PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING SENT TO THE BOARD.

THAT STRIKES ME AS A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF INFLUENCE RELATIVE TO SOMEONE WHO IS NOT ON A COUNCIL.

THAT'S ALL.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

AND I FULLY SUPPORT THAT AS WELL, MUCH AS AMADEU HAD RAISED THAT POINT LAST YEAR.

THE --

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THIS IS -- SORRY MIKE -- THIS IS AN EXCESS OF POWER THAT WE THOUGHT SHOULD COME THIS WAY WHEN WE DESIGNED THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE PROCESS.

SO I AGREE WITH YOU.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: AND, AGAIN, THIS ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THE ORIGINAL NOMINATING COMMITTEE, THE ORIGINAL DRAFT BACK IN 2003 ACTUALLY OPPOSED HAVING SITTING BOARD MEMBERS, IF YOU WILL, SELECT THEIR OWN PEERS.

AND THE BOARD WAS PROHIBITED FROM PARTICIPATING.

SO, AGAIN, I THINK WHAT GEORGE RAISES, EQUALITY AMONG THE BOARD AND THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, AND A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

THE ONE -- SECOND FOLLOW-UP QUESTION, IF I MAY, HAS TO DO WITH THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.

I WAS LOOKING AT THE WEB SITE THAT WAS RECENTLY UPDATED, AND, UNFORTUNATELY, SOME OF THE MINUTES FROM THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE FROM PAST HAVE SORT OF DISAPPEARED, AND WHAT I WAS HOPING COULD HAPPEN WITH SOME OF THE BOARD COMMITTEES IS MAKING THOSE MINUTES AVAILABLE ONLINE.

AND THE REASON THAT I THINK THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT IS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PRESENTATION BY DENISE MICHEL WHICH TALKS ABOUT THE WORK IN THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE BEGINNING TO, IF YOU WILL, DWELL DOWN INTO THE EVALUATIONS OF ALL THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, WE ARE -- THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO BE UNDERTAKING SOME VERY SERIOUS WORK LOOKING AT THE FUNDAMENTAL STRUCTURE OF ICANN.

AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE DEALING WITH THESE ISSUES ARE MADE AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SEE, BECAUSE I WOULD NOT WANT US TO, IF YOU WILL, START TOWARDS AN ICANN 3.0 THAT IS NOT DONE IN AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT MANNER.

SO, AGAIN, THAT'S JUST A COMMENT I'D LIKE TO RAISE.

THE THIRD POINT HAS TO DO WITH TERM LIMITS.

THIS WAS A TOPIC THAT WAS RAISED BY THE LSE REPORT IN CONNECTION WITH THE GNSO.

AND IN CONNECTION WITH THE BOARD REVIEW THAT IS SUPPOSED TO START NEXT YEAR, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE BOARD TO CONSIDER LOOKING AT RE-EVALUATING ITS OWN TERM LIMITS.

AND THE REASON I RAISE THIS QUESTION OR RAISE THIS ISSUE IS IN CONNECTION WITH THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE TO DATE, THERE HAVE ONLY BEEN TWO NOMINATING COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN ELECTED FOR A SECOND TERM.

THAT WAS VINT CERF AND NJERI RIONGE.

HOWEVER, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, THEY GENERALLY HAVE A TREND OF, IF YOU WILL, RE-ELECTING THE SAME PEOPLE.

I MYSELF WAS ELECTED BUT DECIDED TO STEP DOWN.

ALEX, YOU WERE ELECTED MANY TIMES.

PETER AND DEMI WERE RE-ELECTED.

SO I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT FROM A BOARD DYNAMIC STANDPOINT IS, YOU WANT TO SORT OF HAVE SOME EQUALITY.

IF THERE ARE CERTAIN CLASSES OF DIRECTORS THAT TEND TO GET RE-ELECTED TWO OR THREE TIMES, WHEREAS THE OTHER SET OF DIRECTORS ONLY GET ELECTED ONE TIME, THAT MAY CREATE A POTENTIAL IMBALANCE.

SO PERHAPS EVALUATING A REEVALUATION OF TWO TERM LIMITS INSTEAD OF THE CURRENT THREE MAY BE SOMETHING THAT'S WORTHWHILE.

AND I WILL POINT OUT THAT, IN FACT, THE GAC HAS A TWO-TERM LIMIT ON ITS CHAIR.

THE FINAL POINT HAS TO DO WITH THE GNSO REVIEW.

I THINK THE LSE REPORT HAS PUT FORTH A NUMBER OF POSITIVE RECOMMENDATIONS, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS, WE COULD POSSIBLY LOOK AT, IF YOU WILL, AN OUTSIDE EVALUATOR.

A NUMBER OF THE POINTS GEORGE RAISED ABOUT PEOPLE BEING INVOLVED IN THEIR OWN EVALUATION, ONE OF THE SLIDES TALKED ABOUT THE BOARD DEALING WITH COUNCIL.

OBVIOUSLY, THERE NEEDS TO BE A COORDINATION WITH COUNCIL IN THE IMPLEMENTATION.

BUT I THINK IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN OUTSIDE, INDEPENDENT ENTITY MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS TO, IF YOU WILL, PROVIDE INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, MIKE.

THE SPECIFIC ISSUE ABOUT THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MINUTES WILL BE NOTED AND WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT.

NEXT QUESTION.

>> BRENTON THOMAS: MY NAME IS BRENTON THOMAS, I'M THE NEW AUSTRALIAN REPRESENTATIVE ON GAC.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATIONS.

>> MIKE.

>> BRENTON THOMAS: A BIT CLOSER?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATIONS.

I FIND THEM A WELCOME RELIEF AFTER SOME OF THE GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE -- GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN.

THEY'RE SHORT AND SHARP AND TO THE POINT.

AND THAT'S A GREAT RELIEF.

MY QUESTION GOES TO STEVE, AND IT RELATES TO THE ISSUE OF RESEARCH INTO MISUSE OF WHOIS DATA.

I WAS VERY INTERESTED TO HEAR THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME.

I'M WONDERING, THOUGH, WHETHER THERE'S AN INTENTION TO DO SOME MORE RESEARCH INTO THIS AREA.

CLEARLY, IT'S AN ISSUE OF CONCERN TO A NUMBER OF PEOPLE AND A GROWING ISSUE OF CONCERN.

AND, IN PARTICULAR, I WONDER IF WE'RE GOING TO START LOOKING AT RESEARCH INTO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF WHOIS USERS, SUCH AS PEOPLE THAT ARE INDIVIDUALS SIGNING UP AND REGISTERING FOR WHOIS-TYPE SERVICES, OR WHETHER WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO THEN START LOOKING AT QUESTIONS OF COMMERCIAL USERS AND STARTING TO PERHAPS DISENTANGLE THE PRIVACY INTERESTS BETWEEN AN INDIVIDUAL WHO MIGHT REGISTER AND A COMMERCIAL USER THAT MIGHT REGISTER.

THANKS.

>>STEVE CROCKER: LET ME SEE IF I CAN TRY TO GIVE A SHORT ANSWER.

AT FIRST, I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO ASK FOR THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHO IS USING THE DATA, WHETHER A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL OR GOVERNMENT OR SOME COMMERCIAL FIRM WAS LOOKING IT UP.

BUT I TAKE IT THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE -- YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHO THE USER IS AND HOW THEY REGISTER?

>> BRENTON THOMAS: YES, YES.

>>STEVE CROCKER: FRANKLY, WE HAVE NOT BEEN TRYING TO TAKE THE LEAD ON THESE KINDS OF THINGS.

AS, YOU KNOW, GOES -- IS OBVIOUS TO EVERYBODY, WHOIS HAS BEEN ATTRACTING A HUGE AMOUNT OF ATTENTION.

THERE'S A WHOIS TASK FORCE.

WE'VE BEEN WATCHING THE DIALOGUE AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THE PARTS THAT WE FEEL THAT WE HAVE SOME EXPERTISE IN, THE TECHNICAL ASPECTS, AND UNDERSTANDING HOW THE PARTS FIT TOGETHER, ARE BEING UNDERSTOOD AND TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WITHIN THE DIALOGUE AND NOT TRYING TO GET IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC-POLICY ASPECTS OF THIS, SIMPLY WANT THAT THE PUBLIC-POLICY DISCUSSIONS ARE GROUNDED AND FRAMED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF APPROPRIATELY SOUND TECHNICAL BASIS.

SO -- AND WE JUST, FRANKLY, HAVEN'T DUG VERY FAR INTO THAT.

I'LL JUST MAKE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT COMMENT, IN THIS AREA AND SOME OTHER AREAS, IT'S CERTAINLY BEEN MY FEELING THAT SOME ORGANIZED RESEARCH, DONE CAREFULLY, WOULD BE MATERIALLY HELPFUL AND CUT DOWN A LOT OF THE BACK AND FORTH AND NOISE THAT TAKES PLACE.

THAT'S A SUBJECT FOR A SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT KIND OF DISCUSSION, PROBABLY REQUIRES SOME LUBRICATION AT THE BAR.

>> BRENTON THOMAS: JUST ONE COMMENT ON THAT.

I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A VERY GOOD IDEA, LUBRICATION AT THE BAR WOULD HELP A LOT.

BUT I THINK GETTING A BASIC FACT BASE ABOUT WHAT THE TYPES OF MISUSE IS WILL GREATLY INFORM BOTH THE PUBLIC-POLICY CONSIDERATIONS, BUT THEN, IN SEQUENCE, THE TECHNICAL ISSUES THAT MIGHT BE ASSOCIATED WITH SOME SORT OF SENSIBLE RESPONSE.

>>STEVE CROCKER: ONE OF THE THOUGHTS THAT COMES OUT AFTER A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF LUBRICATION IS THAT THE -- THE FAINT CONCERN THAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE MAY NOT ACTUALLY WANT ANY FACTS TO INTRUDE INTO THIS, IT'S MUCH MORE FUN WITHOUT THAT.

[ LAUGHTER ]

[ APPLAUSE ]

>>VINT CERF: LET ME -- THANK YOU, STEVE.

WE NEEDED A LITTLE HUMOR IN THE MORNING.

JUST ONE OBSERVATION.

THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS PROBABLY NOT THE PRIMARY PLACE WHERE ONE WOULD WANT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU RAISED.

SO IT'S GOOD THAT THIS IS PART OF THE GENERAL RECORD, BECAUSE THERE MAY BE OTHER PLACES THAT ARE DOING RESEARCH IN THE AREA THAT WOULD BE RELEVANT.

SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.

VITTORIO.

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: THANK YOU.

I'M VITTORIO BERTOLA FROM THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

AND I AM ACTUALLY COMMENTING ON THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

EVEN IF I THINK I HAVE A BROADER COMMENT, WHICH PERTAINS TO DIVERSITY.

IF YOU HAVE A LOOK AT THE COMPOSITION OF THE NEW BOARD IN TERMS OF GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE WILL BE FIVE PEOPLE FROM NORTH AMERICA, FOUR FROM ASIA-PACIFIC, OF WHICH TWO ARE FROM AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND, FOUR FROM LATIN AMERICA, AND ONLY ONE FROM EUROPE AND ONE FROM AFRICA. AND THIS IS NOT THE ONLY CASE.

IF YOU GO DOWN, I MEAN, DEEPER INTO THE ORGANIZATION TO LOOK AT DIVERSITY, IN GENERAL, UNDER DIFFERENT CRITERIA, IT WILL BE INTERESTING, ACTUALLY, TO HAVE DATA ON -- IN LOOKING BACK AT SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, ADVISORY COMMITTEES, TASK FORCES, COMMITTEES, I MEAN, HOW MANY OF THEM WERE CHAIRED BY A NON-NATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLE, HOW MUCH WERE CHAIRED BY WOMEN, HOW MUCH WERE CHAIRED BY NON-WHITE PEOPLE.

OF COURSE, THIS IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE.

SO I -- I MEAN, IF YOU GO TO THE -- FOR EXAMPLE, TO UNITED NATIONS MEETINGS, THEY USUALLY ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT.

SO THEY HAVE A LOT OF DIVERSITY, BUT SOMETIMES YOU GET PEOPLE DOING TASKS ONLY BECAUSE THEY MEET THE DIVERSITY CRITERIA BUT THEY'RE NOT REALLY FIT FOR THAT.

SO, ACTUALLY, I DON'T WANT TO GET TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROBLEM.

BUT I THINK THERE MIGHT BE ANOTHER WAY.

AND WE SHOULD HAVE TO EXPLORE HOW TO SOLVE THEM.

UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK THAT THE REASON WHY THIS IS STILL HAPPENING IS THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH DIVERSITY IN THE PARTICIPANTS TO ICANN MEETINGS.

SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE A GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM WHICH YOU HAVE TO DRAW THAT IS DIVERSE ENOUGH, THEN, OF COURSE, YOU'RE NOT GETTING DIVERSITY IN THE SELECTIONS.

BUT STILL, I THINK THAT PERHAPS IT DESERVES SOME SPECIFIC -- MAYBE IT'S AN INSIDE REVIEW PROCESS OR MAYBE IT'S A SPECIFIC COMMITTEE OR TASK FORCE, BUT WE SHOULD GET MORE DATA ON THIS AND UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN MAKE SOMETHING PRACTICAL.

THERE MIGHT BE SOME PRACTICAL PROPOSALS, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU COULD RAISE FROM ONE TO TWO THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF DIRECTORS FOR EACH REGION.

I DON'T KNOW, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS, ESPECIALLY IF YOU WANT TO PLAY ON THE SAME TURF AS UNITED NATIONS AGENCIES AND SO ON.

>>VINT CERF: ALEX.

THANK YOU, VITTORIO.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: VITTORIO, YOU ARE CORRECT.

THERE IS NO DISAGREEMENT, AND I ACTUALLY HAVE SOME INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE PRESENT STATUS OF GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY, WHICH IS, INDEED, PROBLEMATIC.

AS YOU WELL KNOW, THIS COMES FROM THE COUPLED NATURE OF THE TWO PROCEDURES FOR -- THE TWO CHANNELS FOR DESIGNATIONS TO THE BOARD, AND ALSO FOR THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS. THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, FOR ALL WE HAVE SEEN, MAKES A HUGE EFFORT, AND GEORGE HAS REPORTED VISIBLY ON THAT TO ENSURE GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY IN THEIR DESIGNATIONS.

THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS DO THE SAME. SOME OF THEM HAVE A VERY STRICT ROTATION PROCEDURE SO THAT A POSITION CANNOT BE OCCUPIED TWICE, FOR EXAMPLE, BY THE SAME REGION IN IMMEDIATE SUCCESSION.

BUT OF COURSE, THE DECOUPLING MAY LEAD TO SITUATIONS LIKE THE ONE WE HAVE AT PRESENT. WE HAVE MENTIONED, FOR EXAMPLE, EUROPE APPEARS TO BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST. I ASSURE YOU THIS IS NOT AGAINST THE EUROPEAN INFLUENCE IN THE ICANN SPHERE IN GENERAL.

BUT THIS WILL OF COURSE IMPLY THAT THE ELECTIONS IN THE UPCOMING YEAR, THE MIDYEAR ELECTIONS, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS WILL HAVE TO FACE EVEN MORE RESTRICTIVE GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY CONSTRAINTS SO THAT THEY CAN COMPENSATE, AND THEN THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE WILL BE FACED WITH THAT TASK. WHEN WE DID THE DESIGN FOR THE NOMCOM AND SO FORTH THIS WAS ONE CONSIDERATION, BUT IT WAS NOT ENSURED YOU WILL GET COMPLETE GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY IN SHORT PERIODS.

AND I HOPE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO GO AND FIX THE BYLAWS AGAIN FROM THE BOTTOM-UP OR FROM THE TOP-DOWN, I MEAN. I MEAN THE BYLAWS, NOT THE PROCEDURE, TO GET THIS COMPLETELY FIXED.

BUT WE CAN LIVE WITH ROLLING ADJUSTMENTS AS LONG AS THE ANOMALIES DON'T BECOME TOO LARGE.

AND I HOPE THAT SATISFIES THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL.

AS YOU SAID, FITNESS FOR THE JOB, MATCHING OF COMPETENCIES FOR THE JOB HAS TO BE A PERMANENT REQUIREMENT. AND WITHIN THAT IS THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO STRIVE FOR GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY. AND THANKS FOR BRINGING THIS FROM THE AT LARGE AND THE BOTTOM-UP PART WHICH WOULD BE THE MOST CONCERNED, OF COURSE, WITH DIVERSITY.

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: AND TO BE CLEAR, I WAS NOT BLAMING ANYONE, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD FLAG THE PROBLEM.

>>VINT CERF: I DON'T THINK ANYONE MISUNDERSTOOD THE POINT, VITTORIO.

THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THE AVAILABLE POOL OF PEOPLE. AND SO FINDING WAYS TO REACH OUT TO MORE QUALIFIED PEOPLE IS CLEARLY AN IMPORTANT STEP.

LET'S SEE. CHUCK GOMES.

>>CHUCK GOMES: YEAH, SPEAKING AS AN INDIVIDUAL, I WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE LSE REPORT AND MAKE SOME SUGGESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF MOVING FORWARD.

IT SEEMS TO BE ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT WOULD BE VERY USEFUL IS TO DEVELOP A LIST OF AREAS THAT THERE'S AGREEMENT THAT NEED IMPROVEMENT IN THE GNSO. THAT CAN BE DRAWN FROM THE LSE REPORT, FROM PATRICK SHARRY'S REPORT, FROM COMMENTS THAT ARE SUBMITTED, AND FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM.

THAT LIST, THEN, ONCE THERE'S AGREEMENT, AND THAT I DON'T THINK SHOULD BE A HUGE TASK, COULD THEN BE USED AS A MEASURING STICK AS WE LOOK AT POSSIBLE IDEAS, CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE AND SO FORTH TO SEE IF THEY ARE ADDRESSING THE AREAS THAT THERE'S AGREEMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT.

SECONDLY, I THINK THAT THERE PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE A DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS, AT LEAST INITIAL COMMENTS. THERE MAY BE A NEED FOR AN ONGOING COMMENT PROCESS ON THIS. BUT I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT THAT SHOULD BE NEAR TERM, BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT'S A HUGE REPORT. IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME TO DEVELOP COMMENTS, SO I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT SHOULD BE THIS YEAR BUT I THINK SHOULD PROBABLY BE EARLY NEXT YEAR.

AND I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT MAYBE SOME DIRECTED COMMENTS WOULD BE GOOD.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE ISSUE -- THE FIRST SUGGESTION I MADE WAS THAT WE FOCUS IN ON WHERE IS THERE AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF WHAT AREA OF THE GNSO NEED TO BE IMPROVED? AND SO YOU COULD SPECIFICALLY ON THE COMMENT SITE GO OUT AND ASK THAT QUESTION WITH SPECIFIC FEEDBACK IN THAT REGARD, AND THAT COULD THEN BE USED TO GET THE PROCESS KICKED OFF.

FINALLY, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMEONE WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY TO STAY ON TOP OF THIS AND KEEP IT MOVING FROM THE BEGINNING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL AS IMPLEMENTATION OF CHANGES AS THEY GO ON.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHUCK.

ALEX HAD A COMMENT AND SUSAN AS WELL.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ALEX, FOR YIELDING. I APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL YIELD TO YOU AT SOME POINT. WE CAN KEEP BOUNCING BACK AND FORTH.

>>VINT CERF: BE CAREFUL, SUSAN. THAT'S NOW IN WRITING

[ LAUGHTER ]

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: I WILL BE VERY CAREFUL.

CHUCK, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT COMMENT.

I THINK THE LSE REPORT IS AN IMPORTANT MILESTONE IN ICANN'S HISTORY, AND I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT ON THE BOARD, AS EXPRESSED IN OUR BYLAWS, TO BE EXERT SOME LEADERSHIP IN RESPONDING TO THAT REPORT.

INDEED, THE BYLAWS REQUIRE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THE REPORT TWO MEETINGS AFTER IT HAS BEEN POSTED FOR 30 DAYS. AND I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE FACT THAT THE BOARD IS PUTTING THIS ON ITS AGENDA AND IS THINKING ABOUT IT.

BUT I THINK I'D LIKE TO PUSH YOU SLIGHTLY ON MERELY MAKING A LIST OF OUTSTANDING AREAS AND MOVING FORWARD WITH THOSE THINGS ON WHICH THERE IS IMMEDIATE AGREEMENT.

THERE MAY NOT BE AGREEMENT ON ALL ELEMENTS OF THIS REPORT, OR IT MAY NOT EVEN BE EASY TO MAKE A LIST.

I THINK THE REPORT WAS EXCELLENT IN ITS CAREFUL WORK, CAREFUL EXAMINATION OF THE GNSO. AND THE REPORTS' AUTHORS TRIED TO PRESENT A PACKAGE OF REFORMS THAT THEY MIGHT ASSIST THE GNSO IN ITS CRUCIAL CONSENSUS POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

SO I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO THE BOARD'S LEADERSHIP HERE. I THINK ALL OF US CAN AGREE THAT IF NOTHING ELSE, THE LSE REPORT SHOWED THAT THE GNSO, THIS CRUCIAL ENGINE FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT, IS SERIOUSLY BROKEN AND THAT THERE IS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT THAT WE CAN DO TO ADJUST IT. AND THAT A PLEA FOR STABILITY MAY EVEN GET IN THE WAY OF INNOVATION IN THIS AREA, THAT MAYBE DESTRUCTIVE IN THE LONG TERM TO ICANN'S CREDIBILITY AND SUCCESS.

SO I THINK THE PALAGE SUGGESTION OF AN OUTSIDE FACILITATOR IS AN INTERESTING ONE FOR INDEPENDENCE. YOUR SUGGESTION OF A LIST TO WORK ON AND PROVIDING SOME PROCESS DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD, THOSE ARE ALSO VERY GOOD SUGGESTIONS.

BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THIS ORGANIZATION'S FUTURE AND THE NEED FOR LONG TERM, FUNDAMENTAL REFORM TO MAKE SURE THIS ENGINE IS WORKING CORRECTLY.

THANKS.

>>CHUCK GOMES: YEAH, AND I HAVE NO DISAGREEMENT WITH ANYTHING YOU SAID. WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO COME TO FULL AGREEMENT ON A LIST, BUT IT'S A STARTING POINT. LET'S IDENTIFY WHAT WE WANT TO IMPROVE AND THEN LET'S MEASURE WHETHER WE'RE ACCOMPLISHING THAT WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: JUST A VERY SHORT NOTE ON THAT. I THINK WE NOW CAN SEE CLEARLY THAT THERE IS A SHARP DISAGREEMENT IN SOME QUARTERS BETWEEN WHAT THE GNSO'S ROLE IS UNDER OUR CONTRACTS WITH REGISTRIES AND REGISTRARS AND WHAT ITS ROLE IS UNDER OUR BYLAWS. AND THAT CENTRAL QUESTION NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED BY THE BOARD AS PART OF ITS EVALUATION OF THE LSE REVIEW.

>>VINT CERF: ALEX, YOU YIELDED EARLIER SO I GUESS YOU ARE STILL IN QUEUE.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I DID VERY WELL IN YIELDING. I HAVE SO LITTLE TO ADD THAT I WILL SKIP MY CHANCE.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: VINT, PETER HERE. CHUCK, I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT AS WELL AND I PARTICULARLY APPRECIATE THE SUGGESTION OF A KIND OF PROJECT MANAGER TO TAKE CARE OF THIS AND TAKE CHARGE. WE'LL BE ADDING THAT TO OUR DISCUSSION AS WELL. THANK YOU.

>>GLENN KOWACK: I AM GLENN KOWACK AND I AM WEARING MY HAT AS A MEMBER OF THE REGISTRY SERVICES TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL, THE RSTEP, AND I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A SMALL BUT I THINK IMPORTANT CORRECTION TO STEVE'S VERY NICE COMMENTS ABOUT THE RSTEP PROCESS, WHICH I SUSPECT LYMAN CHAPIN MIGHT HAVE MADE IF HE WERE HERE. AND THAT EACH RSTEP REVIEW TEAM THAT'S FORMED DOES NOT ACTUALLY MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, PER SE. IN FACT, IF YOU WILL LOOK IN THE REPORTS THAT HAVE COME OUT ON TRAVEL AND GNR, YOU WILL FIND THAT WHAT WE SAY, IN FACT, IS THAT WE EVALUATE THE PROPOSALS WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATERIAL IMPACT ON SECURITY AND STABILITY, AND THEN PROVIDE A STATEMENT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE AND TO WHAT EXTENT.

BUT WE EXPLICITLY STAY AWAY FROM ANY RECOMMENDATION, PER SE, BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY IN THE PURVIEW OF THE BOARD. SO IT'S A SMALL BUT IMPORTANT DETAIL THAT I WANT PEOPLE TO HEAR AND TO BE ESPECIALLY MINDFUL OF WHEN THEY READ THE REPORTS.

>>STEPHEN CROCKER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GLENN. I WILL PRACTICE, REHEARSE, AND TRY TO GET IN STEP WITH RSTEP.

>>VINT CERF: OH, THAT'S TERRIBLE.

>>STEPHEN CROCKER: IT'S EARLY.

>>VINT CERF: DR. SHAHSHAHNI.

>>SIAVASH SHAHSHAHANI: HI, I AM SIAVASH SHAHSHAHANI, I AM A MEMBER OF ALAC AND ALSO I RUN THE DOT IR CCTLD.

I AM HERE IN MY SECOND CAPACITY NOW TALKING.

I HAVE A SHORT COMMENT ABOUT ONE OF THE NOMINATIONS OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

WHEN I FIRST HEARD THAT STEVE GOLDSTEIN HAD BEEN SELECTED FOR THE BOARD, I BECAME REALLY CONCERNED BECAUSE I HAD BEEN AT THE RECEIVING END OF SOME OF HIS ACTIVITIES IN 1990S WHEN HE WAS WITH NSF AND THIS INCLUDED THE BLOCKING OF INTERNET TRAFFIC ON NSF FUNDED INFRASTRUCTURE THEN.

BUT ON MONDAY WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH STEVE, AND REMINISCED ABOUT THE PAST. AND ALTHOUGH WE STILL DIFFER ABOUT IN OUR INTERPRETATION OF WHAT HAPPENED, I AM HAPPY TO REPORT THAT STEVE SEEMED TO BE ENTIRELY COMMITTED TO ICANN, TO THE FUTURE, ICANN'S FUTURE AS A REALLY INTERNATIONAL, EVEN-HANDED AND AN ENTITY THAT DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ANY COUNTRY.

I WOULD WELCOME ANY COMMENTS FROM HIM.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, DR. SHASHAHANI.

STEVE, DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND? I DON'T WANT TO FORCE ANYTHING, BUT I THINK THAT WAS A VERY KIND INVITATION.

>>STEVE GOLDSTEIN: YEAH, WELL -- AM I ON?

YES, I AM CERTAINLY GRATEFUL TO DR. SHASHAHANI FOR HIS WILLINGNESS TO DISCUSS THINGS OPENLY. I STRESS TO HIM THAT I APPROACH MY SERVICE IN ICANN IN A VERY EVEN-HANDED WAY AND THAT IT'S MY BELIEF THAT ALL THE PEOPLE WITH WHOM I SERVE OR WILL SERVE ON ICANN ALSO HAVE THAT SAME SPIRIT OF EVEN-HANDEDNESS TO NOT ONLY ALL COUNTRIES BUT ALL CULTURES.

SO AGAIN, I AM GLAD THAT WE COULD HAVE THAT CONVERSATION ON WHATEVER DAY WE HAD IT.

THE DAYS ARE ALL BLURRING FOR ME NOW.

BUT I DO APPRECIATE THE FRANKNESS AND THE OPENNESS AND YOUR VERY GRACIOUS COMMENTS NOW.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, STEVE.

WENDY.

>>WENDY SELTZER: THANK YOU. I WANT TO SECOND SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT I HAVE ALREADY HEARD ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS' REPORT, REVIEW ON THE GNSO. I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF VERY VALUABLE SUGGESTIONS IN THERE. THEY HAVE CLEARLY DONE A GREAT DEAL OF REVIEW OF THE WAY THAT THIS ORGANIZATION WORKS AND OFTEN DOESN'T WORK AND THERE'S A LOT I THINK THAT IS VALUABLE IN THE WAY OF RETHINKING CONSTITUENCY STRUCTURES THAT OFTEN PUT PEOPLE AT LOGGERHEADS RATHER THAN WORKING TOWARDS CONSENSUS AND VOTING PROCEDURES THAT OFTEN TEND TO FORCE PEOPLE BACK INTO POSITIONS RATHER THAN OUT INTO CONSIDERATION OF OPTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK TOGETHER.

THE SPECIFIC COMMENT I WANTED TO ADD IS FROM THE POSITION OF ONE WHO HAS BEEN TRYING TO WORK WITH THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR SEVERAL YEARS, AND TRYING TO WORK WITH THE GNSO AS A NONVOTING LIAISON TO TASK FORCES WHERE I HAVE VERY SPECIFICALLY FELT THAT THE VOTING PROCESS MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO ADD MEANINGFULLY TO THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT. SO I WELCOME THE SUGGESTIONS THAT INDIVIDUAL INTERNET USERS COULD JOIN WITH NONCOMMERCIAL AND CIVIL SOCIETY INTERESTS TO FORM AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE I THINK A GREAT DEAL OF THE GNSO WORK AFFECTS INDIVIDUAL INTERNET USERS, AND THERE SHOULD BE MUCH MORE DIRECT MEANS FOR INDIVIDUAL INTERNET USERS TO GIVE INPUT ON ISSUES SUCH AS, FOR EXAMPLE, NEW GTLDS, WHOIS, INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES, THAN IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE. AND SO I WOULD VERY MUCH WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITIES TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER AS YOU CONSIDER THIS REVIEW.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, WENDY.

>>BRET FAUSETT: BRET FAUSETT, I AM FROM THE -- OH, WAS THERE A COMMENT FROM THE BOARD?

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: APOLOGIES.

I THINK IT'S VALUABLE TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF TIME AS A CONVERSATION AND NOT ONLY AS THROWING VOLLEYS AT EACH OTHER SO, WENDY, I HAVE A QUESTION.

DO YOU THINK THE ALAC STRUCTURES, LIKE THE ONE THAT HAS NOW SIGNED ITS MOU FOR THE LAC RALO, ARE USEFUL CONDUITS FOR THE INDIVIDUAL USER TO EXPRESS THIS -- SORRY, THESE CONCERNS?

I SEE THAT THIS COMMUNITY IS BECOMING INCREASINGLY INFLUENTIAL IN A STRUCTURED AND EFFECTIVE WAY IN ICANN. IT'S MATERIALIZING THE EXPECTATIONS WE HAD WHEN BUILDING IT UP.

>>WENDY SELTZER: I THINK THEY ARE A VERY VALUABLE WAY TO INVOLVE INDIVIDUALS AND GET THEIR EXPERTISE AND THEIR REPORTS.

I HOPE THAT THERE WILL BE WAYS FOR THEM TO CONVEY THAT INTO ICANN.

AT THE MOMENT, THERE ARE NO FORMALIZED WAYS FOR THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

THEY ARE ONLY ABLE, AS PART OF THIS ADVISORY COMMITTEE, TO OFFER ADVICE IN VARIOUS PLACES TO WHICH IT'S BEEN OUR EXPERIENCE IN THE PAST THERE HASN'T BEEN A LOT OF THIS DIALOGUE.

I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO CONTINUE DIALOGUE AND TO GIVE THESE LATIN AMERICAN MEMBERS AND OTHERS WAYS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSION.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I WILL BE ON THE RECORD DISAGREEING WITH YOU IN THAT A LOT OF THE INPUT THAT WE HAVE OBTAINED FROM THE ALAC IN MANY DIFFERENT ISSUES HAS ACTUALLY BEEN AGENDA SHAPING. IT HAS NOT ONLY BEEN ONE MARGINAL OPINION TO BE CONSIDERED BUT IT HAS TRULY HAD AN AGENDA-SHAPING EFFECT.

>>WENDY SELTZER: I AM VERY PLEASED TO HEAR THAT. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: SUSAN, YOU ASKED FOR A MOMENT.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: JUST VERY BRIEFLY. I DON'T SEE ANY NECESSARY CONFLICT BETWEEN WHAT BOTH OF YOU ARE SAYING AND THE LSE REPORT. IT MIGHT BE QUITE POSSIBLE TO HAVE THIS LARGER USERS' CONSTITUENCY THAT KIN CORP OPERATES STRUCTURES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN CREATES IN THE RALO FRAME OF THINGS AND ALLOWS FOR A MORE DIRECT POLICY INVOLVEMENT.

I ALSO AGREE WITH ALEX THAT ALAC'S POSITIONS HAVE BEEN LISTENED TO AND ARE VERY INTERESTING TO US.

BUT I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE CONCERN ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO DIRECTLY GET PEOPLE ON THE BOARD FROM THE ALAC.

THANKS.

>>VINT CERF: I'M SORRY, BRET. THIS IS A CAREFULLY ORCHESTRATED ARRANGEMENT TO PREVENT YOU FROM BEING ABLE TO SAY ANYTHING AT ALL

[ LAUGHTER ]

>>BRET FAUSETT: I CAN TELL.

>>VINT CERF: I HOPE YOU APPRECIATE THE SKILL WITH WHICH THIS IS BEING CONDUCTED.

>>BRET FAUSETT: VERY SKILLFUL.

>>VINT CERF: I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE WORTH JUST AMPLIFYING ONE POINT.

FOR SOME YEARS NOW, THREE YEARS, ROBERTO GAETANO HAS BEEN THE LIAISON FROM THE ALAC. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE REST OF THE BOARD THAT HIS INPUTS HAVE BEEN AS WEIGHTY AS ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER. EVEN THOUGH UP UNTIL THAT TIME -- UP UNTIL TOMORROW HE HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO CAST A VOTE, I THINK HIS REASONING HAS INFLUENCED MANY.

ROBERTO, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.

>>ROBERTO GAETANO:.

YES, THANK YOU. IT IS NOT A FOLLOW-UP ON THAT. IT'S RATHER A COMMENT ON THE REPORT.

I THINK THAT THE INCOMING OF A VIEW OF THE ALAC MIGHT BRING FURTHER ELEMENTS IN ORDER TO OPTIMIZE, I WOULD SAY, THE ACTIVITIES IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE PARTICIPATION OF THE USER COMMUNITY.

I THINK THAT IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF BEFORE TAKING ANY FUNDAMENTAL DECISION BASED ONLY ON THE LSE REPORT, WE ALSO WAIT FOR THE HIGHLY WELCOME REPORT ON THE ALAC THAT IS DUE TO START IN FEBRUARY, WE JUST LEARNED.

THANK YOU.

>>BRET FAUSETT: GOOD MORNING.

>>VINT CERF: BRET, FINALLY YOU ARE ON.

>>BRET FAUSETT: BRET FAUSETT FROM THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, I HAVE BEEN THE ALAC LIAISON TO THE GNSO, AND IN THAT CAPACITY I WOULD LIKE TO ENDORSE THE ENTIRE PACKAGE OF LSE REFORMS.

AND IF YOU READ THE LSE REPORT, YOU WILL SEE THAT SEVERAL TIMES IN THE REPORT IT'S DESCRIBED AS A COHERENT VISION, A COHERENT PACKAGE.

THERE ARE 24 SEPARATE RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THE LSE SAYS THAT YOU CAN CHOOSE SOME OF THEM OR ALL OF THEM, BUT THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU CHOOSE ALL OF THEM.

I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THE DEFAULT BE THE ENTIRE PACKAGE OF REFORMS AND THE JUSTIFICATIONS BE MADE FOR VARYING FROM THAT.

I THINK AS THE BOARD STARTS CONSIDERING THINGS AND ESPECIALLY THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, YOU ARE GOING TO BE LOBBIED QUITE HARD BY VARIOUS GROUPS WITHIN THE GNSO TO PICK THIS ONE, DON'T PICK THIS ONE, AND IF EVERYONE GETS TO REJECT THE ONES THEY DON'T LIKE, YOU ARE GOING TO DO DAMAGE TO THE COHERENT VISION.

AND WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED TO SEE THE LOBBYING EFFORT. YOU ARE GOING TO BE PUSHED. BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT THESE ARE 24 RECOMMENDATIONS BUT THEY ARE INTERRELATED IN IMPORTANT WAYS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. ALEX.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THE RECORD OF THIS SESSION WILL HAVE TO BE MODIFIED GRAMMATICALLY. BRET FAUSETT'S STATEMENT HAS TO BE RECORDED FOR A DATE LIKE -- I THINK IT IS MARCH 2006. THE PART THAT SAYS "YOU WILL BE LOBBIED HEAVILY BY DIFFERENT GROUPS TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR SPECIFIC REQUESTS" HAS TO BE ON THE RECORD. IT'S A FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENT FOR MARCH 2006. THAT HAS ALREADY STARTED, I THINK.

I HAVE TO GO ON THE RECORD WITH A SERIOUS COMMENT ABOUT THE LSE REVIEW.

THE LSE REVIEW IS INTERNALLY QUITE CONSISTENT, BUT IT HAS SELF-IMPOSED RESTRICTIONS THAT CAUSE MORE WORK TO HAVE TO BE DONE THAN JUST BASING OURSELVES ON THE 24 RECOMMENDATIONS.

IT HAS A SELF-IMPOSED RESTRICTION ON HOW IT ANALYZES THE REPRESENTATIVE CHARACTER, THE REPRESENTATIVENESS OF THE CONSTITUENCIES IN THE GNSO. DELIBERATELY, AND THIS IS NOT IN ANY WAY MEANT AS A NEGATIVE CRITICISM, IT'S A STATEMENT OF FACT.

THE LSE REVIEW DELIBERATELY DECIDED NOT TO ASK A BROADER COMMUNITY OUTSIDE THE CONSTITUENCIES WHETHER THEY FEEL REPRESENTED. WHAT ARE THE ISSUES THAT THEY WANT TO BE CARRIED AND WHETHER THEY EVEN KNOW THAT THEY ARE BEING CARRIED IN THEIR NAME INTO THE ICANN PROCESS BY THE EXISTING REPRESENTATIONS WITHIN THE GNSO CONSTITUENCIES.

THAT'S A VERY SEVERE SELF-IMPOSED CONSTRAINT.

AND TO WORK ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE REPRESENTATIVENESS CONSIDERATION OF THE LSE REVIEW IS ENOUGH AS A BASIS TO GO FORWARD WOULD BE SELF-IMPOSING THAT SAME KIND OF LIMITATION IN THE WORK THAT IS DONE.

THIS IS ONE OF THE QUALMS THAT I THINK THE BOARD AND THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY, INCLUDING THE GNSO, WILL HAVE TO WORK WITH IN MOVING FORWARD.

SINCE THIS HAS COME FORWARD AGAIN, I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT WITHIN THE BGC WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WAY TO PROCEED FORWARD. WE HAVE HEARD SEVERAL CALLS LIKE SUSAN'S FOR EXERTING BOARD LEADERSHIP IN STARTING A REDESIGN.

MY RESPONSE TO YOUR COMMENTS AND TO MIKE'S PREVIOUS REQUESTS WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT I COULD FORECAST, I CANNOT PROMISE THIS AS A FACT, BUT I WOULD FORECAST THAT A STRUCTURED DIALOGUE WILL ENSUE AND IT WILL PROBABLY TAKE THE FORM OF POINTED QUESTIONS, AS HAS ALREADY BEEN SUGGESTED HERE. AND PROBABLY A DRAFT THAT'S OUT FOR COMMENTS AND MAYBE A COUPLE OF CYCLES LIKE THAT.

WE DO HAVE A SEVERE CONSTRAINT FROM THE BYLAWS, AS HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED BY SUSAN AGAIN, I WILL QUOTE HER, OF THE NUMBER OF CYCLES AND THE NUMBER OF BOARD MEETINGS THAT WE CAN WAIT FOR HAVING A PROPOSAL THAT CAN BE VOTED UPON.

BUT AGAIN, A PROCESS OF CYCLES OF CONSULTATION IS ABSOLUTELY ASSURED IN THE GENOME OF THE PRESENT BOARD.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ALEX.

PLEASE.

>>BERTRAND DE LA CHAPELLE: GOOD MORNING. I AM BERTRAND DE LA CHAPELLE, I AM THE FRENCH REPRESENTATIVE IN THE GAC.

ON THE LSE REPORT, THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE GNSO IS AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE ICANN ACTIVITY.

PARTICULARLY IN THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

THE FACT THAT IT FUNCTIONS WELL IS, THEREFORE, OF THE HIGHEST IMPORTANCE.

IN THAT RESPECT, ON A SIDE NOTE, THE PARTICIPATION OF ACTORS WERE TODAY, I WOULD SAY ON BOTH SIDES, IN AN ADVISOR CAPACITY IN THE ONGOING PROCESS, THAT THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. AND WHEN I SAY "ON BOTH SIDES," I MEAN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE ALAC.

BUT BEYOND THAT, THE QUESTION I WANT TO ASK, AND PARTICULARLY TO SUSAN REGARDING ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT -- COMMENTS SHE MADE EARLIER, IS THE FOLLOWING. DOES THE BOARD CONSIDER THE LSE REPORT ON THE GNSO AS A BASIS FOR ITS OWN ACTION OR AS A BASIS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY OF ICANN ON WHAT THE REFORM OF THE GNSO SHOULD BE?

AND IN THAT RESPECT, I WOULD MENTION PUBLICLY AN APPRECIATION FOR THE METHODOLOGY THAT WAS ADOPTED IN THE MEETING YESTERDAY ON MEETINGS UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF SUSAN THAT WAS BASICALLY ARTICULATING NOT A PRESENTATION BUT A BASIS FOR DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMUNITY FROM A PRELIMINARY WORK DOES THE BOARD CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY OF HOLDING THAT KIND OF MEETING ON THE BASIS OF THE LSE REPORT IN FUTURE ICANN MEETINGS?

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: THANK YOU, BERTRAND. I THINK IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR ME TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD IN RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION. WE HAVE NOT YET DISCUSSED THIS AS A GROUP AS TO WHAT THE PROCESS IS GOING TO BE. AND YOU ARE HEARING FROM ME A DEEP DESIRE TO SET THAT PROCESS AND MAKE IT AS EFFECTIVE AND AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A STRUCTURED CONVERSATION ABOUT THE LSE REPORT. AT THE SAME TIME, HOWEVER, I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE BOARD EXERT LEADERSHIP, ACT, VOTE TO RESTRUCTURE THE GNSO IF IT NEEDS TO WITHOUT SEEING THIS AS PURELY A POLITICAL INTERRELATIONSHIP ARGUMENT ABOUT THAT REPORT. BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE FUTURE OF ICANN AS A BOTTOM-UP CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT PETRI DISH, THIS BIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENT WE HAVE HERE, DEPENDS ON OUR ABILITY TO BE FLEXIBLE, CHANGE, ADAPT, AND TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF THE BOARD.

SO I RECOGNIZE I HAVE FAILED IN ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION BUT I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT AS A BOARD WE TAKE THIS VERY SERIOUSLY, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING A VERY EFFECTIVE PROCESS ON THIS REPORT.

>>BERTRAND DE LA CHAPELLE:IF I MAY, AS JUST AN ADD-ON. THE BEST WAY TO ESTABLISH AN APPROPRIATE BOTTOM-UP MULTISTAKEHOLDER PROCESS IS TO DISCUSS THE MODALITIES OF THIS PROCESS IN A BOTTOM-UP, MULTISTAKEHOLDER MANNER.

THE LEADERSHIP THAT WE EXPECT FROM THE BOARD IS IN ESTABLISHING THIS BOTTOM-UP MULTISTAKEHOLDER PROCESS THAT WILL ENABLE IT TO LATER TAKE THE APPROPRIATE LEADERSHIP DECISIONS.

THANK YOU.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: THANK YOU.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: PETER HERE, VINT.

I MIGHT BE ABLE TO JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION, BERTRAND.

AND THE ANSWER IS, IT IS THE BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CONDUCT REVIEWS UNDER THE BYLAWS.

WE HAVE NOT ABDICATED THAT RESPONSIBILITY TO ANY OUTSIDE ORGANIZATION.

SO THE REPORT FROM THE ALAC DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE JOB.

IT'S AN INPUT INTO THE JOB.

>>VINT CERF: OOPS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PETER.

MARILYN CADE.

>>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS MARILYN CADE.

I'M HOLDING IN MY HANDS A DOCUMENT THAT I WISH TO CALL TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE BOARD AS I CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT GOING TO CALL THE LSE REVIEW OF THE GNSO.

I'M GOING TO CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE.

I'M GOING TO CALL IT STRENGTHENING AND IMPROVING THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS.

AND I THINK THAT THE REVIEW PROCESS ACTUALLY, AS I'VE ALWAYS SEEN IT, IS A PART OF STRENGTHENING AND IMPROVING THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND THE ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

AND I MENTION THAT BECAUSE, OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE HAVE SEEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY IN A BOTTOM-UP DIALOGUE THAT I HOPE WE THINK OF AS AN EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND NOT LOBBYING, ABOUT WHAT'S NEEDED TO STRENGTHEN AND IMPROVE THE ORGANIZATION.

AND LOTS OF THE CONCEPTS THAT THE LATER REVIEW THEN COMMENTED ON IT PREVIOUSLY BEEN TALKED ABOUT IN THE STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSIONS AND IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING SESSIONS.

AND I SEE SOME OF THOSE ELEMENTS ACTUALLY REFLECTED IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE OPERATIONAL PLAN.

SO ADDING ADDITIONAL RESOURCES, ADDING AN ECONOMIST, ADDING INCREASED STAFF, ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT WERE THEN LATER IDENTIFIED IN THE LSE REPORT AS GAPS HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, THE BOARD, AND OTHERS AS NEEDED TO STRENGTHEN AND IMPROVE THE GNSO.

AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE, AS WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO EXAMINE INPUT FROM THE REVIEW, I THINK WE ALSO, HOPEFULLY, WILL KEEP IN MIND, AS WE PROVIDE COMMENTS, HOW WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL ELEMENTS OF IMPROVEMENT ALREADY UNDERWAY, THEY'RE ALREADY IDENTIFIED, AND I HOPE WE'RE NOT GOING TO DELAY THOSE KINDS OF STRUCTURAL SUPPORTS WHILE WE TALK ABOUT OTHER ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NEEDED.

I WILL JUST MAKE ONE OTHER COMMENT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES IF YOU COME TO WHATEVER NUMBER OF ICANN MEETINGS WE'VE HAD, YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY THINK THAT ICANN IS A VERY MATURE ORGANIZATION AND A VERY OLD ORGANIZATION.

BUT IT'S NOT.

IT IS A VERY YOUNG AND EVOLVING ORGANIZATION.

AND THAT'S THE BENEFIT OF THE CONCEPT OF THE REVIEWS.

OF COURSE THERE ARE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN A PARTICULAR REVIEW.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I DON'T THINK THERE'S A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ABOUT?

A COMMITMENT TO IMPROVEMENT.

SO I HOPE THAT THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE HEARING FROM PEOPLE ABOUT DIFFERENCES OF OPINION WON'T CALL THAT LOBBYING; YOU'LL CALL THAT AN EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION.

IT MIGHT BE VIEWED AS AN EXCHANGE OF SELF-INTERESTED INFORMATION, BECAUSE CONSISTENT WITH THE PARABLE OF THE NINE BLIND MEN AND THE ELEPHANT, SOMEONE'S ONLY TOUCHING ONE PARTICULAR PART OF THE BEAST, THANK YOU CHAIRMAN SHARIL FOR THAT ANALOGY.

AND I HOPE WE'RE ALL GOING TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THE 747 WHILE WE'RE FLYING IT, AND WE'RE TRYING TO TURN IT INTO A ROCKET SHIP.

>>VINT CERF: AMADEU.

>>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY BUT I COULDN'T RESIST BEING IN THE QUEUE WHEN I SAW MIKE, BRET, MARILYN, CHUCK, AND ALL THE REST, BUT, NO, SERIOUSLY, A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, ONE ON GNSO AND, YOU KNOW, THE ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL USERS PARTICIPATING IN THE CONSTITUENCY.

I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH WENDY WITH THE NEED TO ADD, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUAL VOICES TO THE TASK FORCE WORKING ON THE GNSO WORK.

PERHAPS I DON'T AGREE THAT MUCH IN THE NEED OF CREATING NEW CONSTITUENCIES.

BEING ONE OF THOSE THAT MAY PLEA GUILTY FOR THE CONSTITUENCY MODEL, I THINK THAT IT WAS AT THE VERY BEGINNING DESIGNED TO HAVE -- TO MAKE SURE THAT THE VOICES WILL BE REPRESENTED, YOU KNOW, AT THE VOTING LEVEL.

BUT WHAT ICANN NEEDS MORE THAN NEW BOXES, NEW, YOU KNOW, HORDE-GRABBING EXERCISES SOMETIMES, IS HAVING MORE DISCUSSION IN COMMON.

SO THE ONLY PROBLEM FOR -- I MEAN, THE MAIN PROBLEM FOR THE TASK FORCE IS NOT THAT WE NEED A NEW CONSTITUENCY FOR NEW INDIVIDUAL USERS OR SECONDARY MARKET RESELLERS OF DOMAIN NAMES, OR TO THE EXTREME, FAT, BALD, EYESIGHT-IMPAIRED CATALANS, BUT THAT WE NEED TO OPEN THE TASK FORCE BEYOND THE CONSTITUTION -- SORRY, THE CONSTITUENCIES' LOGIC, THAT ONLY IF YOU BUILD THIS POWER KINGDOM WITHIN THE GNSO, YOU WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM.

THIS IS MORE IMPORTANT FOR INCLUDING INDIVIDUALS OR NO INDIVIDUALS THAN JUST HAVING NEW BOXES THAT GO ALONG ALL THE PROCESS.

SECOND, ON THE GENERAL STRUCTURE OF NOMCOM, I THINK ALSO PERHAPS NOW THAT THIS IS BECOMING MATURE, WELL, PROBABLY EVEN MARILYN IS ACCEPTING, NOBODY WAS SHOOTING CHUCK GOMES TODAY, FOR INSTANCE, WHICH IS ALSO A NICE IMPROVEMENT.

PERHAPS IT'S ALSO TIME TO BE MORE COURAGEOUS AND LOOK AT THE NOMCOM AND TRY TO BRING ALSO THE CONSTITUENCY-BASED APPROACH THERE, TRY TO MAKE THE NUMBERS FORCING THE GNSO, FOR INSTANCE, TO ELECT PEOPLE NOT BASED ON CONSTITUENCY, BUT ON GNSO AS A WHOLE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, TO PREVENT MORE DIVISIONS AND FORCE BY STRUCTURE, YOU KNOW, THE FORMING OF A GNSO AND ICANN OPINION, NOT JUST DEFENDING INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUENCIES' OPINIONS, WHICH I THINK IT WOULD IMPROVE.

FINALLY, REGARDING --

>>VINT CERF: AMADEU, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.

ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE IS THAT THIS IS BEING TRANSLATED AND TRANSCRIBED.

AND YOU HAVE AN ABILITY TO SPEAK FASTER THAN THOSE PROCESSES ARE ABLE TO KEEP UP.

SO IF I COULD ASK YOU TO SLOW DOWN, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

>>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: YOU MAY ASK, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I CAN TRY.

BUT I WILL.

OKAY.

REGARDING THE STRUCTURES OF THE MEETINGS, I WILL SAY THAT, HAVING BEEN A CRITIC FOR A LONG TIME, THEY HAVE IMPROVED A LOT.

EVEN THE PUBLIC FORUM.

NOW, A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS.

FIRST, THIS SETUP IS AWFUL FOR, YOU KNOW, PROMOTING DIALOGUE.

THE QUEUE, AND THE BOARD AS DEMAGOGUES OUT THERE.

BUT, AS I SAID, IT HAS IMPROVED A LOT.

PERHAPS YOU SHOULD EXTEND A LITTLE BIT THE PUBLIC FORUM.

BUT WE SHOULD CONSIDER A PUBLIC FORUM WHERE WE DISCUSS ISSUES.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU ALLOW DIALOGUE, EVEN IF THIS MEANS THAT AMADEU, WHO'S LAST IN THE QUEUE, WILL NOT SPEAK.

SO CONGRATULATIONS FOR IMPROVING THAT.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD DO STILL BETTER NEXT TIME.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, AMADEU.

LET -- BEFORE WE TAKE THE NEXT SPEAKER, LET ME SAY THAT I'M GOING TO END THE QUEUE -- I DON'T WANT ANYONE ELSE TO JOIN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW.

THERE WILL BE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, BECAUSE WE'RE WELL INTO OUR PLANNED BREAK.

ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO TAKE THE BREAK NOW AND THEN REENTER THIS QUEUE, REESTABLISH THIS QUEUE, AND THEN GO ON TO THE REPORTS THAT ARE DUE.

COULD I JUST GET A GENERAL SENSE FROM THE PARTICIPANTS HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD PREFER TO TAKE A BREAK NOW AND THEN RETURN.

YES.

I SEE SEVERAL.

WELL, I SEE ONE IS FRANTICALLY WAVING, WHICH SUGGESTS HE REALLY NEEDS TO TAKE THE BREAK.

OH, I SEE A BOARD MEMBER, TWO BOARD MEMBERS NEED TO TAKE A BREAK.

THAT MUST CONSTITUTE A QUORUM.

[ LAUGHTER ]

>>VINT CERF: LET ME -- LET ME ASK IF THE THREE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE CURRENTLY IN QUEUE, PLEASE REMEMBER WHERE YOU WERE IN QUEUE, AND RETURN IN 20 MINUTES' TIME, AND WE WILL REESTABLISH THE QUEUE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE'LL TAKE A 20-MINUTE BREAK NOW.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

(BREAK.)

>>VINT CERF: WELCOME BACK, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. WE'RE RESTARTING OUR PUBLIC COMMENT QUEUE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE HAVE ALL THREE OF THE PARTIES WHO WERE QUEUED BEFORE, BUT IF NOT, WE'LL JUST START WITH THE FIRST PERSON WHO IS AVAILABLE, SO WHY DON'T YOU BEGIN.

>>STEVE DEL BIANCO: THANK YOU. I'M STEVE DEL BIANCO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE NETCHOICE COALITIONS, A COALITION OF E-COMMERCE COMPANIES, CONSUMERS.

THIS -- MY POINT OF MY REMARKS IS TO TRY TO DRAW A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE OR BALANCE WITH RESPECT TO WHAT WE'VE HEARD OUT OF ALL THE SPEAKERS BEFORE US, WHERE THE EMPHASIS HAS BEEN HEAVY ON PROCESS REFORM AND STRUCTURAL REFORM, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IF I CAN BALANCE THAT OUT WITH A PERSPECTIVE ON PERFORMANCE.

THIS IS MY THIRD ICANN MEETING, AND WITH EACH MEETING I GROW MORE AND MORE AMAZED AT THE COMPLEXITY OF THE INITIATIVES, THE BIG HEAVY LIFTING THIS ORGANIZATION IS TRYING TO DO. IF YOU SIT IN ON THE DETAILED PRESENTATIONS AND WORKSHOPS, YOU REALIZE WHAT IS GOING ON WITH DNSSEC. HARD ENOUGH AT THE ROOT SERVER LEVEL. GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO PUSH DOWN TO THE REGISTRY LEVEL.

ON IDNS, THE COMPLEXITY OF IDNS EXPANDS EVERY TIME I SIT THROUGH A PRESENTATION. AND ALSO NEW GTLDS, WHICH ARE LESS TECHNICALLY COMPLEX THAN THE FIRST TWO BUT THEY ADD AN ELEMENT OF CONTROVERSY.

SO EACH OF US HAS GOT TO BE WONDERING, WHEN I SEE THIS COMPLEXITY, CAN I DO IT. AND IT'S A GOOD THING WE'RE CALLED "ICANN." THAT'S HELPFUL. BUT MAYBE WE SHOULD BE CALLED "ISHALL" OR "IMUST," BECAUSE FAILURE COULD RESULT IN SPLITTING OF THE ROOT AND EVEN SUCCESS OR FURTHER DELAY IS GOING TO RESULT IN THE UNITED NATIONS AND INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM, WHO REALLY BELIEVE THEY'VE GOT A BETTER WAY.

I WAS THERE AT THE IGF MEETING IN ATHENS A LITTLE OVER A MONTH AGO, AND I DO NOT SHARE THE OPINION OF OTHERS WHO GAVE YOU A REPORT ON MONDAY THAT CHARACTERIZED THE IGF AS A BENIGN GROUP OF CONVERSATIONS THAT COMPLEMENT, AS OPPOSED TO, COMPETE WITH ICANN.

THE WSIS AND IGF STARTS WITH A VERY DAUNTING LIST OF LONG-STANDING PROBLEMS, AND THEY WANT TO LOOK APPROPRIATELY TO THE INTERNET TO HELP SOLVE THOSE PROBLEMS. AND THERE ARE ALSO LOTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS WITH THEIR OWN AGENDAS WHO WANT TO ADD THAT TO WHAT THE U.N. WOULD DO, IF IT WERE HANDED THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE KEYS.

SO THAT LOOMING PRESENCE OF THE IGF SHOULD PROD US IN TWO IMPORTANT WAYS.

FIRST IS TO AVOID MISSION CREEP, AND THE SECOND IS TO EXECUTE ON OUR BIG INITIATIVES.

BOTTOM LINE? WE SHOULD BE TALKING MORE TODAY ABOUT PERFORMANCE THAN ABOUT REFORMING OF PROCESS, OR WE WILL END UP WITH NO PROCESS AT ALL. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. I HOPE THAT YOU'RE WRONG ABOUT THE IGF, BUT I TAKE YOUR POINT.

YES, PLEASE.

>>MAWAKI CHANGO: YES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MAWAKI CHANGO FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL.

FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO LEND MY SUPPORT TO WENDY'S COMMENTS ON THE LSE REPORTS EARLIER ON, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INDIVIDUAL USERS CAN JOIN ALAC, TO TAKE THAT EXAMPLE, EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY A MEMBER OF A USER ASSOCIATION ORGANIZATION, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY BE RESOURCEFUL ON A SPECIFIC ISSUE BUT MAY NOT BE AVAILABLE TO JOIN, AS SUCH, AN ORGANIZATION.

SO THOSE COULD BRING IN THEIR INPUTS, DEPENDING ON THE ISSUE AT HAND.

THE SECOND POINT IS THAT I GOT A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED BY ALEJANDRO'S RESPONSE TO BRET EARLIER ON, ON THE LIMITATION OR THE SELF-LIMITATION OF THE LSE REPORT. I THINK THE REPORT -- THE REVIEW WAS ABOUT THE GNSO, SO LSE COLLECTED INFORMATION AND DATA FROM WITHIN THE GNSO. I DON'T THINK THEY NECESSARILY HAD TO GO OUTSIDE THE GNSO AND COLLECT PEOPLE'S OPINIONS WHETHER THEY FEEL REPRESENTED OR NOT.

NEVERTHELESS, WE ANNOUNCE THE REVIEW PROCESS ON OUR VARIOUS LISTS, AND ANYONE BEING ALREADY A MEMBER OF THE CONSTITUENCY COULD TALK TO THE LSE TEAM. AND SO IF WE -- IF WE GO DOWN THAT PATH, WE ARE ALL SELF-LIMITED BECAUSE EVEN THE ICANN HERE DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT ALL THE USERS IN THE WORLD. ONLY THOSE WE MANAGE TO GET HOLD, TO REACH OUT TO, AND ARE INFORMED CAN JOIN THE PROCESS. AND THAT WAS THE SITUATION WITH THE LSE REPORT AS WELL.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THAT NOT -- I'M NOT NECESSARILY SAYING -- I RECOGNIZE THE AUTONOMY OF THE BOARD TO MAKE DECISION BASED ON VARIOUS SOURCES OF INFORMATION. I'M NOT NECESSARILY SAYING, AS BRET, THAT YOU NEED TO TAKE THE PACKAGE OR LEAVE IT, THE LSE PACKAGE OR LEAVE IT. BUT THESE SELF-LIMITATION ISSUES, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO FOCUS ON THAT BECAUSE LSE GOT TO TALK TO EVERYBODY WHO IS INVOLVED IN THE GNSO PROCESSES, AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS THE OUTCOME OF THEIR ANALYSIS OF THE RELEVANT DATA THEY COLLECTED. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: ALEX?

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU. AS -- MAYBE SOME OF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT MAWAKI AND I AND PEOPLE IN HIS GROUP HAVE HAD LONG CONVERSATIONS FOR SOME TIME.

MAWAKI, AS A DEGREE STUDENT IN POLITICAL SCIENCE, IF I REMEMBER WELL, I'M PARTICULARLY SURPRISED BY YOUR COMMENT. THE LSE REVIEW, IN ALL ITS QUALITY AND ALL THE FLOWERY EULOGY ONE CAN MAKE ABOUT IT, HAS A SELF-IMPOSED LIMITATION THAT I THINK THIS IS, I MEAN, A SERIOUS METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATION. I DON'T MEAN TO SAY THAT IT IS FLAWED OR IT'S WRONG IN ITS CONCLUSIONS, BUT IT'S A SELF-SELECTED LIMITED UNIVERSE TO ASK ABOUT REPRESENTATIVENESS. AND IF YOU ASK THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM WHETHER THEY FEEL THAT THEY ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF THEMSELVES, THEY WILL SURELY SAY YES. IF YOU ASK THEM WHETHER THEY ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF SOMETHING ELSE, YOU WILL FIND SOME NUANCES IN THAT RESPONSE. REPRESENTATIVENESS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE IN SOME OF THE CONSTITUENCIES. IT HAS TO BE STUDIED RIGOROUSLY. IT'S NOT THE SAME -- I MEAN, THE PARAMETERS CANNOT BE THE SAME FOR, LET'S SAY, THE REGISTRY CONSTITUENCY, WHICH IS FORMED BY ALL GTLD REGISTRIES THAT EXIST.

AND CONSTITUENCIES LIKE THE NONCOMMERCIAL OR THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS YOU ARE IN, WHETHER IT'S NONCOMMERCIAL, ALTRUISTIC, NOT-FOR-PROFIT, ET CETERA OR FOR-PROFIT. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THERE ARE THOUSANDS, MAYBE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS AND MAYBE EVEN MILLIONS, OF ORGANIZATIONS IN THE WORLD THAT HAVE INTEREST IN THE NONCOMMERCIAL USE OF THE INTERNET AND THE DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM SPECIFICALLY, AND THE COMMERCIAL USE.

AND THE LIMITATION OF NOT GOING OUT AND FINDING OUT WHETHER THEY HAVE ISSUES, WHETHER THESE ISSUES ARE REPRESENTED, WHETHER THEY KNOW ABOUT WHO IS REPRESENTING THEM, WHETHER THEY FIND THE CORPORATE AGGREGATION OF ORGANIZATIONS MODEL THAT WILL HAVE TO REPRESENT THEM AND SO FORTH VALID IS A SERIOUS LIMITATION. AND I MEAN, I'M SURPRISED FROM A STUDENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE THAT -- THAT YOU WOULD NOT FIND THIS -- I WOULD MORE HAVE EXPECTED THAT YOU WOULD TELL US HOW TO SAMPLE THAT IN AN EFFICIENT WAY WITHOUT HAVING TO REDO THE WHOLE STUDY.

>>MAWAKI CHANGO: I'M SORRY IF I DISAPPOINT YOU, ALEJANDRO. THE POINT IS, I RECALL -- THE SELF-LIMITATION IS A FACT, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WE ARE ALL SELF-LIMITED, AND THE LSE PEOPLE ARE MORE COMPETENT THAN ME IN POLITICAL SCIENCE TO DEAL WITH THAT.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS, THAT LIMITATION DOESN'T IMPACT THAT MUCH THE OUTCOME OF THESE RESULTS, IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S A GNSO REVIEW AND ALL THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY PART OF THE CONSTITUENCIES IN THE GNSO WERE AWARE ABOUT -- ABOUT THE REVIEW, AND THEY COULD TALK TO -- MAKE APPOINTMENTS IN THE OTHER MEETING IN NEW ZEALAND, FROM THE OTHER MEETING IN NEW ZEALAND, AND ON THE PHONE OR BY E-MAIL TO TALK TO THEM.

THIS DOESN'T MAKE THEIR OUTCOME OR THEIR RECOMMENDATION UNIVERSAL, BECAUSE THERE IS THAT SELF-LIMITATION, BUT YOU CAN'T REALLY BE UNIVERSAL. YOU NEED TO DEFINE YOUR TOPIC AREA OR YOUR ISSUE AREA, AND THAT WAS WHAT THEY DID, I THINK. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: SUSAN, I THINK YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP ALSO.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: THANK YOU. VERY BRIEFLY, MAWAKI, I TAKE TWO POINTS FROM WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I'M SURE THERE'S MORE, BUT LET ME SEE IF I CAN SUMMARIZE.

THAT THE ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL USERS MAY BE UNDEREMPHASIZED IN ICANN, AND THE IMPORTANCE OF REPRESENTATIVENESS MAY BE OVEREMPHASIZED. THAT THE LSE REPORT MAKES THE POINT THAT IT SHOULD BE EASIER FOR PEOPLE AND ENTITIES TO HAVE AN ENTRY POINT INTO ICANN, TO HAVE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS THAT ENCOURAGE BROAD PARTICIPATION, AND I THINK THAT'S -- THAT'S A VERY VITAL, CENTRAL POINT ABOUT THAT REPORT.

ON THE REPRESENTATIVENESS QUESTION, ICANN COULD NEVER CLAIM TO BE A DEMOCRACY. THAT'S NOT WHAT WE DO HERE. WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE GLOBAL RULES FOR GTLD REGISTRIES AND REGISTRARS ONLY TO THE EXTENT THEY'RE NEEDED AND BASED ON WHO SHOWS UP, WHO CARES ENOUGH TO SPEAK. AND THE BASIS FOR OUR LEGITIMACY IS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO SHOW UP, NOT TO CLAIM THAT WE'RE PERFECTLY REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ENTIRE WORLD. THAT'S WHY OUTREACH AND PARTICIPATION AND TRANSPARENCY IS SO IMPORTANT.

SO FORGIVE ME IF I'VE MISUNDERSTOOD OR MISCHARACTERIZED YOUR REMARKS. I THINK THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT, AND I DO HOPE THAT WE DON'T OVEREMPHASIZE THE ROLE OF REPRESENTATIVENESS IN THIS EXERCISE. THANKS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, SUSAN. PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>NAOMASA MARUYAMA: MY NAME IS NAOMASA MARUYAMA WITH JPNIC, BUT I SPEAK ON MY OWN BEHALF.

NOW, PEOPLE ARE DISCUSSING ABOUT THE GNSO REVIEW AND LSE REPORT, SO I DECIDED TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC, BUT RATHER THAN TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS OF LSE, I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU THE GENERAL VIEW OF THE GNSO SO FAR.

TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS TOPIC, I WANT TO RECALL TO YOU WHAT HAPPENED AT THE MARRAKECH MEETING. IN THE MARRAKECH MEETING, THE BOARD DECISION WAS LIKE -- I CANNOT REMEMBER THE PRECISE LANGUAGE OF THE BOARD DECISION, BUT IT WAS LIKE THIS: "THE BOARD URGES THE GNSO TO COME UP WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE NEXT MEETING," OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SO THIS IS THE VERY IMPRESSIVE THING THAT I SAW IN THE LAST MARRAKECH MEETING, BECAUSE I HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE -- THESE ICANN MEETINGS FOR SEVERAL YEARS, AND THAT KIND OF DECISION -- I NEVER SAW THAT KIND OF DECISION IN THE PAST, THAT THE BOARD IS URGING THE GNSO. IN THE PAST, WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT THE PEOPLE ARE URGING THE BOARD TO MAKE A DECISION. THAT'S TREMENDOUS CHANGE, I THINK.

AND I FELT THAT IS THE -- SOME TURNING POINT FOR THE ICANN AND THE -- QUITE FRANKLY, MY FEELING IS THAT THE PDP PROCESS OF THE -- DEFINED IN THE ICANN REFORM HAS JUST BEGUN TO PRODUCE FRUIT. SO IT'S -- I THINK OUR PDP PROCESS IS A VERY IMPORTANT TOOL FOR THE DECISION-MAKING IN ICANN, AND IT'S DEFINED IN THE REVISED BYLAWS. I THINK IT'S THREE OR FOUR YEARS OLD. BUT IT'S JUST BEGUN TO PRODUCE FRUIT. JUST LIKE THE ROMAN EMPIRE IS NOT BUILT IN A DAY, THE PDP PROCESS IS NOT BUILT IN A DAY. IT'S NOT ENOUGH JUST STIPULATING THE PDP PROCESS IN THE BYLAWS, BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE PEOPLE TO LEARN HOW TO USE THAT, HOW TO WORK WITH THAT, AND MY FEELING IS THAT THE -- THIS YEAR -- ACTUALLY, THE -- RECENTLY, THE GNSO PUBLISHED THE PRELIMINARY REPORT FOR ONE PDP AND PROBABLY ANOTHER ONE WILL COME UP SOON, I THINK, AND THIS IS A GREAT JOB DONE BY THE GNSO COUNCILLORS, AND THIS IS THE -- WHAT THE NEW TREE OF THREE OR FOUR YEARS OLD JUST BEGUN TO PRODUCE FRUIT.

SO TO -- I WANT TO -- I WANT TO ASK THE BOARD MEMBERS AND ALL OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS NOT TO MAKE DECISIONS JUST UPON THE RATHER LOW PERFORMANCE IN THE PAST, BUT PLEASE KEEP IN MIND, PLEASE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT THE -- IT'S JUST BEGUN TO PRODUCE FRUIT, AND DO NOT CUT THE YOUNG TREE OF THREE OR FOUR YEARS OLD WHICH HAS JUST BEGUN TO PRODUCE FRUIT. IT WILL -- IT MAY PRODUCE VALUABLE FRUIT. THAT IS MY COMMENT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MARUYAMA. PAUL LEVINS?

>>NAOMASA MARUYAMA: OF COURSE THERE WILL BE SOME POINT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT, OF COURSE, BUT IT SHOULD BE -- PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT HAPPENINGS WHICH HAPPENED IN THIS THREE OR FOUR MONTHS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PAUL LEVINS?

>>PAUL LEVINS: THANKS, VINT. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T MET ME, MY NAME IS PAUL LEVINS AND I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS WITH ICANN. AS YOU'RE AWARE, WE'RE UNDERTAKING A CONSULTATION ON A SET OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING PRINCIPLES FOR TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY, AND THAT PROCESS HAS BEEN UNDERWAY SINCE THE 16TH OF OCTOBER.

AS PAUL TWOMEY SAID ON MONDAY, WE'VE EXTENDED THAT INITIAL CONSULTATION PHASE THROUGH TO THE 31ST OF DECEMBER, AND WE'VE ALREADY POSTED A SUMMARY OF COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED SO FAR ON THE ICANN WEB SITE. YOU CAN READ THOSE THERE.

I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO PROVIDE SUBMISSIONS TO THAT PROCESS. WE HAVE -- IT'S BEEN MADE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR TO US ALREADY IN THIS CONSULTATION PHASE THAT IT'S A PROCESS THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO -- AND CANNOT AFFORD TO RUSH, AND WE WON'T DO THAT. BUT IN ADDITION, I'D BE PLEASED TO -- I'VE ALREADY TALKED TO A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE AT THIS CONFERENCE SO FAR, AND PEOPLE HAVE APPROACHED ME, WHICH HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL AND I THANK THEM FOR THAT. IN ADDITION WE HAD A VERY USEFUL SESSION, I THINK, WITH THE CCNSO THE OTHER DAY.

BUT AS WELL AS THAT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE OFFER OF MAKING MYSELF AVAILABLE THIS AFTERNOON FOR ANYONE ELSE WHO MIGHT HAVE VIEWS THAT THEY WANT TO EXPRESS, AND I'VE BOOKED A ROOM CALLED THE QUITO ROOM -- Q-U-I-T-O -- QUITO ROOM, WHICH IS ON THE LOWER LEVEL, AND I PLAN TO BE AVAILABLE THERE FROM 2:00 TO AROUND 3:00 THIS AFTERNOON, ALONG WITH MY COLLEAGUE, WHOM MANY OF YOU MIGHT KNOW, PATRICK SHARRY, WHO IS ASSISTING US WITH THIS PROCESS. THANKS, VINT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, PAUL. BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER, I NEED TO EXPLAIN THAT WE ARE WELL OVER TIME NOW TO GET OTHER REPORTS DONE, AND THERE'S ALSO SOME TIME FOR COMMENTS AFTER THAT, SO I'M VERY CONCERNED. I DON'T WANT TO ADD ANY MORE TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THE QUEUE NOW. I'M CLOSING THE QUEUE. I WOULD ASK EACH OF YOU WHO ARE STANDING RIGHT NOW TO KEEP YOUR REMARKS AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> CHANG-HUN LEE: CHANG-HUN LEE FROM IBI.NET. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE ICANN BOARD FOR ITS LEADERSHIP EFFORTS TO DEVELOP AND SOLVE THE MANY RELATED ISSUES TO IDN. HOWEVER, IN TERMS OF IDN, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE ICANN BOARD IF THERE IS ANY CONSIDERATION FOR ESTABLISHING ANY FORMAL LANGUAGE COMMUNITY OR CONSTITUENCY WITHIN THE PRESENT ICANN BODY.

THE TERMS OF LANGUAGE COMMUNITY MAY BE DIFFICULT TO DEFINE. THE REASON IS THAT IDN IS NOT ONLY THE CHANGING OF LANGUAGE SCRIPT FROM ASCII TO NON-ASCII, AS YOU KNOW VERY WELL. THIS WILL BE CHALLENGING FOR THE ENTIRE INTERNET STAKEHOLDER COMMUNITY, SO THERE MUST BE WELL THOUGHT OUT CONSENSUS POSITIONED REGARDED TO REGIONAL LANGUAGE COMMUNITIES, CONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL CULTURAL AND SOCIAL SENSITIVITY, AND, IN ADDITION, A CERTAIN POINT WHERE LANGUAGE ITSELF SYMBOLIZED THE COMMUNITY'S IDENTIFICATION.

FINALLY, I BELIEVE THAT THE IDN REGISTRY SHOULD DEMONSTRATE BROAD-BASED SUPPORT FROM THE LOCAL AND REGIONAL LANGUAGE COMMUNITY IN SELECTING AS IDN TLD REGISTRY. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THERE IS A PRESIDENT'S COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES, AND THAT MIGHT BE A PLACE IN WHICH TO BEGIN.

NEXT COMMENT, PLEASE.

>>JAY WESTERDAL: HI. JAY WESTERDAL, DOMAIN TOOLS. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT AND SUGGESTION FOR FUTURE ICANN MEETINGS AND VENUES IS THAT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL AND MORE HEALTHY FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE A SMOKE-FREE ENVIRONMENT, SUCH AS IN MEETINGS AND IN THE HALLS OUTSIDE OF THE MEETINGS AND IN THE ACTUAL VENUE LOCATION.

I CAN RESPECT THAT THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT CULTURES AROUND THE WORLD THAT ALLOW SMOKING IN MANY DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, BUT I THINK THAT WHEN THE ICANN STAFF SIGNS CONTRACTS FOR VENUES, THAT THEY ENSURE THAT THERE'S NO SMOKING INSIDE OF THE VENUE ITSELF. SPECIFICALLY AT LEAST PAST THE SECURITY CHECKPOINT. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: SUSAN, I HOPE YOU'LL TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT IN YOUR MEETINGS COMMITTEE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT AND LAST COMMENT IN THE OPEN SESSION RIGHT NOW.

>> BRANDON SANDERS: MY NAME IS BRANDON SANDERS. I'M A VOLUNTEER WITH ICANNWIKI. I JUST WANTED TO SAY TO ICANN THANK YOU FOR THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION WEB SITE. THIS IS A GOOD STEP, I BELIEVE, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO CHATTING WITH PAUL AND OTHERS ABOUT WAYS THAT IT COULD BE EVEN BETTER.

AND ONE OTHER COMMENT I WANTED TO MAKE WAS ABOUT THE IGF AND THE POTENTIAL FOR ICANN TO GO AWAY.

I SEE KIND OF RIGHT NOW THERE'S A -- PERHAPS A CONTRAST BETWEEN THE METHODS OF GOVERNANCE BETWEEN THE PYRAMID AS A WAY OF ORGANIZING AND THE NETWORK AS A WAY OF ORGANIZING. AND IF ICANN STAYS KIND OF IN THE PYRAMID SHAPE, I THINK THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET OUT-PYRAMIDED BY THE GOVERNMENTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT MORE EXPERIENCE AND ARMIES AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL PARTICIPANTS TO JUST THINK ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS TO ORGANIZE AS THE NETWORK, BECAUSE THE NETWORK IS NOT JUST NEXT, IT'S NOW.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. I WAS AFRAID YOU WERE GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE SHOULD START DEVELOPING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION OR SOMETHING.

[LAUGHTER]

>>VINT CERF: ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE HAVE NOW GOTTEN RATHER LATE TO THE OTHER REPORTS.

THE ONE THAT -- THAT WE DIDN'T GET TO DO RIGHT AWAY WAS TO INVITE OUR HOST FOR THE LISBON MEETING TO COME AND GET US ALL EXCITED ABOUT COMING TO PORTUGAL, SO I'LL ASK PEDRO VEIGA TO COME AND GIVE YOU A PREVIEW OF WHAT IT WILL BE LIKE THERE.

>>PEDRO VEIGA: WELL, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. MY NAME IS PEDRO VEIGA, AND I AM HERE TO DO A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE MEETING IN LISBON AND GIVE YOU SOME DETAILS.

I WILL TALK A LITTLE ABOUT PORTUGAL AND LISBON, THE VENUE, THE REGISTRY OF DOT PT, THE ORGANIZATION THAT WILL BE ORGANIZING THE EVENT, AND I WILL DO SOME FINAL REMARKS.

FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT DON'T KNOW, PORTUGAL IS A COUNTRY TO THE WEST OF EUROPE. THE MAP IS OVER THERE. WE HAVE A POPULATION OF ABOUT 10 1/2 MILLION. IN PORTUGAL, WE HAVE THE WESTERNMOST POINT IN EUROPE. IT'S CALLED CABO DE ROCA. IT'S IN THE PICTURE BELOW. OUR GDP LAST YEAR WAS AROUND 19,000 U.S. DOLLARS. THIS IS 37TH IN THE WORLD RANKING.

CONCERNING HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX, WE ARE IN 28TH. OUR ECONOMY IS BASED ON INDUSTRY AND SERVICES. FOR EXAMPLE, IN INDUSTRY, WE PRODUCE A LOT OF CARS, MICROELECTRONICS. THE SECOND LARGEST EUROPEAN MANUFACTURING PLANT OF MEMORY IS LOCATED IN PORTUGAL. WE EXPORT A LOT OF MACHINERY NOW, FOR EXAMPLE, TO VIETNAM, CHINA, ALSO TO BRAZIL AND EUROPE.

THE CURRENCY IS THE EURO. THAT WILL MAKE LIFE EASY FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE.

AND WE ARE IN THE SAME TIME ZONE AS LONDON.

WE ARE A QUITE OPEN ECONOMY. THIS IS A REPORT FROM A.T. KEARNEY. PORTUGAL IS RANKED IN 16TH PLACE CONCERNING THE GLOBALIZATION OF OUR ECONOMY.

MOVING TO LISBON, LISBON IS LOCATED MORE OR LESS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE COUNTRY. OF COURSE CLOSE TO THE ATLANTIC COAST. THE POPULATION OF THE CITY ITSELF IS AROUND 850,000 INHABITANTS, BUT GREATER LISBON HAS 2 1/2 MILLION AVERAGE IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA. ALMOST HALF OF THE POPULATION OF THE COUNTRY.

LISBON IS ONE OF THE WARMEST CAPITALS IN EUROPE. THE MEETING WILL BE TAKING PLACE IN THE BEGINNING OF SPRING. USUALLY THE WEATHER IS QUITE FINE. SOMETIMES WE HAVE SOME RAIN. NOT SO STRONG AS HERE IN SAO PAULO. BUT USUALLY AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE A LOT OF SUNNY DAYS.

LISBON CHANGED A LOT IN THE LAST 30 YEARS, BASICALLY BECAUSE THE RIVER TAGUS THAT FLOWS IN LISBON HAS A VERY WIDE [INAUDIBLE] AND THAT PRESENTED A BIG BARRIER FROM MOVING TO THE NORTH TO THE SOUTH. IN 1966, IT WAS BUILT THE FIRST BRIDGE. FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT KNOW THE GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE IN SAN FRANCISCO, IT IS VERY SIMILAR. THAT HELPED A LOT. AND RECENTLY, WE BUILT ANOTHER BRIDGE. IT'S THE LONGEST BRIDGE IN EUROPE. IT'S SHOWN IN THE UPPER PICTURE. IT'S THE PONTE VASCO DA GAMA. VASCO DA GAMA IS A WIDELY KNOWN NAVIGATOR. THE BRIDGE IS RATHER LONG, AS YOU CAN SEE.

LISBON HAS A LOT OF LANDMARKS IN ITS HISTORY. I WILL NOT TALK ABOUT THE WARS. WE HAVE THE FRENCH INVASIONS, SOME WARS WITH OUR NOW SPANISH FRIENDS, BUT WE HAD A MASSIVE EARTHQUAKE IN 1755 THAT DESTROYED, TOGETHER WITH A TSUNAMI, THE CENTER OF LISBON, AND LISBON HAS BEEN COMPLETELY REBUILT.

AND THEN A RECENT EVENT, YOU JUST CAN SEE ON THE TOP SOME REMAININGS OF THE RUINS OF THAT EARTHQUAKE.

BUT RECENTLY IN 1998, WE HAD THE WORLD EXHIBITION THAT HELPED TO REBUILD A BIG PART OF DISTANT PART OF THE CITY, QUITE NEW, VERY NICE TO VISIT.

LISBON, WE HAVE VERY GOOD FLIGHT CONNECTIONS TO EUROPE, OF COURSE. MANY DAILY FLIGHTS TO THE MAIN CITIES. WE HAVE DAILY FLIGHTS TO NORTH AMERICA. BOSTON AND ESPECIALLY NEW YORK, THE TWO MAIN AIRPORTS IN NEW YORK. AND OF COURSE TO SOUTH AMERICA, BUT ALSO TO AFRICA, AND THAT'S QUITE IMPORTANT.

WE ARE ONE OF THE SAFEST CITIES IN EUROPE. WE ARE A GOOD DESTINATION FOR A LOT OF ACTIVITIES. NAMELY, GOLF. GOLF IS VERY POPULAR. IF YOU ENJOY GOLF, YOU CAN -- AFTER THE MEETING. BEFORE THE MEETING, YOU HAVE TO PREPARE FOR ALL THE WORK, BUT AFTER THE MEETING, YOU CAN RELAX PLAYING GOLF IN PORTUGAL.

THIS IS A MAP ABOUT THE CITY OF LISBON. IN ORANGE, YOU'LL SEE THE URBAN AREA, AND IN RED THE TWO MAIN METROPOLITAN AREAS.

IN YELLOW, YOU -- YOU HAVE CABO DE ROCA, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE WESTERNMOST POINT OF THE EUROPEAN CONTINENT. IT'S A NICE PLACE TO VISIT.

CONCERNING THE VENUE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE HOTEL, THE AIRPORT, AND DOWNTOWN ARE RATHER CLOSE. THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW WITH THE TWO BRIDGES. IN THE BOTTOM, THE BRIDGE -- THE ONE THAT I MENTIONED IS QUITE SIMILAR IN ARCHITECTURE OF GOLDEN GATE, GOING TO THE SOUTH END, THE OTHER ONE IS A STRAIGHT -- A NARROW LINE. IT'S DIFFICULT TO SEE. MORE TO THE CENTER.

CONCERNING ICT IN PORTUGAL, INFORMATION SOCIETY IS ONE OF THE PRIORITIES OF THE GOVERNMENT. WE HAVE AN INITIATIVE CALLED LIGARPORTUGAL. THAT MEANS "CONNECT PORTUGAL." WE HAVE SOME GOOD EXAMPLES WHERE THE TECHNOLOGY IS WIDELY ADVANCED. ONE OF THE MOST ADVANCED ATM NETWORKS IN THE WORLD IS THE ONE THAT WE RUN IN PORTUGAL. IT'S NOT ONLY AN ATM NETWORK BECAUSE IN THE KIOSKS YOU CAN -- IN ADDITION OF GETTING MONEY, YOU CAN DO A LOT OF SERVICES: PAY YOUR BILLS, BUY TICKETS, BUY INSURANCE. YOU CAN DO A LOT OF THINGS FROM THOSE ATMS.

IN THE SECOND SEMESTER OF NEXT YEAR, PORTUGAL WILL BE IN THE PRESIDENCY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. I SUPPOSE MOST OF YOU KNOW THERE'S A ROTATING PRESIDENCY, AND WE WILL BE IN THE PRESIDENCY IN THE SECOND SEMESTER. AND ONE OF THE PRIORITIES OF THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE INFORMATION SOCIETY ISSUES BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY RELEVANT FOR THE LISBON AGENDA.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE -- A GRAPH WHERE WE SHOW THE PENETRATION OF INTERNET IN HOUSEHOLDS. WE ARE STILL LAGGING BEHIND THE EUROPEAN AVERAGE, BUT WE ARE GROWING IN -- BASICALLY IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, BROADBAND IS GROWING VERY FAST.

THE MEETING WILL TAKE PLACE IN THIS HOTEL. IT'S CALLED THE CORINTHIA LISBON HOTEL. IT'S A FIVE-STAR HOTEL. IT HAS A LOT OF ROOMS. BUT NEARBY THIS HOTEL, WITHIN A 5-MINUTE WALK, THERE ARE MANY OTHER HOTELS. THE AIRPORT IS RATHER CLOSE.

THIS SEVEN KILOMETERS IS NOT IN A STRAIGHT LINE. IT IS BY MAIN ROADS. WE HAVE A SUBURBAN RAILWAY STATION AND AN UNDERGROUND STATION VERY CLOSE, A SHOPPING CENTER ACROSS THE STREET AND MANY RESTAURANTS NEARBY. YOU CAN WALK. IT IS A SAFE CITY, AND I HOPE THE WEATHER IS FINE.

THIS IS AN ANOTHER DIAGRAM SHOWING THE HOTEL WITH A SWIMMING POOL, IF THE WEATHER ALLOWS YOU, YOU CAN GO TO SWIMMING POOL.

THIS RED LINE SHOWS THE STREET WHERE THERE ARE MANY HOTELS. THE STREET IS 600 METERS LONG, SO IT IS VERY EASY TO WALK. YOU HAVE MANY, MANY GOOD HOTELS AROUND THAT AREA AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE TOP, THE RAILWAY STATION AND BELOW YOU CANNOT SEE FROM HERE, THE UNDERGROUND STATION.

CONCERNING THE REGISTRY OF DOT PT. THIS IS A UNIT OF FCCN. FCCN IS THE ORGANIZATION RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION NETWORK. WE HAVE A BACKBONE RUNNING AT TEN GIGABYTES PER SECOND USING OUR OWN FIBER. WE HAVE FIBER RUNNING ALONG THE PORTUGUESE COAST. WE CONNECT ALL UNIVERSITIES, PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND WE HOPE THE CONNECTIVITY WILL BE GOOD ENOUGH SO THAT YOU ALL HAVE VERY FAST INTERNET CONNECTION FROM THE HOTEL.

WE ALSO RUN THE PORTUGUESE INTERNET EXCHANGE. CONCERNING THE NUMBER OF DOMAINS, AT THE MOMENT WE HAVE 115,000 DOMAINS. WE SUPPORT IPV6 AND IDNS FOR AROUND TWO YEARS. CONCERNING IDNS, WE ONLY SUPPORT THE PORTUGUESE-SPECIFIC CHARACTERS.

WE HAVE IN LISBON A COPY OF THE F ROOT SERVER, ANYCAST. AND WE HAVE AGREEMENTS WITH 100 REGISTRARS INSIDE THE COUNTRY AND IN THE WORLD.

THE WEB SITE IS UP AND RUNNING. YOU CAN VISIT IT. ALL THE RELEVANT INFORMATION IS IN THERE, AND YOU CAN ALSO LISTEN TO THE SITE BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME PORTUGUESE MUSIC ASSOCIATED WITH IT. I WILL NOW TAKE YOU THROUGH A SMALL FLIGHT TO LISBON.

AS YOU KNOW, NOW WE ARE IN SAO PAULO. WE ARE APPROACHING SAO PAULO IN THE TRANSAMERICA HOTEL. OF COURSE, YOU CAN IDENTIFY THE SWIMMING POOL WHERE SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN SWIMMING. OF COURSE, YOU GOT WET ALSO OUTSIDE THE SWIMMING POOL.

FROM HERE TO GO TO LISBON, YOU HAVE TO CROSS THE ATLANTIC. TO YOUR RIGHT, YOU HAVE AFRICA SO AFRICA IS CLOSE TO LISBON AND WE HOPE THAT A LOT OF AFRICAN PARTICIPATION WILL BE POSSIBLE. YOU WILL LAND IN THE MAIN RUNWAY OF THE LISBON AIRPORT, SO WE ARE JUST LANDING.

[ LAUGHTER ]

[ APPLAUSE ]

AND FROM HERE, YOU WILL TAKE A TAXI OR A BUS TO THE AIRPORT -- TO THE HOTEL. WE ARE GOING TO SHOW IMMEDIATELY THE ROUTE. IT IS RATHER CLOSE. WE WILL TAKE ONE OF THE SIDE ROADS IN LISBON. THE TRAFFIC IS USUALLY HEAVY BUT IT IS A SHORT DRIVE. IT IS NOT AS HEAVY AS IN SAO PAULO.

SO WE ARE APPROACHING THE HOTEL. THE HOTEL IS CLEARLY MARKED. TO THE RIGHT YOU HAVE A BIG SHOPPING CENTER, AND THE STREET JUST ON TOP IS THE ONE THAT HAS A LOT OF HOTELS. SO IT IS A CONVENIENT PLACE FOR THE MEETING.

I WILL TRY TO STOP THE MOVIE. CONCERNING THE PORTUGUESE LANGUAGE, YOU KNOW HERE IN BRAZIL THEY SPEAK THE PORTUGUESE LANGUAGE. THE NUMBER BRAZILIANS SPEAKING PORTUGUESE IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THE ONES SPEAKING IN PORTUGAL. IN MY OPINION, THE MAIN SOURCE OF PORTUGUESE IS HERE. ACCORDING TO THIS RANKING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD SPEAKING PORTUGUESE IS 230 MILLION. THE PORTUGUESE INTERNET IS GROWING VERY FAST, AND WE HOPE THAT TAKING THE ICANN MEETING TO LISBON WILL GIVE MORE VISIBILITY TO THE ACTIVITIES AND THE POSSIBILITIES THAT THE INTERNET BRINGS.

IN ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM THE BRAZILIAN ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, AND MY FRIENDS, YOU HAD A LIST OF WORDS IN ENGLISH AND IN PORTUGUESE. I AM SURE YOU HAVE BEEN TRAINING HARD, AND THAT'S GOOD NEWS BECAUSE YOU WILL BE ABLE TO USE THE SAME WORDS WHEN YOU ARRIVE TO LISBON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND BE WELCOME IN LISBON IN MARCH NEXT YEAR.

[ APPLAUSE ]

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PEDRO. I KNOW ALL OF US ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO COMING TO LISBON. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ANNETTE MUEHLBERG IF SHE WOULD GIVE A REPORT NOW ON BEHALF OF THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

>>ANNETTE MUEHLBERG: OKAY. MY NAME IS ANNETTE MUEHLBERG. I AM VERY PLEASED TO GIVE YOU THE REPORT FROM THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THE ALAC HAS GOOD NEWS. THE ALAC HAS GOOD NEWS, AND HERE THEY ARE, RIGHT?

[ LAUGHTER ]

OKAY. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED.

>>VINT CERF: THE ALAC HAS GOOD NEWS, BUT THE COMPUTER DOESN'T. YOU'RE UP NOW.

>>ANNETTE MUEHLBERG: ALL RIGHT. HERE WE GO. RIGHT AT THIS MEETING HERE IN SAO PAULO, WE FOUNDED OUR FIRST REGIONAL AT-LARGE ORGANIZATION.

[ APPLAUSE ]

AND THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING. WE WILL HAVE -- WE HAVE IN PLACE FOR THE LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN REGIONAL AT-LARGE ORGANIZATION 20 AT-LARGE STRUCTURES, AND THEY FOUNDED THIS ORGANIZATION RIGHT HERE ON TUESDAY. THIS IS A GOOD START FOR MORE REGIONAL AT-LARGE ORGANIZATIONS IN ALL THE REGIONS OF THE WORLD.

AND AS THIS PART IS SO IMPORTANT FOR US, I WOULD LIKE AFTER MY COMMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHO IS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE LATIN AMERICAN/CARIBBEAN TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION ON THIS FOUNDATION. I WILL GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW -- A WHOLE OVERVIEW ON WHAT THE ALAC ACTIVITIES WERE IN THE PAST AND WHAT WE ARE PLANNING TO DO IN THE FUTURE.

SO THE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT LOOKS LIKE THAT. WE HAVE 67 AT-LARGE STRUCTURES WORLDWIDE BY NOW, 13 IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC; AND WE ARE HAPPY TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE WILL HAVE A MEETING IN FEBRUARY TO FINALIZE THE MOU FOR ASIA-PACIFIC.

WE HAVE EIGHT AT-LARGE STRUCTURES IN AFRICA ALSO WORKING ON THEIR OPERATING PRINCIPLES. WE HAVE NINE ALSS IN NORTH AMERICA AND WE ALREADY HAD AN OUTREACH MEETING IN CANADA WHICH WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL GAINING MORE AT-LARGE STRUCTURES. WE HAVE 17 ALSS IN EUROPE. WE ARE ABOUT TO FINALIZE THE BYLAWS, AND WE HOPE THAT WE WILL MAKE IT FOR THE START NEXT YEAR TO FOUND THE NEXT ORGANIZATION, THE EURALO, AND THERE ARE ALREADY AGAIN TEN MORE ALSS IN PROCESS.

WHAT ARE WE DOING THIS FOR? WE DON'T WANT TO JUST CREATE ORGANIZATIONS FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING ORGANIZATIONS, WE DON'T WANT TO ESTABLISH MORE BUREAUCRACY. OUR GOALS ARE STRENGTHENING THE BOTTOM-UP STRUCTURE OF ICANN; PROVIDE USERS' CONCERNS INPUT; INVOLVE THEM IN DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES AND GIVING THEM MEANINGFUL PARTICIPATION.

WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THAT JUST BEFORE THE BREAK, SO I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE. I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

THE ALAC GAVE A LOT OF ADVICE. WE GAVE A STATEMENT ON THE DOT COM SETTLEMENT AND THE RENEWAL OF VERISIGN. YOU ALL KNOW WE WERE NOT REALLY HAPPY WITH THAT.

WE HAD OUR CONCERNS AND STILL HAVE THEM ABOUT THE ISSUE OF COMPETITION OF PRIVACY AND THE EFFECT OF PRICE INCREASES.

WE ALSO PROVIDED COMMENTS AND COLLECTED PUBLIC COMMENTS OPPOSING THE RUSH IN APPROVING THE NEW DOT BIZ, ORG AND INFO. I THINK WE CAN JUST WAIT UNTIL THE PDP IS DONE.

WE GAVE MORE INPUTS ON THE D.O.C. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON MOU. WE GAVE INPUTS ON THE INTRODUCTION OF IDNS. AND I WANTED TO ASSURE YOU, THAT WE ARE WORKING ON THE ISSUE OF IDN VERY HARDLY BECAUSE IT IS AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR THE END USERS. WE HAD A WORKSHOP IN MARRAKECH ON THAT, A REALLY SUCCESSFUL WORKSHOP, AND WE WANT TO GO ON WITH THAT AND GIVING A STUDY ON CERTAIN ISSUES OF CONCERNS OF USERS AND EXPECTATIONS, WHAT THEY EXPECT ON IDNS.

SO WE ALSO DID SOMETHING ABOUT OUR INTERNAL PROCEDURES. WE ESTABLISHED A VOTING TOOL TO APPROVE ALL THE ALSS BECAUSE AS YOU CAN IMAGINE IT IS GETTING MORE AND MORE AND MORE AND MORE NOW. SO WE HAVE TO HAVE AN EFFICIENT STRUCTURE TO VOTE ON THOSE. WE COMPLETED OUR INTERNAL REVIEW, AND I'M VERY HAPPY TO SAY THAT WE DID THAT ON A CONSENSUS BASIS.

WE COME ALL FROM DIFFERENT REGIONS AND WE HAVE ALL DIFFERENT CHARACTERS, BUT WE DID MANAGE TO DO IT IN A CONSENSUS, BUT IT IS ALSO GOOD TO SEE THAT THE ALS -- OH, GOD, LSE REVIEW REFLECTS THE SAME ISSUES ON THE GNSO POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AS WE ADDRESS THEM IN OUR REVIEW. SO I THINK THERE ARE THINGS, YOU KNOW, WHICH ARE ALREADY THERE AND WE CAN DISCUSS.

AND I ALSO WANT TO THANK IN THIS CASE OUR ICANNWIKI FOLKS WHO HELPS US DO THIS CONCEPT, WHO DEVELOPED THIS CONSENSUS PAPER BECAUSE WE GOT A TOOL PROVIDED AND SOME HELP PROVIDED TO DO SO.

WE ESTABLISHED A NEW WEB SITE AND WE ARE ALSO USING A LOT OF THE ICANNWIKI TOOLS AND WE CERTAINLY IMPROVED OUR ALAC MAILING LISTS. HERE ARE SOME GOOD AND SOME SAD NEWS. WE ARE VERY HAPPY AND VERY PLEASED TO SEE THAT ROBERTO GAETANO IS MOVING TO THE ICANN BOARD. WE ARE ALSO VERY PLEASED TO SEE THAT SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI WILL REPRESENT US AT THE NOMCOM. WE ARE VERY SAD TO SAY THAT BRET FAUSETT, WHO IS OUR LIAISON TO THE GNSO, AND JEAN POLLY WHO IS OUR WEB SITE MASTER, THAT THOSE ARE GOING TO LEAVE THE ALAC. OF COURSE, WE STILL WILL BE IN TOUCH WITH THEM BUT THEY WON'T BE PART OF THE ALAC AS A TEAM HERE.

WE ARE VERY HAPPY TO WELCOME NEW MEMBERS, ALAN GREENBERG FROM CANADA, AND THE NEW ELECTED LAC MEMBERS, CARLOS FROM ARGENTINA AND JOSE FROM VENEZUELA. I CAN SAY IT IS ALWAYS WORTH JOINING THE ALAC BECAUSE YOU ARE ON THE WINNING TEAM.

[ APPLAUSE ]

AND THIS WINNING TEAM, WE ARE THE AT-LARGE, AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT THE AT-LARGE HAS MANY MEMBERS. AND SO WE HAVE A LOT OF ENERGY AND WE WILL WIN. THANK YOU.

[ APPLAUSE ]

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ANNETTE, THAT'S WONDERFUL. YES, PLEASE. SOME DAY WE WILL FIND A WIRELESS WAY TO CONNECT THESE LAPTOPS UP TO THE PROJECTION SYSTEMS.

>>SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI: THANKS, ANNETTE. MY NAME IS SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI. I AM THE OUTGOING MEMBER FROM LATIN AMERICA. OKAY, THERE WE ARE. I AM HERE TO PRESENT YOU SOME FACTS ABOUT THE RECENTLY CREATED LATIN AMERICAN RALO. WE HAVE IN THIS ORGANIZATION 20 AT-LARGE STRUCTURES PLUS THREE IN THE ACCREDITATION PROCESS. THIS IS THE LIST OF THOSE AT-LARGE STRUCTURES. WE ARE ALREADY ENGAGING IN THIS PROCESS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE ALL OF ISO CHAPTERS. THIS WAS ONE OF THE MOST DISCUSSED ISSUES AS I REMEMBER THREE YEARS AGO. WE HAVE THREE ISO CHAPTERS HERE, AND 17 ORGANIZATIONS FROM DIFFERENT -- 17 DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS. I AM NOT GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT ALL OF THEM.

BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF HOW THIS IS BE BEING ORGANIZED, WE HAVE A BROAD GEOGRAPHIC COVERAGE. YOU CAN SEE IT IS THAT WE HAVE AN ORGANIZATIONS FROM ARGENTINA, BARBADOS, BRAZIL, COSTA RICA, GUYANA, JAMAICA, MEXICO, PERU. WE WENT THROUGH SOME PROCESS. I REALLY WANT TO MAKE THIS SHORT. WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS IN THE LAST YEAR IN WHICH WE TRIED REALLY HARD TO PUSH THIS TO MAKE IT FLY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, REALIZE THAT THIS ISSUE WAS REALLY A DEMAND FROM ICANN AND FROM THE OVERALL AT-LARGE COMMITTEE. SO WE HAD A MEETING IN BUENOS AIRES IN SEPTEMBER THIS YEAR. AND WE KEEP WORKING WITH THE MOU AND DRAFTING OUR OPERATING PRINCIPLES. WE HAD A PERIOD OF PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THAT. WE RECEIVED COMMENT FROM THE CANADIAN CIRA AND FROM THE AT-LARGE COMMITTEE, SO WE TAKE THEIR SUGGESTIONS, DRAFT SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THE DOCUMENTS. AND WE SIGNED THE MOU HERE AT SAO PAULO ON DECEMBER 4TH. SO NOW WE ARE STARTING A NEW CONSULTATIONS PERIOD AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE THE BOARD!

RATIFICATION.

NOW THIS IS MAKING US VERY HAPPY, OF COURSE, THE RESULTS OF TOUGH WORK OF THREE YEARS; BUT IT IS REALLY ONLY THE BEGINNING OF THIS EXPERIMENT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE. NOW THE RALO IS IN PLACE BUT WE WILL NEED TO WORK REALLY HARD TO MAKE SURE IT FULFILLS ITS OBJECTIONS. HOW COULD WE ENSURE FRUITFUL PARTICIPATION FROM THESE DIFFERENT STRUCTURES, ESTABLISHING COMMUNICATION MECHANISMS WITH THE ALAC AND THOSE STRUCTURES AND HOW THESE ORGANIZATIONS WILL WORK TOGETHER. WE NEED TO FIND MORE ORGANIZATIONS IN THE REGION, MORE INTERESTED ORGANIZATIONS IN THE NARROW ICANN MISSION AND WE ALSO WILL NEED TO FIND SOME FUNDING SOURCES TO MAKE SURE THIS RALO IS SELF-SUSTAINABLE AT LEAST IN THE MIDTERM.

THE REAL CHALLENGE, I THINK, IT WILL BE TO ASSURE THAT THIS RALO AND THIS WHOLE STRUCTURE, TO MAKE IT A TOOL TO REALLY CHANNEL THE USER CONCERNS. AND THAT'S INVOLVED PROCEDURES, MECHANISMS, A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE WILL NEED TO DEVELOP IN THE COMING MONTH.

SO THE FINAL WORD IS FROM THE LATIN AMERICANS WHO WILL WORKING IN THIS BIG, THANKS FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE, FOR BOARD MEMBERS AND ESPECIALLY TO ALEJANDRO PISANTY AND ROBERTO GAETANO, FOR DENISE MICHEL, (SAYING NAMES) FOR MICHAEL EVANS, (SAYING NAME), JOHN JEFFREY, BRUCE BECKWITH, MARILYN CADE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HELPING US COMING TO THIS POINT AND A SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE HARD WORK THE STAFF DID FOR US. WE ARE VERY THANKFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[ APPLAUSE ]

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SEBASTIAN. I HOPE THE WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO CREATING THE LAC RALO COULD BE USED AS A MODEL FOR SOME OTHERS AND THEY WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT. I WONDER IF I COULD INVITE SEBASTIAN BELLAGAMBA TO COME UP TO MAKE HIS ADDRESS ABOUT THE ADDRESS SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE HAS BEEN A SMALL TRANSFORMATION. ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE THE REPORT, RAY?

SO THIS IS BEGINNING WITH RAY PLZAK WHO IS THE C.E.O. OF ARIN.

>>RAY PLZAK: GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN. AS WE DID IN THE LAST MEETING IN MARRAKECH, IT IS A COMBINED REPORT FROM THE NRO ON BEHALF OF THE ASO AND ALSO THE CHAIR OF THE ADDRESS COUNCIL ON BEHALF OF THE ADDRESS COUNCIL. INSTEAD OF ME BEING HERE, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RAUL ECHEBERRIA, THE CHAIR OF THE NRONC. I'M NOT RAUL ECHEBERRIA. I DO NOT PLAY HIM ON URUGUAYAN TELEVISION. AND IN THE CASE OF IDENTITY CRISIS, THAT HAPPENED HERE ON THE TRANSCRIPT, THE REAL SEBASTIAN BELLAGAMBA IS STANDING HERE.

WE IN DESCRIBING WHAT WE WERE DOING IN TERMS OF DOING A JOINT PRESENTATION HERE MENTIONED IN PASSING IN THE HALLWAYS WE'RE MORE LIKE THIS OLD AMERICAN TEAM OF MUTT AND JEFF. SO ALL YOU HAVE TO DO FROM NOW ON IS CALL ON MUTT AND JEFF AND WHOEVER IS HERE REPRESENTING US WILL COME UP AND GIVE THE PRESENTATION TO YOU. WITH THAT INTRODUCTION, I AM GOING TO PRESENT THE PORTION THAT...

HERE WE GO. AND WE WILL DISCUSS THE ORGANIZATION, AND AS ALWAYS, WE WILL GIVE THE BOARD A REPORT ON THE RECENT INTERNET NUMBER RESOURCE AND THEN VARIOUS DISCUSSIONS THROUGHOUT THE REGION. FROM AN ORGANIZATIONAL STANDPOINT AS IS WELL KNOWN, THE NRO IS FORMED BY THE IRRS TO FORMALIZE OUR COOPERATIVE EFFORTS. THE SEVERAL REASONS THE NRO EXISTS IS BECAUSE OF THE IRRS' DESIRE TO WORK WITHIN THE ICANN FRAMEWORK AND TO WORK AND SUPPORT ICANN AND THAT IS TO PROTECT THE UNALLOCATED NUMBER RESOURCE POOL AND TO PROMOTE THE BOTTOM-UP POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND BY FORMING TOGETHER COLLABORATIVELY WE ENABLE ICANN TO ADDRESS ALL OF US AS A SINGLE VOICE.

>>VINT CERF: JUST A REMINDER, RAY, TO SLOW DOWN A LITTLE BIT ON BEHALF OF THE TRANSLATION AND THE TRANSCRIBERS.

>>RAY PLZAK: I AM TRYING TO MAKE UP YOUR TIME, TOO.

>>VINT CERF: I UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

>>RAY PLZAK: NO PROBLEM. NO PROBLEM.

SO ANYWAY, THIS IS THE WAY WE ARE ORGANIZED. WE HAVE A SECRETARIAT AND EXECUTIVE COUNCIL WHICH IS COMPOSED OF A MEMBER APPOINTED BY EACH IRR AND CURRENTLY THAT IS THE FIVE CEOS AND ALSO A NUMBERS COUNCIL WHICH IS -- PERFORMS FUNCTIONS AS THE ADDRESS COUNCIL. WE ALSO HAVE SEVERAL FORMAL COORDINATION GROUPS THAT ALLOW US TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY ON TECHNICAL EFFORTS, SUCH AS THE REVERSE DNS AND ALSO ON COMMUNICATIONS OUTREACH.

THIS IS THE CURRENT COUNCIL. OUR OFFICERS ROTATE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AND THIS IS WHAT THE BOARD WILL LOOK LIKE NEXT YEAR. AND THIS IS WHAT WE LOOKED LIKE SEVERAL YEARS AGO, AND HOPEFULLY WE STILL LOOK VERY SIMILAR.

[ LAUGHTER ]

CURRENT THINGS THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN AND THAT WE ARE WORKING ON, DAVID CONRAD MENTIONED THIS MORNING THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE NRO AND ICANN REGARDING SUCH THINGS AS INCLUDING THE SERVICES THAT IANA PROVIDES TO THE IRRS. WE ARE ALSO VERY INTERESTED IN CONTINUING TO PARTICIPATE WHERE WE CAN IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND EXECUTION OF THE ICANN STRATEGIC PLAN.

WE HAVE BEEN ACTIVE IN THE IGF MEETINGS. WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS ON THE ADVISORY GROUP, AND THAT IS RAUL ECHEBERRIA AND ADIEL AKPLOGAN FROM AFRINIC. WE HAVE RECENTLY CONCLUDED A LIAISON AGREEMENT WITH THE ITU-T. WE HAVE YET TO DO ANYTHING TO EXECUTE THAT ARRANGEMENT. WE FOLLOWED WITH INTEREST AND DID PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE GOVERNMENTS IN OUR VARIOUS REGIONS ON OUR VIEWS OF THE RESOLUTIONS THAT WERE BEING DISCUSSED AT THE ITU, IN PARTICULAR ITU RESOLUTION NUMBER 102. WE ARE CURRENTLY THIS WEEK ALONG WITH ICANN AND ISOC PARTICIPATING IN THE WORLD TELECOM ACTIVITY IN OPERATING AN INTERNET PAVILION BOOTH.

A COUPLE OTHER THINGS THAT WE ARE WORKING ON JOINTLY, ONE OF WHICH WAS AGAIN MENTIONED ABOUT DAVID IN HIS REPORT, IS THE USE OF CERTIFICATION, X.509. THIS IS TO PROVIDE SOME DEGREE OF SECURITY IN THE ROUTING SYSTEM, AND WE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT THE HARMONIZATION OF OUR ALLOCATION PRACTICES.

WE HAVE MANY COMMON POLICIES BETWEEN US AND WE ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO MAKE SURE THAT IN PARTICULAR THOSE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT COME TO US SEE THE SAME VIEW OF THE WAY THAT THOSE POLICIES ARE IMPLEMENTED. THIS IS NOT TO MEAN THAT WE ARE DEVELOPING A COMMON SET OF PRACTICES BETWEEN US BUT THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE EQUALLY HELPFUL WHENEVER YOU COME TO US THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

REAL QUICKLY I AM NOT GOING TO DWELL ON THESE NUMBERS.

THIS IS THE STATUS AS OF THE 30TH OF SEPTEMBER, THE AMOUNT OF IPV4 SPACE THAT HAS BEEN CONSUMED AND IS AVAILABLE. THERE HAVE BEEN VARIOUS FORECASTS, I WON'T USE THE WORD "PREDICTION," AS TO WHEN THE SPACE WILL BE EXHAUSTED. THERE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS IN SEVERAL OF THE IRR FORUMS ABOUT WHAT TO DO. IN FACT, THE APNIC AND ARIN FORUMS HAVE CONDUCTED ROUND TABLES ON THIS TO LOOK AT POSSIBLE THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE OR SHOULD BE DONE OR, AS DAVID MENTIONED, NOT BE DONE.

THIS IS THE TREND LINES YOU CAN SEE OF THE ALLOCATIONS FROM THE IRRS TO THE COMPONENT LIRS, ISPS. AND IF YOU VIEW IT AS A PIE CHART, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS.

AND IF YOU VIEW IT AS A PIE CHART, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS. AND THE AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM NUMBER ASSIGNMENTS, THE YEARLY COMPARISON BETWEEN THE REGISTRIES.

AND THE PIE CHART.

AND DAVID MENTIONED THE FACT THAT IANA HAD ALLOCATED 32-BIT ASNS, AND THIS IS IN REACTION TO A SHORTAGE OF IP -- OF AS NUMBERS THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE FUTURE.

IPV6, THIS REPRESENTS THE ALLOCATIONS OF /23S BY THE IANA TO THE RIRS, AND WE OBVIOUSLY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO RECAST THIS STATISTIC IN LIGHT OF THE NEW GLOBAL POLICY AND FIGURE OUT A DIFFERENT WAY OF PORTRAYING THIS.

AND THESE ARE THE ALLOCATIONS, AND YOU CAN SEE BY -- BY AND LARGE, THE BULK OF THE ALLOCATIONS HAVE BEEN DONE IN EUROPE.

AND FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE INTERESTED IN DOING ANYTHING WITH THE STATISTICS, THEY'RE AVAILABLE. THEY'RE UPDATED DAILY AT THE RIR WEB SITES.

A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ASO. IT'S THE NRO PLUS ICANN. IN FACT, THE NRO PERFORMS AND FULFILLS THE ROLE, RESPONSIBILITIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE ICANN ASO, AND ONE OF THOSE COMPONENTS THAT WE HAVE IS THE ADDRESS COUNCIL.

AND THE ADDRESS COUNCIL, IT HAS SPECIFIC ADVISORY DUTIES TO THE BOARD, AND SO I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO -- I BELIEVE YOU'RE MUTT. I'M NOT SURE. BUT IT'S SEBASTIAN. OKAY.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, RAY. SEBASTIAN?

>>SEBASTIAN BELLAGAMBA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU, RAY. I WILL GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ADDRESS COUNCIL.

JUST TO SUMMARIZE WHAT IS THE ADDRESS COUNCIL, AS RAY ALREADY MENTIONED, IT'S THE NRO NUMBERS COUNCIL FULFILLING THE ROLE OF THE ICANN ADDRESS COUNCIL. IT'S A NUMBER RESOURCE POLICY ADVISORY BODY FOR THE ICANN BOARD, AND IT'S ORGANIZED IN 15 MEMBERS, THREE FROM EACH OF THE FIVE RIR REGIONS. TWO OF THEM ARE ELECTED AT LARGE BY THE RIR COMMUNITIES, AND ONE IS APPOINTED BY THE RIR BOARD.

OKAY. SORRY.

AND WE DO HAVE RIR PLUS ICANN OBSERVERS IN OUR MEETINGS. AND MOST OF THE NRO NC, ISO AC MEMBERS HAVE THREE-YEARS TERM AS TARGET, AND WHAT WE DO IS ADVISE THE ICANN BOARD, SELECT TWO BOARD MEMBERS -- HERE ARE PRESIDENT RAIMUNDO BECA AND DAVE WODELET -- AND SELECT ONE ICANN NONCOM MEMBER. SANDY GEORGE IS -- I THINK IS OVER THERE. RIGHT THERE.

AND WE HAVE MONTHLY TELECONFERENCES AND TWO PHYSICAL MEETINGS EVERY YEAR. THE FIRST -- ONE IN THE FIRST SEMESTER AND ANOTHER ONE IN THE SECOND SEMESTER. ONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR RIR MEETING AND THE OTHER ONE WITH AN ICANN MEETING.

WE ARE ACTUALLY HAVING -- WE HAD AN ADDRESS COUNCIL MEETING, PHYSICAL MEETING, IN THIS ICANN MEETING IN SAO PAULO.

YOU WILL SEE HERE WHO ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE ADDRESS COUNCIL FOR EVERY RIR REGION. THE ONE WITH THE STAR IS APPOINTED BY THE RIR BOARD.

WE HAVE -- WE ARE ABOUT TO CHANGE ONE OF THE MEMBERS BECAUSE THERE WERE AN ELECTION IN THE RIPE REGION. DAVE WILSON IS GOING TO JOIN IN THE PLACE THAT SABINE JAUME ALREADY HAD, AND THREE OF OUR MEMBERS ARE BEING REELECTED: H.J. KWON, LOUIS LEE IN THE ARIN REGION, AND MYSELF FOR THE LACNIC REGION.

I AM CURRENTLY THE CHAIR. THE CHAIR HAS A TERM OF ONE YEAR, SO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A NEW ELECTION FOR CHAIR IN OUR FIRST MEETING IN -- FOR THE NEXT YEAR IN JANUARY.

AS I SAID, THESE ARE THE APPOINTEES FROM THE ADDRESS COUNCIL TO THE ICANN BOARD AT THE ICANN NOMCOM.

SINCE OUR LAST MEETING IN MARRAKECH AND THE LAST TIME WE MADE THE PRESENTATION, THOSE ARE THE CHANGES IN OUR POLICY DISCUSSIONS AND OUR POLICY ACTIVITIES IN THE RIR COMMUNITIES, AND I WILL NOT GO THROUGH EXPLAINING EVERY -- EVERY SINGLE POLICY. YOU HAVE IT IN OUR FORA FOR MORE DETAILS. SOME OF THE POLICIES HAS BEEN ADOPTED, SOME OF THE POLICIES ARE IN DISCUSSION, AND SOME OF THEM ARE BEING ABANDONED.

THIS CHART IS FOR IPV4 POLICY DISCUSSIONS. HERE YOU WILL FIND IN IPV6, AND OTHER POLICY DISCUSSIONS YOU WILL FIND IT IN THIS CHART.

THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE ICANN WEB SITE.

THE RIRS ARE HAVING PHYSICAL MEETINGS, AND YOU'LL SEE THE SCHEDULE HERE. AFRINIC IS GOING TO HAVE A PHYSICAL MEETING 1ST AND 2ND DAY OF MAY 2007 IN ABUJA, NIGERIA. APNIC IS GOING TO GET TOGETHER ABOUT THE LAST WEEK OF FEBRUARY IN BALI IN INDONESIA. ARIN IS GOING TO HAVE A MEETING LATE APRIL IN A PLACE TO BE ANNOUNCED. LACNIC IS GOING TO MEET IN ISLA MARGARITA, VENEZUELA LAST WEEK OF MAY. AND RIPE NCC IS GOING TO HAVE A MEETING IN TALLINN, ESTONIA, IN THE FIRST WEEK -- SECOND WEEK OF MAY.

ONE OF THE MAJOR ACTIVITIES WE HAD THIS YEAR WAS THE IPV6 GLOBAL POLICY, AND I'M SORRY, I GAVE YOU OUR BRIEF ON THAT POLICY IN MARRAKECH. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IT'S BEEN RATIFIED BY THE ICANN BOARD ON 7 SEPTEMBER THIS YEAR, AND I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE FOR THAT, AND IT WAS BY UNANIMITY.

IF YOU LIKE TO GO TO OUR POLICY ARCHIVES FOR THE RIR COMMUNITY, THE ASO COMMUNITY, YOU WILL FIND THE LINKS IN THIS SLIDE, AND THAT WOULD BE ALL, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SEBASTIAN.

[APPLAUSE]

>>VINT CERF: YOUR BREVITY IS MUCH APPRECIATED.

AND NOW I'D LIKE CHRIS DISSPAIN TO MAKE THE REPORT FOR THE COUNTRY CODE NAMES SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION.

A REMINDER, CHRIS: THIS IS BEING TRANSLATED AND IT'S TRANSLITERATED, OR TRANSCRIBED, SO PACE YOURSELF, PLEASE.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: I'LL DO MY BEST, VINT. THANK YOU.

AS HAS BECOME -- MY NAME IS CHRIS DISSPAIN. I'M THE CHAIR OF THE COUNTRY CODE NAME SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION. AS HAS BECOME TRADITIONAL, I WON'T DO A SLIDE PRESENTATION. WE HAVE A FORMAL REPORT WHICH IS ON LINE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENED SPECIFICALLY AT OUR MEETINGS, GO TO THERE AND READ THE REPORT. I'M JUST GOING TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW -- A FEW THINGS.

FIRST OF ALL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE CCNSO HAS BEEN WORKING ON FOR SOME TIME IS TRYING TO WORK OUT SOME SORT OF WAY OF GETTING BUDGET CONTRIBUTIONS INTO ICANN. WE HAVE COMPLETED THAT TASK IN A WAY WHICH MAY NOT BE SATISFACTORY TO EVERYONE, BUT WE'VE DONE OUR BEST AND PUBLISHED A GUIDELINE WHICH SETS OUT THE METHODOLOGY AND THE WAY THAT WE WOULD ENCOURAGE MEMBERS OF THE CCTLD COMMUNITY TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION TO THE COSTS OF ICANN. AND WE'RE DELIGHTED TO HAVE THAT MATTER OFF OUR PLATE.

JUST A FEW OTHER THINGS. ONE OF THE MAJOR TOPICS AT THIS MEETING FOR US HAS BEEN DOT IDN, IDN FROM A CCTLD POINT OF VIEW, AND WE'RE -- I THINK I CAN SAY THAT MOST MEMBERS OF THE CCNSO HAVE REACHED THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS IS AN EXTRAORDINARILY COMPLICATED AREA AND WE NEED TO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE GOVERNMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THIS, AND WE INTEND TO DO THAT.

IN RESPECT TO ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY, JUST A BRIEF COMMENT. WE HAD A VERY USEFUL MEETING WITH PAUL LEVINS, AND I THINK THERE IS CONSENSUS IN THE CCNSO THAT WHILST DOING WORK ON IMPROVING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY FROM AN ADMINISTRATION POINT OF VIEW IS VERY IMPORTANT, WE THINK THAT IS ONLY A PART OF THE PICTURE AND THAT THE WORK ON ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT FROM AN OVERARCHING CORPORATE GOVERNANCE POINT OF VIEW, AND WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TO ENSURE THAT THAT HAPPENS.

I'D LIKE TO ENDORSE THE COMMENTS THAT GEORGE SADOWSKY MADE IN RESPECT TO THE NOMCOM. I THINK HIS ADVICE TO THE BOARD ON WAYS OF IMPROVING IT IS COMPLETELY ON POINT, AND I THINK MOST MEMBERS OF THE CCNSO WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

ONE FINAL MATTER IN RESPECT TO ICANN SPECIFICALLY. I WAS VERY ENCOURAGED BY THE REPORT MADE BY DENISE IN RESPECT TO REVIEWS. AND AS I SAID, IT'S GREAT THAT THE NOMCOM ONE IS HAPPENING SOON.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUGGESTION IN RESPECT TO THE BOARD REVIEW. YOU'RE GOING TO BE LOSING A NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS OVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS. YOU HAVE THE HISTORY OF ICANN WITH THEM, AND I THINK THAT THAT IS A MATTER OF CONCERN. I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER MOVING THE TIMING OF THE BOARD REVIEW FORWARDS FROM OCTOBER, BECAUSE I SUSPECT THAT THAT WOULD -- IF YOU START IT IN OCTOBER NEXT YEAR, THEY WILL NOT -- IT WON'T BE COMPLETED BY THE TIME THINGS RADICALLY CHANGE. SO I'D REQUEST THAT THE BOARD CONSIDERS THAT AS A POSSIBILITY.

FINALLY, I'D JUST LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT THE CCNSO NOW HAS A TOTAL OF 57 MEMBERS. WE APPROVED THE MEMBERSHIPS OF NORWAY, JAMAICA, AND ECUADOR AT OUR MEETING YESTERDAY. OUR GOAL IS 60 BY LISBON, ALTHOUGH I KNOW THAT ALEX PISANTY WOULD LIKE ME TO HAVE A GOAL OF 100 BY THE THIS TIME NEXT YEAR, SO I'LL DO MY BEST, ALEX. THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHRIS. NOT ONLY WAS THAT A BRIEF REPORT, BUT IT WAS DONE IN A MEASURED FASHION, SO CHRIS, I THINK YOU GET THE PRIZE TODAY.

THE NEXT REPORT COMES FROM SHARIL TARMIZI, WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE GOVERNMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: THANK YOU, VINT. FOR A MOMENT THERE, I WAS LOOKING FOR A BOX, TO SEE WHETHER I NEEDED TO STAND ON A BOX TO REACH THE MICROPHONE. EVERYONE ELSE HAS BEEN A LOT TALLER THAN ME THIS MORNING.

I MAY NOT BE AS ELOQUENT AS MY PREVIOUS SPEAKER, BUT I WILL TRY, MR. CHAIRMAN.

BEFORE I GO INTO THE PRESENTATION, IF YOU WILL ALLOW ME, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAD WELL WISHES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU MAY HAVE HEARD THAT I WAS TAKEN ILL ON MONDAY EVENING, AND I ACTUALLY DISAPPEARED FOR ABOUT 48 HOURS DUE TO HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE. THE TEAM HERE IN BRAZIL, STEVE CONTE'S TEAM, PAULO, ROBERTO RUSHED ME TO THE HOSPITAL ON MONDAY NIGHT, AND THAT WAS WHERE I WAS ON MONDAY NIGHT, BEING TREATED FOR HYPERTENSION, SO --

I'M OKAY NOW, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO THE TEAM IN BRAZIL FOR DOING THAT.

OKAY. THE GAC COMMUNIQUE. THE GOVERNMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF ICANN MET IN SAO PAULO DURING DECEMBER 3RD TO THE 6TH.

THE PARTICIPATING GAC MEMBERS, COMPRISED OF 36 MEMBERS -- SORRY? MICROPHONE CLOSER?

-- MEMBERS FROM 36 COUNTRIES AND FIVE OBSERVERS. THE GAC EXPRESSED WARM THANKS TO THE BRAZILIAN INTERNET STEERING COMMITTEE AND THE ORGANIZERS FOR HOSTING THE MEETING IN SAO PAULO.

ON WHOIS AND GTLD, YOU MAY READ THAT, BUT IT'S A BIT SMALL. THE GAC REVIEWED ITS DRAFT PRINCIPLES REGARDING WHOIS DATA, AND INCORPORATED ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVES TO ILLUMINATE THE RANGE OF PUBLIC POLICY INTERESTS AND CONCERNS RELATED TO WHOIS SERVICES AND THEIR USE.

THE PRINCIPLES ARE INTENDED TO GUIDE THE WORK WITHIN ICANN PERTAINING TO WHOIS SERVICES. AND THE GAC RESTATED ITS INTENTION TO ADOPT THESE PRINCIPLES IN LISBON IN MARCH 2007. IT IS HOPED THAT THE GAC TIMETABLE FOR THIS INITIATIVE WILL, INTER ALIA, ENABLE THE GAC TO PROVIDE TIMELY INPUT TO THE ONGOING ICANN POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ON NEW GTLDS. THE GAC ACKNOWLEDGED THAT ITS DISCUSSIONS ON THESE ISSUES BENEFITTED FROM THE PRESENTATIONS BY THE GNSO DURING THE PUBLIC FORUM OUTLINING THE STATUS AND SCOPE OF ITS POLICY DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS IN THESE AREAS.

>>VINT CERF: SHARIL, JUST A REMINDER THAT THIS IS BEING TRANSLATED, SO SLOW DOWN A LITTLE.

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: YES, SIR. I'LL TRY AND SLOW DOWN.

ON IDN, THE GAC ACKNOWLEDGED THE PROGRESS MADE BY THE ICANN PRESIDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IDNS AND THE LABORATORY TEST DESIGN PLANS. THE GAC RESTATED THE IMPORTANCE IT ATTACHES TO IDNS AS FACILITATORS FOR THE USE OF THE INTERNET IN RELATION TO NON-ASCII-SCRIPT-BASED LANGUAGES. THE GAC APPRECIATED THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE GNSO COUNCIL AND FELT THAT ISSUES OF PUBLIC POLICY SHOULD BE DEVELOPED BY THE GAC ON A PRIORITY BASIS, IN DISCUSSION WITH GNSO AND CCNSO CONSTITUENCIES IN THE ONGOING POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

ON IPV6, THE GAC REVIEWED DEVELOPMENTS ON THE GLOBAL IPV6 ALLOCATION POLICY, WHICH THE ICANN BOARD RATIFIED ON 7 SEPTEMBER 2006, AND ACKNOWLEDGED THE IMPORTANCE OF ITS ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT IN FUTURE DISCUSSIONS ON GLOBAL IPV6 ALLOCATION POLICY.

ON THE GAC REFORM, THE GAC FINALIZED THE DOCUMENT ON PRIORITIZATION OF GAC'S WORK AND INTRODUCTION OF TARGET-BASED PERFORMANCE THAT CONTAINED THE GAC'S WORK PROGRAM FOR 2007.

I SHOULD SAY THIS DOCUMENT IS ACTUALLY ANNEXED TO THE COMMUNIQUE. I WON'T READ IT, BUT YOU -- I WOULD INVITE YOU TO HAVE A LOOK AT THAT, BECAUSE IT GIVES -- IT SHARES OUR THINKING OF WHAT WE MIGHT WANT TO DO IN 2007.

NOW, THE INTENTION OF SHARING THIS INFORMATION IS TO ENABLE PLANNING AND -- SORRY. EXCUSE ME, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST SORT OF LOST MY LINK. IF YOU GIVE ME A MOMENT.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A SOFT COPY AND YOU DON'T HAVE A HARD COPY. I JUST LOST THE LINK.

YEAH. IT IS HOPED -- EXCUSE ME A MINUTE. I HAVE A BIT OF A PROBLEM WITH THE -- I APOLOGIZE FOR THIS, MR. CHAIRMAN. THERE IS A BIT OF A PROBLEM WITH MY PC.

YES.

>>VINT CERF: IS THAT A GOVERNMENT-ISSUED COMPUTER?

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: UNFORTUNATELY, IT IS, YES.

>>VINT CERF: THAT MIGHT BE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

[LAUGHTER]

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: YEAH. OKAY. IT IS OUR INTENTION -- SORRY, SIR -- TO COORDINATE GAC'S WORK WITH THE REST OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY, AND IT'S PARTICULARLY DRIVEN BY GAC'S OBJECTIVE TO FURTHER INTENSIFY DIALOGUE AND INTERACTION WITH THE REST OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY.

THE GAC UNDERTOOK DISCUSSIONS REGARDING HOW GAC AND ICANN COULD RESPOND TO THE CHALLENGES STEMMING FROM THE OUTCOME OF THE WORLD SUMMIT ON INFORMATION SOCIETY, PARTICULARLY THE INTERPRETATION OF "ENHANCED COOPERATION." WE SPENT SOME TIME ON THAT.

NOW, IN RELATION TO ICANN BOARD AND GAC COOPERATION, THE ICANN BOARD AND GAC DISCUSSED HOW TO BETTER SYNCHRONIZE GAC'S WORK WITH ICANN'S STRATEGIC PRIORITIES. THE GAC SUGGESTS THAT THE ICANN BOARD CONSIDERS DEVELOPING, IN CONSULTATION WITH ALL CONSTITUENCIES, A MASTER CALENDAR TO ADDRESS IMPORTANT LONG-TERM SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES.

THE GAC ALSO HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH ICANN'S -- ON ICANN'S CONTINGENCY PLANNING.

ON THE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY PRINCIPLES, THE GAC ALSO PROVIDED PRELIMINARY INPUT TO THE BOARD'S CALL FOR COMMENTS ON TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT OPERATING PRINCIPLES. THIS PRELIMINARY INPUT IS ATTACHED IN THIS COMMUNIQUE AS ANNEX II, AND THE GAC INTENDS TO PROVIDE FURTHER INPUT AT THE LISBON MEETING.

SO AGAIN, WE HAVE ANOTHER ATTACHMENT TO THIS DOCUMENT WHICH WE INVITE YOU TO HAVE A LOOK AT.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU THAT THE GAC HAD ELECTED THE FOLLOWING OFFICERS BY ACCLAMATION. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW, I AM GOING OUT. SO THE NEW CHAIRMAN OF THE GAC IS AMBASSADOR JANIS KARKLINS. IS HE IN THE ROOM? JANIS, COULD YOU STAND UP, PLEASE? THAT IS THE NEW CHAIRMAN OF THE GAC, GOING FORWARD.

[APPLAUSE]

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: AND HE WILL BE ABLY ASSISTED BY THREE VICE CHAIRPERSONS OR CHAIRMEN. MR. PANKAJ AGRAWALA FROM INDIA, THE CURRENT VICE CHAIR WHO IS ALSO JOINING THE NEW TEAM. PANKAJ, COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE? THERE'S PANKAJ AGRAWALA.

[APPLAUSE]

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: MADAME NDEYE MAIMOUNA DIOP FROM SENEGAL, WHO IS ANOTHER VICE CHAIR. I'M NOT SURE WHETHER SHE'S IN THE ROOM. MADAME DIOP IS FROM SENEGAL AND SHE'S A NEW VICE CHAIR.

AND DR. FRANK MARCH FROM NEW ZEALAND, WHO IS AN EXISTING VICE CHAIR, ALSO GOING ONTO THE NEW TEAM.

[APPLAUSE]

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: I WILL BE STEPPING DOWN AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE NEXT MEETING IN LISBON, SO YOU'LL SEE ME FOR ONE MORE TIME, AND, BY THAT TIME, MORE RELAXED BECAUSE I HAVE VERY LITTLE RESPONSIBILITIES LEFT. AND WE JUST WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU THAT THE -- STEFANO TRUMPY -- MEMBERS OF THE GAC EXPRESS GRATITUDE FOR THE OUTGOING CHAIR AND THE VICE CHAIR, STEFANO TRUMPY, WHO IS ALSO RETIRING AT THIS MEETING. STEFANO, THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE]

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: AND LAST, BUT NOT LEAST, THE GAC WOULD LIKE TO WARMLY THANK ALL THOSE IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE DIALOGUE WITH THE GAC IN SAO PAULO.

OUR NEXT GAC MEETING WILL BE DURING THE PERIOD OF THE ICANN MEETING IN LISBON, PORTUGAL FROM THE 24TH TO THE 29TH OF MARCH 2007.

WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, I CONCLUDE MY FORMAL REPORT. IF YOU WOULD PERMIT ME ANOTHER JUST ONE SENTENCE, AGAIN I JUST WANTED TO SAY MONDAY NIGHT WAS A VERY TRYING TIME FOR ME AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT THAT I GOT FROM THE LOCAL TEAM AND THE ICANN STAFF, TAKING CARE OF ME IN THE AMBULANCE, IN THE HOSPITAL, AND THEN BACK HERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>VINT CERF: WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK.

[APPLAUSE]

>>VINT CERF: THE NEXT REPORT COMES FROM BRUCE TONKIN ON THE --

OH, I'M SORRY, ALEX. YOU HAD A COMMENT WHILE BRUCE IS GETTING READY. GO AHEAD, ALEX.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, VINT. SEVERAL BRIEF COMMENTS.

FIRST, I'M VERY IMPRESSED, AFTER THE MANY YEARS WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE GAC, WITH WHAT WE SEE NOW AND THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES, WORK TOGETHER, REALLY GET INTO A VERY DIFFERENT FUNCTIONING MODE, AND I THINK THAT THE EXPECTATION THAT SOME OF US HAVE THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN HAS BEEN FAR EXCEEDED IN THE QUALITY OF ITS RESULT.

TO SEE THE TURNOVER IN THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR POSITIONS IN THE GAC IS -- I NEED TO SAY IT FOR THE ALAC -- BOTH SAD AND HAPPY NEWS. IT'S A SORRY SIGHT TO SEE EXTREMELY ABLE LEADERS LEAVING THEIR POSITIONS, BUT IT'S ALSO VERY ENCOURAGING TO SEE PROVEN -- LEADERS WHO HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES IN THE DYNAMIC OF ICANN TO COME UP NOW TO THESE POSITIONS.

I THINK THAT THIS MEETING IN SAO PAULO HAS ALSO BEEN A LANDMARK MEETING, NOT ONLY IN THE IMPROVEMENT IN THE FUNCTIONING BETWEEN THE GAC AND THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO IN THAT IT'S REALLY THE POST-WSIS/POST-IGF MEETING OF ICANN IN WHICH WE HAVE ACTUALLY BROUGHT IN TOGETHER THE WORK OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN THIS VERY WELL-ARTICULATED MEETING.

IT WOULD BE PROBABLY VERY CONCEITED AND EXCESSIVELY PROUD TO SAY THAT WE HAVE PUT THE IGF AND THE WSIS TEST MATTERS BEHIND US, BUT CERTAINLY I THINK THAT IT'S PROVEN THAT WE ARE ON A PLATFORM THAT STARTED FROM THE PIONEERING WORK OF THOSE WHO BUILT ICANN, AND THAT CAN NOW BE ANALYZED, SELF-CRITICIZED, CRITICIZED FROM THE OUTSIDE AND SO FORTH, BUT MOSTLY BUILT UPON.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, ALEX.

BRUCE TONKIN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: THANK YOU, VINT, AND THANK YOU, ALEX, FOR MANAGING TO FILL THE SLOT WHILE I GOT THE PRESENTATION UP ON THE SCREEN.

I GUESS I HAVE A BIT OF AN AGENDA WHICH IS COVERING THOSE TOPICS.

THE FIRST TOPIC -- AND I THINK IT REFLECTS THE COMMENT THAT CHRIS DISSPAIN MADE FROM THE CCNSO, BUT THE GNSO DOES REQUEST ONE BYLAW IMPROVEMENT TO IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY, AND THAT IS THAT ICANN SHOULD POST GTLD AGREEMENTS WITH MATERIAL CHANGES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT 21 DAYS PRIOR TO ANY FINAL APPROVAL. WE DO RECOGNIZE THE EFFORTS THAT THE BOARD HAS MADE IN THE PAST YEAR TO DO THAT, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT FORMALIZED IN THE BYLAWS.

THE OTHER TOPIC IN TERMS OF BYLAW CHANGE ADVICE, THE LSE REPORT RECOMMENDED THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE TERM LIMITS -- AND I THINK THIS GOES TO ALEJANDRO'S COMMENT THAT WE DO WANT TO SEE CHANGE AND SEE RENEWAL WITHIN THE VARIOUS BODIES AT ICANN -- AND THE COUNCIL PASSED A MOTION A WEEK OR SO AGO SUPPORTING THAT RECOMMENDATION THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER SHOULD SERVE NO MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS.

THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, WE HAVE THREE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES UNDERWAY. THIS JUST REMINDS PEOPLE ON WHAT THAT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE.

WE START WITH AN ISSUES REPORT. WE THEN INITIATE THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WHERE CONSTITUENCIES OR STAKEHOLDER GROUPS IN ICANN CONTRIBUTE AND COMMENT ON WHAT THEY THINK SOME OF THE SOLUTIONS TO THAT ISSUE MIGHT BE. THESE ARE THEN PUT TOGETHER IN A PRELIMINARY TASK FORCE REPORT.

THERE IS THEN TYPICALLY ABOUT A YEAR'S WORK THAT THEN ENSUES AFTER THAT POINT, WHERE WE TRY AND REACH COMMON AGREEMENT ON THOSE VARIOUS STAKEHOLDER POSITIONS, AND WHEN WE'VE REACHED THAT COMMON AGREEMENT, WE THEN HAVE WHAT'S CALLED A FINAL REPORT.

I GUESS WHAT YOU WILL SEE IN THE COMMENTS ON THE PROGRESS ON INDIVIDUAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES IS THAT WE HAVE EFFECTIVELY THREE DRAFT FINAL REPORTS, BUT THEY ARE STILL UNDERGOING FURTHER IMPROVEMENT AS WE GET FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY HERE, AND HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST THE FIRST SORT OF HALF NEXT YEAR, WE HOPE TO SIGN OFF ON SEVERAL OF THOSE TO BE FINAL REPORTS THAT WE CAN THEN PROVIDE TO THE BOARD.

FIRSTLY, NEW GTLDS. THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ON THIS IN THE PUBLIC FORUM ON MONDAY, SO I WON'T GO THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THEMSELVES, BUT JUST INDICATE THAT WE ARE -- CURRENTLY HAVE A DRAFT FINAL REPORT WITH DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS. WE'RE TAKING FURTHER INPUT FROM THE GAC THIS AFTERNOON, TO LEARN SOME MORE ABOUT PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH NEW GTLDS. I THINK PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST COMPLEX AREAS HERE ARE THE ISSUES AROUND THE CHOICE OF STRINGS AT THE TOP LEVEL. THIS IS A COMPLEX PROCESS AND I DON'T THINK WE COULD EVER POSSIBLY COME UP WITH RULES THAT MIGHT COVER ALL POSSIBLE CASES, SO WE SEE THAT THERE WOULD BE AN OBJECTION PROCESS AND THE OBJECTIONS WOULD BE AGAINST A DEFINED SET OF CRITERIA, AND THAT WE WOULD NEED SOME SORT OF DISPUTE PROCESS WHICH WOULD NEED TO BE INTERNATIONAL IN ITS NATURE.

AND WE'D NEED TO DO SOME FURTHER WORK WITH THE ICANN STAFF TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THERE ARE SOME EXISTING DISPUTE RESOLUTION BODIES THAT WE COULD USE OR WHETHER WE NEED TO CREATE A PROCESS OF OUR OWN.

THE OTHER OUTCOME, I GUESS, THIS WEEK IS RECOGNIZING THAT WE WILL NEED TO OFTEN PROVIDE QUITE DETAILED GUIDANCE ON SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TWO REASONS. ONE IS TO PROVIDE ADVICE AND GUIDANCE TO THE STAFF ON HOW -- A POSSIBLE IMPLEMENTATION OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT ALSO TO PROVIDE ADVICE AND GUIDANCE TO THOSE ENTITIES THAT WISH TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW GTLD, AND SO THAT WE CAN MAKE CLEAR WHAT SORT OF STRINGS THEY SHOULD AVOID, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT ARE LIKELY TO CAUSE OBJECTIONS.

WE WILL BE TAKING FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE SESSIONS HERE THIS WEEK HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL, AND WE WILL BE TAKING FURTHER UPDATES FROM THE CONSTITUENCIES AS THEY NOW SEE WE HAVE A SOLID SET OF RECOMMENDATIONS IN CONFIRMING THAT THEY SUPPORT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND, IN PARTICULAR, IDENTIFY THE POSSIBLE IMPACTS ON THEIR CONSTITUENCIES.

SO I THINK WHERE WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GET TO BETWEEN NOW AND LISBON IS A COMPLETE REPORT THAT IS A VERY SOLID REPORT, COMPLETE WITH IMPLEMENTATION MATERIAL. HOPEFULLY A DRAFT RFP AND DRAFT CONTRACTS AS PART OF THAT, SO THAT PEOPLE CAN REALLY GET A FEEL FOR HOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS MAY BE IMPLEMENTED.

SO WE HOPE TO HAVE THAT FOR THE LISBON MEETING.

ON THE TOPIC OF IDNS, WE ARE DESIGNING THE NEW GTLD POLICY TO ALSO APPLY TO GTLDS THAT MAKE USE OF THE IDN STANDARDS. THE DECISION ON WHETHER TO ALLOW IDNS AT A TECHNICAL LEVEL IS OUT OF SCOPE, AND WE WOULD SEE THAT THE ICANN BOARD, IN DUE COURSE, WOULD MAKE A DECISION TO SAY, "YES, WE BELIEVE IT IS TECHNICALLY APPROPRIATE TO INTRODUCE IDNS AT THE ROOT," AND THEN AT THAT POINT, THIS POLICY WOULD THEN APPLY WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLICATION PROCESSES WITH RESPECT TO CONCEPTS SUCH AS THAT THE STRINGS SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSINGLY SIMILAR AND SO ON.

AND WE WOULD CERTAINLY ATTEMPT TO INCLUDE IN THE GUIDANCE, IN OUR NEW GTLD POLICY, SOME IDN EXAMPLES IN THAT GUIDANCE, SO THAT WE'RE CONSCIOUSLY INCORPORATING THOSE CONCEPTS.

WE HAVE, HOWEVER, FORMED AN IDN WORKING GROUP WITHIN THE GNSO TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THERE ARE, IN FACT, ANY POLICY ISSUES THAT ARE ADDITIONAL TO THE POLICY ISSUES THAT APPLY TO NEW GTLDS GENERALLY, AND THAT WORK -- THAT GROUP IS BEING CHAIRED BY RAM MOHAN, WHO IS ALSO ON THE PRESIDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

WE ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED TO LIAISE WITH THE CCNSO, AND WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE WORKING GROUP TODAY TO DISCUSS HOW WE WOULD COOPERATE OVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS.

AND WE ALSO RECOGNIZE WE NEED TO LIAISE WITH THE GAC ON THE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN GEO POLITICAL NAMES, THE REPRESENTATION OF SOME OF THOSE USING IDN DOMAINS AND COUNTRY CODES.

THE OUTCOME OF THE DISCUSSION WE HAD TODAY WAS TRYING TO IDENTIFY A TIME LINE OR A TARGET FOR WHEN IDNS COULD POTENTIALLY BE INTRODUCED. AND THIS TIME LINE NEEDS TO INCORPORATE THE WORK ITEMS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE IETF WITH RESPECT TO UPDATING THE PROTOCOL, WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH RESPECT TO THE TESTS THAT ICANN IS RUNNING, A BOARD DECISION TO ALLOW IDNS FROM A TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVE. THEN WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE ADVICE AND THE TIME LINE OF THAT ADVICE FROM THE GAC, THE CCNSO POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND THE GNSO NEW GTLD POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

THERE IS A LOT OF INTERCONNECTING EVENTS HERE AND WE FEEL THAT WE NEED TO TAKE A PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACH WHERE WE IDENTIFY ALL THESE EVENTS, IDENTIFY THE DEPENDENCIES BUT HAVE A CLEAR TARGET TO TRY TO INTRODUCE THESE IDNS, ASSUMING THAT THE TECHNICAL TESTS ARE SUCCESSFUL.

WITH RESPECT TO WHOIS, WE HAVE A PARTIAL COMPLETION OF A DRAFT FINAL REPORT. BY "PARTIAL" I MEAN NOT ALL OF OUR TERMS OF REFERENCE HAVE NOT YET BEEN ADDRESSED. WE ARE CURRENTLY CONSIDERING TWO OPTIONS FOR LIMITING DATA FOR WHAT I WILL CALL UNAUTHENTICATED PUBLIC ACCESS AND THAT MEANS WE DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHO IS ASKING FOR INFORMATION AND WE DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO WITH THE INFORMATION. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD CALL AN AUTHENTICATED PUBLIC ACCESS.

THEREFORE, FURTHER WORK IS REQUIRED SHOULD THERE BE SOME LIMITATION ON THE DATA FOR ACCESSING THE DATA WHERE IT IS AUTHENTICATED. BY THAT I MEAN WHERE WE KNOW WHO IS ASKING FOR THE DATA AND WE KNOW WHY THEY ARE ASKING AND WE KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO WITH THAT DATA.

SO THAT WORK IS YET TO BE DONE IN DETAIL.

THERE IS ALSO FURTHER WORK REQUIRED TO IMPROVE ACCURACY OF WHOIS, AND THAT WORK IS NOT YET COMPLETE. WE WILL BE TAKING FURTHER INPUT FROM THE GAC ON PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AGAIN THIS AFTERNOON, AND I THINK THE AIM OF THAT WHOIS GROUP IS TO AIM FOR A COMPLETE DRAFT WHICH COVERS ALL OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE BY THE LISBON MEETING.

THE FINAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IS AROUND EXISTING GTLD CONTRACTS. THAT IS ALSO -- THE STATUS THERE IS A PARTIAL COMPLETION OF THE DRAFT FINAL REPORT. THERE ARE IN SOME CASES SEVERAL OPTIONS BEING CONSIDERED AS POLICY OPTIONS FOR EACH TERMS OF REFERENCE AND THE TASK FORCE IS WORKING THROUGH THOSE.

THERE IS HAS ALSO BEEN ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPLICABILITY OF SOME OF THE OPTIONS GIVEN THE TERMS OF CURRENT GTLD AGREEMENTS. BY THAT I MEAN THAT SOME OF THE CURRENT GTLD AGREEMENTS HAVE BOTH TERMS RELATING TO THE CURRENT AGREEMENT BUT ALSO TERMS RELATED TO THE RENEWAL OF THAT AGREEMENT AND SOME OF THOSE TERMS WOULD MEAN THAT CERTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN THOSE SITUATIONS.

THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN ISSUES RAISED WITH SOME OF THE TOPICS SUCH AS PRICING POLICY WHERE SOME CONSTITUENCIES FEEL THAT THEY MAY BE LIMITED BYLAWS AGAINST -- RELATED TO COMPETITION POLICY THAT MAY LIMIT THEIR ABILITY TO FULLY PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSIONS IN SOME AREAS.

I THINK THE CONCLUSION THAT CERTAINLY IS COMMON HERE, WHICH I THINK IS THE CONCLUSION THE BOARD ALSO CAME TO, IS THAT WE DO NEED FURTHER ECONOMIC ANALYSIS AND FURTHER FACTS THAT WE CAN USE TO HELP GUIDE POLICY DEVELOPMENT WITH RESPECT TO COMPETITION ISSUES.

AGAIN, THE AIM IS TO COMPLETE A COMPLETE DRAFT REPORT WHICH ENCOMPASSES ALL THE TERMS OF REFERENCE WHERE EACH OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE STRONG SUPPORT BY THE LISBON MEETING.

WITH RESPECT TO THE GNSO REVIEW, THE GNSO CONSTITUENCIES HAVE AGREED TO PROVIDE FORMAL FEEDBACK ON THAT REPORT FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE ICANN BOARD WITHIN THE NEXT 40 DAYS. AND WE AWAIT WITH BATED BREATH FOR DECISION FROM THE ICANN BOARD WITH RESPECT TO NEXT STEPS.

I THINK A GENERAL COMMENT I WOULD MAKE WITH RESPECT TO REFORMING THE GNSO AND I THINK IT IS THE SAME COMMENT AS REFORMING ICANN IS THAT WE EFFECTIVELY HAVE -- AND I WILL USE AIRLINE ANALOGY. WE HAVE THREE FLIGHTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY FLYING IN THE AIR AT THE MOMENT. AND THEY ARE ALL PRETTY IMPORTANT. THEY RELATE TO NEW GTLDS, THEY RELATE TO IDNS AND THEY RELATE TO WHOIS. EACH OF THOSE FLIGHTS ARE CURRENTLY FLYING.

WE ACTUALLY WANT TO LAND THOSE FLIGHTS AT SOME TIME AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS ALWAYS VERY ENTERTAINING TO START FIDDLING AROUND THE WITH SYSTEMS WHILE THEY ARE IN FLIGHT, BUT LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP THE PLANES FLYING AND IN PARTICULAR WE HAVE A CLEAR TIMETABLE FOR LANDING THOSE PLANES AND DON'T END UP WITH THOSE PLANES IN A HOLDING PATTERN AROUND THE AIRPORTS SO WE DO WANT TO LAND THEM.

FINALLY, I WANT TO THANK SOME INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE GNSO COUNCIL AND AGAIN REFLECTING SOME COMMENTS THAT I THINK EACH OF THE SPEAKERS SO FAR, THERE IS CHANGE. THESE ARE FIVE PEOPLE THAT ARE LEAVING THE GNSO COUNCIL. IN PARTICULAR, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK KEN STUBBS WHO HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH BOTH THE DNSO VERSION OF THE COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE GNSO SINCE 1999 AND, IN FACT, WAS A PAST CHAIR OF THE COUNCIL. HE HAS MADE A HUGE CONTRIBUTION, AND CERTAINLY AT A PERSONAL LEVEL, I HAVE ALWAYS FOUND HIS GUIDANCE AND WISE COMMENTS AT CRITICAL TIMES TO BE VERY HELPFUL TO ME PERSONALLY. BUT I THINK HE HAS REALLY MADE A HUGE CONTRIBUTION, AND I HOPE YOU WILL JOIN ME IN THANKING HIM FOR HIS EFFORTS THERE.

[ APPLAUSE ]

WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO THANK JUNE SEO WHO HAS REPRESENTED THE REGISTRY CONSTITUENCY, LUCY NICHOLS WHO HAS REPRESENTED THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY. WE HAVE HAD MAUREEN CUBBERLEY WHO HAS BEEN CHAIRING ONE OF THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCES AND THIS IS DESPITE HAVING A NUMBER OF PERSONAL MEDICAL ISSUES WITH SOME SURGERY AND SHE HAS REALLY TRIED TO MAKE HERSELF AVAILABLE DURING A VERY DIFFICULT TIME FOR HERSELF PERSONALLY. IT JUST GOES TO SHOW, AGAIN, THE EFFORTS THAT PEOPLE WILL PUT IN -- INTO THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. AND FINALLY BRET FAUSETT WHO, AS MENTIONED EARLIER, AS LIAISON FROM THE ALAC AND I THINK THE COUNCIL HAS BENEFITTED HUGELY BOTH FROM BRET'S INPUT FROM THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE BUT ALSO INDIVIDUALS FROM THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT HAS PARTICIPATED IN EACH OF THE TASK FORCES.

SO AT THAT POINT, I WILL END MY REPORT.

[ APPLAUSE ]

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BRUCE. I MUST SAY I SAT IN ON SOME OF THE GNSO DISCUSSIONS AND CAME AWAY IMPRESSED WITH HOW HARD SOME OF THE PROBLEMS ARE TO SOLVE. SO I KNOW WE HAVE PLENTY ON OUR PLATE.

ACTUALLY, THE NEXT REPORT WOULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY BILL MANNING IN PLACE OF SUZANNE WOOLF BUT I DON'T THINK IF BILL IS HERE. HE IS IN THE MIDDLE OF ANOTHER ACTIVITY. THERE YOU ARE. WONDERFUL. OKAY.

>>BILL MANNING: I WILL MAKE THIS BRIEF, I THINK. OKAY. AGAIN, MY NAME IS BILL MANNING. I AM PROXYING FOR SUZANNE WOOLF WHO HAD TO -- HAD OTHER COMMITMENTS. THIS IS THE ROOT SERVER ADVISORY COMMITTEE UPDATE. RSSAC IS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL ICANN ADVISORY COMMITTEES ADVISING THE BOARD ON ISSUES PERTAINING TO THE OPERATION OF ROOT NAME SERVERS. THIS IS NOT THE CONTENTS OF THE ROOT ZONE THAT IS OUT OF SCOPE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF OPERATIONAL IMPACT SUCH AS CHANGES ON SOFTWARE REQUIRED TO SERVE IT. TO REITERATE SOMETHING WE HAVE SAID FOR MANY YEARS, WE PUBLISH WHAT THE IANA GIVES US.

THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ARE THE ROOT NAME SERVER OPERATORS AND OTHER LIAISONS AND OBSERVERS FROM VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES AND COMMUNITIES. WE MEET REGULARLY, AT LEAST THREE TIMES A YEAR. OUR LAST MEETING WAS IN NOVEMBER, LESS THAN A MONTH AGO.

AND WE HAVE SOME TECHNICAL INFORMATION TO PROVIDE. ONE OF THESE RELATES TO IPV6 FOR THE ROOT NAME SERVERS. THERE IS A JOINT REPORT WITH SSAC BEING WRITTEN. WE EXPECT IT TO BE RELEASED BEFORE ICANN PORTUGAL WITH THE RECOMMENDED OUTCOME OF RECOMMENDING IPV6 PREFIXES BE ADDING FOR THE ROOT NAME SERVERS. FROM A TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVE, FIVE OF THE ROOT NAME SERVER OPERATORS ARE PREPARED WITH IPV6 PREFIXES AND INFRASTRUCTURE. WE ARE READY TO GO NOW.

THE OTHERS ARE IN PREPARATION.

WE ARE COORDINATING DNSSEC DEPLOYMENT WITH ICANN AND OTHERS. SOME OF THE ROOT SERVERS ARE PREPARED TODAY TO SERVE SIGNED DATA IF THAT WAS ASKED OF US. OTHERS ARE PROCEEDING WITH NORMAL SOFTWARE EVALUATION AND UPGRADE PROCESSES. WE EXPECT THESE TO BE COMPLETE WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR. FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE POINT OF VIEW, WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT IDN DEPLOYMENT AND WE HAD SOME GOOD FOLKS FROM THE ICANN STAFF COME AND LISTEN TO SOME OF OUR CONCERNS AND CONSIDERATIONS. SO THIS INPUT WAS PROVIDED TO ICANN.

WE HAVE HAD AN OUTSTANDING ITEM IN WHICH WE DID NOT HAVE A MECHANISM TO REPLACE THE RSSAC.

CHAIR. THAT MECHANISMS HAS BEEN APPROVED. WE NOW HAVE A NEW VICE CHAIR. MATT LARSON OF VERISIGN HAS AGREED TO TAKE ON THE JOB OF VICE CHAIR.

SOME MORE TECHNICAL WORK HERE. ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEPLOYMENT UPDATES, OVER THE PAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS THE NUMBER OF SERVERS DEPLOYED SERVING THE ROOT ZONE HAS GROWN USING ANYCAST TECHNOLOGY INTO THE LOW HUNDREDS. SO THERE ARE NOW, I BELIEVE, 130 ROOT NAME SERVER INSTANCES SPREAD AROUND THE GLOBE.

DEPLOYMENT OF NEW SERVICES HAS SLOWED BUT FACILITIES CONTINUE TO IMPROVE. MUCH OF THE EFFORT IN THIS PAST YEAR HAS BEEN ON DOING INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT AND WE WILL HAVE A FEW SLIDES ON THAT LATER. THERE ARE FACILITIES AND SOFTWARE UPGRADES IN PROCESS ACCORDING TO NORMAL PROCEDURES.

ONE OF THESE HAS TO DO WITH A RECENT DECISION BY THE IANA TO EXPAND WHAT IS CALLED THE AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM NUMBER SPACE AVAILABLE TO INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS, THOSE PEOPLE THAT PASS OUR BITS AROUND.

THIS ALLOWS THE GROWTH IN THE NUMBER OF POSSIBLE INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS. BUT MUCH OF THE EXISTING CODE THAT PEOPLE USE DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS NEW LARGER SIZE SO THERE IS NOW A TEST UNDERWAY WITH SOME OF THE ROOT SERVER OPERATORS TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS REACHABILITY TO THE ROOT SERVERS ONCE THESE NEW IDENTIFIERS START TO ROLL OUT. AND I BELIEVE THAT THOSE ARE SUPPOSED TO START IN PRODUCTION IN JANUARY? THAT'S WHAT I AM GETTING SOME INPUTTING FROM ONE OF THE RIRS THAT THEY ARE READY TO GO IN JANUARY.

SO WE EXPECT THAT STUDY TO BE COMPLETE BY JULY OF NEXT YEAR. THERE IS A GROUP CALLED CAIDA WHICH DOES INTERNET MEASUREMENT AND THEY ARE PART OF THE RSSAC COMMITTEE. BRAD HUFFAKER TOOK THE ANALYSIS AND PRESENTED THIS STUFF AND IT IS AVAILABLE FROM THAT URL. WHAT THIS DOES IS THIS LOOKED AT THE ANYCAST ROOT NAME SERVERS, ANY OF THAT, AND THE CLIENTS, WHICH CLIENTS ARE GOING TO WHICH NAME SERVERS. AS EXPECTED, WE FIND THAT CLIENTS IN GENERAL GRAVITATE TO USE A LOCAL INSTANCE OF A ROOT NAME SERVER. THIS IS EXPECTED BUT WE HAD NEVER MEASURED THIS.

AND HERE IS -- IF I CAN TAKE A MINUTE OR TWO -- AN INTERESTING GRAPH THAT DESCRIBES THE PLACEMENT OF ROOT NAME SERVERS AND THEIR CLIENT BASE. YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO PULL THE ACTUAL REPORT TO GET DETAILED INFORMATION HERE BUT WHAT YOU WILL SEE IS THAT THE WHITE CIRCLES ARE THE PLACEMENT OF THE ROOT NAME SERVERS AND THE COLORS AND THE SIZE AND PLACEMENT OF THOSE HAS TO DO WITH THE NUMBER OF CLIENTS AND WHERE THOSE CLIENTS ARE LOCATED.

AND SO WHAT WE SEE IS THAT FOR THIS PARTICULAR ROOT NAME SERVER, MOST OF ITS DEPLOYMENTS ARE IN EUROPE AND MOST OF ITS CLIENTS ARE EUROPEAN. YOU WILL FIND THAT THERE ARE ONE OR TWO PLACES WHERE THEY HAVE THINGS THAT ARE FAR AWAY AND THOSE HAVE TO DO WITH ROUTING AND ISP FORWARDING.

SO I WOULD SUGGEST IF YOU ARE INTERESTED TO GO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS REPORT. SO WHERE YOU CAN FIND US, FORMAL AND INFORMAL PARTICIPATION IN ICANN ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING BOARD AND NOMCOM LIAISONS. THE WEB SITE WWW.ROOT-SERVERS.ORG IS PUBLIC INFORMATION ON SOME OF THE ROOT NAME SERVER OPERATIONS. THE ICANN URL FOR OFFICIAL ICANN RSSAC INFORMATION. WE HAVE A COMMITTEE-MAINTAINED WEB SITE AND WE HAVE A MAILING LIST TO SEND US QUESTIONS.

SO THAT IS, I BELIEVE, OUR REPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BILL.

[ APPLAUSE ]

NOW, WE HAVE AN INTERESTING POSSIBILITY HERE OF DOING THINGS TWO DIFFERENT WAYS. ONE POSSIBILITY IS TO HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME WHEN WE GET MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR FOR THE BOARD OR WE CAN MOVE ON AND COMPLETE THE OTHER TWO REPORTS THAT ARE STILL REMAINING, ONE OF WHICH IS AN UPDATE ON THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AND THE OTHER IS AN UPDATE ON THE OPERATIONAL PLAN AND BUDGET.

LET ME ASK FOR A SHOW OF HANDS OF PEOPLE -- IF THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY -- WOULD LIKE TO ASK QUESTIONS NOW? ALL RIGHT. IN THAT CASE, I'M GOING TO ASK KURT PRITZ TO COME AND MAKE THESE TWO REPORTS, AT WHICH POINT, ASSUMING THERE IS TIME LEFT, WE WILL HAVE A MICROPHONE OPEN FOR QUESTIONS, AND I DO HAVE ONE ITEM SO FAR FROM THE ONLINE COMMUNITY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ENTER INTO THE RECORD.

>>KURT PRITZ: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THERE ARE TWO REPORTS HERE THAT ARE SORT OF INTERRELATED. ONE IS TO REPORT ON ICANN'S EFFORTS WITH REGARD TO ITS STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS WHICH IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW, AND THE SECOND PART OF THE REPORT WILL DISCUSS ICANN'S ACTIVITIES WITH RESPECT TO ITS OPERATIONAL PLANNING AND THAT IS AN IN EXECUTION RIGHT NOW.

AS YOU KNOW, ICANN HAS TWO SIX-MONTH PLANNING CYCLES. THE FIRST HALF OF THE STRATEGIC YEAR FROM JULY THROUGH DECEMBER IS TAKEN UP WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING. SO THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.

A DRAFT -- IF YOU CAN MAKE THAT OUT, A DRAFT OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE ENTIRE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS IS OUTLINED -- OR DESCRIBED, RATHER, IN DETAIL AT THAT WEB SITE AND THIS PRESENTATION IS POSTED. I AM GOING TO GO THROUGH AN OVERVIEW OF THAT RIGHT NOW.

THE CONSULTATION REGARDING THE STRATEGIC PLAN HAS BEEN QUITE EXTENSIVE. CONSULTATIONS BEGAN WITH SESSIONS CONDUCTED BY PATRICK SHARRY IN FOUR LANGUAGES AT THE MARRAKECH MEETING, ENGLISH, SPANISH, FRENCH AND ARABIC.

THERE WERE ALSO ONLINE COMMENT FORUMS, AND ICANN SYNTHESIZED THE RESULTS OF THOSE INPUTS AND THE COMMENT FORUMS AND THE PREVIOUS PLAN AND ITS EXPERIENCES, FIRST, TO PUBLISH AN ISSUES DOCUMENT OR A STRATEGIC ISSUES DOCUMENT AND THEN AFTER TAKING COMMENT ON THAT, PUBLISHED A DRAFT OF A STRATEGIC PLAN.

MANY CONSULTATIONS WERE HELD DURING THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 20 THROUGH 28TH. SCHEDULES WERE -- TELECONFERENCES WERE SET UP WITH DIFFERENT TIME ZONES FOR GNSO CONSTITUENCIES, THE ALAC. THEN THERE WERE CONSULTATION SESSIONS SET UP FOR THE CCNSO, ALL SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIRS WERE INFORMED. THAT RESULTED IN A REVISED PLAN THAT WAS PUBLISHED PRIOR TO THE MARRAKECH -- PRIOR TO THE MEETING HERE IN SAO PAULO, I'M SORRY.

THOSE CONSULTATIONS RESULTED IN THE NEXT REVISION OF THE PLAN WHICH WAS PUBLISHED IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT SOMETIME LAST NIGHT. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS REALLY GOING TO WORK, BUT WHAT I WANTED TO TRY TO DEMONSTRATE -- OH, MY DESKTOP LOOKS A LOT DIFFERENT.

THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PLAN HAS CHANGED AS A RESULT OF THE CONSULTATIONS, SO MY PAGE IS A LITTLE BIT SCREWED UP HERE BUT WE WILL PROBABLY BE ABLE TO SEE IT ANY WAY AND I WILL DESCRIBE SOME OF THIS, WHAT WE ARE GOING TO SEE.

BUT I THINK WHAT I JUST WANT TO PAGE THROUGH THE DOCUMENT AND NOTE THE NUMBER OF CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO THE PLAN. OR A COMPLETE SECTION WAS ADDED TO IDENTIFY KEY PRIORITIES AND I WILL DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE LATER BUT THESE WERE ALL ADDITIONS TO THE PLAN.

THEN WHEN WE GET INTO THE PLAN ITSELF, YOU CAN SEE THE AMOUNT OF -- WELL, IN THIS CASE RED LINES AND BLUE LINES. SO I THINK THEY ARE BOTH ACCURATE DESCRIPTIONS OF EDITING ACTIVITIES. THERE WERE SECTIONS ADDED AND THERE WAS A LOT OF AUGMENTATION AND I WILL DESCRIBE THAT IN A LITTLE WHILE.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THE ICANN STAFF AND THOSE THAT SUPPORT IT LISTENED WELL DURING THE PROCESS.

SO TO GO INTO THE PLAN JUST A LITTLE BIT, THE INTRODUCTION TO THE PLAN OUTLINES SOME BASIC TENETS AND THAT IS, FIRST, ICANN'S LIMITED AND DISTINCT MISSION AND THEN CORE VALUES AS DESCRIBED IN THE BYLAWS AND FINALLY THE KEY ENVIRONMENTAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHALLENGES AS THEY ARE DESCRIBED BY THE COMMUNITY AND THOSE COMMUNITY INPUTS HAVE LED US TO DIVIDE THIS PLAN INTO FIVE SECTIONS, SIMILAR TO LAST YEAR'S PLAN, SIMILAR BUT DIFFERENT.

WE ARE ATTACKING AND PROSECUTING ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE IN OPERATIONS AND IN POLICY DEVELOPMENT, WORKING TO INCREASE INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION IN ICANN, WORKING TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION AND INCREASE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE MULTI-STAKEHOLDER BOTTOM-UP MODEL AND THEN, FINALLY, TRANSITION ICANN TO PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT.

I WANT TO DESCRIBE MORE IN DETAIL OUR FEEDBACK SESSIONS AND THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO THE PLAN BASED ON THAT FEEDBACK. ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PIECES OF CRITICISM OR VERY CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM WAS THAT WE HAVE A STRATEGIC PLAN THAT'S VERY BROAD AND AMBITIOUS AND LISTS, OH, SAY 50 OR SO OBJECTIVES. AND WHAT ARE ICANN'S PRIORITIES IN TRYING TO DO ALL OF THAT WHICH SEEMS SO BROAD?

AND SO WE WERE ASKED TO ESTABLISH A LIST OF PRIORITIES, AND ESTABLISHING A LIST OF PRIORITIES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE DOCUMENT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE ARE GOING TO ATTACK ALL THE OBJECTIVES IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN WITH ENTHUSIASM, BUT IT DOES MEAN THAT THERE ARE A SET OF OBJECTIVES WITH AN END GOAL, END SIGHT IN MIND THAT IS QUANTIFIABLE AND IT MAKES SENSE TO PULL THOSE OUT TO SAY THESE ARE WHAT ARE GOING TO BE PROSECUTED AND ATTACKED IN THE SHORT-TERM.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER SUGGESTIONS THAT WILL TAKE UP A FEW SLIDES HERE. WE WERE ASKED TO INCLUDE EXPLICIT EXPRESSIONS OF CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMUNITY. BY NOW CERTAINLY FOR ME, BUT FOR ALL OF US, THOSE EXPRESSIONS ARE IMPLICIT IN EVERYTHING ICANN DOES BUT WE MADE THEM MORE EXPLICIT IN THE PLAN.

WE REINFORCED OUR EFFORTS TO IMPROVE COMMUNICATIONS. IN DESCRIBING, SECURING RELIABLE REVENUE STREAMS, WE MADE SURE TO POINT OUT THAT WE ARE NOT LOOKING FOR REVENUE STREAMS FOR THE SAKE OF AMASSING REVENUE BUT, RATHER, REVENUE IS TAILORED TO MEETING ICANN'S OBLIGATIONS.

AND THEN ANOTHER IMPORTANT ELABORATION THAT WAS MADE ON THE PLAN BASED ON FEEDBACK WAS THAT MANAGING THIS GROWTH THAT ICANN IS GOING THROUGH AND SERVING THE GROWING DNS IS A VERY DIFFICULT PROBLEM AND WE NEED TO IDENTIFY THAT SINGLY.

WE ALSO BASED ON FEEDBACK ELABORATED MORE ON OUR IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVES AND POLICY DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING A DESCRIPTION OF FACILITATING OF GAC INTERACTION WITH OTHER CONSTITUENCIES AS WELL AS WITH ICANN.

WE CAPTURED THE IMPORTANCE OF IDN DEPLOYMENT NOT JUST AS AN OPERATIONS GOAL IN ITSELF BUT, RATHER, TO FACILITATE PARTICIPATION IN OUR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENT.

AND THEN WE -- WE WILL WORK TO ENCOURAGE CCTLD PARTICIPATION IN THE CCNSO WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT. FINALLY, A FEW MORE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED AND CHANGES WERE MADE TO THE PLAN.

WE ARE WORKING TO IMPROVE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ICANN MEETINGS. AND I THINK A SIGNIFICANT STEP WAS TAKEN AT THIS MEETING WITH SUSAN CRAWFORD'S VERY EFFECTIVE WORKSHOP. REVIEW OF THE NOMCOM -- NOMINATING COMMITTEE, SUCCESSES OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEES HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED HERE AND APPLAUDED AND THE REVIEW OF THAT HAS BEEN UNDER DISCUSSION AT THIS MEETING.

IT WAS REQUESTED THAT WE INVOLVE GOVERNMENTS THROUGH THE GAC AND THE TRANSITION PLANNING TO AN INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATION. AND, FINALLY, THAT WE ARE CLARIFYING IMPROVEMENTS IN TRANSPARENCY, HAD A GOAL IN MIND, AND THAT WAS TO MAKE ICANN ACCOUNTABLE FROM AN EFFECTIVE VIEWPOINT.

SO THAT'S A SUMMARY OF ALL THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE PLAN OVER THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE READ AND CAN COMPARE THE TWO PLANS.

THE KEY PRIORITIES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED TO PULL OUT OF THE PLAN AND PUT AT THE TOP AS IDENTIFIABLE, QUANTIFIABLE GOALS ARE IMPROVEMENT IN AUTOMATION OF IANA, ALL THE OBJECTIVES THAT WORK TO ENSURE THE SECURITY AND STABILITY OF THE DNS, THE DEPLOYMENT OF IDNS, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BEST PRACTICES AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY THAT PAUL LEVINS MENTIONED STANDING AT THE MICROPHONE NOT TOO LONG AGO, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A PROACTIVE CONTRACTUAL COMPLIANCE PROGRAM, THE IMPROVEMENT OF COOPERATION AND COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES OF THE GAC WITH ICANN AND ALSO OTHER CONSTITUENCIES AS I JUST MENTIONED, THE CREATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A PROCESS FOR THE DESIGNATION OF NEW TLDS, THE CONTINUING PROSECUTING THE INDEPENDENT REVIEWS OF SOS AND ACS AND THEN, FINALLY, TAKING THE RESULTS OF THOSE REVIEWS AND IMPLEMENTING THE MEANINGFUL PORTIONS OF THEM.

SO THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHERE WE ARE. THE STRATEGIC PLAN WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MEETING TOMORROW FOR APPROVAL. OUR NEXT STEPS ARE, FIRST, TO CONVEY THANKS TO SEBASTIEN BACHOLLET AND SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE IN TRANSLATING REVISIONS TO THE PLAN. SEBASTIEN IS OVER THERE AND THE OTHER SEBASTIAN IS OVER THERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU DID IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. THE LAST REVISION, AS I SAID, WAS POSTED AND WE ARE STILL RECEIVING COMMENTS ON IT AND AFTER ADJUSTING THE PLAN IT WILL BE REVISED AND SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD FOR THEIR BOARD MEETING TOMORROW.

AS I POINTED OUT, THE OPERATING PLANNING PROCESS WILL START JUST ABOUT IMMEDIATELY. AND THE NEXT STRATEGIC PLANNING CYCLE AS I NOW KNOW THROUGH EXPERIENCE STARTS IN SIX MONTHS WHICH WILL OCCUR IN THE BLINK OF AN EYE. SO THERE IS AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO FEEDBACK INTO THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, CONCLUDES MY REPORT ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND I WILL WITH YOUR PERMISSION MOVE INTO THE OPERATING PLAN REPORT.

>>VINT CERF: PLEASE DO, KURT.

>>KURT PRITZ: THIS IS THE SAME SUPPLIED WITH A LITTLE DIFFERENT TWIST. OUR OPERATING PLAN WAS APPROVED AS PART OF THE ICANN BUDGET LAST JUNE AND WE HAVE BEEN OPERATING OR EXECUTING THE PROJECTS DESCRIBED IN THAT PLAN. I AM GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.

HERE IS THE WEB SITE WHERE OPERATING PLAN STATUS DOCUMENT AND THE OPERATING PLAN METHODOLOGY CAN BE FOUND.

SO AS MOST OF YOU KNOW, THE OPERATING PLAN IS THIS ONE-YEAR ACTION PLAN THAT SETS ABOUT ACCOMPLISHING THE OBJECTIVES SET OUT IN THE THREE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN. IT IS THIS SET OF PROJECTS THAT ICANN IS WORKING ON. THE DIFFERENCES IN THIS YEAR'S OPERATING PLAN IS THAT WE HAVE AFFIRMATIVELY LINKED EVERYTHING IN THE OPERATING PLAN TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND THAT EACH PROJECT IS BUDGETED AND WE HAVE DEFINED OUTCOMES FOR EACH PROJECT.

SO WE TAKE THIS OPERATING PLAN, THE SET OF PROJECTS, AND COST IT ALL OUT AND THEN THAT BECOMES PART OF THE ICANN BUDGET. THE OTHER PART OF THE ICANN BUDGET IS BUSINESS AS USUAL SORT OF SEGMENT.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IANA PERFORMING OR ACTING ON ROOT MANAGEMENT CHANGE REQUESTS IS BUSINESS AS USUAL, AUTOMATING THE PROCESS WOULD BE A PROJECT.

SO WE'VE RECENTLY POSTED AN OPERATING PLAN STATUS HOW WE'RE DOING AGAINST THOSE PROJECTS, AND I'M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT LATER.

SO THE OPERATING PLAN IS COMPOSED OF A SERIES OF OVER 50 PROJECTS, AND SO NOW AS ICANN GROWS, WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS SET OF 50 PROJECTS AND RECOGNIZING THAT WE NEED A MORE FORMAL WAY TO MANAGE THEM, SO WE'VE IMPLEMENTED SOME TRADITIONAL AND SOMEWHAT RIGOROUS PROJECT MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGIES THAT SEEK TO BALANCE PUTTING INTO PLACE THE RIGHT CONTROLS WITH ACTUALLY GETTING THINGS DONE, BECAUSE WE WANT TO DO BOTH OF THOSE THINGS.

SO WE'VE CREATED A PROJECT OFFICE TO MANAGE THE PROJECT PORTFOLIO. IT'S STAFFED BY ONE PERSON AND A COUPLE TEMPS, BUT IT'S STILL A PROJECT OFFICE, AND WE HAVE A METHODOLOGY THAT I'LL GO THROUGH IN A SECOND THAT CALLS FOR THE CREATION OF CHARTERS.

SO REPORTS THAT DEFINE PROJECTS AND VARIOUS ASPECTS OF PROJECTS SO THAT PROJECTS ARE APPROVED BY AN EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE AND THEN ADDED TO THE PORTFOLIO. WE'VE CREATED PROJECT TEAMS, AND ICANN IS STILL PRETTY SMALL SO THE PROJECT TEAMS ALL -- YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE ON A LOT OF THE PROJECT TEAMS, BUT THEY'RE CROSS-FUNCTIONAL IN NATURE AND THE IDEA IS TO MANAGE CROSS-FUNCTIONAL DEPENDENCIES. IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT TASK AT ICANN BECAUSE EACH FUNCTION HAS ITS OWN CUSTOMERS TO SERVE.

AND THEN WE GO ON TO CREATE WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURES AND SCHEDULE, AND SCHEDULE SEMIMONTHLY PROJECT REVIEWS FOR PROJECTS. NOT ALL OF THEM, BUT CYCLE THROUGH THE PROJECTS SO THAT WE CAN REVIEW STATUS.

SO SORT OF IN FOCUS, THE MEANINGFUL ELEMENTS OF THIS CHART FIRST TAKE US THROUGH THE PROJECT LIFE CYCLE, SO IMPORTANT ADDITIONS ARE THE INITIATION OF A PROJECT, WHERE IT'S NOT LAUNCHED WITHOUT SOME FORM OF A REVIEW, AND THAT IS TO CREATE A PURPOSE FOR THE PROJECT, AND I'LL -- THROUGH A CHARTER, AND I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT AGAIN, BUT CREATE A PROJECT TEAM AND HAVE SOME ROUGH ORDER-OF-MAGNITUDE ESTIMATE SO THAT A DECISION CAN BE MADE WHETHER IT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE PROJECT PORTFOLIO. AND THEN A SOMEWHAT RIGOROUS PLANNING CYCLE SO THAT WE CAN SCHEDULE RESOURCES AND MAKE A PLAN FOR MANAGING THE PROJECT SO WE CAN MANAGE OURSELVES AGAINST THAT -- THOSE MILESTONES LATER.

AND THEN THE PROJECT IS EXECUTED AND FORMALLY CLOSED.

AT THE TOP OF THIS DIAGRAM, WE -- IS INDICATED A PROJECT CONTROL OR MONITORING PROCESS, AND AT THE BOTTOM, THERE'S A FEEDBACK PROCESS TO IDENTIFY RISKS AND CHALLENGES ALONG THE WAY AND FEED THAT BACK INTO THE MANAGEMENT OF EACH PROJECT.

AND ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE IS INDICATED THE COMMUNITY -- THE INTERACTION WITH THE COMMUNITY, SO THE COMMUNITY HAS INPUT INTO THE STRATEGIC PLAN, AND THEN THE OPERATING PLAN WHICH ACTUALLY IDENTIFIES THE PROJECTS.

WE ALSO RECEIVE REQUESTS FOR PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY. AND THEN THE LESSONS LEARNED GOES BACK INTO THE -- WILL BE REPORTED BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY IN THE FORM OF STATUS UPDATES, SO THAT INPUT CAN BE INFORMED.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIND WHAT I WANT TO FIND ON THIS DESKTOP.

DOES ANYBODY KNOW HOW I CAN GET AROUND THIS THING?

WELL, DO YOU KNOW HOW TO GET AROUND THIS THING? I CAN FIND IT. I'M JUST THINKING WHAT I WANT.

SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT CHARTER -- SORRY ABOUT THIS, BUT --

SO PROJECT CHARTERS BEGIN WITH A PROJECT GRAND PURPOSE AND IDENTIFICATION, SO IN THIS CASE, THIS IS OUR CHARTER TO IMPLEMENT A REGISTRY FAILOVER PLAN, AND IT STARTS WITH A PROJECT OVERVIEW, INCLUDING A BACKGROUND. AND I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO READ OR UNDERSTAND THIS, BUT, RATHER, THE CHAPTERS OF EACH CHARTER. AND AN IDENTIFICATION OF THE CURRENT SITUATION.

AND THEN AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE CHARTER IS TO IDENTIFY HOW THE CHARTER TIES IN WITH OUR STRATEGIC PLAN, OUR OPERATING PLAN, ICANN'S MISSION OR OTHER GOALS.

AND THEN COMES A STATEMENT OF DELIVERABLES FOR EACH PROJECT.

IDENTIFYING WHAT'S NOT IN THE PROJECT. ANOTHER WAY OF GOING ABOUT IT.

AND THEN IMPORTANTLY, IDENTIFYING RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS, OR CONSTRAINTS, AND ICANN STAFF HAVE BEEN THROUGH PROJECT MANAGEMENT TRAINING TO SORT OF ALIGN OUR LINGO, SO THAT WHEN WE DISCUSS THESE THINGS, EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT VERY SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS ASSUMPTIONS, CONSTRAINTS, AND RISKS HAVE.

AND THEN FINALLY, WHAT'S NECESSARY TO GO ON TO THE NEXT STEP.

SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF THAT.

I ALSO WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU A PROJECT PLAN. NOW I NEED YOUR HELP.

SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH MICROSOFT PROJECT. WE WILL PROBABLY IMPLEMENT ANOTHER PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL, AND THIS IS KIND OF A TOUGH SCREEN TO SEE, BUT IN THIS TOOL, WE -- THIS OUTLINES ALL THE TASKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE IDN TESTING PROGRAM, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT REHEARSING THIS BETTER SO I COULD -- YOU COULD SEE HOW THIS IS LAID OUT.

OH, I OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO ANYWAY, THIS IS THE LIST OF TASKS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED WITH THIS PROJECT, AND WE'LL PUBLISH THIS SO YOU CAN SEE IT, BUT IT OUTLINES THE DATES FOR EACH OF THE TASKS, AND THEN WE HAVE MANAGEMENT.

SO WHAT I'VE SHOWN YOU ARE EXAMPLES. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A BOOK FULL OF 60-SOME-ODD CHARTERS AND ALMOST -- YOU KNOW, NEARLY THAT MANY PLANS LIKE THIS.

SO THANKS FOR BEARING WITH ME THROUGH THAT.

YOU NEVER KNOW UNLESS YOU TRY.

ICANN IS PRESENTLY MANAGING OVER 50 PROJECTS DESCRIBED IN THE OPERATING PLAN -- I'M SORRY, I'M GOING TO DO THIS TO YOU AGAIN. MANY OF THE PROJECTS WILL BE COMPLETED IN THIS FISCAL YEAR, BUT PROJECTS DON'T LINE UP WITH THE BEGINNING AND ENDS OF FISCAL YEARS, SO WE HAVE AN OVERALL...

WE HAVE AN OVERALL PROJECT PLAN THAT INDICATES THE SCHEDULES FOR ALL OF THEM.

SO THE LIST OF PROJECTS IS DOWN THE LEFT-HAND SIDE, AND THEN THE FISCAL YEAR IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW OR MAIZE, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HOW THE PROJECTS START AND END WITH VERY -- NOT IN CONCERT WITH THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

THIS WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN IN THE OPERATING PLAN, SO THE OUTCOMES SORT OF DEFINE WHAT'S GOING TO BE DONE THIS YEAR, RATHER THAN COMPLETION OF THE WHOLE PROJECT.

AND I HOPE THAT WAS AS INSTRUCTIVE AS IT WAS INTENDED TO BE.

SO THE OPERATING PLAN PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS ARE, LIKE I SAID, ACCOMPANIED BY A SET OF OUTCOMES, AND ALL THESE OUTCOMES ARE DELIVERABLES WHICH ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ACCOMPLISHED DURING THIS FISCAL YEAR, AND THIS STATUS IS A SNAPSHOT OF THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS AGAINST THE PLAN. SO THIS IS THE WEB SITE AND I WAS GOING TO THROUGH A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK THE FORMATTING WILL BE GOOD.

WE'VE DONE A ROUGH ORDER-OF-MAGNITUDE CALCULATION OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THINGS, AND WE -- AND USING ROUGH ESTIMATION, WE THINK WE'RE ABOUT A THIRD OF THE WAY THROUGH THE OUTCOMES, AND THAT'S TAKING EACH OUTCOME AND DECIDING WHETHER IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT DONE OR 50% DONE OR ZERO PERCENT DONE. THERE'S ABOUT 100 OUTCOMES. AND THEN AVERAGING THAT ALL, WE GET TO 32 OR 33% DONE ABOUT 38% OF THE WAY THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR, WHICH WAS HALFWAY THROUGH NOVEMBER WHEN THIS WAS TAKEN.

THEN THERE'S A LOT OF CHANGE IN OUR ENVIRONMENT, TOO, SO SOME TARGETED OUTCOMES ARE CHANGED.

FOR THE PURPOSES OF KEEPING THE BASELINE STRAIGHT, I LEFT THE SAME OUTCOMES IN THE PLAN.

AND THEN FINALLY, GIVEN THE EVOLVING NATURE OF THE SCOPE OF -- SCOPE OF THE PROJECTS AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS, SAY TINA'S IDN PROGRAM IS ONE OF THEM WHERE WE'RE TAKING CONSIDERABLY MORE INPUT FROM TECHNICAL ALLIES OF OURS THAN WAS PLANNED.

SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND SOME OF THE OUTCOMES OF THESE PROJECTS WILL CHANGE OVER TIME, SO, YOU KNOW, THINGS WILL GO OVER INTO NEXT YEAR, BUT I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT DOESN'T SAY HERE IS THAT I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS AGAINST THESE PROJECTS, AND HOPEFULLY YOU'LL READ THE REPORT AND AGREE WITH THAT.

SO WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO CLOSE MY REPORT, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, KURT. WE ARE -- ASSUMING I SURVIVE. HANG ON ONE.

I'M TOLD IF YOU DRINK ENOUGH OF THIS MIXTURE OF LEMON AND HOT WATER AND HONEY, THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SING LIKE AN OPERA SINGER. SO FAR, THERE'S NO INDICATION THAT THAT'S HAPPENING.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, KURT.

WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY NOW TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR FURTHER QUESTIONS, BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO FIRST IS TO ENTER INTO THE RECORD A COMMENT COMING FROM AN ON-LINE PARTICIPANT. MEHMET, I NEED TO ASK YOU TO BRING UP THE E-MAIL THAT I SENT TO YOU EARLIER.

THIS IS FROM MR. EDWARD HASBROUCK, WHO IS CONCERNED IN FAIRLY COLORFUL LANGUAGE ABOUT A RECONSIDERATION REQUEST THAT HE MADE THAT DIDN'T SHOW UP IN THE ARCHIVES OR IN THE RECORD. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW EASY IT'S GOING TO BE TO READ THAT.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I HAVE TO READ THIS LITERALLY, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT PEOPLE IN THE ROOM CAN SEE IT, AND I'M SURE THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING FROM OUTSIDE CAN'T, SO I FEEL SORT OF COMPELLED TO RENDER THIS ORALLY.

THE MESSAGE COMES FROM MR. EDWARD HASBROUCK.

THAT'S GOING TO MAKE IT VERY HARD FOR ME TO READ BECAUSE IT'S -- THERE. CAN YOU SCROLL UPWARD, PLEASE? SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT. ALL RIGHT.

HE'S SAYING THAT -- HE CLAIMS THAT THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT POSTED TODAY IS KNOWINGLY AND MATERIALLY FALSE AND MISLEADING, AND HE MAKES REFERENCE TO THAT REPORT. HE SAYS THAT ACCORDING TO THAT REPORT, THERE WERE -- NO REQUESTS FOR RECONSIDERATION WERE OR WILL BE PENDING AT THE END OF CALENDAR YEAR 2006 AND NONE HAD BEEN PENDING FOR MORE THAN 90 DAYS.

HE SAYS THAT THESE ARE KNOWINGLY AND MATERIALLY FALSE AND MISLEADING STATEMENTS, AND HE REMINDS US -- IF YOU'LL SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE MORE --

WILL YOU SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE FURTHER, PLEASE? THANK YOU.

STOP.

HE SAYS ON 16 MAY 2005, HE SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RELATED TO THE LACK OF OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY OF THE MAY 3RD, 2005 BOARD MEETING BY E-MAIL TO RECONSIDER -- HE SENT THIS NOTE TO RECONSIDER@ICANN.ORG. THE REQUEST IS POSTED ON HIS WEB SITE.

HE RECEIVED A RESPONSE ON THE SAME DAY FROM JOHN JEFFREY, THE CORPORATE SECRETARY AND GENERAL COUNSEL: "WE'VE RECEIVED YOUR REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND HAVE FORWARDED IT TO THE ICANN BOARD'S RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE FOR HANDLING."

HE GOES ON TO SAY, "I HAVE RECEIVED NO FURTHER COMMUNICATION FROM ICANN REGARDING THIS REQUEST. THIS REQUEST IS NOT POSTED ON THE ICANN WEB SITE. NO NOTICE, AGENDA, MINUTES, OR RECORD OF ANY CONSIDERATION OR ACTION ON THIS REQUEST BY THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE OR ANY ICANN BODY IS POSTED ON THE ICANN WEB SITE. NEITHER" --

I'M SORRY, YOU'VE SCROLLED A LITTLE TOO FAR.

"NEITHER THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE NOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CAN PLAUSIBLY CLAIM TO BE IGNORANT OF THIS REQUEST. I REMINDED YOU THAT THIS REQUEST REMAINS OUTSTANDING IN MY MESSAGE TO THE PUBLIC FORUM DURING THE BOARD MEETING IN WELLINGTON 29 MARCH, 2006. THE FALSE REPORT BEING PRESENTED BY THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE THUS APPEARS TO BE A KNOWING ATTEMPT TO MISLEAD THE BOARD AS A WHOLE, THE INTERNET AND ICANN STAKEHOLDER COMMUNITIES, AND OTHER OBSERVERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES, WITH RESPECT TO THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE'S CONTINUED INACTION [OR, IF THEY HAVE ACTED, IMPERMISSIBLY SECRET AND UNREPORTED ACTION AND FAILURE TO POST THIS REQUEST]. THE SUBMISSION OF A KNOWINGLY FALSE AND MISLEADING REPORT WOULD APPEAR TO CONSTITUTE A CULPABLE BAD-FAITH MALFEASANCE BY THE RESPONSIBLE MEMBERS OF THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR DUTIES. I ALSO NOTE" --

I'M SORRY. I'M GOING TOO FAST, AREN'T I.

"I ALSO NOTE THAT A REPORT OF THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE IS REQUIRED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 4, SECTION 2.19 OF ICANN'S BYLAWS. NO SUCH REPORT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED FOR 2005. IF SUCH A REPORT HAS, IN FACT, BEEN MADE TO THE BOARD, I REQUEST THAT IT BE PUBLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF THE BYLAWS THAT ICANN AND ITS CONSTITUENT BODIES MUST OPERATE, TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE, IN AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT MANNER." AND FINALLY, HE SAYS, "I REQUEST THAT THIS MESSAGE BE READ TO THE PUBLIC FORUM FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT OF THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE."

WELL, AS YOU KNOW, THESE REPORTS WERE SUPPLIED TO YOU ON LINE AND WERE NOT READ HERE, SO THIS IS THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY I HAVE TO RESPOND TO MR. HASBROUCK'S REQUEST.

WHAT I WOULD LIKE NOW TO DO IS TO ASK THE STAFF, WHO HAVE BEEN INTERACTING WITH MR. HASBROUCK OVER A FAIRLY LENGTHY PERIOD OF TIME, TO RELAY TO YOU THE NATURE OF HIS INTERACTIONS AND SOME OF THE CONCLUSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN REACHED AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THAT. AND I'D ASK AMY, IF SHE'S AVAILABLE, TO PRESENT THAT MATERIAL.

YOU COULD DO IT FROM WHERE YOU SIT OR YOU MIGHT, IF YOU WISH, COME TO THE LECTERN.

>> AMY STATHOS: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I DO HAVE A MICROPHONE, SO I WILL REMAIN HERE.

THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2006 IS NOT INACCURATE. IN FACT, MR. HASBROUCK DID SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WHICH THE GENERAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE DID SUBMIT TO THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE AT THAT TIME, AND AT THAT TIME THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE REJECTED HIS REQUEST.

AND WITH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, MR. HASBROUCK'S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION WAS MADE GENERALLY ON THE SAME UNDERLYING GROUNDS AS HIS COMPLAINT TO THE ICANN'S OMBUDSMAN DURING THAT SAME PERIOD. AT THAT TIME, ICANN'S OMBUDSMAN MADE A FINDING THAT AFTER A FULL INVESTIGATION OF MR. HASBROUCK'S CLAIMS, THERE WAS NO SUBSTANTIVE BASIS FOR THE COMPLAINT. THE OMBUDSMAN INFORMED THE BOARD AND THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE THAT HE FELT ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY ANY OTHER DISPUTE RESOLUTION BODY SUCH AS THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE WAS UNLIKELY TO SHED ANY FURTHER LIGHT ON THE ISSUES THAT HAD NOT ALREADY OR COULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH IN A DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN.

THE OMBUDSMAN FURTHER INSTRUCTED BOTH MR. HASBROUCK AND THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE THATM IN THE OMBUDSMAN'S OPINION, MR. HASBROUCK'S APPLICATION FOR INDEPENDENT REVIEW THAT HAD NOT YET BEEN FILED, WHICH WAS BEING DISTRIBUTED AND WAS BASICALLY ON THE SAME GROUNDS, WAS REPETITIVE, TRIVIAL, VEXATIOUS, FRIVOLOUS, NON-SUBSTANTIVE, OTHERWISE ABUSIVE, OR NOT MADE IN GOOD FAITH.

THE OMBUDSMAN THUS DETERMINED THAT MR. HASBROUCK'S INTERACTIONS AND CONDUCT INDICATED THAT HE WAS A QUERULOUS COMPLAINANT WITH NO DESIRE TO REACH RESOLUTION. SUCH DETERMINATION PROVIDED A BASIS FOR THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE TO REJECT MR. HASBROUCK'S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, AND AT THAT TIME, THE COMMITTEE DECIDED THAT BASED ON THE GROUNDS FOR REJECTION AND THE INTERACTIONS WITH THE OMBUDSMAN, THAT IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO PUBLICLY STATE THE GROUNDS FOR REJECTION.

THAT SAID, NOW THAT THESE GROUNDS HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC, WE WILL GO BACK AND MAKE SURE THAT IT IS ON THE RECORD.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AMY.

I SEE BRET. WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT NOW?

>>BRET FAUSETT: IF -- IS THIS THE PUBLIC MIC OPPORTUNITY ON THE STRATEGIC --

>>VINT CERF: THIS IS NOW THE PUBLIC MIC OPPORTUNITY, YES.

>>BRET FAUSETT: TERRIFIC. I WANTED TO COMMENT ON THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS WHICH WE'VE NOW BEEN THROUGH AT LEAST FOR THE LAST AT LEAST ONE YEAR OF THE DIVIDED PLANNING, OF STRATEGIC PLANNING IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE ICANN YEAR AND OPERATIONAL AND BUDGET PLANNING IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE ICANN YEAR.

AS THE BOARD THINKS ABOUT APPROVING THE STRATEGIC PLAN, I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU THAT BUDGET PLANNING IS RELATED TO IT, AND THAT YOU NOT -- BECAUSE IN STRATEGIC PLANNING, WE'RE SORT OF FREED FROM BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS. WE CAN ASK FOR ALL SORTS OF THINGS, AND NOW, IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR IT. AND THAT YOU NOT CONSTRAIN YOURSELF IN ADOPTING THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THERE IF EITHER ICANN CAN'T PAY FOR IT OR, ONCE IT SEES HOW MUCH IT IS, CHOOSES NOT TO PAY FOR IT.

BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEARD IN THE LAST -- LAST YEAR WAS THAT ONE OF THE REASONS THE BUDGET NEEDED TO ESCALATE WAS BECAUSE WE'D ALREADY APPROVED THINGS IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

ICANN CAN'T KEEP ESCALATING ITS BUDGET EVERY YEAR, AND AT SOME POINT YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT YOU'VE REACHED A CAP AND SOME OF THESE THINGS, THE WONDERFUL THINGS WE ASK FOR IN THE FALL, YOU CAN'T PAY FOR IN THE SPRING.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BRET, AND THAT'S COMMON SENSE. AND IN FACT, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH, EVEN IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS, AND PRIORITIZED THINGS, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, HAGEN HULTZSCH, WAS QUITE DETERMINED TO SAY THERE IS A LINE HERE, AND BEYOND THAT LINE, WE CAN'T AFFORD TO DO THAT. SO YOUR POINT IS EXTREMELY WELL TAKEN.

NEXT COMMENT, PLEASE?

>> MICHAEL FROOMKIN: HELLO. MY NAME IS MICHAEL FROOMKIN. I TEACH LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING IN RELATION TO THE HASBROUCK MATTER. I HAVE FOLLOWED THIS ALONG THROUGH THE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO ANYTHING BUT THE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. AND PARTICULARLY IN CONNECTION WITH HIS RECONSIDERATION REQUEST, AND NOW HIS ATTEMPTS TO GO AND GET SOME SORT OF OUTSIDE ARBITRATION, I DON'T THINK ICANN HAS ACTED IN A MANNER WHICH PAINTS IT IN A TERRIBLY GOOD LIGHT. AGAIN, I SPEAK ONLY FROM WHAT'S AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC, BUT IT'S BEEN A TRULY ASTONISHING ATTEMPT BY THE STAFF TO REALLY PLAY SLOW BALL, TO AT ONE POINT SUGGEST HE DROPPED HIS REQUEST WHEN THERE HAD BEEN NOTHING FROM HIM THAT SUGGESTED THAT, AND I'M SOMEWHAT CONCERNED BY THE TONE OF WHAT WE JUST HEARD FROM THE STAFF BECAUSE IT REALLY GIVES A SORT OF A HUMAN TONE DRIPPING WITH VENOM, PRACTICALLY, TO WHAT UNTIL NOW HAS JUST BEEN A SERIES OF RATHER DRY, YOU KNOW, SORT OF LAWYERLY, YOU KNOW, MISSIVES GOING BACK AND FORTH IN THE ETHER. I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE ACTUAL MERI!

TS

ARE. I HAVE A SUSPICION THAT THERE REALLY IS MUCH MORE TO IT THAN THE ICANN STAFF THINKS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT.

I DO KNOW THAT FROM A PROCESS POINT OF VIEW, THIS MAN HAS NOT BEEN TREATED IN A WAY WHICH I THINK ANY ORGANIZATION WHICH YOU BOARD MEMBERS WISH TO BE A PART COULD POSSIBLY BE PROUD, AND I URGE YOU AS BOARD MEMBERS TO LOOK AT THIS FULL CORRESPONDENCE, TAKE IT SERIOUSLY, PLEASE DO NOT JUST RELY ON THE STAFF'S, I THINK, PERSONAL ANTAGONISM AT THIS POINT TO DECIDE YOUR VIEW OF THE PROCESS POINTS HERE, WHICH I THINK ARE MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT EVEN THAN THE MERITS. BECAUSE THE MESSAGE SENT TO THE COMMUNITY HERE IS, IF YOU DARE TO, YOU KNOW, TRY TO EXERCISE YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE BYLAWS, AND IF YOU, YOU KNOW, QUOTE CHAPTER AND VERSE, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TRY TO PAINT YOU AS A NUT, AND THAT'S NOT THE MESSAGE YOU WANT TO SEND.

>>VINT CERF: MICHAEL, I DO HAVE A MESSAGE I'D LIKE TO SEND, PLEASE.

I HAVE DEALT WITH MR. HASBROUCK PERSONALLY. I'VE RECEIVED E-MAIL FROM MR. HASBROUCK. WE HAVE ATTEMPTED REPEATEDLY TO HELP HIM WITH HIS INDEPENDENT REVIEW REQUESTS, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT GENERALLY SPEAKING, MR. HASBROUCK ISN'T WILLING TO ACCEPT MUCH IN THE WAY OF HELP OR GUIDANCE.

>>MICHAEL FROOMKIN: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT --

>>VINT CERF: AND -- I'M SORRY. MAY I COMPLETE MY OBSERVATION?

HIS INSISTENCE, AFTER WE TRIED TO HELP HIM GO TO THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL, WAS TO COME BACK AND SAY, "WELL, THE IRP WASN'T PROPERLY CONSTITUTED."

AFTER A WHILE, EVEN THE OMBUDSMAN CONCLUDED THAT THIS WAS NOT A CONSTRUCTIVE ATTEMPT BY MR. HASBROUCK TO DO ANYTHING EXCEPT CONTINUALLY BADGER THE STAFF AND THE REST OF ICANN.

AND IF YOU CONSIDER THAT TO BE A PEJORATIVE STATEMENT, I'M SORRY, BUT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IT AN HONEST STATEMENT OF FACT.

>>MICHAEL FROOMKIN: I BELIEVE THE IRP IS NOT PROPERLY CONSTITUTED. I BELIEVE HIS ARGUMENT ON THAT IS LEGALLY CORRECT. THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY I THINK THERE'S A DIFFERENCE HERE. I THINK THAT THE BOARD -- THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT THE BOARD HAS TO DO TO CONSTITUTE IT ARE VERY CLEAR. THE PUBLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROCESS ARE VERY CLEAR. AND I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK THEY'VE DONE THAT. THAT'S PART OF WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO.

SO WE MAY HAVE A DISAGREEMENT ON THE SUBSTANCE HERE, BUT MY CONCLUSION -- YOU KNOW, IT'S A LAWYER SPEAKING JUST PURELY FOR MYSELF -- IS THAT HE'S ACTUALLY GOT THE BETTER OF THAT PARTICULAR PART OF THE ARGUMENT.

>>VINT CERF: THEN WE DEFINITELY DISAGREE. COULD WE HAVE --

>>RITA RODIN: VINT? VINT, CAN I MAKE A COMMENT? SORRY.

>>VINT CERF: YES, YOU CAN.

>>RITA RODIN: THIS IS RITA RODIN.

THANKS, MICHAEL, FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THOSE ARE HELPFUL.

CERTAINLY I CAN TELL YOU AS A NEW BOARD MEMBER WHO WAS ASKED TO SIT ON THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE, I HAVE LOOKED AT THE RECORD AND GONE OVER THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. WE DISCUSSED THIS AT THE LAST MEETING THIS WEEK, AND I AM HAPPY WITH THE ACTIONS THAT STAFF HAS TAKEN. IF YOU HAVE ANY PARTICULAR QUESTIONS, YOU CAN MAYBE SUBMIT THEM TO US. WE CAN CERTAINLY CONSIDER THEM. BUT I HAVE LOOKED AT THIS WITH THE STAFF. I'VE LOOKED AT WHAT THIS -- MR. HASBROUCK HAS ASKED THE STAFF TO CONSIDER IN HIS MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO GO AROUND THIS PROCESS, AND I AM SATISFIED THAT THERE'S BEEN ATTENTION PAID TO HIM IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER. BUT THANKS AGAIN FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

>>JOICHI ITO: VINT, CAN I --

>>VINT CERF: JOI, GO AHEAD.

>>JOICHI ITO: YEAH. AND I ALSO WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS WHEN I CAME IN FROM THE OUTSIDE, AND EVEN IF YOU LOOK ON THE MEETING PUBLIC BLOG COMMENTS, I TRY WHENEVER I CAN TO INTERACT WITH HIM IN PUBLIC, BUT I HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT TIME WITH THE INTERACTION BECAUSE, FIRST OF ALL, WHEN WE SAY "ROUGH CONSENSUS," I THINK WE'RE ALLOWED TO IGNORE THE COMPLETELY OUTLYING DATA POINTS, AND WHENEVER THERE IS ANYONE ELSE THAT HAS A SIMILAR CONCERN, I TRY TO LISTEN TO IT. BUT OFTEN HE TAKES ME INTO A CORNER WHERE HE IS THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS THAT SPECIFIC CONCERN.

BUT IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE IGNORING HIM IN PUBLIC, AND I URGE YOU TO GOOGLE FOR HIS NAME IN ANY PUBLIC FORUM AND YOU WILL OFTEN FIND BOARD MEMBERS ENGAGED IN INTERACTIONS WITH HIM, AND IT'S NOT JUST THESE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, JOI. I HOPE WE CAN --

OH, PAUL? I HOPE WE CAN GO ON TO ANOTHER TOPIC, BUT PLEASE GO AHEAD, PAUL.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: MICHAEL, I JUST WANTED TO ASK: PUTTING ASIDE MR. HASBROUCK'S PARTICULAR CONCERNS, I'M VERY INTERESTED TO GET MORE FEEDBACK FROM YOU ABOUT WAYS YOU THINK WE CAN IMPROVE AS PART OF THE OVERALL COMMUNICATIONS AND PROCESS ISSUES. I'M VERY INTERESTED TO GET FEEDBACK FROM YOU ABOUT HOW YOU THINK WE COULD IMPROVE THE REPORTING ON SUCH THINGS. AND IN PARTICULAR, IF YOU -- THIS IS A CHANCE FOR YOU TO TALK WITH PAUL LEVINS. I THINK WE'D LOVE TO GET -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE KIND OF -- WE'RE TRYING TO WORK ON MAKING CERTAIN, UNDER GENERAL HEADINGS OF TRANSPARENCY, THAT WE ACTUALLY COMMUNICATE MUCH BETTER, SO I'D LOVE TO GET THAT FEEDBACK FROM YOU, IF WE CAN DO THAT.

>>VINT CERF: PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>KEITH DRAZEK: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS KEITH DRAZEK AND I'M WITH NEUSTAR, THE REGISTRY OPERATOR OF THE DOT BIZ TLD. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A BRIEF STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD TODAY CONCERNING YOUR VOTE TOMORROW ON THE RENEGOTIATED DOT BIZ AGREEMENT.

AS YOU KNOW, THERE HAS BEEN NEARLY SIX MONTHS OF EXTENSIVE PUBLIC DEBATE AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT --

>>VINT CERF: REMEMBER TO SLOW DOWN FOR THE -- I DON'T -- I DON'T REMEMBER DOING IT EITHER, BUT...

>>KEITH DRAZEK: THANKS.

-- EXTENSIVE PUBLIC DEBATE AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT LEADING UP TO THIS VOTE. AND ON BEHALF OF MY COLLEAGUES, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR PATIENCE, AND YOUR DILIGENCE IN THIS MATTER.

OVER THE LAST 18 MONTHS, WE HAVE NEGOTIATED IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE ICANN STAFF TO BRING THE ORIGINAL DOT BIZ AGREEMENT IN LINE WITH MORE RECENTLY APPROVED AGREEMENTS, INCLUDING DOT COM, DOT NET, AND AT LEAST NINE OTHER TLDS.

ICANN HAS A CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION TO TREAT ALL REGISTRIES EQUITABLY AND TO NOT SINGLE OUT ANY REGISTRY FOR DISPARATE TREATMENT, ABSENT SUBSTANTIAL CAUSE.

OUR AGREEMENT, ALONG WITH THE DOT INFO AND DOT ORG AGREEMENTS, HAS BEEN POSTED FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION AND PUBLIC COMMENT FOR NEARLY SIX MONTHS.

YOU HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS AND VOTE ON THESE AGREEMENTS AT THE LAST SIX MEETINGS OF THE BOARD, PLUS TOMORROW'S PUBLIC MEETING.

THE DOT BIZ RENEGOTIATION PROCESS HAS INTRODUCED AN UNPRECEDENTED OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND PUBLIC COMMENT. AS A RESULT OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND COMMUNITY INPUT RECEIVED OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS, AT YOUR REQUEST NEUSTAR MADE SEVERAL SIGNIFICANT CONTRACTUAL ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PROPOSED DOT BIZ AGREEMENT. THE PROPOSED DOT BIZ AGREEMENT IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH ICANN'S BYLAWS, CORE VALUES, AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS. THIS AGREEMENT BEGINS TO SATISFY ICANN'S CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION FOR EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF ALL GTLD REGISTRIES, AND WILL BEGIN TO HELP PROMOTE COMPETITION IN THE GTLD MARKET.

IT ALSO PROVIDES REASONABLE BUSINESS CERTAINTY TO NEUSTAR, WHICH WILL, IN TURN, GUARANTEE LONG-TERM INVESTMENT IN REGISTRY INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESULT IN A MORE STABLE AND MORE SECURE INTERNET.

IN SUMMARY, THIS BIZ AGREEMENT IS NECESSARY FOR EFFECTIVE COMPETITION, GOOD FOR SECURITY AND STABILITY, AND GOOD FOR THE ICANN COMMUNITY. WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR VOTE TO APPROVE TOMORROW. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, KEN. AVRI.

>>AVRI DORIA: THANK YOU. I FIRST OF ALL WANTED TO MENTION THE META MEETING ON MEETINGS YESTERDAY WHICH I THOUGHT WAS A REMARKABLY WONDERFUL MEETING. HOW MANY TIMES DID I GET "MEETING" INTO THAT SENTENCE? HOWEVER, ONE OF THE THINGS I LEARNED YESTERDAY AND I GUESS IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS ALREADY COMMON KNOWLEDGE SO I WAS SORT OF SURPRISED AT MY NAIVETE IN NOT REALIZING IT, THAT THE BOARD MEETINGS HELD ON FRIDAYS ARE ESSENTIALLY SCRIPTED EVENTS. AND IN TALKING TO PEOPLE AFTERWARDS, I HEARD THEM ALTERNATELY REFER TO AS KABUKI OR DOG AND PONY SHOWS. ONE I WANT TO TRY TO CONFIRM THAT UNDERSTANDING TO SEE IF, INDEED, THAT IS THE CASE AND, TWO, I WANTED TO BRING THAT UP IN THE CONTEXT OF THE META MEETING. ALL OF A SUDDEN I REALIZE I HAVE TO SLOW DOWN, OF THE META MEETING IN TERMS OF HOW WE BEST SPEND OUR TIME IN THIS MEETING BECAUSE I ASSUME THAT A LOT OF TIME GOES INTO PREPARING A SCRIPTED MEETING AND THEN REPLAYING IT FOR US ALL IN OPEN MEETING.

ONE OF THE THINGS I REALIZE WHEN I COME TO A MEETING LIKE THIS, THAT I REALLY ENJOY HEARING THE VOICES, THE SORT OF SPONTANEOUS VOICES OF ALL OF THE BOARD MEMBERS ON THE PARTICULAR TOPICS. AS A MEMBER OF THE GNSO COUNCIL, WHICH DOES ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING IN THE OPEN, RECORDED PHONE CALLS, PUBLIC MEETINGS, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE EVER SCRIPTED ANYTHING.

I FIND THAT, YES, EVEN THOUGH OUR DIRTY LAUNDRY DOES COME OUT IN PUBLIC, IT IS INCREDIBLY VALUABLE. THE FEEDBACK WE GET IS INCREDIBLY VALUABLE. SO I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO SORT OF CONFIRM MY UNDERSTANDING AND IF IT IS CORRECT, SORT OF ASK THE BOARD TO CONSIDER HAVING GENUINE UNSCRIPTED MEETINGS ON THE FRIDAYS.

>>VINT CERF: BUT, AVRI, I REALLY LIKE THE KABUKI MAKEUP.

>>AVRI DORIA: IT IS A WONDERFUL ART FORM.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, AVRI. I AM NOT SURE THERE IS A GOOD ANSWER TO THAT. NEXT QUESTION. I'M SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI. OH, I'M SORRY THERE ARE SEVERAL.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: THE ANSWER IS NAY. YOU ASKED FOR A CLARIFICATION. THE ANSWER IS NAY. THE MEETINGS ARE NOT SCRIPTED. WHAT HAPPENS IS THERE HAS TO BE A DEGREE OF PREPARATION BEFORE A MEETING AND WE DO AS MUCH AS WE CAN TO TRY TO DRAFT RESOLUTIONS WHICH REFLECT THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAVE HAD FROM THE COMMUNITY AND REFLECT THE SERIOUSNESS OF MUCH OF WHAT WE DO.

TO WRITE THOSE SORT OF MOTIONS TAKES SOME TIME. SO IF YOU MEAN SCRIPTING THAT THOSE MOTIONS ARE OFTEN DRAFTED IN ADVANCE, WELL, THAT'S A FORM OF SCRIPTING. BUT THERE IS NO SCRIPTING ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THOSE RESOLUTIONS OR ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON THEM. DOES THAT MAKE IT CLEAR FOR YOU? SCRIPTING, YES, THERE IS DRAFTING OF MOTIONS SO THAT WE GET -- SO THAT THEY PROPERLY RECORD WHAT WE WANT TO RECORD BUT THERE IS NO SCRIPTING ABOUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO VOTE ON THEM.

>>AVRI DORIA: OKAY. I CERTAINLY THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. I TRULY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING FROM OTHER BOARD MEMBERS ON THEIR UNDERSTANDING AS, I GUESS, IN TALKING TO PEOPLE SINCE HEARING THAT, I HAD DIFFERENT IMPRESSIONS ON, PERHAPS -- CERTAINLY, YES, I KNOW THAT NO ONE WROTE OUT A SCRIPT AND SAID, FIRST CHARACTER ONE SHALL SAY, THEN CHARACTER TWO SHALL SAY. BUT THAT THERE WAS A PRIOR UNDERSTANDING OF THE SORT OF COMMENTS THAT ONE WOULD MAKE IN PUBLIC. BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR CLARIFICATION.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY. NEXT COMMENT. I'M SORRY, RITA.

>>RITA RODIN: AVRI, THAT WAS A VERY HELPFUL COMMENT. AGAIN, AS A NEW BOARD MEMBER, ONE OF THE COMMENTS I HAVE BEEN HEARING A LOT IS THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH OUR MINUTES AND OUR AGENDA AND MORE INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW WE DELIBERATE. I CAN TELL YOU IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS I HAVE BEEN VERY HEARTENED HAVING HEARD SOME OF THOSE CRITICISMS AT THE VERY ROBUST DEBATE THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE HAD ON CONTINUING CALLS. IT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I HOPE WE WILL START LOOKING AT THIS COMING YEAR BECAUSE WE HAVE HEARD AND APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY ABOUT UNDERSTANDING A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT OUR DELIBERATIONS AND OUT PROCESSES AND WE ARE GOING TO AT LEAST TRY TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE CAN GIVE YOU ALL MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, RITA. PLEASE. MAY I? OKAY. THE LAC RALO PARTICIPANTS ARE VERY HAPPY WITH THE OPPORTUNITY OF COMMENTING AND GIVE INPUT ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE OPERATIONAL PLAN. WE CELEBRATE THE EXISTENCE OF SPANISH AND FRENCH SESSIONS, AND WE APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT ICANN STAFF IS DOING TOWARDS MULTILINGUALISM AND INCLUSION PARTICULARLY BY PAUL LEVINS, (SAYING NAME) PATRICK SHARRY AND MANY OTHERS. WE REGRET TO SEE THAT THE DOCUMENTS ARE STILL BEING PRODUCED ONLY IN ONE LANGUAGE. THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO PROVIDE INPUT EVEN IN A SPANISH SESSION ABOUT A DOCUMENT THAT IS PRODUCED ONLY IN ENGLISH.

OF COURSE, WE STAND READY TO HELP IN ANY WAY WE CAN, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO STRESS ONCE AGAIN THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING THESE AND SOME OTHER MAJOR ICANN DOCUMENTS IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.

WE WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT PROBLEMS WITHOUT GIVE AT LEAST AN APPROACH TO A SOLUTION. THEREFORE, I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THE ICANN BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CREATION OF SOME KIND OF ASSISTING GROUP ON MULTILINGUALISM TO ADDRESS THE DIFFERENT CHALLENGES RELATING TO TRANSLATION COSTS, NUMBER OF LANGUAGES, SELECTION OF DOCUMENTS, ET CETERA.

I THINK THIS COULD BE A MAJOR STEP FORWARD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TRULY GLOBAL POLICY. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. ALEX, YOU HAVE A COMMENT?

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: YES, VINT. WE HAVE HAD THE ROUNDABOUTS IN MULTILINGUALISM AND TRANSLATION IN MANY MEETINGS. I REMEMBER ONE PARTICULAR EXHIBIT IN THE MELBOURNE MEETING. SO IT TELLS YOU HOW FAR THAT GOES, ABOUT POLYGLOTTISM OF ALL PARTICIPANTS, AND WE HAD WHAT I THINK WAS WONDERFUL SPEECHES IN ARAB, CHINESE AND SOME LESS-WIDELY POPULATED LANGUAGES. TO BRING THIS TO A MORE CONCRETE POINT, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD WELCOME THE PROPOSAL THAT SEBASTIAN HAS EXPRESSED AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT I'VE BEEN IN A CONVERSATION WITH ICANN STAFF ABOUT THIS MATTER. THE SCALING FACTORS FOR THIS PROJECT WHICH CAN ENTAIL ENORMOUS TASKS. IF YOU LOOK, FOR EXAMPLE, AT THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF SCALING LANGUAGES THAT YOU WANT TO TRANSLATE INTO, THE NUMBER OF DOCUMENTS, THE QUALITY AND DEPTH OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU WANT TO TRANSLATE, WHETHER YOU WANT TO TRANSLATE EVERY SINGLE CHAT LIST OR ONLY THE MORE FORMAL AND PERMANENT DOCUMENTS.

THE LEGALLY BINDING CHARACTER OF THOSE DOCUMENTS, WHETHER YOU WANT THE TRANSLATION OF THE CONTRACTS THAT CAN BE VALID IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT COUNTRIES. AND THE PLACE WHERE YOU DO IT. AND IF YOU CAN CONTINUE TO PROJECTIZE THIS, THIS WILL BE A FANTASTICALLY WELCOMED THING.

I HAVE BEEN ASKED BY VINT TO CHAIR WHILE HE IS BRIEFLY ABSENT.

>>SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI: THANKS, ALEJANDRO. WE ARE CERTAINLY VERY HAPPY TO HEAR ABOUT THIS STUFF, PROJECTS. THESE ISSUES ARE ISSUES THAT IT SEEMS WE ARE AFRAID OF. I MEAN, OF COURSE, WE ARE AWARE OF TRANSLATION COSTS AND WHATEVER, BUT WE REALLY CAN'T THINK ABOUT A GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY WITHOUT THESE TOOLS.

AND NOW, HAVING THIS REGIONAL AT-LARGE STRUCTURES IN PLACE, WE HAVE REALIZED THAT THIS DEMAND IS MORE CHALLENGING THAN WE THOUGHT IN THE BEGINNING BECAUSE MOST OF THEM ARE TELLING US THIS IS OKAY BUT CAN YOU PROVIDE US WITH A SPANISH OR FRENCH DOCUMENT ABOUT THIS BECAUSE IT IS HARD FOR US TO PROVIDE INPUT IN SOME OTHER WAY. THIS WILL BE A VERY GOOD TIME TO KEEP SUPPORTING THE AT-LARGE INVOLVEMENT IN THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. THANK YOU.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THANK YOU, SEBASTIAN. SEBASTIEN BACHOLLET. APOLOGIES, ARE THERE ANY ONLINE COMMENTS COMING IN THAT YOU CAN SHARE WITH US?

SEBASTIEN.

>>SEBASTIEN BACHOLLET: BONJOUR. MERCI BEAUCOUP (SPEAKING FRENCH).

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: LET'S NOT MAKE THE POLITICAL DISPLAY ACT AT THIS TIME. CONCENTRATE ON THE MATTER.

(SPEAKING FRENCH).

YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT I AM TRYING TO TELL YOU NOW IS THAT WHEN THE PEOPLE FROM ENGLISH-SPEAKING COUNTRIES GO FAST, NOT JUST FOR THE SCRIBE BUT FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND YOU. YOU HAVE TO BE REALLY AWARE THAT YOU HAVE TO SPEAK FOR FOREIGN PEOPLE, NOT FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE ENGLISH AS FIRST LANGUAGE.

I CAME HERE TO SUPPORT WHAT SEBASTIAN SAID JUST BEFORE ME. I THINK WE WERE TOGETHER HELPING THE ICANN TO HAVE DOCUMENT OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN INTO OTHER LANGUAGE THAN ENGLISH, SPANISH AND FRENCH. WE TRIED WELL TO ANIMATE THE MEETINGS IN FRENCH AND IN SPANISH ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

WE THINK THAT IT IS REALLY AN IMPORTANT POINT TO HAVE PART OF THE MEETING IN THOSE LANGUAGES.

OF COURSE, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SOLVE AND TO TRANSLATE EVERYTHING, BUT I THINK THAT IF A GROUP COULD REALLY WORK ON THAT AND TRY TO FIND SOLUTION, IT WILL BE BETTER THAN TO DO NOTHING. I WILL NOT SAY THAT THERE IS NOTHING BECAUSE THERE IS FEW MEETINGS IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.

AND REALLY I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO MAYBE AS A FIRST STEP OF SOLUTIONS, THAT YOU ASK PEOPLE HERE WHO ARE UNABLE TO COME TO SPEAK BECAUSE IT IS ENGLISH, YOU MAY ASK THEM TO SPEAK IN THEIR LANGUAGE AND ASK OTHER PARTICIPANTS OF THE MEETING TO ADD TO THE TRANSLATION. IT COULD BE A GOOD IMPROVEMENT FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE IN THE ROOM AND UNABLE TO COME TO THE MIKE BECAUSE ENGLISH, IT'S NOT THEIR LANGUAGE AND THEY CAN'T SPEAK. THEY CAN LISTEN, THEY CAN READ BUT THEY CAN'T SPEAK. I THINK IT COULD BE A GOOD IMPROVEMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: ROBERTO GAETANO IN THE QUEUE.

>>ROBERTO GAETANO: YES, JUST TWO COMMENTS TO THIS. ONE POINT, I AGREE WITH SEBASTIAN AND ONE WHERE I DISAGREE. WHERE I AGREE IS THAT WE NEED TO PAY MORE ATTENTION TO MULTILINGUALISM. I HAVE BEEN MYSELF ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAD STARTED THIS -- PARTICIPATED IN STARTING THIS FIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING OF ICANN. SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE AN EFFORT TO TRANSLATE THE DOCUMENT, TO SPEAK SLOWLY AND TO FAVOR THIS WITH OUR ATTITUDE A BETTER COMPREHENSION.

HOWEVER, WHAT I DISAGREE IS THE FACT THAT THIS SEEMS TO BE KIND OF POINTING FINGERS AT THE BOARD. AT LEAST I GOT THIS KIND OF IMPRESSION FROM YOUR STATEMENT, AND I THINK IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE SHARE WITH THE WHOLE COMMUNITY BECAUSE I ASSURE YOU THAT I HAVE HARD TIMES IN UNDERSTANDING PEOPLE THAT -- FROM THE OPEN MIKE SPEAK VERY FAST AND REGARDLESS THE LANGUAGE.

AND I THINK THAT I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAD SIMULTANEOUS TRANSLATION FOR THIS SESSION. I'M ALSO SURPRISED THAT PEOPLE FROM THIS REGION, PEOPLE THAT ARE SPANISH SPEAKING, HAVE NOT TAKEN THE OPPORTUNITY OF USING THE LANGUAGE. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, I THINK THAT IT NEEDS A COLLECTIVE EFFORT.

AND THE BOARD CAN PUT CERTAIN -- CAN GIVE SOME POSSIBILITY TO THE COMMUNITY BUT THEN ALSO THE COMMUNITY COULD MAKE A BETTER USE OF THESE POSSIBILITIES WHEN THEY ARE GIVEN TO THEM. THANK YOU.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THAT'S A VERY PRACTICAL POINT. AND TO ALL PRESENT HERE, WE HAVE ABOUT 18 MINUTES LEFT OF THIS FORUM. SO I THINK WE -- APOLOGIES TO THE SCRIBES AND TRANSLATORS AND INTERPRETERS.

(TRANSLATING INTO SPANISH.)

I THINK WE HAVE GONE THROUGH 27 ITERATIONS OF THIS DISCUSSION. WE HAVE SAID THERE IS A PROJECT ONGOING THAT WILL BE PROPERLY COSTED. WE WELCOME THE CONTRIBUTION THAT HAS BEEN OFFERED BY THE ALAC. LET'S GO TO SOMETHING THAT THE COMMUNITY FINDS MORE SUBSTANTIVE UNLESS THERE REALLY ISN'T ANY MORE.

>>VINT CERF: HAGEN, WERE YOU IN THE QUEUE?

>>HAGEN HULTZSCH: IT DOESN'T REALLY CONTRIBUTE AS ALEJANDRO SAYS, BUT YOU HAVE SEEN THAT I HAVE SPONTANEOUSLY LEFT WHEN SEBASTIEN STARTED TO SPEAK FRENCH. NOT THAT I DON'T LIKE FRENCH. I WAS MUCH BETTER IN FRENCH THAN I STARTED TO SPEAK ENGLISH. BUT I THINK THIS COMMUNITY HAS TO LEARN AND HAS ALSO MISSION TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO SPEAK IN ONE LANGUAGE, WHICH ACCIDENTALLY IS ENGLISH.

NOW I AM FAVORING THAT WE SHOULD COMMUNICATE ON OUR MAJOR SUBJECTS IN THIS ONE LANGUAGE WHICH DOES NOT, LET'S SAY, INCLUDE THAT WE HAVE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS TRANSLATED INTO INDIVIDUAL LANGUAGES AND THAT WHEN PEOPLE CANNOT SPEAK OR WHEN WE WOULD LIKE TO HONOR THE LOCAL, LET'S SAY, PRESENCE, WE SHOULD OCCASIONALLY INCLUDE OTHER LANGUAGES.

BUT THE MISSION FOR THIS LONG-TERM GLOBAL APPROACH MUST BE TO HELP PEOPLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFICIENTLY IN ONE LANGUAGE BECAUSE TRANSLATION IS ALWAYS WEAK. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: RAIMUNDO AND THEN WE WILL GET WENDY AND I SEE WE HAVE A LONG QUEUE HERE. SO BRIEFLY, PLEASE.

>>RAIMUNDO BECA: I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE SAME SUBJECT BUT FROM A LITTLE DIFFERENT ANGLE. IT IS TAUGHT IN ALL THE BUSINESS SCHOOL AND I HAVE BEEN TEACHING THAT ALSO IN BUSINESS SCHOOL THAT IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN, THE PROCESS IS AS IMPORTANT AS THE PLAN ITSELF. TODAY -- TODAY WE ARE -- OR MAYBE TOMORROW WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN IMPORTANT MILESTONE. THE IMPORTANT MILESTONE IS THAT FINALLY WE GOT IN THE SCHEDULE TO HAVE THE STRATEGIC PLAN APPROVED IN THE LAST MEETING OF THE YEAR AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE IN THE FIRST MEETING NEXT YEAR THE OPERATIONAL PLAN AND IN THE SECOND ONE, THE BUDGET.

SO WE ARE NOW IN SCHEDULE. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND DOING THAT ALSO IN SCHEDULE, WE HAVE HAD IN EVERY OTHER -- IN EVERY OTHER MEETING FROM THE LAST TWO YEARS, THE CONSULTATIONS IN TWO OR THREE LANGUAGES.

I HAVE MADE THE PERSONAL EFFORT OF BEING ON THE BOARD TO ATTEND ALL THE MEETINGS IN SPANISH AND IN FRENCH BECAUSE I SPEAK -- I CURRENTLY SPEAK BOTH LANGUAGES. BEING NATIVE LANGUAGE SPANISH AND ADOPTED LANGUAGE FRENCH. I HAVE SEEN ALL MEETINGS HOW PEOPLE ARE PARTICIPATING THERE AND SOMETIMES AN IMPORTANT PART OF THOSE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN MORE TO SPEAK OF COMPLAINING ABOUT THE ABSENCE OF AN EFFORT FOR THE LANGUAGE THAN ON THE CONTENT.

I THINK TODAY OR TOMORROW WHEN WE ARE HERE THE SCHEDULED TIME, IT'S ALSO THE TIME TO IMPROVE THE CONTENT, TO IMPROVE THE CONTENT NOT ONLY THE LANGUAGES BUT IN THE OTHER LANGUAGE, BUT ALSO IN ENGLISH SO THAT TODAY I AM REALLY HAPPY THAT WE ARE ON SCHEDULE. BUT I AM NOT SO HAPPY ON THE CONTENT OF THE DOCUMENT, EITHER IN ENGLISH OR IN SPANISH OR IN FRENCH. THANKS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, RAIMUNDO. LET ME -- YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP FOR SOME REASON. NO, OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO -- GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF TIME LEFT, I WANT TO END THE QUEUE WHERE YOU ARE, PLEASE, SO THAT'S IT. NO MORE PEOPLE AFTER YOU. NO, NO, I'M NOT SAYING GO AWAY. YOU ARE THE LAST ONE. NO MORE PEOPLE AFTER YOU.

>>WENDY SELTZER: THANK YOU. I HAVE A COMMENT THAT FOLLOWS ON SOME OF THOSE LAST, ABOUT COMMUNICATION AND THE STRATEGIC PLAN. I NOTE THAT THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND ITS DISCUSSION OF MULTISTAKEHOLDER COORDINATION ASKS ICANN TO IMPLEMENT AND REFINE A COMMUNICATIONS PLAN THAT CLEARLY EXPLAINS ICANN'S MISSION AND COMMUNICATES ICANN'S ACTIVITIES AND ACHIEVEMENTS. TO THAT, I WOULD ALSO VERY MUCH LIKE TO SEE ICANN COMMITTING ITS CHALLENGES AND OPEN QUESTIONS BECAUSE FAR MORE THAN THE PUFFERY OF WHAT ICANN HAS DONE AND HOW WONDERFUL IT IS, THE COMMUNITY CAN BENEFIT FROM LEARNING WHAT ICANN HAS IN PROGRESS AND HOW AND WHERE OUR INPUT CAN BE USEFULLY ACCEPTED BEFORE SOMETHING IS DONE AND SET IN STONE.

SO TO THAT I WANT TO ADD A THANKS TO THE GAC FOR INCLUDING IN ITS COMMUNIQUE AN APPENDIX ON TRANSPARENCY WHERE I THINK THEY MAKE VERY USEFUL SUGGESTIONS ABOUT SPECIFIC WAYS THAT ICANN CAN HELP TO CALL FOR PARTICIPATION NOT ONLY FROM THE GAC BUT FROM OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, AND THAT INCLUDES THINGS LIKE POSTING NOTICE -- CLEAR NOTICE IN ADVANCE OF WHAT ISSUES WILL BE CONSIDERED AND WHEN AND WHEN THE DEADLINES ARE FOR PUBLIC INPUT OR IF -- EVEN WHEN NOT FIXED DEADLINES, WHEN PUBLIC INPUT CAN USEFULLY BE CONSIDERED SO AS TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE VARIOUS POLICY PROCESSES AS WELL AS FOR THE BOARD PUBLISHING MINUTES OF MEETINGS, RELATIVELY PROMPTLY AND WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE DISCUSSED, PUBLISHING A BIT MORE OF THE DECISIONAL PROCESS DISCUSSION, AN EXPLANATION OF THE REASONS BEHIND THE DECISION SO THAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS CAN KNOW WHERE THEY HAVE BEEN HEARD, WHAT RESPONSE HAS BEEN MADE TO CONCERNS THAT THEY HAD AND PERHAPS COME TO AGREE WITH THE DECISION!

THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN CONTRARY TO THEIR VIEWS BECAUSE THEY MAY BE PERSUADED BY THAT REASONING. AND IF THEY ARE NOT, AT LEAST THEY WILL UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WERE HEARD AND CONSIDERED IN THE PROCESS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, WENDY. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT WE COULD DO A BETTER JOB OF DOCUMENTING HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE END UP IN A LOT OF OUR DISCUSSIONS. AND SO I THINK THAT THIS YEAR -- THIS COMING YEAR WILL BE A TIME TO WORK VERY HARD ON THAT, AND I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE.

THE NEXT COMMENTS ARE?

>>WERNER STAUB: WERNER STAUB. I AM MAKING A PERSONAL COMMENT. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT TRANSLATIONS, BUT I AM NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT TRANSLATIONS BUT , RATHER, WHAT WE COULD DO TO OTHERWISE EASILY MAKE COMMUNICATIONS BETTER.

WE HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING ASSISTED HERE BY HIGHLY GIFTED SCRIBES WHO ARE ABLE TO TRANSCRIBE WHAT WE SAY AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE --

[ APPLAUSE ]

WITH ALL THE CRITICISM THAT PEOPLE MAY HAVE ABOUT USING ENGLISH, ENGLISH IS ONE OF THE LANGUAGES -- IT HAS THE TOOLS FOR RAPID TRANSCRIPTION. NOT ALL LANGUAGES HAVE THAT. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT IN GERMAN. SO LET US USE IT MORE.

AND ONE OF THE EASY THINGS THAT WE THINK OF OURSELVES AS MOSTLY TECHIES COULD DO WOULD BE TO CREATE A REALTIME FEED OF EXACTLY WHAT APPEARS ON THE SCREEN HERE ON THE LEFT IN FRONT OF US, SEND THAT TO AN ICANN SERVER AND THAT ICANN SERVER WOULD DISTRIBUTE IT IN MANY WAYS BUT, MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT WOULD TIME STAMP EVERY LINE WITH UTC TIME STAMP. FROM THERE WE COULD HAVE CONTENT THAT COULD BE USED IN MANY WAYS .

IT COULD EVEN BE USED FOR TRANSLATION. THERE ARE MANY TRANSLATION SCHOOLS OUT THERE WHO WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT KIND OF CONTENT WHEN IT WILL BE TIME STAMPED, SO TO SPEAK, SUBTITLES AND VIDEO AND THE SOUND TRACK. ALL THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL INPUT THAT COULD BE USED REALTIME OR DEFERRED, IF WE JUST USE IT MORE AND ADD IT AS LITTLE TWEAK TO WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

>>VINT CERF: I ACTUALLY -- I KNOW YOU HAVE A COMMENT, JOI. IT TURNS OUT THERE IS A VERY BASIC TECHNICAL PROBLEM WITH THE CURRENT SCRIBING SYSTEM THAT PREVENTS IT FROM DOING WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR. THIS IS THE WRONG TIME TO GO INTO DETAIL.

I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IT WITH YOU, THOUGH, BECAUSE IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO OVERCOME THAT PARTICULAR TECHNICAL PROBLEM, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT KIND OF OUTCOME, TOO. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE LOOKED AT THAT VERY CAREFULLY AND WE RAN INTO A PARTICULARLY TOUGH DIFFICULTY.

JOI?

>>JOICHI ITO: YOU JUST SAID WE WOULDN'T GO INTO DETAIL, BUT I WAS GOING TO GO INTO DETAIL. THERE IS A SOFTWARE COMPANY. WE ARE IN TOUCH WITH THEM. IT REQUIRES DEVELOPMENT WORK. IT IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE.

>>WERNER STAUB: JOI, SLOW DOWN, PLEASE.

>>JOICHI ITO: BASICALLY, WE ARE TRYING VERY HARD BUT IT INVOLVES COOPERATION OF A SOFTWARE COMPANY.

>>VINT CERF: SO WE ARE HEARING -- WE HEAR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND WE WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

OKAY, MR. MARUYAMA.

>>NAOMASA MARUYAMA: I SUPPORT WHAT WERNER SAID. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT -- THE CAPTIONING IS VERY IMPORTANT AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE GOOD USE OF THAT. THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT THING. I KNOW AS A NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER, I KNOW HOW THE TRANSLATION -- HOW COSTLY IS IT. AND MORE IMPORTANT THING IS HOW TO MAKE GOOD USE OF THE ENGLISH. THAT IS, I THINK, A TOP PRIORITY.

AS A NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER, I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU ONE OBSERVATION OF TODAY'S PUBLIC FORUM. I TRULY APPRECIATE THAT BOARD MEMBERS AND OTHER PEOPLE TRY TO SPEAK SLOWLY, AND IT WAS VERY EASY TO UNDERSTAND FOR ME UNTIL ONE SPEECH. THAT IS -- SOME GENTLEMAN GAVE ABOUT MR. HASBROUCK. HE SUPPORTED -- I UNDERSTAND HE SUPPORTED WHAT MR. HASBROUCK SAID, BUT IT WAS TOO FAST AND I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND THAT. SUDDENLY AFTER THAT, THE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD ALSO RUSHED INTO VERY RAPID SPEECH AND IT WAS QUITE REGRETTABLE, I THINK.

I THINK THIS IS THE NATURE OF THE MEETING THAT EVEN IF PEOPLE TRIED TO MAKE EFFORT FOR SOMETHING, ONLY ONE PERSON MAY BREAK IT. I HAVE TO POINT OUT THAT. I HOPE PEOPLE LEARN FROM THAT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, MR. MARUYAMA.

ARIGATO.

LYNN.

>>LYNN ST. AMOUR: YOU SAID ONE VERY BRIEF COMMENT, RETURNING TO THE DISCUSSION EARLIER ON THE BOARD MEETINGS.

ISOC AND ICANN OBVIOUSLY SHARE A LOT OF THE SAME PROCESSES, GIVEN THAT WE WERE SPRUNG FROM THE SAME INTERNET GLOBAL COMMUNITY.

WE EQUALLY MAKE OUR BOARD MATERIALS AHEAD OF TIME, AS WE DO OUR AGENDA.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE STARTED DOING, AND I OFFER FOR CONSIDERATION, RECENTLY IS WHEN WE POST OUR BOARD AGENDA, WE INCLUDE A SHORT SUMMARY WHICH SAYS, THIS IS THE PURPOSE OF THAT PARTICULAR ITEM.

WE ALSO TRY AND IDENTIFY WHETHER OR NOT IT'S FOR DISCUSSION, FOR INFORMATION, FOR RESOLUTION, AND IF IT'S FOR RESOLUTION, THEN WE ACTUALLY POST A PROPOSED DRAFT RESOLUTION AHEAD OF TIME.

THAT'S CERTAINLY TO ENSURE THAT THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS, AS WELL AS EVERYBODY ELSE IN OUR AUDIENCE, WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE DISCUSSION IS, WHAT WE INTEND TO DO WITH THAT DISCUSSION, AND CERTAINLY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE RESOLUTION AS RIGHT AS POSSIBLE.

SO I THINK -- I DON'T LIKE THE WORD "SCRIPTING," BECAUSE I THINK THAT IMPLIES TOO MANY NEGATIVE CONNOTATIONS.

BUT ADVANCE PREPARATION OF BOARD RESOLUTIONS, POSTING AND MAKING THOSE VISIBLE IS, I THINK, A VERY USEFUL TOOL NOT ONLY FOR THE BOARD, BUT ALSO FOR THE COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, LYNN.

PLEASE.

>>ANA SANCHEZ: SHE IS ANNOUNCING THAT SHE IS GOING TO SPEAK IN SPANISH.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: IS THE TRANSLATION COMING IN?

SHE SAYS SHE REPRESENTS A COUNTRY CALLED ECUADOR, AND HER LANGUAGE IS SPANISH.

>>ANA SANCHEZ: BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ONLY GOING TO BE ILLITERATE IN THE LANGUAGE, BUT ALSO IN KNOWLEDGE.

BECAUSE WE CANNOT ACHIEVE MUCH IN -- WITHOUT THE DOCUMENTATION IN SPANISH, AND WE ARE BECOMING ISOLATED.

THEREFORE, WE REQUEST THAT THE DOCUMENTATION BE PROVIDED IN SPANISH TO BE ABLE TO --

>>VINT CERF: YOU NEED TO SLOW DOWN WITH THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION SO THE TRANSCRIBERS CAN KEEP UP WITH YOU.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO KEEP UP WITH HER.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I WAS TRYING NOT TO INTERRUPT HER FLOW.

>>VINT CERF: YOU SHOULD -- CAN YOU PAUSE?

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I WILL ASK HER FOR BREAKS.

>>VINT CERF: -- A LITTLE BIT AND WAIT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND WAIT, AND HE CAN TALK.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: APOLOGIES TO THE SCRIBES, AGAIN, AND TO -- I APOLOGIZE, I WAS TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE ANA.

YOU ARE THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GAC?

>>ANA SANCHEZ: NO.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: SHE IS THE CHAIR OF ISOC, ECUADOR, HAS STATED SHE REPRESENTS ECUADOR, AND THAT SHE REQUIRES -- SHE'S A MEMBER OF THE ALAC.

SHE REQUESTS THAT THE DOCUMENTATION FOR THE MEETINGS BE PROVIDED IN SPANISH, THAT NOT HAVING ACCESS TO THE LANGUAGE WILL MAKE US ILLITERATE IN KNOWLEDGE.

AND BECAUSE OF THE CRITICALITY OF THE DOCUMENTS, SHE HAS MADE THIS REQUEST OF HAVING THEM PROVIDED IN SPANISH IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO INVOLVE HER COMMUNITY ADEQUATELY.

>>ANA SANCHEZ: THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: DA NADA.

>>SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI: I'M LIKELY TO BE THE LAST ONE, BECAUSE I WOULD WOULDN'T LIKE MY PROPOSAL ELUDE IN THIS DISCUSSION.

IT WASN'T TO START A DEBATE ABOUT MULTILINGUALISM, BUT JUST TO PROPOSE A WAY OF TRYING TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM WITH ALL OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY.

I DON'T THINK THIS IS REALLY UP TO THE BOARD, LIKE, SAY, WHY DON'T YOU GIVE US THE SOLUTION FOR THIS, BUT, RATHER, FOR US TO TRY TO GET A CONSENSUS ON HOW THIS COULD BE SOLVED.

BUT I -- AND, OF COURSE, I APPRECIATE SEBASTIEN'S SUPPORT, AND ALL OF THEM.

I WOULD LIKE JUST TO MAKE A QUICK POINT ABOUT WHAT RAIMUNDO SAYS.

IT'S NOT THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING DURING THE SESSIONS ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLAN ABOUT LANGUAGE AND DON'T GET INTO THE STRATEGIC THING.

BUT THE LANGUAGE IS REALLY A STRATEGIC -- SHOULD BE A STRATEGIC POINT IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

I MEAN, IT'S A STRATEGIC ISSUE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A GLOBAL POLICY.

AND FOR DOING SO, YOU CAN'T DO IT IN ENGLISH.

OF COURSE, WE CAN HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS IN ENGLISH, AND THAT'S WHY I'M DOING THE EFFORT OF DOING SO.

AND ALL OF THEM, IT'S OBVIOUSLY THAT WE NEED ONE SINGLE LANGUAGE IN WHICH WE COMMUNICATE CLEARLY OR -- WELL, I'M NOT SURE WITH MY ENGLISH.

BUT, ANYWAY -- BUT THE THING IS THAT IT SHOULD BE A STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE FOR ICANN, AND IT SHOULD BE WELL REFLECTED IN THE OPERATIONAL PLAN THAT WE HAVE AT LEAST SOME MAJOR DOCUMENTS IN AT LEAST SOME MAJOR LANGUAGES.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: I'D LIKE TO ENDORSE THAT COMMENT ABOUT MAJOR DOCUMENTS BEING RENDERED IN MORE THAN ONE LANGUAGE.

IN PARTICULAR, AS WE COME TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN, NOTWITHSTANDING RAIMUNDO'S CONCERN ABOUT SUBSTANCE, ONCE WE'VE ADOPTED IT, IT SEEMS APPROPRIATE TO MAKE IT VISIBLE IN LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH.

IT ALSO OCCURS TO ME THAT AS WE ENTER FURTHER INTO THE INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAME TERRITORY, THAT THERE WILL BE PARTICIPANTS IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO WILL HAVE AN INCREASINGLY LARGE DIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES IN WHICH -- WHICH THEY WILL CONSIDER TO BE COMFORTABLE IN NATIVE LANGUAGES.

SO WE MAY FACE THIS PROBLEM INCREASINGLY AS THE NETWORK REACHES FURTHER AND FURTHER INTO COMMUNITIES THAT HAVEN'T USED IT BEFORE.

PAUL, AND THEN VANDA.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY THAT THERE ARE SPECIFIC PROJECTS IN THE OPERATIONAL PLAN FOR 2006/2007 SPECIFICALLY TO THIS PURPOSE.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN FUNDS ALLOCATED.

I CAN REPORT TO YOU THAT PAUL LEVINS IN PARTICULAR HAS BEEN EXPLORING POTENTIAL PROVIDERS OF THESE SERVICES, AND THAT TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF OUR CONCERN OF THE ISSUE THAT HAGEN RAISED OF HOW DO YOU ENSURE THE DIFFICULTY OF ACCURATE TRANSLATION AND TRANSLATION OF SENSE, ONE OF THE PEOPLE HE'S BEEN SPEAKING TO IS ONE OF THE WORLD'S LARGEST TRANSLATION PROVIDERS FOR THE TELEVISION AND MOVIE INDUSTRY, WHO DO A LOT OF THE TRANSLATIONS IN THAT ENVIRONMENT.

BUT WE'RE ALSO VERY INTERESTED TO CONTINUE TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK FROM MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WAYS OF PROVIDING THE SERVICE.

I WOULD JUST MAKE ONE OTHER OBSERVATION ON THE ONE LANGUAGE ISSUE.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT -- AND I THINK THIS IS TRUE IN MANY INTERNATIONAL ENTITIES.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE MAINTAIN A SINGLE LANGUAGE FOR BUSINESS.

THAT SORT OF FOR THE ACTUAL DOING OF BUSINESS AND FOR THE CONDUCTING OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, IT IS ACTUALLY VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO THAT IN ONE LANGUAGE.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T TRANSLATE DOCUMENTS.

BUT THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE -- THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS SHOULD BE IN THAT ONE LANGUAGE.

>>VINT CERF: VANDA, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.

>>VANDA SCARTEZINI: YES.

I WILL USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE OFFER SOME SUGGESTION THAT WHEN PORTUGUESE IS SPOKEN, I BELIEVE THERE ARE NOT MANY PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD WHO SPEAK PORTUGUESE.

SO THE CCTLD HERE DECIDED TO DO THIS EFFORT, TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO THE COMMUNITY HERE.

SO MOST OF THE IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS CAME OUT FROM ICANN WEB SITE IS TRANSLATED -- ARE TRANSLATED TO PORTUGUESE IN ONE WEEK OR SO.

SO I BELIEVE OTHER CCTLDS COULD HELP THEIR POPULATION TO DO THE SAME.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, VANDA.

AN INTERESTING OBSERVATION IS THE ONE THAT PAUL MADE CONCERNING THE PRECISION OF THE TRANSLATIONS.

IF IT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, THEN THE TRANSLATIONS ARE EXTREMELY HELPFUL.

IF THEY WERE INTENDED TO BE, FOR EXAMPLE, CONTRACTS THAT BOUND THE PARTIES, THEN YOU REALLY NEED TO WORK HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S PRECISE.

BUT FOR MANY, MANY OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE OF INTEREST TO OUR COMMUNITY, I THINK WE HAVE A GREAT DEAL MORE FLEXIBILITY.

AND THAT'S IMPORTANT.

WELL, I THINK WE'VE COME TO THE END OF THIS SESSION.

I DON'T SEE HANDS UP.

AND I'D ASKED THE PARTICIPANTS TO END THE OPEN QUESTIONS.

SO I THANK ALL OF YOU AGAIN FOR TAKING THE TIME TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US.

WE WILL BE RECONVENING THE BOARD MEETING TOMORROW MORNING AT 8:30.

IN THE MEANTIME, MANY OF YOU HAVE OTHER MEETINGS THAT YOU NEED TO GO TO.

SO, PAUL.

SORRY.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: I'M SORRY, VINT.

I JUST WANTED TO REMIND THE COMMUNITY THAT IN THIS ROOM, STARTING AFTER THIS SESSION, THERE IS A PANEL ON CARIBBEAN PEOPLE AND CARIBBEAN PRIORITIES, WHICH WILL BE BOTH LIVE HERE, BUT WILL ALSO BE VIDEO-STREAMED AND ARCHIVED.

SO THOSE WHO HAVE AN INTEREST FROM THE CARIBBEAN ON A RANGE OF ISSUES, AND SOME OF THE SPEAKERS INCLUDE, FOR INSTANCE, BERNADETTE LEWIS, SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE CARIBBEAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS UNION, AMONGST OTHERS.

THERE ARE OTHER HIGH-LEVEL SPEAKERS HERE.

I JUST WANTED TO REMIND THE COMMUNITY, THE MEETING WILL BE TAKING PLACE HERE AFTER THIS.

>>VINT CERF: ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YES, SHARIL.

>>SHARIL TARMIZI: I JUST WANTED TO REMIND ALSO THE GAC MEMBERS WHO ARE STILL IN THIS ROOM, THE SESSION WITH THE GNSO COUNCIL AND THE GAC IS ALREADY RUNNING NEXT DOOR.

SO, YOU KNOW, GO AND HAVE A CHAT ABOUT WHOIS AND THAT KIND OF STUFF.

IT'S NEXT DOOR.

DON'T MEAN TO COMPETE WITH YOUR ANNOUNCEMENT, PAUL, BUT MULTIPLE MEETINGS HAPPENING.

>>VINT CERF: ALL RIGHT.

SO THIS MEETING IS OFFICIALLY ADJOURNED, AND WE WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE CARIBBEAN MEETING.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I THINK PAUL IS GOING TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT MANAGEMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS COMING FROM MEETINGS.

>>VINT CERF: WE MADE THAT ANNOUNCEMENT EARLIER.

HE MADE THAT ANNOUNCEMENT EARLIER.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: THEN IT SEEMS NOT TO HAVE --

>>VINT CERF: YOU'RE MIXING YOUR PAULS UP.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: NO.

I'M FORCING ONE PAUL.

I'M FORCING PAUL.

I'M TWISTING HIS ARM.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: I'M SORRY, CAN YOU TALK INTO THE MICROPHONE.

I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I WAS TRYING TO TWIST YOUR ARM INTO REPEATING PAUL LEVINS'S ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT HOW THINGS FROM MEETINGS WILL BE REPORTED FROM NOW ON.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: OKAY.

I'M HAPPY TO -- I'M HAPPY TO REINFORCE FOR THE COMMUNITY, -- TO THE BOARD, BUT ALSO TO THE COMMUNITY, PROPOSED CHANGES FOR MINUTING OF ICANN BOARD MINUTES, STAFF-PROPOSED CHANGES, WHICH THE BOARD WILL ALSO FURTHER CONSIDER, FOR -- AS OF THE NEXT TELECONFERENCE-BASED MEETING, WHICH WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT EXTENSION OF THOSE BOARD MINUTES TO INCLUDE SUMMATION OF MATERIAL AND INPUT TO THE BOARD, NOT A VERBATIM, BUT A REPORTING OF BOARD MEMBERS' VIEWS ON EACH PARTICULAR ITEM, AS WELL AS THE SENSE OF THE MEETING, AND THEN ALSO THE VOTES AND ANY STATEMENTS THAT BOARD MEMBERS WISH TO MAKE ON THE VOTES.

SO THAT'S A PREANNOUNCEMENT OF THE NEXT ATTEMPT.

AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR FURTHER FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD AND OTHERS.

[ APPLAUSE ]

>>PAUL TWOMEY: I WOULD SUGGEST PEOPLE HOLD THEIR APPLAUSE UNTIL THEY SEE THE PRODUCT.

>>VINT CERF: ALL RIGHT.

SO THERE MUST BE PEOPLE WHO ARE WAITING TO CONVENE THE CARIBBEAN MEETING.

IF THEY ARE, THE BOARD SHOULD EXIT, AND WE SHOULD ALLOW THOSE PEOPLE TO TAKE OVER THE ROOM.

© Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers