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 Links and information may be outdated or incorrect.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 Vancouver, Canada

ICANN Public Forum, Part 1

Friday, 02 December 2005

Note: The following is the output of the real-time captioning taken during the ICANN Public Forum, Part 1 held on 02 December, 2005 in Vancouver, Canada. 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.

ICANN PUBLIC FORUM, PART 1
FRIDAY 2 DECEMBER 2005
VANCOUVER, BC

>>VINT CERF: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS PUBLIC FORUM TO
ORDER.

SOMEHOW OR OTHER, PUBLIC FORUM AND "ORDER" SOUNDS LIKE AN OXYMORON, BUT WE'LL
GO AHEAD ANYWAY.

I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAYS. THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS THAT HAD TO BE TAKEN
CARE OF FIRST TECHNICALLY.

WE'RE GOING TO RUN THIS PUBLIC FORUM UNTIL 5:30 TONIGHT. SINCE WE DIDN'T
START UNTIL NOW, 2:00, WE MAY NOT GET THROUGH EVERYTHING, AND IF THERE ARE
THINGS THAT WE DON'T FINISH, I WILL MOVE THEM OFF TO THE NEXT PART OF THE
FORUM, 9:00 TOMORROW MORNING.

MOST OF THIS AFTERNOON'S MATERIAL CONSISTS OF REPORTS COMING FROM VARIOUS OF
THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, STAFF AND THE LIKE.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY ASKING PAUL TWOMEY, THE CEO OF ICANN, TO DELIVER
HIS PRESIDENT'S REPORT.

SO PAUL.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU, VINT. I THINK THAT'S THE SAME SLIDE ON MY MACHINE
AS IS UP THERE.

THANKS VERY MUCH, CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I THOUGHT I WOULD GIVE
YOU A REPORT WHICH COVERS A NUMBER OF THINGS. SOME HIGHLIGHTS OF THE LAST
QUARTER, SOME ISSUES THAT ARE PRESENTLY BEING CONSIDERED BY THE COMMUNITY,
WHICH I WILL JUST TOUCH ON BECAUSE YOU WILL ALL RECEIVE FURTHER REPORTS FROM
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY DURING THE NEXT AFTERNOON -- THE NEXT AFTERNOON.
AND I PARTICULARLY THOUGHT, I HAVE HAD ADDED IN AFTER CONVERSATIONS OF THE
LAST SEVERAL DAYS WITH REGISTRARS AND OTHERS, THE ISSUE OF ICANN'S BUDGET
HAVING COME UP, I THOUGHT I WOULD SHARE WITH YOU AND THE COMMUNITY SOME OF
THE HISTORY ABOUT ICANN'S STAFF RESOURCE STABILITY, FINANCIAL STABILITY OVER
THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, JUST TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF THE CEO'S HEADACHES,
I THINK.

SO LET'S JUST QUICKLY MOVE ON.

AS WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED HERE YESTERDAY AFTERNOON, I THINK ICANN WELCOMES
THE OUTCOME OF THE TUNIS SUMMIT. THE WSIS HAS BEEN A MAJOR ISSUE FOR US THIS
YEAR. I THINK WE CAN BE PLEASED WITH THE OUTCOME AND VERY PLEASED WITH THE
PERFORMANCE OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND ALLIES, AND WE ARE CERTAINLY
COMMITTED TO ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS OF GOVERNMENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE
MULTISTAKEHOLDER ENVIRONMENT.

TO MAKE IT CLEAR AGAIN, WE HAVE A LETTER TO THE CHAIR OF THE GAC ON THE 8TH
OF NOVEMBER, AND AN INTERVENTION I MADE AT THE TUNIS PREPARATORY COMMITTEE
MEETING I THINK LAID A GOOD BASIS FOR A NOW DEEPER DIALOGUE BETWEEN GAC AND
GOVERNMENTS AND THE ICANN BOARD FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING PROPER GOVERNMENT
PUBLIC POLICY INTERACTION WITH THE ICANN BOARD. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT
THERE ARE MUCH -- THAT'S NOT THE ONLY THING THAT'S AN IMPORTANT OUTCOME OF
THE WSIS IN TERMS OF VALUES, AND I THINK WE HAVE DONE VERY WELL IN TERMS OF
MULTISTAKEHOLDER AND OTHER VALUES, BUT WE NEED TO KEEP THOSE ADDRESSED AS
WELL. SO I DON'T THINK THE COMMUNITY SHOULD TAKE AWAY THAT THE ONLY EMPHASIS
OF THIS BOARD IS UPON IMPROVING RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE GOVERNMENTS. IT'S
ABOUT A CONSTANT EMPHASIS UPON OPERATING WELL AS A MULTISTAKEHOLDER
ORGANIZATION.

THE SECOND THING TO TOUCH BASE ON IS THE WORK BEING DONE ON INTERNATIONALIZED
DOMAIN NAMES.

THIS IS HIGH PROPERTY. IT HAS DEDICATED STAFF RESOURCES. IT NEEDS MORE
STAFF RESOURCES. IT NEEDS MORE SCHOOLED RESOURCES.

MAJOR ACTIVITIES HAVE INCLUDED THE REVISION OF THE GUIDELINES, IDN
GUIDELINES, WITH A LOT OF WORK BY THE VARIOUS REGISTRIES. A REVISION OF THE
IANA IDN LANGUAGE TABLES REGISTRY. THE WORKSHOP THIS WEEK, WHICH I THINK WAS
USEFUL. I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS THE THIRD WORKSHOP WE HAVE HAD ON IDNS, AND
THIS IS A COMPLEX AREA. BUT I DO THINK THERE WAS A BEGINNING OF SIGNALS OF
SOME STEPS FORWARD TO BEGIN TO TAKE SOME CONCRETE STEPS FORWARD PERHAPS ON
TESTS, ET CETERA.

AND I THINK ALSO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE IDN -- PRESIDENT'S IDN ADVISORY
COMMITTEE IS IMPORTANT, BECAUSE WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE IN THIS IDN ENVIRONMENT
THAT IT HAS A GEOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY, A LANGUAGE DIVERSITY, AND ALSO THE LAYERS
OF THE INTERNET AND APPLICATION LAYER DIVERSITY. IT'S SORT OF A HORIZONTAL
AND VERTICAL DIVERSITY. AND ICANN IS A PART OF THAT, BUT IT DOESN'T PRETEND
TO BE ALL OF IT, NOR SHOULD IT BE.

AND ONE OF THE KEY THINGS OF THE PRESIDENT'S COMMITTEE IS TO TRY TO BRING
PEOPLE FROM OTHER PARTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT TOGETHER AND TO TRY TO BE A FORCE
TO ENERGY AND SOME COHERENCE AROUND A NUMBER OF INITIATIVES TAKING PLACE NOW
AND COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT DIFFERENT MILESTONES.

SO I WAS VERY PLEASED TO SEE MEMBERS OF THE BROWSER COMMUNITY AND OTHERS
INVOLVED IN THIS DISCUSSION. AND I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.

I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT IN THE ONGOING DISCUSSIONS AND WORK THAT WILL
COME FROM THE GNSO ON IDNS IN THE TLD, IN THE ROOT. THAT WORK NEEDS TO
PROCEED, BUT IT NEEDS TO COALESCE WITH THE OTHER INITIATIVES AND ENSURE THAT
WE HAVE THE TIMING -- SOME FORMS OF TIMING ALIGNMENT.

STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE. AS PEOPLE ARE AWARE THERE WAS A CONSULTATION SESSION
IN LUXEMBOURG IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGES, AND THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THAT I
PARTICULARLY IN THE FRENCH AND SPANISH SESSIONS, WERE VERY ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT
THAT, AND WE'VE REPEATED THAT AGAIN AT THIS MEETING. THE OUTPUT WAS AN
ISSUES PAPER WHICH WAS DISTRIBUTED IN SEPTEMBER 2005 IN ENGLISH, FRENCH, AND
SPANISH.

SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND LIAISONS WERE CONSULTED ABOUT THAT IN OCTOBER
2005. THAT RESULTED IN A KEY PRIORITIES DOCUMENT BEING POSTED ON THE WEB
SITE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE HAVE HAD FURTHER CONSULTATION ABOUT THAT DOCUMENT HERE IN VANCOUVER, AGAIN
WITH THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMITTEES REPRESENTATIVES.

AND THAT IS AN INTERESTING STAGE NOW BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE IS A STRATEGIC
PLANNING DOCUMENTATION WHERE I CAN TELL YOU THERE'S NOT A SINGLE WORD WRITTEN
BY STAFF MEMBERS. IT'S ALL COMING FROM CONSULTATION WITH SUPPORTING
ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMITTEES. OBVIOUSLY STAFF ARE INVOLVED IN THE
DISCUSSION, BUT IT'S INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THAT WHOLE TEXT HAS BEEN
DEVELOPED.

SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS HAVE ASKED THAT THE FINAL PLAN ACTUALLY BE TAKEN
BACK, ONCE IT'S -- ONCE THE NEW DOCUMENT IS ISSUED FOR COMMENT AT THE END OF
THIS MEETING AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO AND HAVE CONSULTATIONS BACK IN
SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMITTEES, THAT WE ACTUALLY MOVE T TO APPROVING
THE PLAN IN WELLINGTON. HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE SIX MONTHS STRATEGIC PLANNING,
SIX MONTHS OPERATIONAL PLANNING AND WE DO NEED TO MOVE IN JANUARY TO THE
BEGINNING OF THIS UPCOMING YEAR'S OPERATIONAL PLAN. AND THAT OPERATIONAL
PLAN, I THINK THERE WILL BE ENOUGH DETAIL AFTER THIS MEETING TO WORK FORWARD
ON THE FIRST DRAFT OF AN OPERATIONAL PLAN, SO WE WILL BE IN PARALLEL PROCESS
UP UNTIL WELLINGTON, AND THE OPERATIONAL PLAN ITSELF WILL BE CONSIDERED AT
MARRAKESH IN JUNE.

I JUST WANT TO REINFORCE THAT THIS PROCESS, WE ARE LEARNING AS A
MULTISTAKEHOLDER COMMUNITY AND ORGANIZATION AS TO HOW TO DO THIS. I THINK
WE'RE GETTING BETTER AT IT. I THINK WE ARE LEARNING HOW TO CONTRIBUTE, AND I
THINK, THE STRATEGIC PLAN NEXT YEAR WILL BE A LESS INTENSE EFFORT BECAUSE A
LOT OF WORK IN THE THREE-YEAR CYCLE HAS BEEN DONE NOW. VERY IMPORTANTLY FOR
ISSUES OF BUDGET ACCOUNTABILITY.

I THINK THIS IS A NEW LAYER OF TRANSPARENCY BEING INTRODUCED INTO THE PROCESS
OF BUDGET TRANSPARENCY. AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE BUDGET IS PRETTY
TRANSPARENT NOW, BUT I THINK WE HAVE A NEW LAYER COMING IN.

AND THAT IS WE'VE GOT THE SETTING OF STRATEGIC TARGETS BY THE COMMUNITY AND
THE BOARD. WE WILL HAVE OPERATIONALLY THAT DETERMINED DOWN INTO HOW TO
PERFORM EACH OF THOSE LINES BY PROJECT, AND THE OPERATIONAL PLAN WILL BE
BASICALLY A LONG LIST OF PROJECT PLANS WITH ALLOCATED FUNDING. THAT TO BE
CONSIDERED AND APPROVED.

THAT WILL BE REPORTED AGAINST AT THE END OF THE NEXT FINANCIAL YEAR LINE ITEM
BY LINE ITEM, HOW WAS THE MONEY SPENT, WHERE ARE WE ON EACH OF THOSE LINE
ITEMS.

SO I THINK IT'S BOTH COMMUNITY SETTING PRIORITIES, CONSIDERING WHAT SORT OF
PROJECTS, AND THEN HAVING THOSE PROJECTS REPORTED BACK AGAIN, WHICH I THINK
GIVES ANOTHER LAYER -- ANOTHER FURTHER LAYER ON ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRANSPARENCY TO THE BUDGETING PROCESS.

THERE IS A NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN POLICY PROCESS UNDERWAY IN THE GNSO. I WON'T
GO THROUGH THIS IN DETAIL. I JUST WANT TO SAY I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT AS WE CONSIDER THE INTRODUCTION OF NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS THAT WE
KEEP THE RIGHT DIALOGUE GOING ACROSS ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, ALL
THE STAKEHOLDERS, ESPECIALLY THEY EARLY STAGE OF ISSUE IDENTIFICATION. AND
THAT I THINK THE NEW WAYS OF ACTUALLY LEARNING TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT THE
ISSUES AND HAVE EVERYBODY ENGAGED, PARTICULARLY I CAN SAY THIS WITH SOME
EXPERIENCE HAVING BEEN THE CHAIR OF THE GAC PREVIOUSLY, ENSURING THAT THE
GOVERNMENT MEMBERS OF THE GAC GET ENGAGED AND INPUT EARLY ON THE ISSUES, NOT
JUST RECEIVE A DOCUMENT AT THE END. BUT ALSO THAT'S TRUE, I SEE, WITH THE
CCS AND THE GNSO MEMBERS AS WELL.

NOW, I KNOW THE CHAIRS OF THOSE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMITTEES TAKE
THAT SERIOUSLY, SO I WON'T TALK FURTHER TO IT BUT I THINK IT'S A VERY
IMPORTANT MESSAGE.

WE HAVE THE GNSO REVIEW UNDER WAY. AND THAT'S TO COME UP LATER IN THIS BOARD
MEETING.

THERE IS BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS AND DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE
AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE.

IF THE BOARD APPROVES THE TERMS OF REFERENCE AT THIS MEETING, THEN THE
PUBLICATION OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FROM EVALUATORS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY
PUBLISHED. A SELECTION OF INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR WILL TAKE PLACE IN JANUARY
OF 2006, AND THE AIM IS TO HAVE THE REVIEW FINALIZED BY THE END OF THE SECOND
QUARTER, 2006.

AND I'LL JUST REMIND EVERYBODY, I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE STRENGTHS OF THE
ICANN PROCESS, IS OF CONSTANT REGULAR EVALUATION OF THE RELEVANCY AND
OPERATIONS OF THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND STRUCTURES. IT IS A PROCESS
OF BUILDING IN REFORM WITHOUT MAKING IT A MASSIVE SINGLE EVENT BUT A CONSTANT
PROCESS FOR REFORM.

THERE IS SOME ISSUES HERE ON THE CC PROCESS, BUT I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT FOR
ADDRESS BY THE CC CHAIR, CCNSO CHAIR.

IMPORTANTLY, I THINK, WE HAVE AT THIS MEETING OF ICANN CHAIRMEN A -- THE
ADDRESS SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION OR THE ADDRESS COUNCIL, AT LEAST, HAS ENSURED
A MEETING SCHEDULE WHICH IS TAKING PLACE IN THE ICANN FRAMEWORK. SO THEY ARE
MEETING HERE IN VANCOUVER. THE BOARD WILL GET TO MEET WITH THEM TOMORROW.

AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD INITIATIVE, AND I UNDERSTAND WE MAY WELL SEE THAT
HAPPENING MORE REGULARLY.

I WOULD REMIND ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT THERE IS A PROPOSAL
PRESENTLY BEING DEVELOPED WITHIN THE REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRIES AND COMING
UP THROUGH THE PROCESS WE HAVE FOR APPROVAL OF GLOBAL POLICY THERE IS A
PROPOSAL FOR IPV6 NUMBER ALLOCATIONS UNDER WAY. THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT POLICY
BECAUSE IT COMES TO THE VERY HEART OF HOW ADDRESSES WILL BE ALLOCATED OUT OF
THE V 6 AREA. SO I WOULD EXHORT ALL PEOPLE TO LOOK AT THE APPROPRIATE
REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRY WEB SITE FOR YOUR REGION, IF YOU WISH TO MAKE
COMMENT, IF YOU WISH TO BE INVOLVED, LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S EMERGING.
NOW IS THE TIME.

THIS DOES COME THROUGH A SET PROCESS FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION. THAT HAS
A VERY SET TIME FRAME. THE TIME FOR GOOD COMMENT NOW IS IN THE RIR PROCESSES
AND THROUGH THEIR WEB SITES AND THROUGH THEIR MEETINGS.

JUST QUICKLY ON THE IANA. WE HAVE, SINCE OUR MEETING IN LUXEMBOURG, HAD SOME
SIGNIFICANT INCREASE -- AMENDMENTS TO STAFFING. DAVID CONRAD HAS TAKEN A
POSITION OF GENERAL MANAGER OF IANA. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER DAVID IS IN THE
ROOM. NO. HE IS OUT IANA'ING.

DAVID JOINS US, HE WAS WITH THE FIRM NOMINUM WHICH IS AMONGST OTHER THING A
PRODUCER OF DNS SOFTWARE, BUT HE WAS ALSO THE CHAIR OF ARIN, THE FOUNDING CEO
OF APNIC. I THINK HE FOUNDED ONE OF THE EARLY ISPS IN JAPAN AND COMES WITH A
VERY STRONG BACKGROUND PARTICULARLY FROM THE IP ADDRESSING COMMUNITY.

KIM DAVIES HAS ALSO JOINED IANA. KIM IS FORMERLY THE TECHNICAL LIAISON FOR
CENTR, THE EUROPEAN CCTLD GROUPING, BROADER THAN EUROPE CCTLD GROUPING, AND
KIM HAS JOINED AS A LIAISON FOR THE NAME ENVIRONMENT.

I JUST REMIND PEOPLE THAT IANA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING MORE THAN 250
REGISTRIES OF IDENTIFIERS AND RESOURCES FOR THE NAMES AND NUMBERS
COMMUNITIES. IT HANDLES UPDATES FOR MORE THAN 70 OF THEM IN ANY GIVEN MONTH.

AND I ONLY PUT THIS AD BACK UP, THIS IS REINFORCING A MESSAGE TO PEOPLE,
ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO MAY BE WATCHING THIS THROUGH VIDEO STREAMING.

IF THERE IS ANY INQUIRY ABOUT A REDELEGATION PROCESS OR ANY -- PEOPLE WANT TO
KNOW ABOUT A REDELEGATION OR WHAT'S INVOLVED IN A REDELEGATION -- I AM NOT
TRYING TO PROMOTE A REDELEGATION, JUST PUT INFORMATION OUT THERE, THE
INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND AT THAT WEB SITE, WEB ADDRESS.

SIMILARLY, IF PEOPLE WISH TO MODIFY CCTLD INFORMATION OR TLD INFORMATION,
ACTUALLY, THE WEB FORMS FOR DOING THAT MODIFICATION ARE FOUND AT THE
FOLLOWING ADDRESS.

SO WE NOW -- IF PEOPLE WISH TO MAKE CHANGES TO -- IN THE ZONE FILE, INITIATE
PROCESS FOR AMENDMENTS IN THE ZONE FILE, WE HAVE A TEMPLATE -- A WEB TEMPLATE
PROCESS FOR THAT INTERACTION.

ONE OF THE INITIATIVES THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR SOME TIME IN THE
COMMUNITY IS THE IDEA OF HOW DO WE INTERACT IN VARIOUS REGIONS OF THE WORLD.
AND WE HAVE MOVED FORWARD WITH THE APPOINTMENT OF REGIONAL LIAISONS THAT WERE
ORIGINALLY BUDGETED FOR IN THE LAST FINANCIAL YEAR.

THEIR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO PROVIDE OUTREACH AND SUPPORT AND ENGAGEMENT WITH
RESPECTIVE REGIONS AND STAKEHOLDERS, CIVIL SOCIETY, BUSINESS, GOVERNMENTS,
SUPPORT THE REGIONAL AT-LARGE PROCESS WHERE APPROPRIATE. TO PARTNER WITH
RESPECTIVE ORGANIZATIONS, NOT TO TRY TO COMPETE WITH THEM. AND TO DELIVER
AGAINST BUSINESS PLANS CONSISTENT WITH ICANN'S OPERATIONS AND STRATEGIC
PLANS.

AND WE ANTICIPATE THAT MOST OF THESE WILL BE IN PLACE BY MID-2006. AND I
JUST WANTED TO INFORM YOU THAT RECRUITMENT PROCESS IS WELL UNDERWAY AND WE
WILL PROBABLY APPOINT A NUMBER OF PEOPLE BY JANUARY TO THESE POSITIONS.

OKAY. IF I CAN TAKE THE REMAINDER OF THE TIME, I WON'T SOUND TOO AUSTRALIAN
AND SAY REMINDER OF THE TIME, REMAINDER OF THE TIME, I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT RESOURCE STABILITY, AND I JUST DO THIS TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION
BECAUSE I KNOW THERE IS DIALOGUE ABOUT THIS GOING ON AT THE MOMENT. AND I
WANT TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION OF THE TWO PREVIOUS FINANCIAL YEARS. SO
FINISHING AS OF JUNE 2005.

AND MY KEY MESSAGES ARE THAT CASH, AND CERTAINLY FREE CASH, HAS LAGGED BUDGET
REVENUE CONSISTENTLY BECAUSE OF DELAYS OF -- YOU CAN EITHER CALL IT THE --
IT'S BOTH THE BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS, BUT ALSO THE REGISTRAR APPROVAL
PROCESS FOR SELECTION OF ONE OF THE MAIN SOURCES OF REVENUE. AND ALSO ONE OF
THE BIG IMPACTS BEING LEGAL COSTS.

SO AS A CONSEQUENCE, STAFF NUMBERS HAVE BEEN KEPT STEADY AND WELL BELOW
BUDGET, TO OPERATE WITHIN CASH CONSTRAINTS. AND YET THE WORKLOAD HAS NOT
DIMINISHED. IF ANYTHING, IT'S PROBABLY INCREASED.

SO TO GIVE YOU SOME SENSE OF HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS GO VERSUS BUDGET, THERE IS
THIS SAW-TOOTH PHENOMENON THAT TAKES PLACE IN OUR CASH RECEIPTS UNTIL NOW.
AND WHILE I WOULD ACCEPT THAT PROBABLY HAVING A CONCEPT OF BUDGETED REVENUE
SHOULD BE EQUAL EACH QUARTER, IS PROBABLY A LITTLE FALSE. YOU WOULD EXPECT
SOME LAG IN THE FIRST QUARTER, IF YOU ARE CHANGING THE BUDGET.

WE DO HAVE THIS PHENOMENON OF SAW TOOTH, WHICH COMES FROM THE DELAYS IN
GETTING VARIOUS VOTES THROUGH PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY AT THE MOMENT.

SOME PEOPLE WILL NOT KNOW, BUT IF WE COLLECT INCREASED REVENUES FROM
REGISTRARS, THERE IS PROVISION IN THEIR ACCREDITATION AGREEMENTS, PROVISION
IN ONE OF THE AGREEMENTS WE HAVE WITH THEM, THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE
ON THAT, AND THAT WE HAVE TO GET A TWO-THIRDS OF NAMES UNDER MANAGEMENT VOTE
TO GET THAT THROUGH. THAT PROCESS OF GETTING TWO-THIRDS OF NAMES UNDER
MANAGEMENT NOW THAT WE HAVE 600 REGISTRARS IS QUITE A CHALLENGE JUST IN TIME
SENSE.

SO I WON'T GO ANY FURTHER IN TERMS OF HOW THAT OPERATES, BUT IT IS SIMPLY FOR
FINANCIAL RISK ANALYSIS OR STABILITY ANALYSIS, THIS SAW TOOTH PHENOMENON IS
HAPPENING AGAIN THIS YEAR, AND FOR VARIOUS REASONS. IT'S JUST SOMETHING I
POINT OUT.

I'D ALSO POINT OUT THAT IF YOU TOOK LEGAL COSTS OUT OF THAT CASH -- ACTUAL
CASH RECEIPTS, THERE'S NO ONE TIME WHEN THE CASH IS AVAILABLE WHICH ACTUALLY
MEETS BUDGET FORECAST.

AND IN THE YEAR 2004-2005, THE CONSEQUENCE OF THAT DELAY WAS THAT FOR A
BUDGET OF $15.8 MILLION, WE DID NOT RECEIVE $5.8 MILLION IN REVENUE. IT JUST
NEVER ARRIVED. SO WE OPERATED AT TWO-THIRDS OF WHAT OUR BUDGET WAS FOR THAT
YEAR.

THE CONSEQUENCE HAS BEEN THAT WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO MANAGE TO CASH. THE ONLY
QUESTION PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF AND KURT ASK, AND I AM CONSTANTLY ASKING, IS HOW
MUCH MONEY IS IN THE BANK, JUST MANAGING THE CASH. THE CONSEQUENCE AS BEEN
THAT WE HAVE HAD TO ENSURE WE DO NOT DO ALL THE STAFFING. SO THE BUDGET
APPROVED THROUGH THE COMMUNITY PROCESS FOR STAFFING AS TO THE END OF THIS
LAST FINANCIAL YEAR, JUNE, WOULD HAVE HAD US JUST SHORT OF 60 STAFF. THE
REALITY IS THAT WE HAD JUST ON 37, I THINK IT WAS.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCE OF HAVING TO MANAGE FOR THAT CASH
PHENOMENON AS WE HAVE JUST NOT HAD THE STAFF.

BUT THE WORK DEMANDS, AS YOU ARE ALL WELL AWARE, DO NOT CONTINUE TO DECREASE.
THEY CONTINUE TO BE MAJOR AND THEY CERTAINLY IN SOME RESPECTS HAVE BEEN
INCREASED.

WE HAVE HAD SOME VERY MAJOR PROJECTS IN THIS PERIOD, PARTICULARLY THE
APPLICATION ROUND FOR NEW STLDS, WHICH IS ENORMOUSLY, ENORMOUSLY RESOURCE
ABSORBING.

THE REBIDDING PROCESS FOR DOT NET, AS YOU ARE AWARE NOW, VERISIGN LITIGATION
AND SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, IDN GUIDELINES, WSIS PARTICIPATION, THEY ARE
JUST SOME OF THEM. BUT IF YOU THINK YOURSELVES WHAT IS INVOLVED, IT'S BEEN
QUITE INTENSE.

SIMILARLY, OTHER ACTIVITIES WHICH ARE PROBABLY MORE, IF YOU LIKE,
TRANSACTIONAL OR USUAL HAVE CONTINUED TO INCREASE SIGNIFICANTLY, OR HAVE OVER
THIS PERIOD.

NEW REGISTRAR APPLICATIONS INCREASED PARTICULARLY IN THE END OF 2003-2004.
SO WE -- AND WHILE THERE IS LOTS OF DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT SORT OF REGISTRARS
ARE THESE AND ARE THEY SO-CALLED REAL REGISTRARS OR NOT REAL REGISTRARS, AND
I'M NOT GETTING INTO THAT DEBATE, BUT THAT WORDING IS USED OCCASIONALLY, ALL
I WOULD SAY IS THAT THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS ARE STILL THE SAME, OR BASICALLY
THE SAME, AS WE INCREASE THEM.

JUST ANOTHER LITTLE FACT. THIS IS NOT, YOU KNOW, REALLY GOOD INFORMATION
ABOUT IMPACT ON WORKLOAD. BUT TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF THE POLICY
DISCUSSION, THE INTENSITY OF POLICY DISCUSSION TAKING PLACE AMONGST THE ICANN
COMMUNITY, AND THIS IS NOT AN INDICATION OF WORKLOAD. THIS IS JUST AN
INDICATION OF INTERACTION, I SUPPOSE. BUT THIS IS THE AVERAGE MONTHLY
TRAFFIC ON ICANN E-MAIL SINCE 1999 THROUGH TO 2005. AND YOU CAN GET SOME
FLAVOR OF THE INCREASE IN DIRECTION.

SO THAT'S PROBABLY SOME FLAVOR OF THE INTERACTION THAT YOU YOURSELVES SEE IN
THE COMMUNITIES AND CONSTITUENCIES.

THIS IS JUST A SMALL THING. WE ARE NOT A VERY BIG PLACE, BUT THE IMPACTS ON
OUR FINANCIAL OFFICE ARE SUCH THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN INCREASING NUMBERS OF
TRANSACTIONS TO MANAGE.

I'LL FINISH WITH THIS LAST SLIDE. WE EXPECT, THOSE OF US IN POSITIONS OF
AUTHORITY OBVIOUSLY EXPECT TO WORK HOURS THAT ARE NECESSARY. SO I'M NOT
TRYING TO DEFEND -- ICANN IS NOT A 40-HOUR WEEK TYPE OF PLACE. AND IT
SHOULDN'T BE SO.

BUT THIS IS -- WE JUST TOOK A QUICK SAMPLE IN OCTOBER OF THE PREVIOUS FOUR
WEEKS. FOR -- THIS IS -- I THINK IT'S THE TOP 60% OF STAFF. AND THE AVERAGE
HOURS PER WEEK WORKED. AND YOU CAN SEE IT'S IN THE MID-SIXTIES, LOW
MID-SIXTIES, THAT RANGE.

NOW, I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARILY AN OUTRAGEOUS WORKLOAD, BUT I DON'T
THINK -- FOR MEAN, THE INDICATION IS I REALLY PREFER THAT BE SITTING CLOSER
TO 50 HOURS A WEEK THAN 60, 62, 63, WHEN I KNOW THIS IS PRETTY DEEP DOWN IN
THE ORGANIZATION.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO SHARE SOME OF THOSE STRAINS.

BUT YOU SHOULD HAVE CONFIDENCE WE ALWAYS MANAGE TO FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY,
SO WE MANAGE TO CASH VERY CAREFULLY TO ENSURE THAT THE ORGANIZATION IS NOT AT
ANY RISK.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

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

THOSE ARE PRETTY TOUGH HOURS. I SUSPECT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE
ROOM WHO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS, BECAUSE A LOT OF US SHARE THAT
WORKLOAD.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON NOW TO SOME OF THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION AND ADVISORY
COMMITTEE REPORTS.

THE FIRST ONE OF WHICH COMES FROM THE CCNSO AND CHRIS DISSPAIN.

I SEE CHRIS ROUNDING THE BEND IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM THERE. HE COMES UP THE
CORRIDOR. HE IS RUNNING AT ABOUT THREE LENGTHS BEHIND THE LEADER.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: THANK YOU FOR THAT INTRODUCTION.

GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS CHRIS DISSPAIN. I AM THE CHAIR OF THE
CCNSO.

WE HAVE A REPORT FROM OUR TWO-DAY MEETING, AND OUR COUNCIL MEETING THIS
MORNING WHICH I DON'T PROPOSE TO GO THROUGH IN ANY DETAIL. IT WILL BE POSTED
ON THE WEB SITE, ET CETERA. BUT I THOUGHT I'D JUST TALK ABOUT A FEW
HIGHLIGHTS AND A FEW THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING.

THE FIRST IS THAT I'M DELIGHTED TO SAY THAT THE CCNSO HAS FINISHED ITS POLICY
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, AND AS OF ROUGHLY 1:00 THIS AFTERNOON, THE BOARD REPORT
WAS E-MAILED TO JOHN JEFFREY BY OUR ISSUE MANAGER. AND I'M SURE YOU WILL ALL
ENJOY WADING THROUGH IT AND READING IT.

BASICALLY AS A RESULT OF THAT, WE HAVE ASKED FOR SOME CHANGES TO BE MADE TO
THE BYLAWS. AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO RECEIVING YOUR RESPONSE IN DUE COURSE.

THE OTHER TOP-OF-MIND ISSUE FOR MANY BOARD MEMBERS AND PEOPLE IN THE
COMMUNITIES IS ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK.

WE HAVE PUBLISHED AN ACCOUNTABILITY -- A DRAFT ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK
GUIDELINE. COMMENTS CLOSE ON THAT ON THE 9TH OF DECEMBER, AND AS SOON AS WE
CAN THEREAFTER WE WILL, HAVING DEALT WITH THOSE COMMENTS, PUBLISH -- FORMALLY
PUBLISH THE GUIDELINES SO THAT ICANN STAFF CAN START USING THEM IN THEIR
DISCUSSIONS AND NEGOTIATIONS WITH CCTLDS.

I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT, IF I CAN, ABOUT THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE. I CAN
SEE GEORGE SITTING DOWN THERE.

WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE NOMINATED BY THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE ONTO OUR COUNCIL,
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS INTENDED THAT THERE WILL BE AT SOME POINT A
REVIEW OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE PROCESS. I JUST WANTED TO FLAG A CONCERN
THAT THE CCNSO HAS KEY CURRENTLY NOW, AS OF THE END OF THIS MEETING, HAVE TWO
EUROPEAN, NOMINEES AND ONE ASIA-PACIFIC NOMINEE ON OUR COUNCIL FROM THE
NONCOM. AND IN FACT, UNDER OUR G.O. DIVERSITY RULES, THAT SHOULD NOT OCCUR.
WE SHOULD, IN FACT, HAVE ONE PERSON FROM ONE OF THE FIVE REGIONS. AND WE'D
LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S DEALT WITH AND DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE PERSON WHO HAS BEEN
NOMINATED, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH.

I THINK I CAN SAY -- SPEAK FOR MOST OF THE CCTLDS PRESENT AT THIS MEETING
THAT WE ARE HUGELY ENCOURAGED BY THE CHANGES AT IANA, AND THE INTERACTION
THAT'S OCCURRED AT THIS MEETING HAS BEEN FANTASTIC. WE ARE VERY PLEASED. WE
ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH DAVID AND KIM AND THE REST
OF THE STAFF AT IANA TO GET THINGS DONE THAT NEED DONE, AND THAT'S VERY
ENCOURAGING.

THE ICANN/VERISIGN AGREEMENT HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF LOTS AND LOTS OF
DISCUSSION.

THE CCTLDS VIEWS OF THIS ARE PROBABLY SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY DRIVEN TO THE REST
OF THE COMMUNITIES INASMUCH AS WE ARE LESS CONCERNED ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THE
CONTRACT THAN WE ARE ABOUT THE PROCESS ITSELF AND THE POSSIBLE PRECEDENCE
THAT COULD BE SET IN RESPECT TO THAT PROCESS.

I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVE SENT OR WILL SEND OUT A -- WE DO
INTEND TO TRY TO GIVE YOU SOME FEEDBACK. IT WILL, BY NECESSITY, BE FEEDBACK
AT A HIGH LEVEL RATHER THAN FEEDBACK IN RESPECT TO INDIVIDUAL CLAUSES IN THE
CONTRACT, ET CETERA.

WE HAVE SENT OUT OR WE WILL BE SENDING OUT A DRAFT RESOLUTION TO OUR MEMBERS.
AND OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS, WE'LL GET FEEDBACK ON THAT, AT SOME POINT
HOPEFULLY PROVIDE THAT TO YOU.

ANOTHER PLUS IS THE WAY THE STRATEGIC PLAN IS NOW BEING MANAGED. I AM
INVOLVED IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO STICK
AROUND. AFTER THIS PUBLIC FORUM, I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A STRATEGIC PLAN
SESSION, AND IT'S WORTH BEING HERE FOR THAT BECAUSE I THINK YOU WILL BE
PLEASED AND IMPRESSED WITH THE WAY THAT THE DOCUMENT IS COMING TOGETHER.

AND I MUST ECHO WHAT PAUL SAID.

I THINK THIS HAS BEEN A LONG, HARD ROAD, BUT ONCE WE GET THIS BIT RIGHT, NEXT
YEAR WILL BE A LOT EASIER.

FINALLY, THIS TIME LAST YEAR -- SORRY, THIS TIME IN LUXEMBOURG, I MADE A
COMMITMENT TO VINT THAT WE WOULD DO OUR ABSOLUTE BEST TO COMPLETE THE
ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK BY THE TIME OF THIS MEETING.

AND, BASICALLY, WE'VE ACHIEVED THAT.

SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO MAKE ANOTHER COMMITMENT, AND THAT IS THAT I'M --
IT'S MY GOAL THAT BY THE TIME WE GET TO WELLINGTON, THAT THE CCNSO WILL HAVE
CEASED ITS NAVEL GAZING AND WILL START TO GET ON TO DO SOME REAL WORK.

THANK YOU.



>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU HAVE A QUESTION FROM PETER DENGATE THRUSH.

PETER.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: JUST A COMMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN, RATHER THAN A
QUESTION.

CHRIS, I WANTED TO COMMEND AND YOU YOUR CCNSO, AND PARTICULARLY THE ISSUE
MANAGER, BART BOSWINKEL.

I THINK COMPLETING THAT PDP HAS BEEN A BIG EFFORT.

THAT'S THE FIRST ONE FOR THE CCNSO, AND THAT ALWAYS RAISES ISSUES.

BUT A FANTASTIC AMOUNT OF WORK HAS BEEN DONE, AND I AND I'M SURE THE REST OF
THE BOARD, LOOK FORWARD TO REVIEWING NOW THE CHANGES THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING
TO THE BYLAWS WITH A VIEW TO STRENGTHENING THE CCNSO.

SO THANK YOU.

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

CHRIS, THANK YOU.

WE APPRECIATE ALL OF THE HARD WORK THAT AND YOU YOUR TEAM HAVE PUT IN THIS
LAST YEAR.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THOSE RESULTS IN WELLINGTON.

THE NEXT REPORT COMES FROM THE GNSO COUNCIL, AND IT WILL BE DELIVERED BY
BRUCE TONKIN, WHO IS ON HIS WAY UP THE STAGE NOW.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: OKAY.

THANK YOU, VINT.

JUST FIRSTLY ON THE TOPIC OF THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT WORK THAT'S UNDERGOING
WITHIN THE GNSO, THIS WEEK, THE COUNCIL APPROVED A NEW POLICY RECOMMENDATION
IN THE AREA OF WHOIS.

AND THIS POLICY RECOMMENDATION IS BASICALLY THAT THE ICANN STAFF WORK TO
DEVELOP A PROCESS FOR DEALING WITH CONFLICTS BETWEEN PRIVACY LAWS THAT ARE
PROGRESSIVELY BEING DEVELOPED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD WHERE SOME
REGISTRARS AND REGISTRIES ARE LOCATED AND THE CURRENT ICANN CONTRACTS THAT
GOVERN THE OPERATION OF GTLD REGISTRIES AND REGISTRARS SO THAT THE DETAILED
TEXT OF THAT RECOMMENDATION WILL BE SENT TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION BY
THE BOARD AT ITS MEETING AFTER THIS MEETING.

THE OTHER WORK THAT'S GOING ON WITH WHOIS THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED THIS WEEK IS
IN TRYING TO GET A CLEAR DEFINITION OF PURPOSE OF WHOIS, BECAUSE A LOT OF THE
PRIVACY LAWS THAT DO EXIST AROUND THE WORLD DO REQUIRE YOU BOTH TO DECLARE
WHAT YOUR PURPOSE IS WHEN YOU'RE COLLECTING DATA, AND SO THEREFORE WE NEED A
CLEAR DEFINITION THAT WE CAN USE ACROSS THE DIFFERENT REGISTRIES AND
REGISTRARS.

THE PROCESS OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS, I GUESS, IS, WE TYPICALLY START WITH SIX OR
MORE POINTS OF VIEW.

WE'RE CURRENTLY DOWN TO TWO.

SO WE'VE GONE FROM SIX TO TWO, WHICH IS PROGRESS, I GUESS.

AND WE NOW HAVE TWO DEFINITIONAL PROPOSED DEFINITIONS, ONE SUPPORTED BY THE
REGISTRIES/REGISTRARS, AND NONCOMMERCIAL USERS, AND THE OTHER SUPPORTED BY
THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS, AND BUSINESS USERS.

SO THE INTENT IS TO PUBLISH THOSE DEFINITIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND
HOPEFULLY SEEK TO COMBINE THOSE TWO ALTERNATIVE DEFINITIONS INTO ONE
SUPPORTED -- ONE DEFINITION SUPPORTED BY ALL THE PARTICIPANTS IN THAT
PROCESS.

THE -- WE'VE ALSO COMMENCED WORK ON A POLICY FOR NEW GENERIC TOP-LEVEL
DOMAINS.

WE FINISHED THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THAT POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS TODAY,
AND WE WILL SHORTLY BE CALLING FOR PUBLIC INPUT ON THIS TOPIC OF NEW GLOBAL
TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS.

THE FOUR MAIN AREAS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TO FIRST ANSWER THE QUESTION SHOULD
WE HAVE ANY NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS, AND WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS NOT JUST TO
THOSE PARTIES THAT MIGHT BE WISHING TO OPERATE A TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN, BUT ALSO
WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS TO THE REGISTRANTS THAT MIGHT REGISTER WITHIN THAT
DOMAIN, AND PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS TO INTERNET END
USERS THAT WOULD WISH TO MAKE USE OF THOSE DOMAINS TO NAVIGATE WITHIN THE
INTERNET.

THE SECOND AREA THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED THERE IS, IF WE DO DECIDE TO
INTRODUCE NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS, WHAT SHOULD BE THE SELECTION CRITERIA?

UNDER WHAT BASIS WOULD WE ACCEPT A PROPOSAL FOR A NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN?

WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA?

WE'LL BE USING THE EXPERIENCE GAINED IN THE SELECTION ROUNDS OF 2000 AND MOST
RECENTLY IN 2004 FOR THE SPONSORED ROUND, AND ALSO THE SELECTION CRITERIA
USED FOR THE DOT ORG AND THE DOT NET SELECTION PROCESSES.

THE THIRD AREA IS THEN CONSIDERING THE ISSUE OF ALLOCATION.

AND SOME OF THE ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED THERE IS -- AND PAUL MADE THE COMMENT
TODAY THAT THE PROCESS FOR THE SPONSORED ROUND WAS VERY RESOURCE-INTENSIVE.

THERE'S ONLY A LIMITED -- IF THE DECISION WAS TO USE THAT KIND OF PROCESS,
THERE'S PROBABLY A LIMIT TO HOW MANY YOU COULD INTRODUCE AT ONCE.

AND THEN, OF COURSE, YOU NEED TO DECIDE, WELL, IF YOU'RE LIMITING HOW MANY
YOU CAN INTRODUCE AT ONCE, HOW DO YOU SELECT WHO GETS TO GO FIRST, AND YOU
ALSO NEED TO DEAL WITH ISSUES SUCH AS WHERE TWO PARTIES MIGHT PASS THE
SELECTION CRITERIA BUT BOTH WANT THE SAME TOP-LEVEL STRING AND HOW WOULD YOU
DEAL WITH MAKING A DECISION BETWEEN THOSE TWO PARTIES.

THE FOURTH MAIN AREA IS LOOKING AT, LOOKING FORWARD, WHAT SHOULD BE IN THE
CONTRACTS THAT GOVERN THE OPERATION OF NEW TOP-LEVEL NAMES.

AND IN DOING THAT, WE BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO FIRST CONSIDER WHAT ARE THE
HIGH-ORDER POLICY ISSUES.

AND SOME OF THESE ISSUES HAVE COME UP IN DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE PROPOSED DOT
COM AGREEMENT AND HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE THINGS TO CONSIDER.

IS THERE A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE SOME SORT OF PRICING CONTROL?

WHAT SHOULD BE THE EXPECTATION FOR RENEWAL OF A TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN AGREEMENT?

AND THESE ARE THE SORTS OF THINGS WE BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE CLEAR
POLICY DIRECTION FOR THE BOARD AND THE STAFF TO FOLLOW, WHICH THEY CAN THEN
INCORPORATE INTO THE CONTRACTUAL TERMS OF THOSE AGREEMENTS.

SO THOSE ARE THE SORT OF FOUR AREAS THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING IN THAT POLICY
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

AND THE FINAL AREA OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS DISCUSSED TODAY WAS AND IS
AN OUTCOME OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE EARLIER THIS WEEK, AND THAT IS A
FORMAL REQUEST FOR THE STAFF TO PRODUCE AN ISSUES REPORT IN THE AREA OF
INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES WITH RESPECT TO THE EXISTING GLOBAL TOP-LEVEL
-- EXISTING GENERIC TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS.

THE GNSO COUNCIL RECOGNIZES BOTH THAT THE PRESIDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH
RESPECT TO INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES HAS MANY REPRESENTATIVES FROM
ORGANIZATIONS OUTSIDE OF ICANN THAT HAVE BEEN WORKING ON SOME OF THE
TECHNICAL AND LANGUAGE AND CULTURAL ASPECTS OF THIS TOPIC, AND SO THE GNSO
EXPECTS TO LIAISE VERY CLOSELY WITH THAT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO GET ADVICE ON
THE ISSUES, THE POLICY ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER.

AND WE HOPE ALSO THAT AS WE DEVELOP POLICY DECISIONS OR PROPOSE POLICY
DECISIONS, WE CAN THEN LOOK AT GETTING ASSISTANCE FROM TECHNICAL GROUPS TO
WORK OUT WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO IMPLEMENT A PARTICULAR POLICY OR WHETHER A
PARTICULAR POLICY IS EVEN IMPLEMENTABLE AT ALL.

SO, CLEARLY, THAT NEEDS TO BE CLOSE COOPERATION THERE.

WE ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED TO WORK CLOSELY WITH THE CCNSO AS THE CCTLDS
ARE ALSO VERY KEEN TO INTRODUCE INTERNATIONALIZED VERSIONS OF THEIR DOMAIN
NAMES AT THE TOP LEVEL.

AND, FINALLY, AS PAUL HAS MENTIONED, THERE'S CERTAINLY A NEED TO CONSIDER
WHAT IS THE BEST WAY FOR THE GNSO TO INTERACT WITH THE GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE WITH REGARD TO BOTH NEW GENERIC TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS AND ALSO
INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES.

SO WE'VE GOT, I GUESS, A VERY HEAVY SCHEDULE OF WORK HERE.

AND ONE OF THE KEY THINGS THAT WE RECOGNIZE WE NEED TO DO IS DO A PLAN THAT
TAKES US THROUGH, I GUESS, THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF NEXT YEAR, AN OPERATIONAL
PLAN, AS PAUL HAS POINTED OUT, THAT REALLY IDENTIFY HOW WE'RE GOING TO
ALLOCATE BOTH STAFF RESOURCES AS WELL AS COMMUNITY RESOURCES TO WORK ON THESE
AREAS TO TRY TO MEET, I GUESS, THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY.

BECAUSE THERE, I GUESS, IS A LOT OF PENT-UP DEMAND WITH RESPECT TO NEW
TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN NAMES AND WITH RESPECT TO INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES.

WE ALSO NOTED TODAY THAT SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE LEAVING US, AND SO WE
JUST WANTED TO NOTE OUR THANKS TO THEM, WHICH WAS TO PHILIP COLEBROOK, FROM
THE REGISTRIES CONSTITUENCY; ALICK WILSON, WHO WAS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL
APPOINTEES FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL; AND, FINALLY, NIKLAS
LAGERGREN FROM THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY.

WE'RE ALSO PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT FOR SOME TIME, WE HAVE NEVER HAD ANY
REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE AFRICAN REGION IN THE GNSO.

AND IN THE LAST MONTH OR SO, WE NOW HAVE TWO NEW APPOINTEES FROM THE AFRICAN
REGION.

SO IT'S A SIGN THAT BOTH THE INTERNET IS BECOMING MORE GLOBAL, BUT ALSO OUR
POLICY PROCESSES ARE BECOMING MORE GLOBAL IN THE SENSE OF WIDENING OUR
PARTICIPATION.

FINALLY, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, THE FINAL COUNCIL RESOLUTION WAS TO PROVIDE
SOME GUIDANCE TO THE BOARD WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED DOT COM AGREEMENT
BETWEEN VERISIGN AND ICANN.

THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF VERY COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSIONS THIS WEEK AMONGST THE
GNSO COMMUNITY, BEGINNING WITH A WORKSHOP ON TUESDAY WHICH WENT FOR ABOUT
THREE HOURS AND HAD PARTICIPATION FROM ALL PARTS OF THE GNSO.

THERE WERE FURTHER MEETINGS WITHIN EACH CONSTITUENCY YESTERDAY, AND A NUMBER
OF THOSE CONSTITUENCIES MET WITH THE BOARD AND PROVIDED THEIR SPECIFIC
CONCERNS.

AND SO THIS RESOLUTION WAS VOTED ON BY THE MEETING TODAY TO PROVIDE -- TO TRY
TO PROVIDE AT LEAST AN AGREED STATEMENT FROM THE GNSO AS A WHOLE.

AND SO WE BASE -- THAT STATES: WHEREAS THE GNSO CONSTITUENCIES PARTICIPATED
IN A REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT -- AND EACH CONSTITUENCY HAS PROVIDED
DETAILED WRITTEN STATEMENTS TO THE BOARD, AND THEY WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE
BOARD THROUGH THE PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS.

WHEREAS THE COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE CONCLUSION OF THE LITIGATION BETWEEN ICANN
AND VERISIGN, WE RECOGNIZE THAT'S BEEN A DRAIN ON BOTH ORGANIZATIONS.

WHEREAS, THE GNSO COUNCIL DOESN'T SUPPORT ALL THE ARTICLES WITHIN THE
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT.

THE COUNCIL BELIEVES THAT THERE ARE BROADER QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED
IN THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE GNSO COMMUNITY.

AND SO THE GNSO COUNCIL RESOLVES THAT THE ICANN BOARD SHOULD POSTPONE
ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT TO ALLOW US A CHANCE TO INVESTIGATE THE
POLICY ISSUES RAISED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGES.

SO THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT.

THANK YOU, VINT.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BRUCE.

LET'S SEE.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY THIS COMMUNICATION FROM THE
COUNCIL.

ARE YOU MAKING ANY DISTINCTIONS AT ALL BETWEEN THE SETTLEMENT OF THE DISPUTE
AND THE CONTRACT, THE DOT COM CONTRACT?

OR ARE YOUR COMMENTS DIRECTED TO SORT OF THE UNION OF THE TWO?

>>BRUCE TONKIN: I THINK IT'S PROBABLY FAIR TO SAY IT'S THE UNION OF THE TWO.

MOST OF THE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN FOCUSED ON THE ACTUAL PROPOSED CONTRACT
ITSELF DURING THE WEEK.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.

THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I WOULD ASK IS THAT IF YOU CAN SUPPLY QUICKLY THE
SPECIFIC POLICY ISSUES THAT ARE A CONCERN SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE OF
YOUR REQUEST TO INVESTIGATE THOSE POLICY ISSUES, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: OKAY.

NOT RIGHT NOW THOUGH?

>>VINT CERF: NOT RIGHT NOW, THOUGH.

BUT IF YOU WOULD PROVIDE THAT AS SOON AS IS PRACTICABLE, THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: YES.

>>VINT CERF: PETER ASKED TO ASK A QUESTION.

PETER?

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: BRUCE, CAN I TAKE YOU BACK TO YOUR FIRST POINT, WHICH
IS THE WORK ON NEW GTLDS.

AND, FIRST OF ALL, CONGRATULATIONS ON THAT.

SAID BEFORE, CLEARLY IT'S THE WORK OF THE GNSO TO DEVELOP THE POLICY FOR NEW
GTLDS.

BUT THE OTHER ISSUE IS THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY WHO FEELS
THAT THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO THEIR COMMUNITIES IN RELATION TO THAT.

DOES YOUR POLICY PROVIDE A MECHANISM FOR THE OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES TO
PARTICIPATE?

YOUR PROCESS?

>>BRUCE TONKIN: THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WITHIN THE GNSO, THE FIRST
STEP IN THAT PROCESS IS ESSENTIALLY PUBLISHING FORMALLY ON THE ICANN WEB SITE
THAT WE WILL BE CONDUCTING POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND THIS IS WHAT WE WILL BE
WORKING ON.

THAT IS A COMPLETELY OPEN REQUEST FOR PEOPLE TO CONTRIBUTE ISSUES.

SO IT'S OPEN NOT JUST TO THE MEMBERS OF THE GNSO, BUT ANYONE IN THE WIDER
ICANN COMMUNITY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE GOVERNMENTS IN RESPECT TO PROVIDING
INPUT.

THEN IT MOVES ON TO A STAGE REQUESTING FORMAL STATEMENTS FROM EACH OF THE
CONSTITUENTS OF THE GNSO.

AND THEN THERE'S AN ATTEMPT TO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE ISSUES THAT HAVE
BEEN RAISED, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF THE FORMAL STATEMENTS THAT ARE BEING
MADE BY THE CONSTITUENTS, AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES, FOR THAT MATTER, TO THEN
DEVELOP, I GUESS, A PROPOSED POLICY.

ONCE AGAIN, THAT PROPOSED POLICY IS THEN MADE AVAILABLE FOR THE ENTIRE
COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE THEIR INPUT ON, THE ENTIRE ICANN COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE
INPUT.

AND THEN IT GOES THROUGH ANOTHER ITERATION.

AND THEN THERE'S A FINAL REPORT.

THE COUNCIL THEN MAKES A DECISION ON THAT.

THAT THEN IS PUBLISHED AGAIN FOR USUALLY AT LEAST 30 DAYS FOR PUBLIC INPUT
BEFORE GOING TO THE BOARD.

SO THERE ARE AT LEAST SORT OF THREE MAJOR PLACES WHERE IT'S COMPLETELY WIDE
OPEN IN RESPECT TO INPUT.

IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS FOR GIVING THAT INPUT, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE MORE
IMPORTANT QUESTION, WE HAVE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW WE CAN MORE
EFFECTIVELY GAIN THE WIDER PARTICIPATION OF THE PUBLIC IN THAT PROCESS,
PARTICULARLY AS WE'RE TRYING TO DO THIS MORE QUICKLY THAN WE HAVE IN THE
PAST.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THERE IS RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS IN
WHICH PEOPLE MAY CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE.

SO SOME PEOPLE MIGHT BE FINE CONTRIBUTING VIA MAILING LIST.

OTHERS MIGHT BE FINE WITH USING SOME OF THE NEWER APPROACHES TO THESE FORUMS,
SUCH AS WIKIS.

AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT TRIALING THAT AS ONE AREA OF CREATING A POLICY FORUM,
USING A WIKI ON THAT PARTICULAR TOPIC.

WE'RE ALSO RECOGNIZING THE NEED TO INCREASE THE FACE-TO-FACE TIME WE HAVE
AVAILABLE ON THESE SORTS OF ISSUES.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE REQUESTED IS THAT TWO FULL DAYS BE ALLOCATED
TO THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC IN WELLINGTON, MOST LIKELY THE WEEK BEFORE.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE OBSERVED, I THINK, IF YOU LOOK AT THINGS LIKE THE
IDN WORKSHOP THAT HAPPENED EARLIER THIS WEEK, IS YOU HAVE SORT OF A HALF A
DAY WHERE LOTS OF PRESENTERS PRESENT DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, AND WHEN YOU GET
TO THE END OF THAT HALF-DAY SESSION, EVERYBODY IS READY TO GO DO SOMETHING,
AND WE'RE OFF TO COCKTAILS AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT IN THREE MONTHS' TIME
AGAIN.

SO YOU SORT OF RECOGNIZE THAT YOU NEED THE HALF DAY PERHAPS TO GET PEOPLE'S
HEADS AROUND ALL THE ISSUES AND THE TOPICS.

BUT THEN YOU NEED PROBABLY ANOTHER DAY AND A HALF TO ACTUALLY COME UP WITH A
POLICY RESOLUTION, IF YOU LIKE, THAT INCORPORATES ALL OF THOSE IDEAS.

SO I HOPE THAT -- IT'S A FAIRLY LONG ANSWER, BUT IT'S AN AREA WHERE WE'RE
REALLY TRYING TO SEE HOW WE CAN EFFECTIVELY GAIN THAT PUBLIC INPUT.



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

AND, ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE HARD WORK OF YOUR TEAM.

WE MOVE AHEAD NOW TO A REPORT ON THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

AND THAT REPORT WILL BE DELIVERED BY VITTORIO BERTOLA.



>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: THANK YOU.

SO WELL, MY REPORT, AS USUAL, STARTS WITH A VERY QUICK DESCRIPTION OF WHAT
THE COMMITTEE IS.

SO WE WERE CREATED NOW THREE YEARS AGO, BASICALLY, AT THE BEGINNING OF 2003,
TO PROMOTE THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL INTERNET USERS AND TO ADVOCATE
THEIR INTEREST INSIDE THE ICANN FRAMEWORK.

AND THIS IS DONE BY THE CREATION OF A NETWORK OF LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT
WILL IN TURN FORM FIVE REGIONAL AT-LARGE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WILL BASICALLY
GATHER THE INPUT FROM THE REGION AND THEN PROMOTE IT AT THE ICANN LEVEL BOTH
BY SENDING OPINIONS AND BY APPOINTING MEMBERS OF THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE.

SO WELL, THIS IS MY ACTUAL UPDATE ON THE -- WHERE THE ORGANIZING WORK STANDS.

HERE IN VANCOUVER, WE HAVE HAD ANOTHER MEETING OF THE -- FOR THE FORMATION
PROCESS OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION ORGANIZATION WHERE DRAFT BYLAWS ARE BEING
DISCUSSED.

SO THAT'S PRETTY WELL ON TRACK.

AND ALSO IN TERMS OF THE EUROPEAN REGIONAL AT-LARGE ORGANIZATIONS, WE ARE
ABOUT TO PUBLISH A SORT OF PRINCIPLES PAPER THAT SHOULD DESCRIBE THE WAY WE
IMAGINED A REGIONAL ORGANIZATION TO BE.

AND THEN IT WILL UNDERGO A PERIOD OF PUBLIC COMMENT SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY
PROCEED WITH THE BYLAWS.

OF COURSE, WE ARE DOING OUR USUAL OUTREACH WORK.

SO WE HAVE BEEN PARTICIPATING IN EVENTS ALL AROUND THE WORLD.

AND IN PARTICULAR, ALSO IN THE WORLD SUMMIT ON THE INFORMATION SOCIETY, BUT
THERE'S MANY OTHER EVENTS OUTSIDE. U.N. FRAMEWORK.

AND WE SEND OUT MONTHLY NEWSLETTERS AND MESSAGES TO MAILING LISTS.

AND IN PARTICULAR, WE'RE WORKING ON AN ENTIRELY NEW WEB SITE, WHICH WE CALL
AN INDEPENDENT WEB SITE IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S NOT INTEGRATED WITH THE ICANN
WEB SITE, BUT IT MEANS TO BECOME A NEW FRAMEWORK FOR US TO POST OUR MESSAGES
AND TO POST OUR NEWS, AND FOR OUR AT-LARGE STRUCTURES TO INTERACT WITH US.

SO WE ARE PRETTY HARD ON THE WORK OF FINISHING THAT.

WE PLAN TO RELEASE THAT IN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO, IF POSSIBLE.

THEN WE CONTINUE WITH THE WORK OF ACCREDITING AT-LARGE ORGANIZATIONS.

AND I'LL COME TO THAT LATER.

AND WE'VE -- IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, WE'VE SENT TO THE BOARD A COUPLE OF
PROPOSALS FOR BYLAWS REVISIONS.

ONE WHICH IS FOR CONSIDERATION TO THE BOARD HERE IN VANCOUVER, AND REGARDS A
SMALL CHANGE IN THE WAY THE AT-LARGE STRUCTURES ARE ACCREDITED, WHICH WOULD
ALLOW US TO MAKE OUR WORK MORE EFFECTIVE.

AND ANOTHER ONE REGARDING THE MINIMUM PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS OF OUR
AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS, WHICH IS STILL UNDER DISCUSSION.

SO THIS IS THE OTHER HALF OF OUR WORK, WHICH IS WHAT WE DO IN TERMS OF POLICY
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.

AND OF COURSE WE ARE INVOLVED IN ALL THE DIFFERENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT
PROCESSES IN THE ICANN ENVIRONMENT, IN THE GNSO, WE ARE ALSO PARTICIPATING IN
THE IDN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND WE ARE VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT APART FROM OUR
OWN REPRESENTATIVE, A PERSON COMING FROM ONE OF OUR ACCREDITED AT-LARGE
STRUCTURES WAS APPOINTED THROUGH OTHER CHANNELS.

SO THIS MEANS THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY MANAGING TO REACH OUT TO INTERESTED
COMMUNITIES ALL AROUND THE WORLD.

AND, OF COURSE, WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF PUBLIC MEETINGS HERE.

AND FOR THE FIRST TIME, WE'VE ALSO MET THE BOARD, WHICH WAS A REALLY PLEASANT
EXPERIENCE.

AND WE ARE SUPPORTING THE STRATEGIC PLAN SECTIONS, SO PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON
THE NON-ENGLISH ONES.

AND WE HAVE BEEN APPOINTING TWO REPRESENTATIVES ON THE DOT MOBI POLICY
ADVISORY BOARD.

SO WE ARE ACTUALLY STARTING TO INTERACT WITH SOME REGISTRIES AND GTLDS.

AND WE ARE ABOUT TO RELEASE OR HAVE RELEASED SOME NEW STATEMENTS.

AND WHAT IS ABOUT THE IDN THAT'S GOING TO BE A VERY COMPREHENSIVE ONE, SO WE
HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THAT FOR ONE YEAR NOW, AND WE'RE CONFIDENT WE CAN
FINALIZE IT IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.

ANOTHER ONE IS ON THE WSIS FOLLOW-UP, WHICH WE THINK IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT
MATTER, IN PARTICULAR, WE MIGHT WANT TO ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TO MAKE ANY
PROCESS FOR FURTHER CHANGES IN THE ICANN STRUCTURE COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT,
OPEN, AND INCLUSIVE OF ALL THE ICANN ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND SUPPORTING
ORGANIZATIONS.

AND THE FINAL ONE IS ON THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.

WELL, I AM NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT HERE.

IT'S POSTED.

WE ALREADY GAVE PRINTED COPIES TO THE BOARD.

AND SO, WELL, OF COURSE, AS YOU MIGHT IMAGINE, WE ARE AGAINST IT.

AND I THINK PRETTY MUCH FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS BEEN
POSTING, SO I WILL NOT GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN.

SO THIS IS ABOUT AT-LARGE ORGANIZING.

WE HAVE HAD SEVEN NEW ACCREDITED ORGANIZATIONS SINCE THE MEETING IN
LUXEMBOURG.

AS YOU MIGHT SEE FROM THE LIST ON THE SCREEN, THEY ARE FROM ASIA-PACIFIC AND
FROM LATIN AMERICA.

WE HAVE ACTUALLY STARTED TO REJECT EVEN A COUPLE OF APPLICATIONS.

AND IN OTHER CASES, THERE ARE APPLICATIONS FROM AFRICA AND FROM NORTH AMERICA
UNDER CONSIDERATION, ACTUALLY, THREE OF THEM FROM NORTH AMERICA ARE UNDER
RECONSIDERATION AFTER AN INITIAL VOTE FAILED TO ACCREDIT THEM.

AND LAST, WE HAVE SOME NEW MEMBERS, SO I WANTED TO THANK THE OUTGOING
MEMBERS, AND IN PARTICULAR, TOMMY MATSUMOTO FOR HIS WORK.

I WANTED TO INTRODUCE THE THREE NEW MEMBERS, JACQUELINE MORRIS FROM TRINIDAD
AND TOBAGO.

CAN YOU STAND UP.

ALICE WANJIRA FROM KENYA.

AND SIAVASH SHASHAHANI FROM IRAN.

AND WE HAVE AN ISSUE THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING WITH INITIAL MEMBERS, BECAUSE YOU
MIGHT REMEMBER THE BOARD APPOINTED TEN INITIAL INTERIM MEMBERS THREE YEARS
AGO, OF WHICH EIGHT ARE STILL SERVING ON THE COMMITTEE. AND WE ARE WONDERING
WHETHER IT'S NECESSARY FOR US TO GET BACK TO YOU AND TO GET SOME ENDORSEMENT
AGAIN, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO STAY THERE FOREVER.

AND WE ARE SUPPOSED TO EXPIRE ONCE WE FINISH OUR WORK OF CREATING THE
REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S TAKING MORE TIME THAN EXPECTED.

SO WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE ARE STILL LEGITIMATE AND STAY THERE.

AND, OF COURSE, WE ARE ALSO DISCUSSING NEW APPOINTMENTS FOR 2006.

SO THIS MIGHT LIKELY BE MY LAST OCCASION ON THIS PODIUM.

I'M ACTUALLY HAPPY ABOUT THAT.

SO, THANK YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO TAKE MY LAST CHANCE HERE, SINCE MY HOMETOWN, TORINO, IS
HOSTING THE NEXT WINTER OLYMPIC GAMES, FOLLOWING VANCOUVER IN 2010, AND SO I
WANTED TO USE MY OLD (INAUDIBLE) OF PIAMONTESE TO GREET YOU AND REMIND YOU
THAT WE STILL CAN'T USE IT IN DOMAIN NAMES.

THANK YOU.

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

BEFORE YOU STEP DOWN, I HAVE ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION, PLEASE.

YOU MENTIONED THAT THE ALAC WAS AGAINST THE SETTLEMENT, OR AGAINST THE
AGREEMENTS WITH VERISIGN.

DID YOU MEAN TO SAY THAT THE ALAC IS AGAINST ANY FORM OF SETTLEMENT AND
THEREFORE BELIEVES THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE LITIGATING?

OR ARE YOU SIMPLY SAYING THAT YOU DIDN'T AGREE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
OF THE SETTLEMENT AND WOULD PREFER TO SEE CHANGES TO IT?

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: WELL, WE THINK THAT -- WELL, BY THE WAY, PERHAPS THE
SETTLEMENT AND THE CONTRACT SHOULD BE BETTER SEPARATED.

BUT, OF COURSE, WE ARE NOT AGAINST ANY KIND OF SETTLEMENT.

BUT OUR SENTIMENT IS THAT THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT THE RIGHT ONES.

SO YOU HAVE TO REALLY EVALUATE WHETHER, I MEAN, IT'S FOR THE GOOD OR FOR THE
BAD AND ACTUALLY WHETHER IT'S FOR THE GOOD OF THE OVERALL ICANN COMMUNITY TO
SETTLE THIS OR TO ACT DIFFERENTLY.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

I THINK YOU'VE COMPLETED YOUR WORK.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VITTORIO.

I HOPE THE OLYMPICS GO WELL NEXT YEAR.

THE NEXT REPORT COMES FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

AND I'LL CALL UPON GEORGE SADOWSKY TO MAKE THAT PRESENTATION.



>>GEORGE SADOWSKY: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

THANK YOU.

IT'S MY DUTY AND PLEASURE NOW TO PRESENT THE REPORT OF THE NOMINATING
COMMITTEE FOR 2005.

I'M GOING TO PRESENT FOUR SECTIONS OF THE REPORT, FIRST THE RESULTS; SECOND,
INFORMATION ABOUT THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE; THIRD, A DISCUSSION OF ITS
PROCEDURES; AND, FOURTH, SOME REMAINING ISSUES THAT ARE WORTH EXPLORING.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ICANN IS APPOINTED BY EIGHT -- EIGHT MEMBERS ARE
APPOINTED BY THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, TWO MEMBERS ARE APPOINTED EACH BY THE
ADDRESS SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION, THE GNSO, AND THE CCNSO.

THE EIGHT MEMBERS THAT ARE NOMINATED BY THE COMMITTEE ARE OVER A THREE-YEAR
CYCLE, AND THIS YEAR WE NOMINATED TWO DIRECTORS, WHO ARE SUSAN CRAWFORD, FROM
THE UNITED STATES, AND NJERI RIONGE FROM KENYA, WHO IS A REAPPOINTMENT TO THE
BOARD.

THEIR TERMS END -- ARE FOR THREE YEARS AND THEY END AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE
2008 ANNUAL MEETING.

THE GNSO COUNCIL RECEIVES THREE OF ITS MEMBERS FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE,
AND WE SELECTED TWO SEATS THIS YEAR FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM, ENDING IN THE -- AT
THE END OF THE ANNUAL MEETING IN 2007.

AND THEY ARE SOPHIA BEKELE FROM ETHIOPIA, AFRICA, AND AVRI DORIA, WHO IS A
REAPPOINTMENT TO THE COMMITTEE FROM THE UNITED STATES.

THE INTERIM ALAC RECEIVED THREE NOMINATIONS FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE
THIS YEAR, CORRESPONDING TO THREE REGIONS: AFRICA, ASIA, AUSTRALIA, PACIFIC,
AND LATIN AMERICA, CARIBBEAN.

THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN INTRODUCED BY VITTORIO.

THEIR TERMS IS TWO YEARS TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE 2007 MEETING.

THEY ARE JACQUELINE MORRIS FROM TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO, SIAVASH SHASHAHANI FROM
IRAN, AND ALICE WANJIRA FROM KENYA.

AND THEN, FINALLY, THE CCNSO COUNCIL RECEIVES, IN ALL, THREE MEMBERS FROM THE
NOMINATING COMMITTEE OVER THE THREE-YEAR CYCLE.

THIS YEAR, WE SELECTED ONE SEAT FOR A THREE-YEAR TERM, AND -- EXCUSE ME --
AND THE NOMINEE WAS SLOBODAN MARKOVIC FROM SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO.

HERE ARE SOME SUMMARY STATISTICS THAT CAME FROM THE PROCESS.

WE HAD 72 CANDIDATES.

16 RECOMMENDATIONS OF CANDIDATES.

AND YOU'LL SEE THERE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE CANDIDATES BY REGION AND THE
DISTRIBUTION OF THE NOMINEES BY REGION.

AND THEN BELOW IT, THE DISTRIBUTION BY GENDER OF BOTH THE CANDIDATES AND THE
NOMINEES.

THE MAJORITY OF OUR CANDIDATES CAME FROM NORTH AMERICA -- I'M SORRY, THE --
NOT THE MAJORITY, BUT MORE OF OUR CANDIDATES CAME FROM NORTH AMERICA THAN ANY
OTHER REGION. AND IT TURNS OUT THAT MORE OF OUR NOMINEES CAME FROM AFRICA
THAN FROM ANY OTHER REGION.

IN THE AREA OF GENDER, MOST OF OUR CANDIDATES WERE MALE.

THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE SAW FIT TO RECOMMEND MOST OF THE NOMINEES AS BEING
FEMALE.

THE CITIZENSHIP OF THE CANDIDATES WAS VERY DIVERSE.

THEY CAME FROM 36 COUNTRIES AND AREAS.

I WON'T READ THIS LIST.

I'LL PAUSE FOR A MOMENT TO LET YOU READ IT.

THEY CAME FROM ALL REGIONS OF THE WORLD AND SOME COUNTRIES THAT WE PROBABLY
HAVEN'T HAD NOMINEES FROM BEFORE.

I THINK THIS IS A WELCOME TREND.

WE ARE SEEING MORE INTEREST IN ICANN THIS YEAR THAN WE DID LAST YEAR, AND I'M
NOT SURE ABOUT THE YEAR BEFORE, BUT MY GUESS IS THAT OUR NOMINEES ARE COMING
FROM MORE PLACES.

AND THIS TREND, WE HOPE, WILL CONTINUE.

NOW, THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE EMERGED THREE YEARS AGO FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE
ICANN REFORM AND RESTRUCTURING PROCESS AND IT'S A KEY ELEMENT OF THE CURRENT
STRUCTURE. IT'S A NEW WAY TO FILL SOME OF THE KEY LEADERSHIP POSITIONS OF
ICANN. IN THE CASE OF THE BOARD, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE NOMINATING
COMMITTEE FILLS EIGHT POSITIONS, WHEREAS THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS FILL
THE OTHER SIX. THE CEO IS THE 15TH.

IT OPERATES IN PARALLEL TO THE OTHER SELECTION PROCESSES FOR LEADERSHIP
POSITIONS, IT VERY IMPORTANT, IT FUNCTIONS INDEPENDENTLY OF ANY OTHER
SELECTION PROCESS. ONCE OF THE COMMITTEE IS LAUNCHED, IT FUNCTIONS
INDEPENDENTLY UNTIL THE NOMINEES ARE ANNOUNCED.

OUR CHARGE IS TO PURSUE THE BROAD PUBLIC INTEREST OF THE GLOBAL INTERNET
COMMUNITY, AND NO PARTICULAR INTERESTS.

WE DEVELOP AND WE PUBLISH COMMITTEE PROCEDURES, AND THIS YEAR WE DEVELOPED A
PROCEDURE TO FILL MID YEAR VACANCIES. THAT DID NOT EXIST BEFOREHAND, AND WE
ACTUALLY USED IT TO FILL A MID YEAR GNSO VACANCY, VACATED, AND WE FILLED IT
WITH AVRI DORIA WHO IS RETURNING TO THE GNSO.

WE MAKE THE FINAL SELECTION OF NOMINEES, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY
ARE OF THE HIGHEST INTEGRITY AND CAPABILITY. AND THEY ARE COMMITTED TO PLACE
THAT BROAD PUBLIC INTEREST AHEAD OF THEIR OWN PARTICULAR SPECIAL INTERESTS.

THEY HAVE TO BE KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH ICANN OPERATES,
AND A FEW OTHER CRITERIA.

NOW, OUR NOMINATING COMMITTEE IS DEFINED IN THE BYLAWS. THERE ARE 23
MEMBERS. IT'S A LARGE COMMITTEE. 17 OF WHOM ARE VOTING, AND OUR MEMBERS ACT
ON BEHALF OF THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY, WITHOUT PERSONAL COMMITMENTS.

OUR TIMETABLE FOR THIS YEAR STARTED IN JANUARY WHEN WE SENT INVITATIONS TO
THE CONSTITUENCIES AND GROUPS TO SELECT THEIR MEMBERS FOR THE NOMCOM. WE MET
THE FIRST FACE-TO-FACE MEETING IN POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IN APRIL AND WE
SENT A CALL FOR RECOMMENDATIONS AND FOR STATEMENTS OF INTEREST NEAR THE END
OF APRIL.

OUR DEADLINE, POSTPONED FROM THE ORIGINAL DEADLINE OF THE 15TH OF JUNE, WAS
THE 20TH OF JULY. AND WE RECEIVED THOSE 72 APPLICATIONS DURING THAT TIME,
AND CHECKED REFERENCES, WENT THROUGH A PROCESS OF TRIAL SLATES, AND ON THE
15TH OF SEPTEMBER WE HELD OUR SECOND FACE-TO-FACE MEETING NEAR GENEVA BECAUSE
OF WSIS TO SELECT THE NOMINEES.

AFTER THAT, WE CARRIED OUT DUE DILIGENCE ON OUR CANDIDATES, AND ANNOUNCED THE
-- WE HAD OUR LAST TELECONFERENCE OF 12 ON THE 2ND OF NOVEMBER AND ANNOUNCED
THE RESULTS ON THE 4TH OF NOVEMBER.

THERE ARE SIX DETAILED BYLAWS CRITERIA FOR CANDIDATES. FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S
THE STATURE OF THE CANDIDATE AND SPECIFIC DESIRED CHARACTERISTICS IN TERMS OF
BACKGROUND.

SECOND, AN UNDERSTANDING OF ICANN'S MISSION. AND THIRD, COMMITMENT TO
ICANN'S SUCCESS.

FOURTH, A FAMILIARITY WITH THE SPECIFIC FUNCTIONAL AREAS THAT WERE BEING
NOMINATED FOR AND WHAT THE SKILLS WERE THAT WERE NEEDED.

FIFTH, A WILLINGNESS TO SERVE AS AN UNCOMPENSATED VOLUNTEER, WHICH IS TRUE OF
ALL OF OUR NOMINEES.

AND SIXTH, AN ABILITY TO WORK AND COMMUNICATE IN ENGLISH.

THERE ARE ALSO SOME ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFIC EXCLUSIONS. THERE
ARE DIVERSITY REQUIREMENTS WHICH CAUSE US TO WORK VERY HARD TO SATISFY THEM.
THERE ARE CULTURAL DIVERSITY REQUIREMENTS, FUNCTIONAL, GENDER AND GEOGRAPHIC
REQUIREMENTS, AND ON SOME POSITIONS THERE ARE TERM LIMITS.

WE ARE CONSIDERING THE SELECTION OF CANDIDATES, WE TRY TO BUILD THE SLATES OF
THE BEST QUALIFIED CANDIDATES. WE HAVE TO BALANCE WHAT WE RECOMMEND WITH THE
OTHER ICANN LEADERSHIP SELECTION PROCESSES, WHICH COME FROM, IN THE CASE OF
THE BOARD, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CCNSO, THE GNSO, ET CETERA.

WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS RELEVANT EXPERIENCE FOR THE BOARD AND THE
GNSO AND THE CCNSO, AND THE ALAC.

WE DEPEND A LOT ON THE CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT OF INTEREST, WHICH IS FAIRLY
THOROUGH, AND IN WHICH THE CANDIDATE DESCRIBES THEIR BACKGROUND, THEIR
EXPERIENCE, THEIR WILLINGNESS TO SERVE, WHAT THEY THINK THEY CAN GIVE TO
ICANN. AND THEY PUT THEIR BEST FOOT FORWARD IN THAT STATEMENT OF INTEREST.

WE THEN ASK FOR REFERENCES. IN MANY CASES THE CANDIDATES ARE KNOWN BY THE
NOMCOM. WE THEN LOOK FOR THE DIVERSITY TO SATISFY THE DIVERSITY
REQUIREMENTS. AND WE WANT TO GET THAT MIX OF EXPERIENCE AND SKILLS WHICH THE
VARIOUS GROUPS NEED IN ORDER TO FULFILL THEIR ROLES EFFECTIVELY.

AND FINALLY, WE NEED TO BALANCE COMPETING VALUES OF CONTINUITY OF PEOPLE ON
VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS VERSUS THE DESIRABILITY OF CHANGE.

WE TRY TO MAKE OUR DECISIONS BY CONSENSUS WHEREVER POSSIBLE. OFTEN IT'S
POSSIBLE; SOMETIMES IT'S NOT.

WE NEED TO BALANCE THE COMMITMENT TO THE OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY OF THE
PROCESS WITH RESPECT FOR THE PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE CANDIDATES.

JUST BY THE NATURE OF THE PROCESS, OUR DISCUSSIONS ARE TOTALLY PRIVATE AND
CONFIDENTIAL. WE ARE TOTALLY NONTRANSPARENT WHEN IT COMES TO THE -- TO WHO
THE CANDIDATES ARE AND HOW WE EVALUATE THEM. THEREFORE, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON
US TO BE MORE TRANSPARENT WITH REGARD TO THE PROCESSES WHICH WE ADOPT IN
ORDER TO DO OUR JOB WELL.

WE WANT TO MAKE -- WE HAVE A COMMITMENT TO A CODE OF ETHICS FOR ALL THE
NOMCOM MEMBERS.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE FAIR AND CONSISTENT IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE
HANDLE THE CANDIDATES.

WE DISCLOSE ALL OF OUR VARIOUS AFFILIATIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE PUBLIC
AND WELL-KNOWN AMONG THE COMMITTEE.

AND WE TRY TO ADOPT A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE IN THE DEFINITION OF OUR SLATES, IN
OUR SELECTIONS, SO THAT WE NOT ONLY RECOGNIZE THE MERITS OF THE INDIVIDUAL
CANDIDATES BUT WE RECOGNIZE THE BALANCE OF THE SET OF CANDIDATES THAT WE
SELECT.

THE CODE OF ETHICS IS A DOCUMENT ON THE WEB SITE. IT'S THREE PAGES. EVERY
MEMBER OF THE NOMCOM SIGNS IT. THE STAFF PERSON ASSIGNED BY ICANN TO THE
COMMITTEE SIGNS IT.

WE ACTIVELY MANAGE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST BY DISCLOSURE AND RECUSAL FOR
CONFLICTS, AND WE USE WHAT WE CALL THE "RED FACE" TEST TO AVOID EVEN THE
APPEARANCE OF CONFLICT. AND THAT TEST IS EVEN THOUGH THERE MAY NOT BE A
CONFLICT, IF SOMEBODY POINTED IT OUT, SAY, ON THIS PODIUM TO THE ENTIRE
GROUP, WOULD YOU BLUSH? AND IF YOU WOULD BLUSH, THEN IT DOESN'T PASS THE "RED
FACE" TEST AND THE MEMBER RECUSES HIMSELF OR ANOTHER ACTION IS TAKEN.

THERE IS A SUBCOMMITTEE THAT ENFORCES THE CODE OF ETHICS, AND THE MEMBERS,
THIS LAST YEAR, WERE JOSE SALGUEIRO, WHO WAS THE CHAIR, ALAN DAVIDSON,
MICHAEL SILBER, ADAM PEAKE AND SIMBO NTIRO.

IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY, WE PUBLISH THE COMMITTEE
COMPOSITION, WE PUBLISH THEIR BIOGRAPHIES, OUR PROCEDURES ARE FULLY PUBLIC ON
THE ICANN WEB SITE, THE FORMAL CALL IS ON THE SITE. AND WE MAINTAIN AND
UPDATE A SERIES OF FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS SO THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE
CANDIDATES OR WANT TO RECOMMEND CANDIDATES HAVE GOOD GUIDELINES TO FOLLOW.

WE DO AS BROAD OUTREACH AS POSSIBLE IN RECRUITING OF CANDIDATES, AND THAT'S
AN ISSUE I WILL COME BACK TO.

ALSO, BY NOMCOM MEMBERS. AND WE HAVE MECHANISMS FOR PUBLIC INPUT INTO THE
PROCESS, ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THIS YEAR WE GOT EVEN ONE COMMENT.

SO THE SELECTION PROCESS IS THAT THE CANDIDATES SUBMIT THEIR STATEMENTS OF
INTEREST. THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS COME IN FROM OTHER PEOPLE, SAYING IN EFFECT
I WISH YOU WOULD CONTACT MRS. X. SHE LOOKS LIKE SHE WOULD BE A GOOD
CANDIDATE. WE DO MAKE THAT CONTACT, AND MOST OF THE PEOPLE RECOMMENDED DO
END UP IN THE CANDIDATE POOL.

WE THEN REVIEW AND EVALUATE THE CANDIDATES. WE KEEP ALL CANDIDATES UNDER
CONSIDERATION UNTIL THE VERY END IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF THE BALANCING
ISSUE. BECAUSE WE MAY NEED BALANCE, AND SOME CANDIDATE WHO ON THE BASIS OF
INDIVIDUAL MERITS MAY NOT HAVE SCORED IN THE TOP FEW PROVIDES A BALANCE THAT
IS REALLY USEFUL IN THE OVERALL SLATE.

THERE IS A DIFFICULTY IN BALANCING THIS SLATE, BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE, THIS
YEAR WE HAD EIGHT POSITIONS TO FILL. AND IF YOU TRY TO BALANCE ACROSS
MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS WITH ONLY A FEW POSITIONS, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO DO.

THE EDGE CASE IS IF YOU HAVE ONE CANDIDATE AND YOU HAVE TO DO GENDER BALANCE.
IT'S NOT POSSIBLE.

WE DEFINE FOR THE EVALUATION THREE INDEPENDENT SUBCOMMITTEES AND ASSIGN THEM
TO INVESTIGATE IN DEPTH ONE-THIRD EACH OF THE CANDIDATES. WE ASK THEM TO
FOLLOW UP THE REFERENCES. IF THE REFERENCES HAVEN'T REPLIED, TO WRITE AND
THEN TO TELEPHONE.

WE ASK THE SUBCOMMITTEES TO DEFINE, BASED ON THEIR SUBSET OF CANDIDATES,
SLATES THAT THEY THINK WOULD BE THE BEST SLATES FOR THEM. THIS IS IN PART A
PRACTICE EXERCISE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FINAL PROCESS IS LIKE, AND IT'S IN
PART A WAY OF GETTING MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE CANDIDATES.

WE MADE A SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT THIS YEAR. LAST YEAR OUR COMPUTER-BASED
MECHANISMS FOR SHARING INFORMATION WERE FAIRLY PRIMITIVE. THIS YEAR, THROUGH
THE GENEROSITY OF ELIOT NOSS WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE WE
USED BLOGWARE FROM TUCOWS, AND THAT REALLY HELPED THE ENTIRE PROCESS VERY
MUCH.

WE THEN GO INTO CONSENSUS, TO THE EXTENT WE CAN ESTABLISH IT, VOTING IF WE
CANNOT, RATIFICATION. AND THEN THERE IS A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK MADE,
THE DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO APPLIED ARE REALLY
THE PEOPLE WHO APPLIED, AND THAT THERE ARE NO ISSUES THAT WOULD CLOUD THE
APPROPRIATENESS OR THE VALIDITY OF THE NOMINATION.

WE HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS. LAST YEAR'S COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT WE
BEGIN THE NOMCOM PROCESS EARLY IN THE YEAR.

THERE ISN'T ENOUGH TIME, GIVEN THE CURRENT SCHEDULE, TO DO AS THOROUGH A JOB
AS WE WOULD LIKE. I THINK IT'S A GOOD JOB, BUT IT COULD BE BETTER. AND IN
PARTICULAR, THE CANDIDATE POOL COULD BE LARGER AND ENLARGED IN VARIOUS WAYS
IF WE HAD MORE TIME.

THE BOARD APPROVED THE ACCELERATION OF THE PROCESS, BUT WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE
TIME TO GET OUR ACT TOGETHER THIS YEAR. THE NEXT YEAR'S COMMITTEE I HOPE
WILL START VERY SOON AND THEY WILL HAVE MORE TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO THE JOB
WELL.

WE NEED TO BROADEN THE CANDIDATE POOL FURTHER. THE NUMBER OF CANDIDATES HAS
GONE DOWN EVERY YEAR. IT IS AT 72 THIS YEAR. I THINK IT WAS IN THE EIGHTIES
OR NINETIES LAST YEAR. AND MORE THAN THAT THE YEAR BEFORE.

AND WE NEED TO RECRUIT BEYOND WHAT I HAVE CALLED HERE THE INTERNET COMMUNITY.
WE HAVE VERY GOOD CANDIDATES WHO APPLY. WE DON'T HAVE QUITE ENOUGH, I THINK,
IN ORDER TO SELECT THE SLATES THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SELECT. AND THERE IS
ANOTHER ISSUE HERE. I CALL IT THE DISCOURAGED CANDIDATE EFFECT. SOME OF --
WE HAVE OBVIOUSLY GOTTEN MORE REALLY GOOD CANDIDATES THAN WE CAN APPOINT WITH
ONLY EIGHT POSITIONS. AND THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO HAVE APPLIED
AT LEAST TWICE AND THEY SAY, "WELL, WHAT'S THE USE OF APPLYING AGAIN? YOU
HAVE TURNED ME DOWN THE FIRST TWO YEARS." AND OF COURSE THE RESPONSE IS THEY
WERE NOT TURNED DOWN BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT GOOD CANDIDATES. THEY WERE TURNED
DOWN BECAUSE THERE WERE TOO MANY GOOD CANDIDATES AND PERHAPS ONE OF THE
BALANCES DIDN'T WORK SO WELL.

SO I DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION FOR THIS, BUT I POINT IT OUT AS AN ISSUE OR
PROBLEM IN THE CURRENT PROCESS.

LAST YEAR'S COMMITTEE SUGGESTED THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN ORIENTATION FOR
NOMINEES, AND THIS YEAR WE ARE TRYING THAT SHORTLY AFTER THE PUBLIC FORUM FOR
THE NEW NOMINEES.

THERE WILL BE A FORMAL WRITTEN REPORT SUBMITTED AND PUBLISHED AND IT WILL
HAVE A NUMBER -- IN FACT, QUITE A NUMBER OF SMALLER RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
NEXT YEAR'S COMMITTEE, AND WE HOPE TO HAVE IT ORIENTED TOWARD ASSISTING THE
UPCOMING NOMINATING COMMITTEE EVALUATION PROCESS TO HELP THEM OUT WITH OUR
CURRENT EXPERIENCE.

THAT'S MY REPORT, MR. CHAIRMAN.



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

I WANT TO COMMEND -- OH, I'M SORRY. ALEX, YOU HAD A QUESTION?

YOU SHOULD GO AHEAD, ALEX. I WAS GOING TO GIVE HIM AN EXIT LINE, SO YOU NEED
TO ASK YOUR QUESTION FIRST.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I HEARD THE BEGINNING OF THE WORD "COMMEND" IN YOUR
STATEMENT, SO I WILL JUST TRY TO COMMENT VERY STRONGLY BUT VERY BRIEFLY AS
YOU HAVE A LOT OF COMMENDATIONS TO DO BECAUSE I THINK GEORGE HAS PERFORMED AN
EXTRAORDINARY JOB AS THE CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE, HAS FACED MANY DIFFICULTIES
AS HE MENTIONED WITH OBTAINING A LARGE POOL OF CANDIDATES.

AND I WOULD MAKE A COMMENT ON THE CALL WHICH ARE BROADER THAN FOR GEORGE. IT
IS MOSTLY FOR THE CONSTITUENCIES AND SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS THAT APPOINT
MEMBERS TO THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

I THINK THE ANALYSIS THAT GEORGE HAS SHOWN US AND THE EXPERIENCE OF THE
NOMINATING COMMITTEE ARE SHOWING US THAT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA. WE HAVE A FIRST
SET OF GOOD FEEDBACK THAT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO ESTABLISH THIS PROCESS OF THE
NOMINATING COMMITTEE. THAT IT'S WORKING WELL IN GENERAL. THAT ONE FACTOR
THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT AND WILL HELP, FOR EXAMPLE, TO INCREASE THE NUMBER AND
CONTINUAL GROWTH OF THE WEIGHT AND IMPORTANCE OF THE CANDIDATE POOL IS THAT
THE CONSTITUENCIES MAKE A POINT OF APPOINTING TO THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE
THEIR MOST SENIOR PEOPLE, THE MOST SENIOR, THE MOST EXPERIENCED AND
RECOGNIZED PEOPLE AROUND THEIR COMMUNITIES. THE WHOLE PROCESS WAS DESIGNED
AROUND THE IDEA THAT THE CONSTITUENCIES WOULD CHOOSE WHAT WAS THEN CALLED THE
ELDER STATESMEN OF THEIR COMMUNITIES. NOT NECESSARILY OF THE INSIDE OF THE
CONSTITUENCY. THIS WOULD MEAN, TO USE AN EXAMPLE, THAT THE BUSINESS
CONSTITUENCY OR THE NONCOMMERCIAL CONSTITUENCY OF THE GNSO WOULD NOT
NECESSARILY SELECT AMO!

NG THEIR MEMBERS, BUT THEY WOULD INVITE SOME PEOPLE THEY TRUST TO CARRY THE
BUSINESS OR THE NONCOMMERCIAL IDEALS. BUT AT THE LEVEL THAT THESE ARE PEOPLE
WHO ARE NOT ASPIRING TO FURTHER JOBS; WHO HAVE NOT TO MAKE COMMITMENTS OR
NEGOTIATIONS, BUT INSTEAD HAVE TO REALLY JUST SIT IN THE COMMITTEE, DO THE
WORK, OF COURSE, AND WHO HAVE A GREAT CAPACITY OF CALLING IN THE CANDIDATES
THAT GEORGE HAS MENTIONED AT THE END, THE CORE CANDIDATES. PEOPLE WHO CAN
REALLY SERVE ON THE BOARD. PEOPLE WHO, AS GEORGE HAS SAID, I THINK, DURING
THIS PROCESS. THE MEMBERS OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE MUST BE ABLE TO
NOMINATE TO THE BOARD PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE FULL POTENTIAL OF BECOMING A CHAIR
OF THE BOARD AS MUCH AS FOR THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION COUNCILS. THE CALLS
AND THE APPOINTMENTS HAVE, AGAIN, TO BE MADE FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN BECOME CHAIRS
AND WHO CAN MOVE FORWARD IN THE ORGANIZATION, MAYBE TO OTHER SUPPORTING
ORGANIZATIONS OR TO THE BOARD.

SO THIS WOULD BE REALLY A CALL FOR ALL CONSTITUENCIES AND SUPPORTING
ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF DESIGNATING THEIR
REPRESENTATIVES OR THE CORRESPONDING MEMBERS OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE TO
REALLY PUSH FORWARD TO THE HIGHEST STATURE OF PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN TRUST TO
CARRY THEIR IDEALS AND THEIR INTERESTS IN THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE. THAT
WILL BE A KEY FOR THIS PROCESS TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

THERE IS MANDATED A REVIEW OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE PROCESS AS A WHOLE,
BUT I THINK IT WILL BE VERY HARD TO PUT IN WRITING ANY RULES THAT ARE
NONDISCRIMINATORY, NONGENDER, NONAGE, NON, IN ANY OTHER SENSE,
DISCRIMINATORY, THAT WILL CARRY THIS MESSAGE OF BRING THE PEOPLE YOU TRUST
MOST AMONG YOUR HIGHEST STATURE AND NOT AMONG ONLY THE ACTIVE MEMBERS OF THE
GROUP.

>>GEORGE SADOWSKY: THANK YOU. I ENDORSE YOUR COMMENTS STRONGLY.

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

YOU HAVEN'T LEFT A WHOLE LOT FOR ME TO SAY EXCEPT I CERTAINLY WANT TO
RECOGNIZE AND APPLAUD THE WORK THAT GEORGE HAS LED IN HIS COMMITTEE, AND
THOSE WHO DELIVERED NOMINATIONS TO THE NOMINATION COMMITTEE.

IT STRIKES ME THAT NOT ONLY WILL YOUR REPORT BE OF SOME USE TO US IN
INFORMING THE NEXT NOMINATING COMMITTEE, BUT I THINK AS WE GO FORWARD THROUGH
OUR NORMAL ASSESSMENTS OF VARIOUS OF OUR SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, ONE OF THE
ASSESSMENTS IS THE BOARD ITSELF AND HOW WELL IT FUNCTIONS AND HOW WELL WE
HAVE FELT THE MIX OF BOARD MEMBERS HAS SERVED THE COMMUNITY.

AND SO THAT, TOO, COULD BE FED BACK INTO THE NOMINATIONS PROCESS THAT WE HAVE
SOME SENSE OF HOW WELL WE THINK WE HAVE MANAGED TO DO OUR JOBS AND DID WE
HAVE THE RIGHT SKILL MIX AND SO ON.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GEORGE.

>>GEORGE SADOWSKY: BEFORE I LEAVE I WOULD LIKE TO REFLECT YOUR THANKS TO
MEMBERS OF MY COMMITTEE WHO ARE HERE AND WHO WORK VERY HARD TO PROVIDE THESE
RESULTS.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: LET ME SUGGEST SINCE WE HAVE RUN PAST THE ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED
BREAK TIME THAT WE POSTPONE THE SECTION ON NEW ZEALAND MEETING UNTIL AFTER
THE BREAK. LET ME ASK YOU TO TRY TO RETURN SOMETIME BETWEEN 3:30 AND 3:40,
PLEASE. NO LATER THAN 3:40. AND WE WILL BREAK FOR 20 MINUTES.

(BREAK)

>>VINT CERF: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU'D TAKE YOUR
SEATS.

WE'D LIKE TO RESTART THE MEETING.

THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT SEATED SHOULD EITHER SIT DOWN OR DEPART THE ROOM,
ONE OF THE TWO.

WE'RE GOING TO HEAR NEXT NOW FROM OUR HOSTS OF THE NEW ZEALAND MEETINGS THAT
ARE COMING UP IN WELLINGTON NEXT MARCH.

AND SO I'D LIKE TO INVITE COLIN JACKSON, THE PRESIDENT OF INTERNETNZ, TO GIVE
US A GLIMPSE OF WHAT LIES AHEAD.

>>COLIN JACKSON: THANK YOU, VINT.

WE'LL START WITH A DVD JUST TO SEE WELLINGTON.

(DVD PLAYING.)



>> MY NAME IS KERRY PRENDERGAST AND I'D LIKE TO INVITE THE DELEGATES OF ICANN
TO MY CITY, WELLINGTON.

IT'LL BE AN UNFORGETTABLE EXPERIENCE IN THE POLITICAL AND CULTURAL CAPITAL OF
NEW ZEALAND.

WE'RE AN INNOVATIVE COUNTRY THAT DEMANDS (INAUDIBLE) TECHNOLOGY.

A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF OUR SPIRIT AS HE LEADS THE WAY IN FILMING OF BLOCK BUS
TERSE LIKE "LORD OF THE RINGS" AND "KING KONG."

WE HAVE MADE A COMMITMENT TO CONNECTIVITY WITH GIGABYTE FIBER AVAILABLE.

WELLINGTON HAS THE TRANSPORT, ACCOMMODATIONS, AND FACILITIES OF A LARGE CITY,
BUT IT'S COMPACTNESS, JUST TWO KILOMETERS WIDE, MAKES IT A WALKING CITY, WITH
A THRIVING STREET CULTURE AND VIBRANT (INAUDIBLE).

COME AND SAMPLE OUR LOCAL CUISINE, OUR STUNNING FORESTS, HIT THE SHOPS, GOLF,
YOU MAY EVEN FIT IN A (INAUDIBLE).

SO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE NEW ZEALAND, THE HOME OF ICANN, MARCH 2006.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>COLIN JACKSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY.

TODAY IS FRIDAY.

IT'S ALREADY SATURDAY IN NEW ZEALAND.

IF YOU TAKE OFF, YOU GET THERE THE DAY OF A TOMORROW.

NEW ZEALAND'S WHERE TIME STARTS.

WE'RE THE FIRST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD TO SEE THE SUN EVERY DAY.

INTERNETNZ IS THE MANAGER OF THE .NZ NAME SPACE.

WE WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME ICANN TO YOUR NEXT MEETING IN WELLINGTON, MARCH
2006.

IN THE VIBRANT CAPITAL OF NEW ZEALAND, IT'S A SMALL CITY.

WE'RE ONE OF THE FIRST WIRED CITIES IN THE WORLD.

WE THINK WE MAY BE THE FIRST CITY TO HAVE MUNICIPAL FIBER.

WE STARTED PULLING THAT IN 1999, AND THAT'S DOWN TO AN INNOVATIVE LOCAL NEW
ZEALAND COMPANY CALLED CITY LINK.

THEY'VE BEEN DELIVERING FOR BUSINESSES AND PEOPLE IN WELLINGTON SINCE THEN.

WE'RE A SMALL CITY BY INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS, SO THERE'S OUR MESSAGE.

WE'RE GOING TO PRETTY MUCH FILL THE PLACE UP.

DON'T GET CAUGHT OUT.

NEW ZEALAND'S A LONG WAY AWAY, SURE, BUT MOST PEOPLE ARRIVE ON THE LONG
HAULS, MOST OF THE AIRLINES, AUCKLAND, WHICH IS A CITY IN THE NORTH ISLAND.

IT'S A ONE-HOUR FLIGHT DOWN TO WELLINGTON FROM THERE.

ALTERNATIVELY, YOU CAN COME THROUGH AUSTRALIA.

YOU HAVE FLIGHTS FROM MOST AUSTRALIAN CITIES DIRECT TO WELLINGTON.

THAT'S A GOOD OPTION IF YOU'RE COMING FROM EUROPE.

I'D LIKE TO THANK THOSE KIND SPONSORS, AND THERE ARE ONLY VERY FEW
SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES LEFT.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO TAKE ONE UP, YOU NEED TO SEE KEITH OVER HERE.

ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WELLINGTON, WHERE DO I STAY, WHERE IS NEW ZEALAND?

WHAT IS A KIWI?

JUST SEE ONE OF THE TEAM.

AND YOU SEE THEM HERE.

I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE IN PARTICULAR OUR CONSUL GENERAL AND TRADE
COMMISSIONER, ANNE CHAPPAZ.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>COLIN JACKSON: AND THERE'S THE DOMAIN NAME FOR THE BOOKINGS.

I HOPE TO SEE YOU ALL IN NEW ZEALAND.

WELCOME!



>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE'RE ALL LOOKING FORWARD TO OUR JOURNEY TO THE FAR SOUTH.

THE NEXT REPORT COMES FROM OUR HOSTS FOR THE MOROCCO MEETING IN 2006.

AND I WOULD CALL UPON HICHAM LAHJOMRI FROM THE AGENCE NATIONALE DE
REGEMENTATION DES TELECOMMUNICATIONS TO GIVE US A LITTLE GLIMPSE OF WHAT WAS
GOING IN MOROCCO IN THE MIDDLE OF 2006.



>>HICHAM LAHJOMRI: MY NAME IS HICHAM LAHJOMRI.

I AM FROM THE MOROCCAN TELECOMMUNICATION AGENCY.

AND WE ARE VERY PLEASED IN MOROCCO TO BE THE HOST OF THE NEXT -- THE ICANN
MEETING IN JUNE 2006.

I AM HERE WITH MY COLLEAGUE FROM THE ISOC OF MOROCCO.

AND WE ARE WORKING TOGETHER TO ORGANIZE THE JUNE MEETING IN MARRAKESH.

WE STARTED WORKING WITH ALL THE LOGISTICAL STAFF FROM ICANN SINCE A FEW
MONTHS AGO.

AND I WILL TRY JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION CONCERNING MOROCCO AND THE
ICANN MEETING WHICH WILL TAKE PLACE IN MARRAKESH.

JUST SOME INFORMATION CONCERNING THE COUNTRY.

IT IS IN THE NORTH OF AFRICA, JUST 12 KILOMETERS FROM EUROPE, AND BORDERING
THE ATLANTIC SEA AND THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA ALSO.

MARRAKESH IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE COUNTRY AND IT IS VERY KNOWN BY ITS
MONUMENTS AND HISTORICAL SITES.

THE TEMPERATURE AND THE WEATHER IS VERY -- IS GENERALLY TEMPERATE.

AND THE TEMPERATURE VARIES FROM 8 DEGREES TO 26 DEGREES, A LITTLE BIT HOTTER
THAN WHAT WE HAVE IN VANCOUVER.

AND WE HAVE 30 MILLION, THE POPULATION IS AROUND 30 MILLION.

AND THE LANGUAGES THAT ARE SPOKEN IN MOROCCO IS ARABIC, FRENCH, SPANISH, AND
ALSO ENGLISH.

I WOULD LIKE JUST TO FOCUS ON THE MARRAKESH CITY.

MARRAKESH WAS FOR A LONG TIME THE CAPITAL OF SUCCESSIVE DYNASTIES.

AND IT'S A CITY THAT HAS A UNIQUE GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION, A SIGNIFICANT -- IT
HAS LOTS OF CULTURE AND HISTORICAL MONUMENTS.

AND I WOULD LIKE JUST TO SHOW YOU SOME SIGHT-SEEING FROM MARRAKESH.

THIS IS A VERY KNOWN PLACE, AND IT IS CLASSIFIED AS WORLD HERITAGE BY UNESCO.

AND ALSO THIS IS THE PLAZA.

THIS IS THE MEETING VENUE, THE CONFERENCE CENTER WHERE WE ARE GOING TO HOST
THE NEXT ICANN MEETING.

IT IS A CONFERENCE CENTER THAT CAN HAVE MANY PARTICIPANTS.

AND IT OFFERS BLAZING FAST WI-FI INTERNET ACCESS AND OTHER FACILITIES.

FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION CONCERNING THE
INTERNET IN MOROCCO.

THIS IS JUST SOME INDICATORS, NUMBER OF INTERNET USERS AND OTHER INDICATORS
THAT MAYBE WILL BE INTERESTING TO KNOW ABOUT MOROCCO.

AND FINALLY I WOULD LIKE TO SAY TO YOU THAT IN THE BEGINNING OF NEXT YEAR, WE
WILL HAVE A WEB SITE THAT WILL PROVIDE YOU FURTHER INFORMATION CONCERNING THE
NEXT ICANN MEETING IN MARRAKESH.

I HOPE TO SEE YOU ALL IN MARRAKESH IN JUNE 2006.

AND I WILL JUST GIVE YOU MAYBE A PRACTICAL CONTACT POINT, IF YOU HAVE ANY
INFORMATION, WOULD LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS, YOU CAN CONTACT THIS APPOINT
CONTACT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE NOT BEEN TO MOROCCO, YOU'RE IN FOR A TREAT.

AND I HOPE YOU ARE ABLE TO TAKE A LITTLE EXTRA TIME TO VISIT OTHER PARTS OF
THE COUNTRY, CASABLANCA, FOR EXAMPLE, AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE BEEN
THERE BEFORE, I'M SURE THAT YOU'LL ENJOY A RETURN TO THE CUISINE AND BEAUTY
OF THAT CITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT LITTLE GLIMPSE AHEAD.

I'D LIKE NOW TO OPEN THE MICROPHONES ON THE FLOOR FOR ANY COMMENTS THAT -- OR
QUESTIONS THAT THE PUBLIC WISHES TO MAKE SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO THE
REPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN GIVEN.

AFTER WE HAVE HEARD ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THE REPORTS, THEN I'M GOING
TO ASK PAUL TWOMEY TO GIVE A SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED VERISIGN SETTLEMENT, THE
CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS WITH REGARD TO FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED THUS FAR.

SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR ISSUES WITH REGARD TO THAT VERISIGN MATTER,
PLEASE DON'T ASK THEM AT THIS TIME.

WE'LL HAVE TIME AFTER PAUL HAS FINISHED WITH HIS PRESENTATION FOR THOSE
COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS.

SO I'LL CALL ON MY COLLEAGUE, OR FORMER COLLEAGUE, AMADEU.

>>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: GOOD AFTERNOON, AMADEU ABRIL.

ICANN ATTENDEE.

I HAVE TO COMMENT, ONE, ON THE GNSO REPORT; THE OTHER ONE IS ON THE NOMCOM
REPORT.

LET'S START WITH THIS LAST ONE.

ALEX ALREADY MADE THE COMMENT THAT IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR, YOU KNOW, CORRECT
FUNCTIONING OF THE SYSTEM THAT WE TRY TO OPEN A LITTLE BIT THE RANGE OF
INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY GIVE INPUT.

BECAUSE WE ALWAYS REPEAT THE SAME PEOPLE IN THE SAME CIRCLE OF INPUT, WE
ALWAYS GET THE SAME OUTPUT SOMEHOW.

AND I COMPLETELY SUPPORT THAT.

BUT I HAVE A CONCRETE PROBLEM THAT HAS BEEN MANIFESTED AT LEAST THE LAST TWO
YEARS IN THE NOMCOM.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE SITTING AT THE SAME TIME IN A COUNCIL FOR WHICH THE
NOMCOM IS ELECTING PEOPLE, AND AT THE VERY NOMCOM ITSELF.

THIS RAISES TWO PROBLEMS REGARDING, YOU KNOW, THE FAIRNESS OF THE PROCESS.

THE FIRST ONE, IT'S VERY SIMPLE.

THESE PEOPLE VOTE TWICE FOR THE BOARD.

FIRST THEY VOTE WITHIN THEIR CONSTITUENCY -- THEIR SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION AS
MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

THEN THEY ALSO VOTE AS MEMBERS OF THE NOMCOM WITH DIFFERENT HATS BUT THE SAME
INDIVIDUALS.

THIS SEEMS STRANGE AT LEAST.

THE SECOND ONE IS EVEN MORE WORRYING.

THEY ARE ELECTING THE PEOPLE THAT WILL SIT AS THEIR OWN COLLEAGUES IN
DIFFERENT CAPACITIES.

SO THEY ARE EITHER REGISTRY OR BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVE OR AN IPC
REPRESENTATIVE WITHIN THE NAMES COUNCIL -- SORRY, THE GNSO COUNCIL, JUST TO
GIVE SOME EXAMPLES, AND THEY ARE ELECTING THE NOMCOM APPOINTEES TO THAT SAME
COUNCIL THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO PRECISELY REPRESENT A DIFFERENT SUBSET OF IDEAS.

IT'S NOT THAT THE INTEREST SHOULD NOT PARTICIPATE.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT PARTIES THAT PARTICIPATE IN THE GNSO COUNCIL SHOULD NOT
ELECT THEIR COLLEAGUES.

I'M SAYING THAT PEOPLE SITTING IN THAT COUNCIL SHOULD NOT ELECT THEIR OWN
COLLEAGUES THAT COME FROM OTHER REPRESENTATIVITY IN OUR SYSTEM.

I THINK THAT BOTH THINGS, DOUBLE VOTING AND CO-OPTING OF COLLEAGUES, IS
SOMETHING THAT'S VERY STRANGE.

I BELIEVE THAT NONE OF YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT YOU SIT IN THE NOMCOM
ELECTING YOUR COLLEAGUES FOR NEXT YEAR, BUT THIS WAS HAPPENING AT THE COUNCIL
LEVEL.

AND I WOULD ADVISE THE NOMCOM OR THE BOARD DURING THE NEXT YEAR CALL TO MAKE
AN EXPLICIT REQUEST, IF NOT A BYLAW CHANGE, TO PREVENT THIS BEHAVIOR.

REGARDING THE GNSO COUNCIL, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT BRUCE CLEARLY STATED BUT
SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED THIS MORNING DURING THE COUNCIL.

THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT SOMETHING RELATED, A STATEMENT RELATED TO DOT
COM SETTLEMENT.

I'M NOT -- I WILL NOT COMMENT ON THAT CONCRETELY.

THE PROBLEM WAS CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

THERE WAS AN APPEARANCE OF, YOU KNOW, MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS THINKING THAT
ANYBODY THAT HAS A RELATION WITH REGISTRIES OR REGISTRARS OR WHO KNOWS WHAT
SHOULD NOT VOTE BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CLEAR INTEREST.

I WOULD SUBMIT THAT THIS IS EXACTLY THE CONTRARY.

ONE THING IS THAT THE VERY COMPANY THAT'S THE SUBJECT.

BUT I THINK THAT THE SOS ARE PRECISELY HERE TO CHANNEL THE INTEREST.

AND THAT WE WANT PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED TO BE IN THE COUNCIL AND TO
EXPRESS WITH ABSOLUTE CLARITY THE INTEREST THEY REPRESENT.

IT IS AT THE BOARD LEVEL THAT THE MEDIATION OF THIS INTEREST SHOULD HAPPEN,
BUT NOT PREVENTING PEOPLE TO CHANNEL THAT AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL.

QUITE THE CONTRARY.

THE COUNCIL IS THERE TO MAKE THE ADDITION OF ALL THE INTERESTS, NOT TO
PREVENT THOSE INTERESTS FROM BEING MANIFESTED.

THANKS.



>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, AMADEU.

I ALWAYS APPRECIATE YOUR SUCCINCTNESS AND CLARITY.

I TAKE IT THAT THAT INFORMATION WILL HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE BOARD
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE CHAIR, ALEJANDRO PISANTY, AND COULD BE TAKEN UP AND
CONSIDERED THERE YES, IZUMI.

>>IZUMI AIZU: MEMBER OF ALAC FROM AUSTRALIA AND ASIA-PACIFIC.

I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW UP WHAT VITTORIO REPORTED ON ABOUT OUR ACTIVITIES, WE ARE
THREE YEARS OF INTERIM STATUS AND STILL WORKING VERY HARD TO DO THE OUTREACH,
HAVE THE VOICES OF THE INDIVIDUAL USERS TO GET INVOLVED WITH THE PDP PROCESS
OF ICANN.

BUT -- AND WE ARE NOW TRYING TO MAKE OUR OWN REVIEW ABOUT OUR OWN
PERFORMANCE.

BUT WE REALLY NEED COMMUNITY REVIEW.

WE ARE AWARE THAT AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW PROCESS WILL START WITHIN -- AFTER
THREE YEARS OF ANY SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION OR ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

AND WE REALLY ASK YOU GUYS NOT ONLY THE BOARD MEMBERS THERE, BUT THE
COMMUNITY PEOPLE, HOW YOU FEEL TAKE THIS STRUCTURE, AT-LARGE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, ALS, RALO, AND INDIVIDUAL USERS IN DUE TIME.

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

VITTORIO.

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: THANK YOU.

AND I WANT TO MAKE A PERSONAL COMMENT, EXTREMELY PERSONAL, ABOUT THE NOMCOM.

AND I THINK I HAVE TO DISCLOSE THAT I WAS A CANDIDATE IN THE PAST IN ONE OF
THE NOMCOMS, AND SO I WONDER WHETHER WHAT I AM GOING TO SAY IS GOING TO
DISCOURAGE CANDIDATES.

I HOPE IT'S NOT.

I MEAN, TALKING WITH OTHER PEOPLE AND TALKING ALSO WITH THE ORGANIZATIONS WE
ARE TRYING TO ACCREDIT AND TO BRING INTO ICANN, OFTEN THEY BRING UP THE ISSUE
OF HOW DO WE GET OUR REPRESENTATIVES INTO THE DIFFERENT PLACES OF THE ICANN
STRUCTURE, SO NOT JUST THE ICANN BOARD, OF COURSE, BUT ALSO THE GNSO COUNCIL
AND OTHER PLACES.

AND AS YOU MIGHT KNOW, WE DO HAVE NONVOTING LIAISONS IN THESE PLACES.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN YOU LOOK, FOR EXAMPLE, AT THE COMPOSITION OF THE
BOARD, YOU SEE THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SEATS THAT ARE BEING APPOINTED BY
THE NOMCOM AND THEN THERE ARE OTHER SEATS BEING APPOINTED BY THE SUPPORTING
ORGANIZATIONS THROUGH WHICH OTHER CONSTITUENCIES USUALLY GET PEOPLE FROM
THESE CONSTITUENCIES INTO THE BOARD.

SO THEY ASK, WHAT'S THE WAY THROUGH AT-LARGE INDIVIDUAL USERS CAN GET PEOPLE
TO ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT COUNCILS?

AND THREE YEARS AGO WHEN THE AT-LARGE ELECTIONS WERE CANCELED, WE WERE TOLD
IT'S GOING TO BE THE NOMCOM, SO THE NOMCOM WILL BE A DIFFERENT WAY TO SELECT
PEOPLE THAT CAN ACT IN THE INTEREST OF THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY OF USERS.

BUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THAT EVEN IF -- I'D SAY MANY -- IF NOT PERHAPS ALL OF
THE APPOINTMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE BY THE NOMCOM ARE GOOD PEOPLE, AND OFTEN
ARE PEOPLE THAT COME FROM THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY.

THEY ARE NOT TIED IN ANY WAY TO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO BUILD, SO THEY -- I
THINK I'VE NEVER SEEN ANY APPOINTMENT BY THE NOMCOM OF SOMEONE COMING FROM AN
AT-LARGE STRUCTURE OR FROM PEOPLE THAT ARE PARTICIPATING IN THE AT-LARGE
CONSTITUENCY.

AND THIS IS REALLY DISCOURAGING FOR US AND THE PEOPLE OR WHAT TRYING TO BRING
IN.

AND SO MY -- I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO TACKLE THIS.

I DON'T HAVE ANY SOLUTION.

BUT I THINK THERE IS A SORT OF A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE WAY THAT THE NOMCOM
OPERATES AND WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO.

IF WE ARE EXPECTED TO BE THE CHANNEL THROUGH WHICH THE USER CONSTITUENCY
PARTICIPATES IN ICANN, WE WOULD EXPECT THAT -- I MEAN, TO HAVE A WAY TO BRING
PEOPLE TO THE DIFFERENT COUNCILS.

AND I'M ASKING WHETHER THERE IS ANY WAY NOW.

BUT I THINK THERE IS NOT.



>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, VITTORIO.

WELL, THAT'S -- I HOPE THAT AS THE ALAC REVIEW PROCEEDS, THAT INFORMATION
LIKE THAT WILL GET CAPTURED SO THAT IT CAN BE CONSIDERED IN THE EVENT THAT
NEW POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE APPROPRIATE.

KARL AUERBACH.

>> KARL AUERBACH: I WASN'T GOING TO TALK ABOUT ALAC, BUT SINCE IT'S BEEN
BROUGHT UP, I WILL.

IT'S TIME TO PULL THE PLUG.

IT'S BEEN A PATHETIC FAILURE.

IT'S HAD ITS TIME AND MONEY PUT INTO IT.

IT'S BEEN ON LIFE SUPPORT FOR YEARS.

AND IN JUST A FEW MONTHS, IN THE YEAR 2000, WE HAD A VIBRANT ELECTORATE FORM
ALL BY ITSELF.

WE HAD ELECTIONS.

THIS THING HAS HAD SEVERAL YEARS.

IT CAN'T GET ANY MEMBERSHIP.

THE BYZANTINE STRUCTURE IS SO OBVIOUS TO PEOPLE WHO WOULD JOIN THAT IT
ESSENTIALLY RENDERS THE VOICE OF THE INDIVIDUAL USELESS AND MAKES THE
INDIVIDUAL IMPOTENT.

WE REALLY SHOULD GIVE UP ON THAT APPROACH AND GO BACK TO SOMETHING WHICH HAS
A RATHER MORE CLOSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PERSON AND THE ULTIMATE MAKING
OF DECISIONS WITHIN ICANN.

AND WE AS INDIVIDUAL USERS OF THE INTERNET HAVE BEEN KEPT OUT IN THE COLD OF
ICANN'S PROCESSES FOR FAR TOO LONG.

AND MAJOR DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OVER OUR PARTICIPATION, STARTING WITH THE
UDRP.

AND TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.

THE ALAC SHOULD NOT BE STUDIED, RESTUDIED, RESTUDIED, AND RESTUDIED AGAIN.

IT SHOULD SIMPLY BE REPLACED.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, KARL.

I HOPE THAT YOU'LL FIND A WAY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ALAC ANALYSIS SO THAT
THAT GETS FED BACK INTO IT AS WELL.

PLEASE.

>>J. SCOTT EVANS: J. SCOTT EVANS FROM THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
CONSTITUENCY.

I WANT TO DRAW MY COMMENTS TO THOSE MADE BY AMADEU.

I UNDERSTAND HIS CONCERNS.

BUT I ALSO THINK THE BOARD KNOWS, AND THAT CERTAINLY THOSE ON THE PLANNING
COMMITTEE KNOW, THAT ONE OF THE REASON THERE IS MAY SEEM A DUPLICITY OF
COUNCIL MEMBERS SERVING ON THE NOMCOM IS JUST A LOGISTICAL REALITY THAT WE
HAVE VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE GIVING THEIR TIME.

AND WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO FIND PEOPLE WHO ARE AWARE OF THE PROCESSES AND THE
WORKINGS OF ICANN, THERE'S A LIMITED POOL OF PEOPLE TO CHOOSE FROM.

AND USUALLY THEY HAVE TO -- IN FACT, I BELIEVE IT'S REQUIRED THAT THEY GO TO
IN-PERSON MEETINGS THAT ARE HELD AT THE MEETINGS THAT ICANN HAS.

AND SO IT'S DOUBLED UP, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON COUNCILS OR COMMITTEES
ARE ACTUALLY THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALLOTTED THE TIME IN THEIR PERSONAL
SCHEDULES TO TRAVEL TO THE VENUES AROUND THE WORLD AND ACTUALLY BE THERE AND
GIVE THAT KIND OF TIME.

I WILL ALSO REMIND THE BOARD THAT THE ONE TIME WE DID HAVE A MEMBER FROM THE
IPC THAT WAS NOT ON A COUNCIL, THE MEETING WAS HELD IN A PARTICULAR
JURISDICTION WHERE THIS PERSON FROM ISRAEL COULD NOT GET A VISA AND COULD NOT
ATTEND.

AND HAD QUITE A PROBLEMATIC TIME WITH THE NOMCOM IN EXPLAINING AND GETTING
PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT WASN'T A PERSONAL CHOICE; IT WAS A GOVERNMENTAL
CHOICE, AS TO WHY SHE COULD NOT ATTEND.

SO IT'S PRACTICALITIES THAT DRAW THIS DUPLICITY, NOT SOME SORT OF CONSPIRACY
OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, SCOTT.

I THINK THE TERM YOU WERE LOOKING FOR IS DUPLICATION.

DUPLICITY HAS A VERY DIFFERENT CONNOTATION.

I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO A GOOGLE SEARCH ON DUPLICITY AND VERIFY YOUR
UNDERSTANDING.

>>J. SCOTT EVANS: OR MALAPROP.

>>VINT CERF: YES, ALSO TRUE.

>>SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI: GOOD AFTERNOON. I AM SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI, I AM WITH
THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT ALL OF OUR
MEETINGS AND PROCESSES ARE OPEN, ARE VERY TRANSPARENT. AND WE ALSO WELCOME
PEOPLE WHO DON'T AGREE WITH THE ACTUAL MODEL TO DISCUSS THEM. IT WOULD BE
GREAT IF WE SEE YOU IN OUR MEETINGS INSTEAD OF HAVING THIS KIND OF ARGUMENTS
IN PUBLIC FORUMS. THANK YOU.

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

BRUCE TONKIN.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: THANK YOU, VINT. JUST A RESPONSE, ALSO, TO VITTORIO. HE
MENTIONED THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BUT I THINK THE MORE GENERAL ISSUE
IS HOW THE USERS PARTICIPATE MORE IN THE GNSO, AND I THINK PETER DENGATE
THRUSH WAS PARTLY ASKING THAT QUESTION AS WELL, HOW DO YOU MANAGE PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION.

I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR PAUL TWOMEY, IF HE COULD ANSWER THAT FOR ME.
THERE WAS THE CONCEPT OF THE MANAGER OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AS A POSITION,
AND THAT HAS BEEN, I GUESS, ON THE BOOKS FOR A WHILE. IS THERE AN INTENT TO
FILL THAT ANYTIME SOON? BECAUSE THAT WILL PARTLY CLARIFY MY NEXT --

>>PAUL TWOMEY: I WON'T GIVE THE OBVIOUS ANSWER. WHEN I HAVE SOME MONEY TO
PAY THEM.

NO, ACTUALLY, WE WILL BE POSTING PROBABLY THREE DIFFERENT COMMUNICATIONS
POSITIONS VERY SHORTLY WITH THE ASSUMPTION WE ARE GOING TO HAVE MONEY TO PAY
THEM.

AND ONE OF THEM WILL BE -- ONE IS GOING TO BE EXTERNAL MEDIA, ONE IS GOING TO
BE -- SORRY. I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE RIGHT WORD. TECHNICAL WRITING
PERSON, SOMEONE WHO CAN HELP WRITE UP CASE STUDIES, WRITE UP MATERIALS THAT
WE CAN USE FOR MATERIALS. AND THE THIRD ONE WILL BE SOMEONE FOCUSED
SPECIFICALLY ON THAT DEFINITION YOU SAY OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. IN OTHER
WORDS, THE COMMUNICATION WITH THE COMMUNITY. THE COMMUNITY COMMUNICATION.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: BECAUSE WHAT WE REALLY NEED, WE ARE JUST STARTING UP A NEW
TOPIC IN THE GNSO WHICH IS NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT
WOULD BE A GREAT CASE STUDY TO SAY LET'S TRY SOME DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, WHETHER IT'S WIKIS OR MORE FACE TO FACE OR WHATEVER.
BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE IF THERE WAS A STAFF MEMBER THAT WAS ALLOCATED
TO LOOKING AT HOW DO WE GET PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AS A GENERAL GOAL.

SPECIFICALLY WITH TERMS OF VOTING PEOPLE ONTO THE COUNCIL, THERE IS A
MECHANISM TO CREATE NEW CONSTITUENCIES WITHIN THE GNSO, AND I DON'T KNOW IF
THAT'S WIDELY UNDERSTOOD, BUT USERS OF WHATEVER FORM THEY LIKE. THEY COULD
BE SKIERS, FOR THAT MATTER. BUT THERE'S A METHOD WHERE YOU CREATE A GROUP
WITH A PARTICULAR DEFINITION, AND THAT GROUP CAN FORM PART, CREATE A
CONSTITUENCY, AND DIRECTLY ELECT PEOPLE TO THE GNSO COUNCIL.

SO THAT IS ACTUALLY, BY DEFINITION, AN OPEN PROCESS. IT'S NOT CLOSED. IT
DOESN'T HAVE A FIXED STRUCTURE. IT'S JUST THAT IT HAPPENS TO BE FIXED FOR
THE LAST THREE YEARS DOESN'T IMPLY IT IS PERMANENTLY FIXED. AND I THINK WE
ARE ABOUT TO GO THROUGH A GNSO REVIEW. AND IF YOU ARE DOING AN ALAC REVIEW,
IT'S PROBABLY WORTH THINKING ABOUT THAT AND THINKING, WELL, SHOULD WE
PROACTIVELY CREATE SOME CONSTITUENCIES WITHIN THE GNSO SO THAT THEY CAN ELECT
PEOPLE TO THE COUNCIL SO THAT THEY CAN, IN TURN, VOTE. THAT'S ONE ISSUE.

AND SECONDLY, ARE THERE BETTER WAYS OF ENGAGING THE PUBLIC MORE BROADLY THAN
THE SMALL SUBSET OF PEOPLE THAT PHYSICALLY PARTICIPATE IN THESE MEETINGS.
AND THAT'S KIND OF ISSUE I RELATE TO IN TERMS OF HAVING A STAFF MEMBER
DEDICATED TO LET'S TRY SOME THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, BRUCE. BEFORE I RECOGNIZE MARILYN, LET ME FIND OUT
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE NOW IN QUEUE WAITING TO SPEAK. VITTORIO. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE? BRET, ARE YOU? I'M SORRY. IT'S NOT BRET, IT'S JORDYN. ARE YOU
IN QUEUE? NO.

LET ME ASK IF WE CAN CLOSE THE QUEUE WITH VITTORIO BECAUSE I WANT TO GET
PAUL'S REPORT.

MARILYN CADE.

>>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU, MY NAME IS MARILYN CADE. I AM AN ELECTED
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY TO THE GNSO COUNCIL. AND I AM
SPEAKING AS AN INDIVIDUAL COUNCILLOR; THEREFORE, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, AS SOMEONE
WHO I THINK HAS GREATLY BENEFITED FROM THE CONTRIBUTIONS THAT THE AT-LARGE
HAS MADE IN THE PARTICIPATION PROCESS. I HAVE SEEN THE SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT
OF INTERACTION NOT ONLY INSIDE ICANN BUT OUTSIDE ICANN IN THE HEAVY LIFTING
THAT MEMBERS OF THIS GROUP DID IN THE WSIS PROCESS.

AND SO WHEN WE LOOK BACKWARD OR LOOK FORWARD AT EXAMINING HOW A GROUP CAN
WORK OR HAS WORKED IN THE PAST, I'D LIKE TO BE SURE THAT WE REALLY RECOGNIZE
THE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION THAT IS BEING MADE RIGHT NOW BY THAT GROUP IN
WHATEVER INSTANTIATION THEY MAY TAKE GOING FORWARD.

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

>>LESLEY COWLEY: HI, LESLEY COWLEY, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, NOMINET UK. I WOULD
LIKE TO REFER TO THE CCNSO REPORT AND TO THANK THE CCNSO FOR THE REVIEW OF
THE BYLAWS THAT HAS BEEN GOING THROUGH THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

WE AWAIT THE OUTCOME OF THE BOARD DELIBERATIONS ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT
ARE BEING MADE WITH INTEREST. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LESLIE. WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT,
TOO. VITTORIO.

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT I THINK WE HAVE SORT AFTER
CULTURE PROBLEM IN REFERRING TO WHAT KARL WAS SAYING. AND I WOULD ACTUALLY
WELCOME KARL AND THE OTHER LONG TIME CRITICS OF THE ALAC AND OF THE AT-LARGE
SITUATION AT ICANN TO COME UP WITH A PROPOSAL ON HOW TO -- I MEAN HOW TO
STRUCTURE USER PARTICIPATION IN NORTH AMERICA.

WE ARE REALLY WILLING TO LISTEN TO THAT AND UNDERSTAND WHETHER IT CAN BE
IMPLEMENTED IN THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK, AND EVEN CONSIDER PROPOSING CHANGES TO
THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK IF IT CANNOT BE IMPLEMENTED.

AT THE SAME TIME, I AM A BIT CONCERNED BY THE IDEA OF IMPOSING THIS
PARTICULAR CULTURE OF (INAUDIBLE) REPRESENTATION AND PEOPLE THAT ARE VERY
USED TO WORKING ONLINE, BEING ONLINE, AND TYPING AND CHATTING ONTO THE ENTIRE
WORLD, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE POINT, THE VERY POINT WE WERE TRYING TO DO WHEN WE
CREATED THIS REGIONAL STRUCTURE.

I THINK THAT THIS MIGHT WORK VERY WELL IN NORTH AMERICA, BUT IT WILL NEVER
WORK IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD.

THE CULTURAL PARTICIPATION IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD IS VERY DIFFERENT,
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S WORKING IN ASIA, I DON'T THINK IT'S WORKING IN AFRICA,
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S WORKING IN EUROPE AND LATIN AMERICA AS WELL.

SO I THINK THAT WE WELCOME CONSTRUCTIVE PROPOSALS, BUT PLEASE DON'T TRY TO
IMPOSE A SPECIFIC POINT OF VIEW FROM A SPECIFIC PART OF THE WORLD ON THE
ENTIRE GLOBAL COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT PERSPECTIVE, VITTORIO.

I WOULD LIKE TO CALL ON PAUL TWOMEY NOW TO OFFER A SUMMARY OF THE VERISIGN
AGREEMENTS AND THEIR CURRENT STATUS.

I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU ARE GOING TO DO THIS FROM THE LECTERN OR FROM YOUR
CURRENT POSITION.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: WHILE YOU ARE WAITING, WHY DON'T YOU COMPARE NOTES ABOUT SITE
FINDER EXPERIENCES OR SOMETHING.

(LAUGHTER.)



>>VINT CERF: I'D MUCH RATHER TALK ABOUT HOW YOU CAN USE GOOGLE TO FIND SITES.
SHAMELESS ADD

(LAUGHTER.)

>> THAT'S TWICE.

>>VINT CERF: I'M PRACTICING.

I'M JUST ANOTHER ONE OF THE GOOGLE ADS, EXCEPT -- WELL....



I KEEP THINKING THAT WE OUGHT TO HAVE A PROJECTION UNIT THAT IS WIFI ENABLED
THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, CABLES AND CONNECTORS.

THE FUN PART, OF COURSE, WOULD BE TAKING OVER THE PROJECTOR FROM THE FLOOR.
AND PRESENTING SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT THE SPEAKER INTENDED TO PUT UP
THERE.

MR. TWOMEY, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE READY.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU. I KNOW THIS IS GOING TO BE A TOPIC OF A LOT OF
INTEREST AND A TOPIC FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND FEEDBACK.

I'D LIKE TO STOP BEFORE I GO THROUGH SLIDES AND BASICALLY TELL THE STORY, A
PERSONAL STORY FROM MY PERSPECTIVE OF THE JOURNEY WHICH TAKES US TO TODAY.

MANY OF YOU IN THIS ROOM HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH ICANN AND BEFORE ICANN WITH
THIS SPACE, AND PARTICULARLY WITH ICANN SINCE THE FORMATION. AND YOU WILL
KNOW THAT IF THERE'S BEEN TWO POINTS OF THINGS THAT PRODUCE HEAT IN A LOT OF
OUR DISCUSSIONS OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS NOW, IT IS, ONE, ANY DISCUSSION
ABOUT THE .COM CONTRACT, BECAUSE THAT IS ALWAYS A NOISY AFFAIR, AND THE
SECOND IS ABOUT INTRODUCTION OF SERVICES AND PARTICULARLY SERVICES INTRODUCED
INTO .COM OR .NET OR .ORG AT SOME STAGE PROPOSED BY VERISIGN. SOME OF YOU
WILL REMEMBER IN MELBOURNE NOT ONLY WAS THERE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE .COM
CONTRACT; THERE WAS ALSO A DISCUSSION ABOUT IDN SERVICE.

SO WE HAVE MANAGED AGAIN TO PUT ALL OF THOSE INTO ONE PROCESS. BUT I JUST
WANT TO SAY THAT THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN A TOPIC WHICH PRODUCES HEAT AND LIGHT
IN THIS COMMUNITY.

YOU WILL RECALL THAT IN 2003 THE OPERATOR OF THE .COM AND THE .NET REGISTRY
INTRODUCED SITE FINDER AS A NEW SERVICE. I WAS ACTUALLY RUNG ON A MONDAY
AFTERNOON AND TOLD IT WAS GOING TO BE INTRODUCED THE NEXT DAY FROM A
REPRESENTATIVE OF VERISIGN AND THE PREVIOUS -- MY TECHNICAL PEOPLE RANG ME
FIVE MINUTES LATER AND SAID IT WAS INTRODUCED THREE HOURS AGO. SO THERE WAS
VERY LITTLE NOTICE, AND YOU WILL REMEMBER THE DEGREE OF HEAT THAT PRODUCED IN
THE INTERNET COMMUNITY AND IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY.

YOU MAY RECALL THAT I REPORTED AT THE TIME THAT WE HAD -- I HAD MYSELF, AND
MEMBERS OF MY STAFF, HAD COMMUNICATIONS WITH VERISIGN IMMEDIATELY SUGGESTING
THAT THEY MAY VOLUNTARILY WISH TO REVIEW WHAT THEY HAD DONE AND MAY
VOLUNTARILY WISH TO TAKE THAT PARTICULAR SERVICE DOWN.

THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN, SO THEN ON OCTOBER THE 3RD, I THINK IT WAS, 2003 --
OCTOBER 6TH, OCTOBER 3RD, I HAVE FORGOTTEN WHICH ONE, I WROTE A LETTER TO
VERISIGN SAYING THAT IF THEY DID NOT WITHDRAW THIS SERVICE THAT WE WOULD
CONSIDER OUR LEGAL POSITION.

THAT LETTER I THINK WAS SENT ON A FRIDAY, AND ON A MONDAY, VERISIGN WITHDREW
THE SERVICE.

SOME MONTHS LATER, VERISIGN THEN SUED ICANN. AND THE LAWSUIT THAT WAS
INSTITUTED, IF YOU READ THE PUBLIC PRESS AND THEIR MESSAGING, WAS JUST TO
CLARIFY UNCERTAINTIES ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE -- HOW THEY INTRODUCE SERVICE.
WANTING CERTAINTY ABOUT HOW THEY COULD INTRODUCE NEW REGISTRY SERVICES. I
THINK A MORE OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL DOCUMENTS, WHICH WERE THE FIRST
SET OF LITIGATION DOCUMENTS, WERE ACTUALLY ABOUT THE INEVITABLE, SINCE 1999,
THE INEVITABLE SERIOUS ANTITRUST ACTION TO BASICALLY SEVERELY LIMIT IF NOT
DESTROY THE ICANN PLACE IN THE ARENA.

I SAY INEVITABLE BECAUSE IT'S NOT -- IT IS THE NOT UNCOMMON THING THAT OCCURS
AT SOME STAGE IN THE LIBERALIZING MARKET THAT THERE IS THE SERIOUS LAWSUIT BY
THE INCUMBENT AGAINST THE FORCES THAT ARE FORCING LIBERALIZATION. AND IF YOU
THINK ABOUT TELECOMS, HOW MANY TIMES AT SOME STAGE IN THE LIBERALIZING
TELECOMS ENVIRONMENT DOES THE INCUMBENT NOT PRODUCE SOME MASSIVE LAWSUIT
AGAINST THE REGULATOR. I CAN THINK OF SEVERAL MARKETS WHERE THAT HAS
HAPPENED.

SO THIS ACTION WAS SOMEWHAT FORESEEABLE, I SUSPECT, AND PUTTING IT OFF ON
ISSUES, PROBABLY INEVITABLE.

SO WE WENT INTO INTENSE LITIGATION, SERIOUS LITIGATION. WE SPENT A LOT OF
MONEY AS WE TOLD YOU AT THE TIME.

THERE WAS A DECISION BY THE U.S. FEDERAL COURT WHICH BASICALLY THREW OUT,
DECLINED THE ANTITRUST ACTION. I THINK THAT WE HAD TWO BITES OF THE CHERRY.
I THINK IT WENT THROUGH TWO SETS OF HEARINGS, TWO DECISIONS.

I WON'T PRETEND TO GIVE YOU THE ACCURATE LEGAL STUFF. WE'LL LEAVE THAT TO
THE LAWYERS TO GIVE YOU THE ACTUAL LEGAL.

BUT ALL THROUGH THAT PROCESS, AS HAPPENS IN LITIGATION, THERE IS OCCASIONALLY
THERE IS THE SUBTLE LINE OF WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO SETTLE THIS DISAGREEMENT.
BECAUSE THIS IS ALL ABOUT COMING TO SOME UNDERSTANDING ABOUT HOW TO DO
BUSINESS.

THE AFTER THAT SETTLEMENT I MADE A PRESS COMMENT THAT WE OUGHT TO BE SPENDING
THE COMMUNITIES' MONEY DOING OTHER WORK, AND I ALWAYS PREFER TO SETTLE
PROBLEMS BY TALKING, NOT BY FUELING LAWYERS, WITH DUE RESPECT TO ALL GOOD
LAWYERS IN THE ROOM. AND AT THAT STAGE RUSTY LEWIS GOT IN CONTACT WITH ME,
THIS IS TOWARDS THE END OF 2004, NOVEMBER 2004 AND SAID WHAT DO WE NEED TO
TRY TO SETTLE THIS. WHAT DO WE NEED TO TALK?

WE WENT THROUGH A SERIES OF DISCUSSIONS THAT WENT FUNDAMENTAL FACTS FACING
THE TWO PARTIES, AND AGAIN TALKING VERY PERSONALLY HERE, AND I HOPE YOU WILL
EXCUSE THE PERSONAL STORY, MY PERSONAL APPROACH TO THESE THINGS, AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE, IS TO TRY NOT TO GET CAUGHT UP IN POSITIONS BUT TO TALK TO PEOPLE
ABOUT WHAT THE INTERESTS ARE.

AND FUNDAMENTALLY, AS WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THERE WAS
NO TRUST BETWEEN THESE TWO PARTIES. THIS WAS NOT A -- THIS WAS NOT A MEETING
BETWEEN FRIENDS. WE WERE IN A LONGSTANDING WAR.

SO WE TRIED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AROUND WHAT WERE THE INTERESTS. AND WHAT
THEY CAME DOWN TO WAS BASICALLY TWO FUNDAMENTAL THINGS, REALLY. AND THESE
DISCUSSIONS TOOK PLACE NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, JANUARY, FEBRUARY. THERE WAS SORT
OF ONGOING ATTEMPTS TO TRY TO TALK THIS THROUGH.

IN THE MEANTIME, WE WERE STILL HEAVILY IN THE COURTS, THE STATE COURT IN
CALIFORNIA OVER THE ACTUAL CONTRACT ITSELF, THE ARBITRATION PROVISIONS WERE
BEING EXERCISED.

THE CONVERSATION WAS REALLY ABOUT, IF I CAN SUMMARIZE IT THIS WAY, THAT
VERISIGN AS A REGISTRY HAD AN INTEREST IN KNOWING, HAVING CERTAINTY ABOUT HOW
COULD IT INTRODUCE NEW SERVICES AND HOW COULD IT DO SO IN A TIMELY MANNER.

WHAT WE HAD AN INTEREST IN WAS BEING A STEWARD FOR THE SECURITY AND STABILITY
OF THE INTERNET AND HOW TO ENSURE THAT THAT SECURITY AND STABILITY WAS BEING,
AND THAT GENERAL SORT OF SHARED STEWARDSHIP, IF YOU LIKE, WAS BEING
RECOGNIZED.

AND WE GRADUALLY TALKED THAT THROUGH.

WE WERE MUCH AIDED AND HELPED IN THAT DISCUSSION BY A SEPARATE PROCESS THAT I
HAD INITIATED IN OCTOBER 2003, WHICH WAS A LETTER TO THE CHAIR OF THE GNSO
ASKING FOR A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AROUND NEW REGISTRY SERVICES.

AND WHAT CAME OUT -- FUNDAMENTALLY WHAT CAME OUT OF THESE DISCUSSIONS WAS IF
WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A WAY OF GOING FORWARD WITH NEW REGISTRY SERVICES,
WHICH DOES NOT END UP WITH REPEATS OF WLS AND SITE FINDER AND MANY OF THE
THINGS THAT HAVE CAUSED DIFFICULTIES, WE NEED TO BASICALLY DO TWO THINGS. WE
NEED TO DETERMINE WHETHER SOMETHING IS A COMPETITION ISSUE OR NOT AND WE NEED
TO DETERMINE IF THIS IS GOING TO BE A SECURITY OR STABILITY ISSUE OR NOT.

AND WE NEED TO HAVE SOME INDEPENDENT, FINITE WAY OF BEING ABLE TO DO THAT.

WHEN IT CAME TO THE COMPETITION ISSUE, WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT,
AND, YOU KNOW, WORKED ON THE SENSE THAT COMPETITION LAW IS SOMETHING THAT IS
DONE BY THE SOVEREIGN. IT IS ESTABLISHED AND OPERATES WITH EVERYBODY IN MOST
COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD. THESE PEOPLE ACTUALLY DETERMINE WHAT IS COMPETITION
RULES. THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE PLACE THESE QUESTIONS OUGHT TO GET ASKED.

AND SECONDLY, WHEN IT COMES TO SECURITY AND STABILITY, IT REALLY IS THE ICANN
COMMUNITY WHERE YOU LOOK TO GET THE -- AND THE INTERNET COMMUNITY WHERE YOU
LOOK TO GET THAT EXPERTISE, SO IS THERE A WAY OF ESTABLISHING A SPECIALIST
EXPERT GROUP THAT COULD ACTUALLY ANALYZE IN AN OPEN WAY, BUT IN A TIMELY WAY,
THE PROCESS OF A NEW SERVICE IF IT HAD A SECURITY AND STABILITY IMPACT.

AND AGAIN, IN THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE YOU WILL SEE IN THE PROPOSED CONTRACT
IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE PDP LANGUAGE THAT EMERGED THROUGH THE GNSO.

IN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT TOOK PLACE, REMEMBER THESE DISCUSSIONS THAT ARE
AROUND -- AROUND SETTLEMENT, IT BECAME CLEARER AS WE TALKED THROUGH THE
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES THAT THEY WOULD REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT IF
THEY WERE GOING TO BE BROUGHT INTO EFFECT.

SO THESE WERE DISCUSSIONS THAT WERE TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE FUNDAMENTAL
CAUSES BEHIND THE LAWSUIT. NOT JUST THE LAWSUIT BUT THE FUNDAMENTAL CAUSES
OF WHY THERE HAD BEEN SO MUCH ANGST FOR THE PREVIOUS YEARS.

AND SO THAT'S WHY WE CONSIDERED THE AGREEMENT, AND BROUGHT THE AGREEMENT INTO
THE DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERED THROUGH THE SORT OF TERMINOLOGY WHAT SHOULD BE
IN THE AGREEMENT. THAT'S WHY IT'S A PIECE OF THE WHOLE, IF YOU LIKE, THE
THINGS WERE LINKED TOGETHER.

SO WE WORKED THROUGH THAT. THERE WAS LANGUAGE BORROWED HEAVILY IN THAT
AGREEMENT FROM THE LANGUAGE THAT HAD BEEN PREPARED FOR THE SPONSORED
TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS THAT HAD ALSO GONE OUT IN A -- WHAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING
FOR? -- A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ALSO FOR .NET.

SO THAT FRAMEWORK OF A CONTRACT WAS THERE. WE REFERRED A LOT TO THAT IN
TERMS OF THE STUFF THAT WAS BEING PUT IN FOR THIS WHOLE ARRANGEMENT OF THE
.COM.

AND THERE'S MORE TO THE AGREEMENT. SO I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO GO THROUGH ALL
THE ASPECTS OF THE AGREEMENT, BUT I'M TRYING TO GIVE THE SENSE OF THE
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES WE WERE TRYING TO DEAL WITH AND WHY THE AGREEMENT GOT
INCORPORATED INTO THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES OF TRYING TO SETTLE THE CAUSES OF
CONFLICT. AND I CERTAINLY THINK WE FELT ON THE ICANN SIDE THAT WE WERE
TRYING TO ADDRESS SOMETHING FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, FOR THE WHOLE ENTIRE
INTERNET, WHICH WAS TRY TO SOLVE A FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM BOTH FOR THE ONGOING
HEALTH OF THE DOMAIN NAME SPACE BUT ALSO A FUNDAMENTAL SORT OF SET OF CAUSES
FOR CONSTANT CONFLICT INSIDE THE ICANN FORUM.

WE HAD, AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION -- I SHOULD TAKE YOU BACK.

IN 1999, WHEN THERE WAS THE FIRST MOVE TO BREAK UP THE -- TO MOVE THE
SO-CALLED MONOPOLY, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO DEFINE WHAT MONOPOLIES ARE, BUT
TO MOVE THE MONOPOLIES ARE FROM ONE OPERATOR. THERE WAS A SET OF AGREEMENTS
PUT IN PLACE, WHICH THEN REVERT -- WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WAS
HEAVILY INVOLVED IN IN THE FORMATION. I THINK JUST FUNDAMENTALLY BECAUSE ITS
WEIGHT WAS NEEDED AT THAT TIME TO GET THE -- THAT OPERATOR TO AGREE WITH THE
AGREEMENT AND BECAUSE ICANN WAS A BRAND-NEW ORGANIZATION.

IN 2001 THEY WERE REVIEWED, AND IN THAT REVIEW, THERE WAS A FURTHER
NEGOTIATION. PEOPLE WILL KNOW ABOUT THIS FROM MELBOURNE. THERE WAS
BASICALLY THE AGREED PROCESS WAS THAT .ORG WOULD BE REBID WITH THE
PRESUMPTION OF GOING OUTSIDE, OF GOING TO ANOTHER OPERATE. THAT .NET WOULD
BE REBID WITH THE PRESUMPTION OF AN OPEN BIDDING SITUATION.

AND THAT .COM WOULD BE A PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL FOR .COM AND THAT WAS WRITTEN
INTO THAT CONTRACT. AND D.O.C.'S ROLE IN CONFIRMING ANY CHANGE TO THAT
CONTRACT WAS ALSO WRITTEN IN BECAUSE THERE WAS A CONTINUATION OF THE NEED TO
GET THIS SPECIAL FORCING THROUGH THE SORT OF CONTINUOUS CHANGE OF
LIBERALIZATION, IF YOU LIKE, OR BREAKING UP THE MONOPOLY.

I'M MAKING THAT POINT BECAUSE ONE OF THE UNIQUE ASPECTS OF THIS NEGOTIATION
WAS THAT IT WAS A THREE-PARTY AFFAIR. THERE HAS BEEN A THIRD PARTY INVOLVED,
IS A BETTER WAY OF PUTTING IT. THERE HAS BEEN A THIRD PARTY INVOLVED, WHICH
HAS BEEN WE HAVE BEEN REQUIRED TO CONSULT THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE IN THIS
DISCUSSION.

ONE OF THE KEY AREAS THAT WE STARTED IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH VERISIGN AT THE
FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE WAS THERE IS A REAL ISSUE HERE ABOUT -- FOR US, ONE OF THE
THINGS IS HOW DO WE PROMOTE -- HOW DO WE FURTHER PROMOTE COMPETITION. THAT'S
WHAT WE ARE CHARTERED FOR, SO LET'S TALK ABOUT HOW COMPETITION WORKS IN THE
TLD SPACE. AND WE HAD QUITE A BROAD DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NATURE OF LOCK-IN
MARKETS, WHAT'S THE NATURE OF HOW THOSE MARKETS WORK, WHAT'S THE ROLE OF
PRICE CAPS. IS IT EFFECTIVE TO HAVE LONG-TERM PRICE CAPS, DO THEY ACTUALLY
PROMOTE LONG-TERM INTRODUCTION OF NEW TLDS TO COMPETE WITH THE TLD. A WHOLE
RANGE OF CLASSIC MICRO ECONOMIC DISCUSSIONS IN PARTICULAR TYPES OF
MARKETPLACES.

WE HAD THE DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES BUT WE KNEW WE WERE GOING TO
HAVE TO TAKE ISSUES OF PRICE, PRICE CAP, WHAT HAVE YOU, AS PART OF THE
CONVERSATION WITH THE D.O.C.

SEEING I HAVE BEEN ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS I CAN GO INTO FURTHER DETAIL.
THE D.O.C. IMMEDIATELY TOOK THIS AGREEMENT, PARTICULARLY THOSE QUESTIONS,
AND PASSED IT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. AND IT WAS QUITE A LONG
DISCUSSION, PARTICULARLY BETWEEN VERISIGN AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
ABOUT ISSUES CONCERNING PRICING AND IF I CAN CHARACTERIZE -- AGAIN, I DON'T
SPEAK FOR VERISIGN HERE, BUT IF I CAN CHARACTERIZE THE NATURE OF THE VERISIGN
DISCUSSION, WE SAID THIS IS A LONG-TERM BUSINESS, WE HAVE RISKS IN THE
LONG-TERM BUSINESS, WE RECEIVED THE REVENUE AROUND ONE BASIS, WHICH IS
REVENUES RECEIVED PER NAME REGISTERED. OUR COSTS ARE DRIVEN BY OTHER THINGS.
OUR COSTS ARE DRIVEN BY RESOLUTION, BY ATTACKS, BY INCREASES IN CERTAIN
ASPECTS. SO IT'S A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN OUR COSTS -- THERE'S NOT AN
ALIGNMENT BETWEEN OUR COST AND OUR REVENUE.

NOW, THAT WAS THEIR CASE TO MAKE. I AM NOT TRYING TO JUSTIFY THAT CASE. YOU
CAN CRITICIZE IT OR OTHERWISE. I AM JUST TRYING TO CHARACTERIZE IT. BUT
THAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE DISCUSSION THAT TOOK PLACE BETWEEN QUITE A LOT OF
OFFICIALS AND ECONOMISTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND WITH VERISIGN OVER
A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. THERE WERE OTHER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CERTAIN INDICES,
CERTAIN INDUSTRY INDICES AND INFLATION AND ALL SORTS OF ASPECTS.

BUT EVENTUALLY AT THE END OF THAT PROCESS, THERE WAS A NUMBER -- THERE WAS A
RECOMMENDATION OR A NUMBER RECOMMENDED WHICH WAS A 7% CAP ON PRICE INCREASES.

WE TOOK THAT 7% AND PUT IT IN THE PROPOSED CONTRACT.

SO THAT'S A PIECE OF THE HISTORY, IF YOU ARE WONDERING WHERE DID THE 7%
NUMBER COME FROM, THAT'S THE HISTORY OF THAT.

I WANT TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR, THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE HAS NOT APPROVED
THIS CONTRACT. AS UNDER THE CURRENT CONTRACT IT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO.
THE PROPOSED CONTRACT.

NOR HAVE THE BOARDS OF THE TWO ORGANIZATIONS APPROVED -- SO THIS IS STILL
VERY STRONG, STILL A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND A PROPOSED CONTRACT.

WHEN WE HAD THESE DISCUSSIONS, VERISIGN EXECUTIVES, LIKE THE MOST SENIOR
EXECUTIVES IN VERISIGN, SAID ONE OF THE THINGS THEY HAD TO REMAIN VERY
CONCERNED ABOUT OR WERE VERY SINCERE IN THEIR BELIEF IN IT WAS THEIR
INTERPRETATION OF THE LEGAL ISSUES THAT FACED THEM AS EXECUTIVES OF A
PUBLICALLY LISTED COMPANY. AND PARTICULARLY ANNOUNCEMENT EFFECTS, RICH'S
ANNOUNCEMENT EFFECTS ON THE SHARE PRICE OF THE STOCK MARKET.

WE DID NOT QUESTION THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE LEGAL POSITION. WE ACCEPTED
IT AT FACE VALUE. WE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS APPROPRIATE WE SHOULD REANALYZE
THEIR INTERPRETATION. BUT WHAT WE DID SAY WAS THAT AT SOME STAGE IN THIS
PROCESS, WHEN IT GOT TO A STAGE OF GREATER CERTAINTY, WE WERE GOING TO HAVE
TO GO TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND WE WERE NOT AGREEING TO THIS AGREEMENT UNTIL
THEY WENT TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND WE WERE CLEAR FROM THE VERY BEGINNING ON
THAT IN THE FIRST DISCUSSIONS.

SO WHEN THE ACTUAL POST SETTLEMENT AND CONTRACT WERE ANNOUNCED, AND THEY WERE
CERTAINLY ANNOUNCED PARTLY TO -- IN WAYS THAT WERE PARTLY ADDRESSED TOWARDS
VERISIGN'S OWN NEEDS WITH MARKET CONDITIONS, ET CETERA, BUT WE WERE VERY
COMMITTED THAT WE WERE IN A PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS AND PUBLIC
CONSULTATION PERIOD.

SO THAT'S -- I WANT TO BE QUITE CLEAR, BECAUSE WE WERE CLEAR UP FRONT WITH
THAT.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING OF A STORY AS TO HOW WE GOT HERE.

AND I WANT TO JUST THEN GO THROUGH A BIT MORE FROM THE SLIDE. I WANT TO BE
QUITE CLEAR THAT WHEN THIS WAS POSTED IT WAS PROPOSED. IT'S NOT SETTLED.
THAT ICANN HAS COME TO VANCOUVER AND THE BOARD HAS COME NOT TO ACT ON THE
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT BUT TO BE IN LISTENING MODE THIS WEEK, TO PROVIDE
OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL CONSTITUENCIES TO PROVIDE CONCISE ACTIONABLE COMMENTS
DIRECTLY WITH THE BOARD AND STAFF.

WE WANT FEEDBACK TO THE COMMUNITY WHAT HAS BEEN HEARD. WE WANT TO TAKE THE
TIME TO SYNTHESIZE THIS INFORMATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITY INPUTS.

THEREFORE, NO DECISION IS TO BE TAKEN CONCERNING A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AT
THIS MEETING.

SO THAT'S THE FIRST THING. WE SAID THAT DURING THE WEEK. WE'RE QUITE CLEAR.

WHAT CONSULTATION WAS TAKEN PRIOR TO THIS MEETING. WELL, THE SETTLEMENT WAS
POSTED ON 24TH OF OCTOBER, 2005, AND THERE WAS A PUBLIC FORUM. THAT PUBLIC
FORUM HAS BEEN VERY ACTIVE. LETTERS WERE SENT TO CHAIRS OF SUPPORTING
ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER GROUPS. THERE WERE ACTIONS BY THE BOARD LIAISONS
FROM VARIOUS ADVISORY COMMITTEES COMMUNICATING THIS OUT TO MEMBERS.

WE HAD CONSULTATIONS WITH THE GTLD REGISTRARS, WE HAD SEVERAL CONFERENCE
CALLS AND LOTS AND LOTS OF INDIVIDUAL CONSULTATIONS ONE ON ONE AT THE STAFF
LEVEL.

WE HAD SIMILAR WITH THE GTLD REGISTRIES THROUGH INDIVIDUAL COMMUNICATION.
THE CCNSO CHAIR AND CERTAIN MEMBERS THAT WE COULD CONTACT AS WELL AS THE
COMMUNICATION WE GOT TO SPEAK TO SOME OF THE CCNSO MEMBERS. THE GNSO
CONSTITUENCY CHAIRS WERE SPOKEN TO INDIVIDUALLY. NRO AND ASO MEMBERS WERE
APPROACHED, WERE COMMUNICATED WITH. SOME OF THE GAC MEMBERS WERE
COMMUNICATED WITH DIRECTLY.

AND ALL CONSTITUENCIES AND COMMITTEES WERE ASKED FOR COMMENTS AND INVITED TO
MEET WITH THE BOARD.

YOU WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO TALK TO EVERYBODY YOU POSSIBLY CAN. WE SORT OF
RAN INTO TIME PARAMETERS AS A PROBLEM. AND I WAS FRUSTRATED THAT THE TIMING,
THE WSIS EXERCISE WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS PROCESS AS WELL WHICH ABSORBED
SOME OF OUR COMMUNICATION CAPABILITIES.

BUT THAT'S TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF THE CONSULTATION THAT TOOK PLACE UNTIL
NOW.

BUT HERE IN VANCOUVER, AS VINT MADE CLEAR TO THE COMMUNITY, I THINK, THE
BOARD WANTED TO COME AND LISTEN AND ENSURE THAT THEY GOT ALL THE FEEDBACK THE
PEOPLE WANTED TO GIVE ON THIS PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND CONTRACT.

THERE WAS A WORKSHOP AMONG ALAC, BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY, ISPS, REGISTRARS,
WITH STAFF AND SOME MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY
MET DIRECTLY WITH THE BOARD. THE BOARD MET DIRECTLY WITH THE NONCOMMERCIAL
CONSTITUENCY, WITH THE CCNSO DIRECTLY THIS MORNING AND WITH MYSELF YESTERDAY.
CROSS-CONSTITUENCY CONSULTATION, THERE WAS A BRIEF MEETING ON THIS ISSUE WITH
THE BOARD. THE REGISTRY CONSTITUENCY, REGISTRAR CONSTITUENCY, AND ALSO ALAC,
WHICH WERE MEETINGS BETWEEN THOSE CONSTITUENCIES FACE TO FACE WITH THE BOARD
MEMBERS. AND THAT HAS BEEN VERY VALUABLE. WE APPRECIATED THAT VERY MUCH.

WE HAVE BEEN SOLICITING, THE BOARD HAS BEEN SOLICITING, CONCISE ACTIONABLE
COMMENTS AND YOU HEARD SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS MAKE THAT POINT OF -- I DON'T
WANT TO SAY IT'S EASY TO CRITICIZE, BUT WHAT'S MORE VALUABLE IS TO HAVE
ACTIONABLE COMMENTS RECEIVED. THOSE ARE STILL BEING RECEIVED AND PUBLIC
COMMENTS CONTINUING, AND PEOPLE ARE LISTENING VERY CAREFULLY.

WHAT THE STAFF AND MYSELF HAVE DONE FOR THIS PARTICULAR STAGE RIGHT NOW IS
TRY TO SYNTHESIZE INPUT RECEIVED BEFORE AND DURING THE VANCOUVER MEETING.

THIS COMPILATION THAT I'M GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU CAPTURES MUCH, PERHAPS NOT
ALL OF THE COMMENTARY. IT IS A GENERAL SUMMARY. IT'S NOT THE ONLY SUMMARY
THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE, BUT I JUST THOUGHT I WOULD SHARE WITH YOU NOW WHAT WE
HAVE HEARD TO DATE.

THE ORDER OF THE COMMENTS PRESENTED IS OF NO INDICATION OF THE RELATIVE
IMPORTANCE. THERE IS CLEARLY SOME DIVERSITY ON THESE ISSUES. THERE IS
BROADER AGREEMENT ON SOME ISSUES THAN ON OTHERS, AND THERE ARE COUNTERPOINTS
TO MANY OF THE CONCERNS. SO MANY OF THE CONCERNS RAISED, THERE ARE ACTUAL
RESPONSES TO THEM, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT.

I WANT TO JUST GIVE YOU A VERY CAREFUL READING OUT OF WHAT WE SO FAR HAVE
SUMMARIZED AS BEING THE COMMUNICATED ISSUES.

SO WE HAVE HAD COMMUNICATED PERCEIVED BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT.
THEY ARE THE END TO LITIGATION WILL PROVIDE INCREASED STABILITY TO THE ICANN
ENVIRONMENT AND ELIMINATE A DRAIN ON RESOURCES THAT CAN BE BETTER USED
ELSEWHERE.

THE BINDING ARBITRATION PROVISION REDUCES CHANCES OF FUTURE COSTLY
LITIGATION.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES PROVIDED TO ICANN IN THE AGREEMENT CAN BE UTILIZED TO
IMPROVE CONTRACTUAL COMPLIANCE EFFORTS AND OTHER IMPORTANT PURPOSES AS
DETERMINED BY THE COMMUNITY.

THE ROOT SERVER MANAGEMENT TRANSITION AGREEMENT HAS POSITIVE ASPECTS, BUT
ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT MAY BE REQUIRED.

PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL HAS POSITIVE ASPECTS THAT LEND THEMSELVES TO STABILITY.

THE MANNER IN WHICH NEW REGISTRY SERVICES ARE CONSIDERED WILL IMPROVE
TRANSPARENCY, PREDICTABILITY AND TIMELINESS.

NOW, LET ME GIVE YOU ALSO THE SUMMARY OF COMMUNICATED CONCERNS.

AND YOU WON'T BE SURPRISED TO KNOW THERE'S MORE OF THOSE THAN THE FORMER.

SO LET'S JUST GO TO ISSUES AROUND PRICE.

INCREASES IN PRICE SHOULD BE COST-JUSTIFIED, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE DOT COM
MARKET SHARE.

A DISCOVERY OF COSTS IS NEEDED.

AN INDEPENDENT ECONOMIST SHOULD STUDY THIS MARKET AND THE EFFECTS OF VERISIGN
MARKET SHARE AND POTENTIAL PRICE CHANGES.

THE INCREASED PRICE WILL BE PASSED ON TO CONSUMERS WHILE THE EFFECT TO
INDIVIDUAL DOMAIN NAME HOLDERS MAY BE THE SAME.

THE SMALL BITS AMOUNT TO A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FUNDS TO BE TO BE RECEIVED
FROM THE USERS AS A WHOLE THAT GOES TO TWO PARTIES.

SETTLEMENT PUSHES COST TO THIRD PARTIES, REGISTRARS, RESELLERS, AND END
USERS.

DUE TO COMPETITIVE ASPECTS OF THE MARKETPLACE, REGISTRARS WILL BEAR COSTS OUT
OF DWINDLING MARGINS.

ON -- SUMMARY OF COMMUNICATED CONCERNS AND ICANN FEES AND RESOURCES.

THE SETTLEMENT RESULTS IN A LARGE INCREASE IN REVENUE FOR ICANN CONCENTRATED
IN ONE SOURCE, VERISIGN.

NOT A GOOD BUSINESS MODEL.

ENDANGERING ICANN INDEPENDENCE.

ICANN FEES ARE PASSED DIRECTLY ON TO REGISTRARS, WHO, DUE TO COMPETITIVE
ASPECTS OF THE MARKETPLACE, WILL BEAR THE COSTS OUT OF DWINDLING MARGINS
WHILE VERISIGN WILL NOT PAY FOR ANYTHING FOR THE LICENSE TO OPERATE THE
REGISTRY.

IF ICANN RECEIVES SIGNIFICANTLY MORE REVENUE, IT MUST SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE
TRANSPARENCY OF BUDGET AND REPORTING PROCESSES.

ICANN FUNDING IS A POLICY DECISION AND SHOULD NOT BE SET THROUGH BILATERAL
NEGOTIATION.

THE AGREEMENT ESSENTIALLY ELIMINATES THE CHECK AND BALANCE AGAINST ICANN
REVENUE INCREASES PROVIDED BY THE PRESENT APPROVAL MECHANISM.

POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES.

COMMUNICATED CONCERNS INCLUDE THERE ARE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE RESULTS OF
THE GNSO COUNCIL PDP FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE NEW REGISTRY SERVICES AND THE
PROPOSED CONTRACT PROVISION OF THE SAME, THAT IS, THE FUNNEL.

THE PROPOSED CONTRACT PROVIDES THAT THE FUNNEL CANNOT BE ALTERED FOR THREE
YEARS, AS A RESULT, THE PROCESS FOR DOT COM WOULD BE DIFFERENT FROM OTHER
REGISTRY CONTRACTS, EXISTING AND PROPOSED, SUSCEPTIBLE TO ABUSE BY VERISIGN
IF THE PROCESS IS DETERMINED TO BE FLAWED AFTER AN INITIAL PERIOD OF USE.

THE PROVISION FOR THE USE OF TRAFFIC DATA BYPASSES THE FUNNEL, ALLOWING
VERISIGN TO OFFER THE SALE OF THIS INFORMATION, A COMMERCIAL ASSET, WITHOUT
REVIEW BY ICANN.

OTHER ASPECTS OF THE AGREEMENT SHOULD BE THE PRODUCT OF A POLICY DEVELOPMENT
RATHER THAN A BILATERAL NEGOTIATION.

PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL, PRICING AND ICANN FEES, THE USE OF TRAFFIC DATA.

LET ME TALK TO PRESUMPTIVE RIGHT OF RENEWAL AND THE SUMMARY OF COMMUNICATED
CONCERNS IS, THE PRESUMPTIVE RIGHT OF RENEWAL GRANTS VERISIGN THE DOT COM
REGISTRY IN PERPETUITY, PRECLUDING THE EXISTENCE OF REAL COMPETITION IN THE
SECTOR OF THE DNS FOR A LONG TIME.

THIS RIGHT, EXISTING IN THE PRIOR CONTRACT, DID NOT NEED TO BE CARRIED OVER
INTO THE NEW PROPOSED AGREEMENT.

THE FACTORS LISTED BY WHICH ICANN CAN EITHER TERMINATE THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT
OR REBID THE AGREEMENT AT ITS CONCLUSION HAVE BEEN WEAKENED IN COMPARISON TO
THE LAST AGREEMENT.

AND A SUMMARY OF OTHER CONCERNS WHICH HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATED.

TECHNICAL COORDINATION OF THE DNS IS A PUBLIC TRUST.

ICANN IS THE TRUSTEE.

VERISIGN IS A CONTRACTOR.

IT IS ICANN'S DUTY TO OPERATE THE TRUST FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD.

IN THIS CASE, PROTECTING THE MARKET FROM UNJUSTIFIED PRICE INCREASES THAT
WORK TO THE DETRIMENT OF EVERYONE EXCEPT VERISIGN.

PROMOTING COMPETITION BY WORKING TO REDUCE PRICES AND ELIMINATING PRESUMPTIVE
RENEWAL CLAUSES.

THE EXISTING AGREEMENT PROVIDES THAT VERISIGN PROVIDE A PROPOSAL FOR ICANN
CONSIDERATION NOT EARLIER THAN TWO YEARS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE
AGREEMENT, NOVEMBER 2005.

ICANN TAKE UP WITHIN SIX MONTHS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY TO REVIEW THE PROPOSAL.

THE RESULTING AGREEMENT SHOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS EXISTING REGISTRY
AGREEMENTS.

THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT NO LONGER CONTAINS A PROVISION THAT VERISIGN INVEST
$200 MILLION IN R & D AND INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THERE HAS BEEN NO REPORT ON
SPENDING TO DATE INDICATING THIS REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN SATISFIED.

THE PROCESS AND TIMING GOING FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION OF THIS PROPOSAL HAS
NOT BEEN DEFINED.

THE PROCESS TO DATE HAS CONFUSED SETTLEMENT ACTIVITIES WITH THE CONTRACT
RENEWAL/RENEGOTIATION PROCESS.

THEY SHOULD BE HELD SEPARATE.

THE AGREEMENT CREATES THE EXISTENCE OF SPECIAL FUNDS FROM A PORTION OF THE
INCREASED REVENUE THAT MAY ALLOW ICANN TO SPEND WITHOUT APPROPRIATE COMMUNITY
REVIEW.

OTHER QUESTIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN POSTED OR ASKED.

HOW DOES THE SETTLEMENT PROMOTE ICANN CORE VALUES?

SHOULD ICANN BE IN THE BUSINESS OF SETTING PRICE CONTROLS OR SHOULD THE
MARKETPLACE PLAY A GREATER ROLE IN SETTING PRICES THROUGH REGISTRY AND
REGISTRAR COMPETITION FOR CUSTOMERS?

SHOULD ICANN FORCE VERISIGN AND ALL OTHER REGISTRY OPERATORS TO MEET SPECIFIC
LEVELS OF CAPITAL INVESTMENT, AND IF SO, WHAT LEVEL?

SO THAT'S A SUMMATION AS WE'VE HEARD IT TO DATE.

AND THAT'S JUST A SUMMATION BY STAFF.

IT'S NOT THE FINAL SUMMATION.

YOU CAN'T BELIEVE HOW MUCH SELF-CONTROL I HAVE EXHIBITED BY NOT RESPONDING TO
ANY ONE OF THOSE AS I'VE READ THROUGH THEM.

BUT THEY ARE ALL GOOD QUESTIONS, OF COURSE.

WHAT WE ARE NOW DOING IS WE ARE NOW OPENING THIS TO AN OPEN MICROPHONE
SESSION TO FOLLOW IMMEDIATELY.

AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE HERE AND THOSE WHO ARE ONLINE TO ASK -- IF
THERE ARE ANY OMISSIONS, IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ANYTHING THAT IS BEEN CAPTURED
OR YOU HAVE OTHER THINGS TO TELL US, WE'RE HERE TO LISTEN AND TO HEAR.

THE ICANN BOARD WILL CAREFULLY EXAMINE THE POINTS RAISED HERE PRIOR TO MAKING
ANY DECISION.

AND THE PROCESS FORWARD IS IN THE HANDS OF THE CHAIR AND THE BOARD.

SO, CHAIR, THAT'S A SUMMATION.

AND --

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

LET ME SUGGEST SOME GROUND RULES FOR RESPONSES AT THIS POINT.

FIRST OF ALL, I'M SORRY THAT WE GOT STARTED LATE.

SO WE HAVE SOMEWHAT LESS TIME THAN ORIGINALLY PLANNED.

BUT WE CAN GO UNTIL 5:30.

SECOND, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT IF YOU HAVE SUBSTANTIVE REMARKS THAT YOU WANT TO
HAVE CAPTURED IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE SAY ON THE MICROPHONE AND IN THE
TRANSCRIPT, IT MIGHT BE VERY HELPFUL IF WE COULD HAVE A WRITTEN COMMENT FROM
YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT IT GETS CAPTURED BY STAFF.

PAUL -- LET ME ASK EITHER PAUL, WHO'S HIDING BEHIND THE LECTERN NOW, IS THERE
AN E-MAIL ADDRESS TO WHICH -- OR WEB -- OR BETTER, PERHAPS, A PUBLIC WEB
POSTING LOCATION WHERE I CAN INVITE PEOPLE TO SEND ADDITIONAL WRITTEN
REMARKS?

MY INTENT HERE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE CAPTURED AS ACCURATELY
AS POSSIBLE THE COMMENTARY THAT WE ARE COLLECTING THIS WEEK.

SO --

>>PAUL TWOMEY: CAN I ANSWER THOSE TWO QUESTIONS?

>>VINT CERF: YES, PLEASE.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: IF PEOPLE WISH TO -- PEOPLE WHO ARE ONLINE, WHO ARE WATCHING
THIS VIDEO STREAMING, WISH TO COMMUNICATE, THEN THE ADDRESS IS
VANCOUVER@ICANN.ORG.

SO VANCOUVER@ICANN.ORG.

THAT E-MAIL ADDRESS WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS OR INPUTS.

BUT YOU WANT TO DO THAT NOW.

IF PEOPLE WANT TO MAKE INPUT, WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD -- PUBLIC
COMMENT PAGE AVAILABLE, IT'S BEEN A VERY ACTIVE ONE, ON THE ICANN WEB SITE
THAT'S LINKED TO FROM THE FRONT PAGE.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.

SO WHAT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST FOR EFFICIENCY IS THAT THOSE WHO WISH TO SPEAK
NOW CONSIDER BEING FAIRLY TERSE AND THEN SUPPLY ANY MORE LENGTHY MATERIAL IN
WRITTEN FORM.

BY NO MEANS AM I TRYING TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM VENTING IF YOU FEEL THE NEED.

BUT MY INTENT HERE IS TO TRY TO GET AS MANY COMMENTS AS POSSIBLE IN THE TIME
AVAILABLE, AND ALSO TO ASSURE THAT EVEN OUTSIDE OF THIS COMMENT PERIOD, YOU
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET INFORMATION TO BOARD AND STAFF.

AT THE BOARD MEETING ON SUNDAY, I WILL SPECIFICALLY BE ASKING STAFF TO
PREPARE A FINAL SUMMARY, WHICH WILL BE MADE PUBLIC FOR ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENT.

AND I ASSUME THAT STAFF WILL HAVE ACCESS NOT ONLY TO WHAT HAS TRANSPIRED THIS
WEEK, BUT, OF COURSE, ALL THE MATERIALS THAT HAVE COME INTO THE PUBLIC
COMMENT WEB SITE AS WELL.

SO LET ME OPEN THE MICROPHONES NOW.

I THINK I SAW BRUCE COMING -- NOT BRUCE -- OH, OKAY.

GO AHEAD.

>> I WAS QUICKER.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: SORRY, VINT, YOU HAVE ANNOUNCED A DURATION OF THIS OPEN
MICROPHONE UNTIL 5:30.

IT WAS, ANYWAY, THE PLANNED TIME.

CAN WE EXTEND THAT CLOSER TO 6:00?

>>VINT CERF: I WAS CONCERNED THAT I MIGHT BE OVERRIDING ANY ALREADY-PLANNED
MEETING TIMES.

BUT IF, IN FACT, WE HAVE THE AVAILABLE TIME, I'M CERTAINLY HAPPY TO EXTEND
THE PERIOD.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: WE HAVE A STRATEGIC PLAN WORKSHOP STARTS AT 6:00, SO WE
COULD HAVE A VERY SHORT TIME THERE.

>>VINT CERF: THAT WOULD GIVE PEOPLE A SHORT TIME TO RECOVER.

I'M HAPPY TO GO ON, IF THAT'S NECESSARY.

SO PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>MARCUS FAURE: I'M MARKUS FAURE WITH CORE COUNCIL OF REGISTRARS.

I HAVE A REPUTATION FOR MAKING SHORT STATEMENTS.

I WOULD LIKE THE BOARD TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER TO REBID DOT COM AS VERISIGN IS
IN MATERIAL BREACH OF ITS AGREEMENT.

I AM NOT SAYING THAT THIS WILL BE AN EASY STEP.

THERE WILL BE LAWSUITS.

BUT YOU WILL HAVE LAWSUITS WHICHEVER WAY YOU CHOOSE.

YOU JUST HAVE TO STEP OUTSIDE OF THIS DOOR AND SEE PEOPLE WITH EXPENSIVE LAW
FIRMS.

SO, WHAT'S THE BENEFIT?

WE WILL NOT HAVE TO SPEND EVERY OTHER MEETING TO DISCUSS VERISIGN ISSUES.

ICANN WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT IT CAN BE STRONG AND BENEFICIAL TO THE INDUSTRY
AND THAT THE INDUSTRY WILL FIND IT EASIER TO FUND ICANN.

YOU CAN HAVE ALL THE BENEFITS THAT PAUL ENUMERATED IN A NEW CONTRACT WITH A
NEW OPERATOR.

THE DOMAIN PRICE WILL DROP TO $3 OR LESS, WHICH WILL MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE
FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AND WILL HELP ICANN'S OUTREACH PROCESS.

WHAT WE HAVE ON THE TABLE HERE IS EITHER PEOPLE WILL REMEMBER YOU AS A
VERISIGN TOY, WHICH, UNFORTUNATELY, IS THE REALITY TODAY, OR YOU CAN BE A
SUCCESSFUL REGULATOR AND A MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR TO BRINGING THE INTERNET TO
DEVELOPMENT COUNTRIES.

TO ME, THE CHOICE IS CRYSTAL CLEAR.



>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: OTHERS?

COULD I REMIND YOU AGAIN THAT WE WOULD BE PLEASED IF YOU WOULD SEND
STATEMENTS ALONG THESE LINES OR ANY OTHERS THAT YOU MAKE TO THE WEB -- THE
E-MAIL ADDRESS THAT WAS SUGGESTED, VANCOUVER@ICANN.ORG.

BRUCE -- WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET WRITTEN MATERIALS SO WE
CAPTURE THIS ACCURATELY.

BRUCE.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: THANK YOU, VINT.

PAUL, JUST ON THE TOPIC OF PRICE INCREASES, I GUESS THE COMPLEXITY OF THAT IN
THIS CASE IS THAT THERE MAY BE PRICE INCREASES THAT MIGHT BE RELATED TO
INCREASED COSTS, MAYBE INCREASED RESOLUTION LOAD ON THE DOT COM NAME SERVERS,
ET CETERA.

BUT THERE'S ALSO A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ICANN FEES THAT ICANN HAS
PLACED IN THE AGREEMENT AND THE IMPACT THAT MAY HAVE ON PRICES.

I THINK THEY REALLY NEED TO BE COMPLETELY SEPARATE TOPICS.

AND TO DO -- I THINK VINT ASKED THE QUESTION WHILE I WAS ACTING IN MY ROLE OF
GNSO COUNCIL CHAIR AS TO WHAT THE POLICY ISSUES ARE.

I COULDN'T RESPOND AS CHAIR, BECAUSE THE COUNCIL HASN'T FORMED A RESOLUTION
ON THAT.

BUT I WILL RESPOND AS A REGISTRAR.

SO I'LL JUST ANNOUNCE WHO I AM AGAIN.

I'M BRUCE TONKIN, AND I REPRESENT THE REGISTRAR MELBOURNE I.T.

BUT THE POLICY ISSUES, I THINK, ARE SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU'VE ANNOUNCED, PAUL,
BUT WE DO NEED TO CONSIDER WHAT IS THE RIGHT FUNDING MODEL FOR ICANN.

YOU'VE GIVEN A GRAPH IN YOUR EARLIER PRESENTATION TODAY THAT HAD A BIG DIP IN
IT.

AND CERTAINLY I THINK REGISTRARS ARE VERY WILLING, FROM THE REGISTRAR
COMPONENT OF THAT, TO DISCUSS THAT AND SEE HOW WE CAN ADDRESS THAT
SAW-TOOTHED WAVEFORM.

BUT MORE GENERALLY, AT THE GNSO LEVEL I THINK WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WELL,
HOW DOES THE RELATIONSHIP WORK BETWEEN REGISTRIES, REGISTRARS, AND
REGISTRANTS WITH RESPECT TO THE FUNDING MODEL OF ICANN.

I THINK NOW IS THE RIGHT TIME TO REVIEW THAT.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE POLICY ISSUES.

THE SECOND ONE IS, SHOULD WE IMPOSE SOME SORT OF PRICE CONSTRAINTS ON A
REGISTRY WHICH IS A SINGLE OPERATOR OF A PARTICULAR TLD?

THAT IN ITSELF IS A SEPARATE TOPIC.

YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE HAD BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION BETWEEN VERISIGN AND
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ON THAT.

AND A LOT OF ANALYSIS.

BUT IT SEEMED THAT THAT WAS ONE PARTY PROVIDING THEIR ANALYSIS, BUT IT DIDN'T
SEEM TO GET MUCH WHAT I WOULD CALL INDEPENDENT INPUT.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAD PUT IN YOUR REGISTRY SERVICES PROCESS WAS
THAT IF YOU NEEDED TO GET COMPETITION ADVICE, YOU WOULD MAKE A PUBLIC
ANNOUNCEMENT ON YOUR WEB SITE SAYING THAT YOU WERE SEEKING OR HAD SENT THIS
ISSUE TO A COMPETITION AGENCY TO CONSIDER, AND YOU'D EXPECT THE REGISTRY
OPERATOR WOULD PUT THEIR CASE.

BUT THE ASSUMPTION THERE WAS THAT OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY COULD ALSO
PUT THEIR CASE, TOO.

AND THAT HASN'T HAPPENED IN THIS CASE.

SO YOU'VE GOT AN ANSWER BACK FROM PERHAPS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUT NONE OF
US HAVE SEEN ANY OF THE RATIONALE FOR THAT ANSWER.

NOR HAVE WE HAD A CHANCE TO PLACE INPUT IN.

AND I THINK THE GENERAL PERCEPTION, WHETHER IT'S RIGHT OR WRONG, BUT THE
PERCEPTION IN THE REGISTRAR COMMUNITY, I GUESS, IS THAT THE COST PER UNIT
DOMAIN NAME HAS BEEN DROPPING, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IN WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE
REGISTRAR MARKET, YET WE HAD A PROPOSAL HERE TO BE INCREASING THE COSTS ON A
PER-UNIT BASIS.

SO WHILE THE NET COSTS FOR VERISIGN MAY BE INCREASING, I DOUBT VERY MUCH THAT
THE PER-UNIT, THE PER-DOMAIN NAME COST WOULD NEED TO INCREASE.

THAT SEEMS COUNTER INTUITIVE TO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE INDUSTRY MORE
GENERALLY.

THAT WOULD BE LIKE SAYING THAT THE PRICE OF A LAPTOP COMPUTER SHOULD BE
INCREASING OR THE PRICE OF A CHIP SHOULD BE INCREASING ON A PER-UNIT BASIS.

SO I THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE OF PRICING.

THERE'S THE ISSUE OF ICANN'S FUNDING SOURCE.

AND THEN THERE'S THE OTHER ISSUE, POLICY ISSUE, I THINK, IS WHAT IS THE
PROCESS FOR RENEWING A REGISTRY AGREEMENT.

AND I THINK THAT ALSO IS A SEPARATE ITEM.

SO I THINK THERE ARE REALLY THREE POLICY TOPICS THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED
HERE.

THE POLICY OF HOW, AS AN ORGANIZATION, ICANN RECEIVES ITS REVENUE; THE ISSUE
OF WHETHER WE SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT HAVE SOME SORT OF PRICE REGULATION OF
REGISTRY AGREEMENTS; AND, THIRDLY, WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE RENEWAL PROCESS
FOR A REGISTRY AGREEMENT.



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

LET ME REMIND YOU -- THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE PATIENTLY STANDING IN LINE -- THAT
YOU WILL BE -- THE PEOPLE WHO ARE FARTHER IN THE BACK WILL GREATLY APPRECIATE
THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE IN THE FRONT BEING REASONABLY CONCISE, AND ALSO A
REMINDER THAT IF YOU CAN SUMMARIZE YOUR REMARKS AND THEN SEND MORE EXTENSIVE
THINGS BY E-MAIL, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS WOULD BE HELPFUL TO US IN CAPTURING THE
SPECIFIC RESPONSES.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>JORDYN BUCHANAN: THANKS.

FORTUNATELY, MY SPEECH IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT SHORTER, BECAUSE BRUCE HAS
MADE -- BRUCE HAS PROVIDED A VERY GOOD INTRODUCTION, I THINK.

WHEN THE BOARD CAME TO THE REGISTRAR CONSTITUENCY MEETING, VENI ASKED A
QUESTION THAT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE REALLY GIVEN AN ADEQUATE ANSWER TO YET,
AND THAT IS, WHY DO YOU NEED MORE TIME BEFORE THE BOARD APPROVES THIS.

AND, FUNDAMENTALLY, I THINK THE REASON WE NEED MORE TIME IS BECAUSE, AS BRUCE
HAS POINTED OUT, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF POLICY ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE RESOLVED
BEFORE THIS CONTRACT OUGHT TO BE SIGNED INTO PLACE.

AND THERE IS A SOMEWHAT TIME-CONSUMING PROCESS INVOLVED IN ANSWERING THOSE
POLICY QUESTIONS.

AND I THINK, ULTIMATELY, THOUGH, AT THE END OF THAT PROCESS, WE END UP WITH A
-- WHAT I AM HOPING WILL BECOME A FRAMEWORK FOR REGISTRY OPERATIONS AND
REGISTRY CONTRACTS THAT WILL HOPEFULLY BE BENEFICIAL NOT ONLY TO THE DOT COM
AGREEMENT, BUT TO NEW TLDS AND OTHER FUTURE NEGOTIATIONS WITH OTHER
REGISTRIES AS WELL, BECAUSE JUST LIKE WE HAVE A POLICY FOR REGISTRARS AND OUR
ACCREDITATION, WHICH ESSENTIALLY DICTATES TO THE STAFF HOW TO WRITE A
CONTRACT FOR REGISTRARS TO ENGAGE WITH ICANN.

WE WILL HAVE THE SAME THING FOR REGISTRIES, AND IT WILL PROVIDE STAFF WITH A
LOT OF GUIDANCE ON HOW TO CONDUCT NEGOTIATIONS THAT WON'T CREATE PERHAPS THE
SAME LEVEL OF UPROAR EVERY TIME WE TOUCH THE DOT COM CONTRACT BECAUSE THE
COMMUNITY WILL HAVE ALREADY SETTLED UPON A SET OF POLICIES THAT APPLY NOT
ONLY TO DOT COM, BUT TO ALL OTHER TLDS AS WELL.

SO THAT'S, I THINK, A VERY IMPORTANT PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME.
AND I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE THAT PROCESS SUFFICIENT
TIME TO COMPLETE.

I THINK THE BOARD HAS AN OBLIGATION, IN FACT, TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS AN
ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF TIME TO COMPLETE THAT PROCESS BEFORE YOU POSSIBLY CONSIDER
SIGNING THIS -- AUTHORIZING THE SIGNATURE OF THIS AGREEMENT.

BUT I'LL SAY ON THE FLIP SIDE, THAT MEANS THE COMMUNITY HAS CERTAIN
OBLIGATIONS BACK TO ICANN AND THE BOARD AS WELL.

AND I THINK THERE'S TWO VERY IMPORTANT OBLIGATIONS THE COMMUNITY HAS.

THE FIRST IS, THE COMMUNITY HAS AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT POLICY
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS HAPPENS IN AS EXPEDITIOUS A MANNER AS POSSIBLE.

IT CAN'T BE A TWO-YEAR PROCESS.

AND IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING MORE LIKE THE PROCESS DICTATED BY THE CURRENT
PDP IN THE BYLAWS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE A FAIRLY PROMPT ANSWER TO THOSE
QUESTIONS.

AND THE SECOND IS THAT I THINK THE COMMUNITY, AS BRUCE ALLUDED TO, NEEDS TO
ENSURE THAT ICANN IS ADEQUATELY FUNDED DURING THE INTERIM.

BECAUSE TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, THE STAFF AND MAYBE THE BOARD ARE EXPECTING THAT
THE CURRENT -- THE PROPOSED DOT COM AGREEMENT ARE GOING TO PROVIDE ICANN WITH
A STABLE SOURCE OF REVENUE.

TO THE EXTENT THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE CASE WHILE WE'RE CONSIDERING THESE
ISSUES, I THINK THE COMMUNITY HAS AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH ICANN AND
FIGURE OUT HOW THE FUNDING IS THERE IN THE MEANTIME.

BUT IN ANY CASE, I AM CONFIDENT THE COMMUNITY CAN RALLY TOGETHER AND MAKE
THAT HAPPEN AND LIVE UP TO THOSE OBLIGATIONS.

I'M ALSO CONFIDENT THAT IF WE ENGAGE IN THAT AND LIVE UP TO THOSE
OBLIGATIONS, THAT WE'LL GET THE BEST POSSIBLE OUTCOME AT THE END OF THIS, I
THINK, SOMEWHAT COMPLICATED PROCESS.

THE ONE THING I AM GOING TO LEAF THIS WITH AND ENCOURAGE THE BOARDS TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE HAVE HAPPEN IS WE NEED A FRANK DISCUSSION ABOUT TIMING, HOW MUCH
TIME DO WE HAVE, MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE TIME IN ORDER TO COMPLETE
THIS PROCESS, IF WE THINK THAT THERE ARE ROADBLOCKS IN PLACE TODAY THAT WILL
PREVENT THE COMPLETION OF THE POLICY PROCESS BEFORE YOU THINK YOU HAVE TO
SIGN THE DOT COM AGREEMENT, LET'S TALK ABOUT THOSE AND MAKE SURE WE GET THEM
OUT OF THE WAY SO WE CAN COMPLETE THE POLICY PROCESS AND THE COMMUNITY HAS
TIME TO REACT TO THIS.

I THINK WE'LL ALL END UP IN A MUCH BETTER PLACE IF WE DO THAT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, JORDYN.

VENI MARKOVSKI WANTED TO SAY ONE LINE, AND THEN WE'LL COME TO THE NEXT
SPEAKER.

>>VENI MARKOVSKI: THANK YOU.

I WANT JUST TO MAKE A POINT THAT SINCE WE ARE SUPPOSED TO VOTE ON THIS MATTER
SOONER OR LATER, I WOULD STILL PREFER TO HEAR NOT ONLY PROBLEMS, BUT ALSO
SUGGESTIONS FOR SOLUTIONS IN LINE WITH WHAT I HAVE BEEN TELLING TO YOU AND TO
THE GAC.

THANKS.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.

THANK YOU, VENI.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>JON NEVETT: THANK YOU, JON NEVETT, NETWORK SOLUTIONS.

I AM THE CHAIR OF THE REGISTRAR CONSTITUENCY WORKING GROUP ON THE DOT COM
CONTRACT.

I'LL MAKE MY POSITION VERY BRIEF HERE, AND I'LL PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION IN
THE WRITTEN FORMAT.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO ECHO WHAT PAUL SAID, THAT UNDER THE ICANN BYLAWS AND
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, ONE OF ICANN'S
CORE VALUES IS TO PROMOTE COMPETITION.

PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL PROVISIONS, BY THEIR NATURE, DO NOT PROMOTE COMPETITION.

THE EXISTING CONTRACT AND THE EXISTING PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL PROVISION
HANDCUFFS ICANN.

BUT THE PROPOSED CONTRACT STRENGTHENS BOTH THE PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL PROVISION
AND THE TERMINATION PROVISIONS IN THE CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF VERISIGN, FURTHER
WEAKENING ICANN'S RIGHTS.

WE ASK, AND YOU ASKED FOR SOMETHING SPECIFIC -- WE ASK THAT, AT A MINIMUM,
THE PROPOSED PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL AND TERMINATION PROVISIONS IN THE PROPOSED
CONTRACT BE REPLACED WITH THE EXISTING PROVISIONS IN THE CURRENT DOT COM
AGREEMENT.

SECOND, GRANTING A MONOPOLIST OR A SINGLE-SOURCE PROVIDER THE UNILATERAL
RIGHT TO INCREASE FEES IS NOT PROMOTING COMPETITION.

THE IRONY OF NETWORK SOLUTIONS ARGUING FOR INCREASE THE COMPETITION DOESN'T
ESCAPE ME.

BUT WE ARE A NEW COMPANY, BORN OUT OF ICANN'S HISTORICAL SUCCESS TO PROMOTE
COMPETITION.

THAT SUCCESS SHOULD NOT BE REVERSED HERE.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT REGISTRANTS WILL PAY FOR ANY PRICE INCREASES
IN THE MARKETPLACE.

BUT THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T THINK THAT VERISIGN WILL INCREASE FEES, I REMIND
YOU THAT VERISIGN IS A FOR-PROFIT COMPANY WITH A FIDUCIARY DUTY TO MAXIMIZE
PROFITS.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, AND THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH WHAT
VERISIGN HAS DONE HERE.

THEY ARE DOING A GREAT JOB ON BEHALF OF THEIR SHAREHOLDERS.

INDEED, A RECENT ANALYST REPORT THAT TRACKS VERISIGN STATES THAT, QUOTE, "IT
IS HIGHLY LIKELY THAT VERISIGN WILL RAISE PRICING FOR DOT COM.

PRELIMINARILY, WE ESTIMATE VERISIGN COULD RECEIVE ROUGHLY $40 MILLION IN
REVENUE IN 2007 FROM A 7% DOT COM PRICE INCREASE COUPLED WITH THE RECENTLY
AGREED UPON ALLOWANCE OF A MAXIMUM 10% DOT NET PRICE INCREASE."

THOSE INCREASES WILL BE BAKED INTO THEIR ESTIMATES.

THEY WILL HAVE TO RAISE PRICES.

OUR SPECIFIC REQUEST HERE, AGAIN, IS TO CHANGE THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT TO
MANDATE THAT VERISIGN COST JUSTIFY ANY PRICE INCREASES LIKE IT HAS TO DO
RIGHT NOW WITH DOT COM AND LIKE EVERY OTHER NON-VERISIGN GTLD REGISTRY
PROVIDER HAS TO DO.

WE SHOULD WORK TOGETHER OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS -- AND I SAY FEW MONTHS, AND
IN LIGHT OF PAUL'S COMMENT THAT THEY'VE -- THAT YOU'VE BEEN NEGOTIATING THIS
SETTLEMENT FOR OVER A YEAR -- TO ARRIVE AT A TRANSPARENT AND PREDICTABLE
SYSTEM OF ICANN FUNDING, A SYSTEM IN WHICH ICANN AND THE BUDGET HAS
SUFFICIENT ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE COMMUNITY.

IF ICANN IS CONCERNED ABOUT ITS FUNDING ISSUES, LET'S WORK ON THEM.

IT SHOULD NOT ENTER INTO AN ANTICOMPETITIVE AND INEQUITABLE CONTRACT, A
CONTRACT THAT BINDS ITS HANDS, OUR HANDS, FOREVER IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THESE
SHORT-TERM FUNDING ISSUES.

THANK YOU.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I AM CONSCIOUS OF THE LINE'S LENGTH RIGHT NOW.

AND I AM ALSO CONSCIOUS THAT EVEN IF WE GO UNTIL 6:00, WE WILL BE
HARD-PRESSED WITH THE LENGTHY STATEMENTS THAT ARE BEING READ, TO COMPLETE BY
THAT TIME.

AND I AM CONCERNED THAT WE LET AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE SPEAK.

I WOULD LIKE TO IMPOSE A FOUR-MINUTE MAXIMUM LIMIT ON THESE SPEECHES AND
REMIND YOU YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEND YOUR MATERIAL IN THIS WRITTEN
FORM.

AND IT WILL BE POSTED PUBLICLY.

AND IT WILL BE SUMMARIZED BY STAFF.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

CAN WE GET THE CLOCK UP, PLEASE.

>> KEITH DRAZEK: THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS KEITH DRAZEK. I AM WITH NEULEVEL, THE DOT BIZ REGISTRY.

I WANT TO MAKE A BRIEF STATEMENT ON THE TOPIC OF PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL IN GTLD
REGISTRY AGREEMENTS.

MY COMMENT HAS TWO ELEMENTS, FIRST A GENERAL STATEMENT AND THEN A SPECIFIC
CONCERN.

FIRST, I BELIEVE THAT THE BOARD AND THE ICANN COMMUNITY MUST CONSIDER THAT
PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL CLAUSES CAN BENEFIT STABILITY AND ENCOURAGE INNOVATION
AND INVESTMENT IN THE GTLD MARKET.

FOR A REGISTRY OPERATOR FACED WITH SIGNIFICANT AND ONGOING REQUIREMENTS TO
INVEST IN INFRASTRUCTURE, PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL LEADS TO PREDICTABILITY, WHICH
IN TURN PROVIDES GREATER CERTAINTY OF A REASONABLE RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

THIS IS PARTICULARLY TRUE CONSIDERING THE SIGNIFICANT FIXED STARTUP COSTS TO
LAUNCH A NEW REGISTRY, AND TO THEN MAINTAIN SERVICE LEVELS AND PERFORMANCE IN
A CONSTANTLY CHANGING MARKETPLACE.

AS LONG AS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SAFEGUARDS ARE IN PLACE TO PREVENT ROGUE
BEHAVIOR, THERE IS NOTHING INHERENTLY WRONG WERE PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL IN A
REGISTRY CONTRACT.

THE NOTION OF PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL, WITH APPROPRIATE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE
SAFEGUARDS, IS WELL ESTABLISHED IN MANY INDUSTRIES.

BUSINESS CERTAINTY LEADS TO INCREASED INVESTMENT AND INNOVATION, THEREBY
ENHANCING STABILITY.

MY SPECIFIC CONCERN RELATES TO ICANN'S CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THE
EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF REGISTRY COMPETITORS.

IF ICANN EXTENDS PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL TO THE LARGEST DOMINANT REGISTRY
OPERATOR WITH 80% MARKET SHARE, IT HAS AN OBLIGATION, A CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATION, TO EXTEND PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL TO THE SMALLER AND NEWER
COMPETITORS IN THE MARKETPLACE.

INCLUDING FOR ANY NEW TLDS THAT ARE INTRODUCED.

SINCE ICANN ALREADY EXTENDED PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL TO DOT NET AND NOW PROPOSES
TO EXTEND IT TO DOT COM, ICANN HAS AN OBLIGATION TO ENSURE EQUITABLE
TREATMENT TO VERISIGN'S COMPETITORS IN THE MARKETPLACE BY EXTENDING
PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL TO ALL.

I THANK THE BOARD FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT TERSE AND CONCISE STATEMENT.

NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU, MY NAME IS STEVE DELBIANCO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF NET CHOICE,
THE COALITION OF THE NATION'S LARGEST E E-COMMERCE COMES ALONG WITH ABOUT
20,000 E-COMMERCE CONSUMERS.

DOT COM IS CRITICAL.

WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF ICANN'S ABILITY TO OBLIGATE AND INCENTIVIZE THE REGISTRY
OPERATORS TO MAKE THE INVESTMENTS FOR SECURITY, STABILITY, PERFORMANCE AND
SCALE IN THE REGISTRIES.

BUT REGISTRY OPERATORS WILL BE UNDERSTANDABLY HESITANT TO MAKE THE KINDS OF
INVESTMENTS NECESSARY UNLESS THEY HAVE AN EXPECTATION OR EVEN AN ANTICIPATION
THAT CONTRACTS WILL BE RENEWED PROVIDED THAT THEY MEET ALL OF THEIR
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS.

SO I'D LIKE TO BACK UP PROFESSOR MUELLER AND THE REGISTRY OPERATORS AND THE
GENTLEMEN FROM NEULEVEL THAT WE JUST HEARD OF IN A SUPPORT OF PRESUMPTIVE
RENEWAL OF REGISTRY OPERATORS INCLUDING VERISIGN AND OTHERS AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>ELLIOT NOSS: HI.

ELLIOT NOSS FROM TUCOWS.

I WANT TO PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THIS SPECIFIC
PROPOSAL SETTLEMENT.

THE GREATEST ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THIS ICANN EXPERIMENT, THE GREATEST
ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THIS ICANN COMMUNITY, IS CREATING A -- IS THAT IT HAS
CREATED A RICH ECOSYSTEM OF THOUSANDS OF COMPANIES, REGISTRARS, WEB HOSTING
COMPANIES, ISPS, WEB DESIGNERS, ET CETERA, SUPPLYING DOMAIN REGISTRATION AND
ASSOCIATED SERVICES TO MILLIONS, TENS OF MILLIONS, DEPENDING ON HOW YOU WANT
TO LOOK AT IT, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF END USERS.

THAT HAS LED TO A WAVE OF INNOVATION AND HIGHER LEVELS OF SERVICE, ALL AT
SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER COSTS TO THE END USERS.

THIS SPECIFIC AGREEMENT AS IT RELATES TO DOMAIN REGISTRATION THREATENS ALL OF
THAT.

VERY SPECIFICALLY, THE COMBINATION OF THE ICANN FEE AND THE VERISIGN PRICE
INCREASE TAKE SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF OXYGEN FROM AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS
HYPERCOMPETITIVE.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE BEHAVIORS IN THE MARKETPLACE ARE QUITE EASY TO
THINK THROUGH.

ONE OF THE INTERESTING ASPECTS OF THIS SPECIFIC CONFERENCE IS WE'VE SEEN FOR
THE FIRST TIME THE REAL PRESENCE OF PROS, DOMAINERS HERE.

I WANT TO TALK IN THIS CASE ABOUT THE AVERAGE INTERNET USER.

THAT USER WILL BUY IN A BUNDLE, AND THAT BUNDLE, WHETHER 9.99, 19.99, IS NOT
GOING TO GO UP TO $10.02 OR $10.06 TO COVER THESE INCREASES.

THE INCREASES WILL GO DIRECTLY FROM REGISTRARS, WEB HOSTING COMPANIES, ISPS,
INTO THE POCKETS OF ICANN STAFF AND THE EXISTING MONOPOLY.

THERE IS ONE CLEAR WAY FORWARD HERE, AND THAT IS THE INTRODUCTION IN THE NEAR
TERM OF SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER NUMBERS OF TLDS, A LIBERALIZED TLD INTRODUCTION
PROCESS.

THAT WILL IMMEDIATELY ADDRESS ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALK ABOUT.

I WANT TO DO A QUICK BIT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.

HOW MANY PEOPLE HERE ARE IN FAVOR OF MANY MORE TLDS?

(APPLAUSE.)

>>ELLIOT NOSS: THE PRESSURE AT A BUDGET LEVEL CAN GO AWAY IMMEDIATELY.

THE THORNIEST QUESTIONS AROUND PRICE, AROUND PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL, AROUND
ANTITRUST, AROUND ICANN STAFF AND BOARD HAVING TO LAY A THICK HAND ON THE
MARKETPLACE ALL CAN GO AWAY.

ICANN, WHEN FACED, ICANN STAFF, WHEN FACED WITH LITIGATION THAT THREATENS ITS
VERY EXISTENCE, HAS RESPONDED BY PROPOSING A SETTLEMENT THAT INSTEAD
THREATENS ITS GREATEST ACCOMPLISHMENT.

LET'S INSTEAD TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE MOST IMPORTANT CORE
ELEMENT OF ICANN'S MISSION FROM THE VERY START, WHICH IS INCREASED
COMPETITION.

AND LET'S USE THAT TO, INSTEAD OF PUTTING A BAND-AID ON A PROBLEM THAT WILL
INEVITABLY LEAD US IN '07 OR '08 TO ANOTHER SET OF SIMILAR ISSUES, MUCH LIKE
99 WASN'T A SOLUTION, '01, '05 WILL NOT BE EITHER.

LET'S ADDRESS THESE ISSUES ONCE AND FOR ALL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, ELLIOT.



>>VINT CERF: BEFORE YOU START, PAUL TWOMEY HAS A REMARK.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU, ELLIOT.

I HAVE APPRECIATED THE TIME IN WHICH WE HAVE HAD THESE DISCUSSIONS OVER THE
LAST WEEKS.

SO I JUST NEED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU INTENDED WHAT
I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY.

YOU TALKED ABOUT INCREASED FUNDS GOING INTO THE POCKETS OF ICANN STAFF.

I ASSUME YOU DIDN'T MEAN -- YOU DIDN'T HAVE AN ACCUSATION OF CORRUPTION IN
THAT, DID YOU?

THAT'S A SERIOUS QUESTION, BECAUSE WE'RE ON THE RECORD?

>>ELLIOT NOSS: YES, NO, I WAS NOT INDICATING CORRUPTION.

I WAS INDICATING SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED BUDGET, ET CETERA.

AND -- AND, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU ASKED THE QUESTION, THIS SPECIFIC APPROACH
IS THE HISTORICAL APPROACH.

IT IS THE FAILURE OF IMAGINATION AND THINKING THROUGH, BROADENING THE FUNDING
SOURCES.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.

LET ME JUST DO A LITTLE NUMBER COUNT HERE.

ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, TEN, 11.

THAT'S 44 MINUTES IF YOU STICK WITHIN YOUR TIME LIMITS.

SO WE ARE --

(LAUGHTER.)

>>VINT CERF: -- PRETTY CLOSE TO NEEDING TO CUT OFF THE END OF THE LINE HERE.

IN A LITTLE WHILE, DEPENDING ON HOW QUICKLY YOU MANAGE TO FINISH, I WILL
PROBABLY ASK THAT THE LINE TERMINATE.

I WILL NOT TAKE ANY -- I WILL NOT TAKE ANYONE AWAY WHO IS CURRENTLY STANDING
IN THE LINE.

>> MY NAME IS BOB HUTCHINSON.

I WRITE SOFTWARE AND SYSTEMS FOR A LIVING THAT RELY UPON DOT COM.

IN FACT, I HAVE NEVER WRITTEN A SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T RELY ON DOT COM.

AND I RISE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IS INVOLVED IN THIS
AND THE LARGE RISK THAT IS INVOLVED WITH NOT SETTLING AND MOVING FORWARD.

I WISH THAT THE ENTIRE INTERNET COMMUNITY WOULD RISE TO FUND ICANN IN A
CONSISTENT AND GENEROUS MANNER.

IT IS A WORLD BODY THAT DOES HUGE WORK FOR THE INTERNET.

AND TO QUIBBLE ABOUT THE SMALL AMOUNT THAT DOT COM PEOPLE ARE PAYING FOR
INTERNET NAMES IS, IN MY BUSINESS EXPERIENCE, A HUGE WASTE OF TIME.

SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU MOVE FORWARD AND EXPAND THE ROLE AND EXPAND THE
INITIATIVES THAT ICANN IS INVOLVED WITH.

WE NEED MORE OF THE AGENDA BEING ADDRESSED AT A GIVEN TIME.

I THANK YOU.



>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

STEVE METALITZ.

>>STEVE METALITZ: THANK YOU.

STEVE METALITZ WITH THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY.

I WANT TO THANK THE BOARD AND THE STAFF FOR THE OUTREACH THAT YOU HAVE DONE
SO FAR TO THE COMMUNITY ON THIS PROPOSED NEW DOT COM AGREEMENT.

I THINK SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE NOW THAT WOULD HELP TO FACILITATE A GOOD
DECISION AND, IMPORTANTLY, A PROMPT DECISION ON THIS MATTER, THERE ARE A FEW
THINGS THAT THE STAFF, I THINK, COULD GENERATE AT THIS POINT, SOME
DELIVERABLES THAT WOULD HELP US TO EVALUATE SOME OF THE CONTENTIONS THAT I
THINK PAUL VERY WELL SUMMARIZED IN HIS PRESENTATION.

I'LL JUST GIVE TWO EXAMPLES OF THE KINDS OF DOCUMENTS THAT I THINK SHOULD BE
DEVELOPED AND PUBLICLY POSTED.

ONE WOULD BE, THERE ARE ASSERTIONS IN THE SUMMARY THAT THE NEW REGISTRY
SERVICES PROCEDURE IN THE CONTRACT IS EVENTUALLY THE SAME AS THE NEW REGISTRY
SERVICES PROCEDURE THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE BOARD ON THE RECOMMENDATION
OF THE -- OF THE GNSO.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S BEEN A COMPARISON DEVELOPED ON THIS.

AND I HOPE THAT THE STAFF CAN POST THAT SO THAT WE CAN ALL HELP TO EVALUATE
THAT ASSERTION.

SECONDLY, TO EVALUATE THE ASSERTIONS REGARDING THE CONCENTRATION OF REVENUE.

IF THE AGREEMENT WENT THROUGH IN ITS CURRENT FORM, I THINK THERE ARE SOME
DELIVERABLE THAT THE STAFF COULD PROVIDE REGARDING ANTICIPATED REVENUES AND
THE SOURCES OF THOSE REVENUES BASED ON A RANGE OF REASONABLE ASSUMPTIONS,
WITH THE AGREEMENT AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, AND WITHOUT THE AGREEMENT AS IT
CURRENTLY STANDS.

THAT WOULD HELP US TO EVALUATE THE ASSERTIONS REGARDING CONCENTRATION OF
REVENUE.

AND, AGAIN, I'M NOT ASKING THE STAFF TO HELP EVALUATE THE ASSERTIONS ABOUT
THE IMPACT ON ICANN INDEPENDENCE, FOR EXAMPLE, BUT JUST TO GIVE US SOME
QUANTITATIVE BASIS ON WHICH TO TRY TO DRAW OUR OWN CONCLUSIONS.

AND THERE MAY BE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THIS.

BUT I WANTED TO GIVE THOSE TWO.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AT THIS POINT.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANKS VERY MUCH, STEVE.

THIS IS THE KIND OF INPUT THAT'S VERY HELPFUL, BECAUSE IT'S CONCRETE AND IT'S
ACTIONABLE.

MAY WE HAVE THE NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

>>ANDREW MACK: HI. HELLO, EVERYONE. THANKS FOR LETTING US HAVE THIS
OPPORTUNITY.

MY NAME IS ANDREW MACK, AND I HAVE A CONSULTING PRACTICE HELPING FIRMS DO NEW
MARKET DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY IN EMERGING MARKETS. I AM ALSO HERE IN PART
BECAUSE OF MY INTEREST AS A FORMER WORLD BANK EMPLOYEE. I WAS WORKING WITH
TECHNOLOGY IN PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT, PRIMARILY WORKING IN AFRICA AND
LATIN AMERICA, AND SO I AM VERY IN TOUCH WITH THOSE MARKETS AND WHAT THE
OPPORTUNITIES ARE LIKE, AND ALSO WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO WORK WITH THE
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, LIKE THE U.N, WORLD BANK AND SUCH.

IT'S MY OPINION THE NEW CONTRACT IS VERY POSITIVE AND I THINK IT CAN MAKE
ICANN VERY SUCCESSFUL AND IN THE END THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE ARE ALL HERE
ABOUT.

THE THREE REASONS I LOOKED AT, FIRST THE STABLE FUNDING, SECOND CLARIFICATION
OF THE MISSION, AND THIRD, THE CLEARER RULES ABOUT THE WAY TO GO FORWARD.

MY EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH THESE DIFFERENT INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IS
THAT ORGANIZATIONS AND DIFFERENT ARMS OF THEM, WITHOUT FUNDING AND WITHOUT
CLEAR MISSION, OFTENTIMES THEY RISK GETTING MARGINALIZED AND ONE OF THE
CONCERNS I HAVE IS THAT ICANN HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB. ICANN IS IN A
LEADERSHIP POSITION RIGHT NOW, AND WE WOULDN'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING OR,
FRANKLY, NOT DO THINGS THAT WOULD JEOPARDIZE THAT POSITION.

IT'S MY OPINION AND A LOT OF WHAT I HAVE READ SUGGESTS THAT WHAT MIGHT
REPLACE ICANN AS THE WORLD LEADER WOULD BE A LOT WORSE FOR US AND FOR THE
FUTURE OF THE INTERNET.

AS I SAID, I SPENT MOST OF MY LIFE WORKING WITH EMERGING MARKETS, AFRICA AND
LATIN AMERICA, AND ONE OF MY BIG HOPES IS THROUGH THIS PROCESS, A STRONGER
ICANN WILL EVOLVE THAT HAS MUCH MORE CAPACITY TO DO OUTREACH TO THESE
UNDERSERVED AND EMERGING COUNTRIES.

I LIKE THE AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT CAN BUILD CAPACITY WITHIN ICANN, AND THE
STAFF GETS STRONGER AND THE FUNDING SOURCES, YOU CAN LOOK LONG TERM, YOU CAN
HAVE CERTAINTY OVER THE COURSE OF TIME.

THERE IS ALSO THE OPPORTUNITY TO PLAY A MORE ACTIVE ROLE. I WAS LISTENING TO
THE DIFFERENT PRESENTATIONS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PODIUM WHEN PEOPLE WERE
MAKING PRESENTATIONS UP AT THE PODIUM. ALL OF THE FIRST THREE PRESENTATIONS
CALLED FOR MORE STAFF RESOURCES. ALL OF THE FIRST THREE PRESENTATIONS CALLED
FOR A FOCUS ON STRATEGIC PLANNING. THESE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS I THINK
MAKE GOOD SENSE TO KEEP ICANN RUNNING AS A BUSINESS.

SO RECOGNIZE THERE ARE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION IN THE ROOM. BUT MY SENSE IS
THIS A GOOD WAY TO GO FORWARD; THAT THERE IS AN AWFUL LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE;
AND THAT, FRANKLY, THE WORLD IS COUNTING ON ICANN. IT'S TIME TO GET GOING.
YOU ASKED FOR CONCISE, ACTIONABLE COMMENTS. WHAT SHOULD WE DO? I THINK IT'S
TIME TO MOVE ON, GO WITH THE SOLUTIONS WE ALREADY HAVE AND ACCEPT THE
CONTRACT AND THE AGREEMENT.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK, FOLKS -- FOLKS CAN TELL THE
DYNAMIC RANGE OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN COMING TO US OVER THE PAST
WEEKS.

>>KARL AUERBACH: IT'S KARL AUERBACH AGAIN, AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT.

I WONDER HOW LONG ICANN BELIEVES THAT WE USERS OF THE INTERNET CAN BE TREATED
AS QUIET SHEEP TO BE LED TO THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WHY DID ICANN EVEN CONCEIVE THAT VERISIGN SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO
DO DATA MINING ABOUT OUR USE OF THE INTERNET AND PRODUCE MARKETING DATA?

THAT TO ME IS JUST REPREHENSIBLE.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>KARL AUERBACH: AND IT ISN'T SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO DO.

AS FAR AS COSTS GO, THEY AREN'T SMALL. BY SOME PUBLISHED DATA IT LOOKS LIKE
VERISIGN IS MAKING AS MUCH AS FOUR AND A HALF DOLLARS, AND POSSIBLY A LOT
MORE, PER NAME, PER YEAR, AND WHEN YOU MULTIPLY THAT BY 40 MILLION NAMES PER
YEAR IN .COM, WE ARE ABOUT AT LEAST $200 MILLION A YEAR, PLUS ICANN'S 7%
SOLUTION. THAT IS HARDLY A TINY AMOUNT THAT IS BEING SUCKED OUT OF THE
POCKET OF INTERNET USERS THAT. COULD PAY FOR WHOLE COUNTRY'S NET
INFRASTRUCTURES WITH LOTS LEFT OVER.

THAT IS AN UNDESERVED PROFIT FOR VERISIGN THAT IS TAKEN FROM NO ONE EXCEPT
INTERNET CONSUMERS AND USERS. IT IS IMPROPER, AND COMPLETELY -- I MEAN, IT'S
OBSCENE.

NOW, AS FAR AS SOLUTIONS TO THAT GO, ICANN, I WOULD SUSPECT, HASN'T A CLUE OF
THE ACTUAL COSTS THAT VERISIGN IS INCURRING TO PROVIDE THIS. AND I SUGGESTED
IN MY WRITTEN SUGGESTIONS THAT WE ACTUALLY DO A COSTS PLUS PROFIT
ARRANGEMENT. HOWEVER, DAVID JOHNSON HAS CONVINCED ME THERE IS A MUCH BETTER
WAY WHICH IS TWO PARTS. FIRST, YES, LET US GET A GOODLY NUMBER OF NEW
GENERAL TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS SO THEY CAN COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER FOR NEW
CONSUMERS AND THUS DRIVE THE PRICE FOR THE NEW INTERNET DOMAIN CONSUMER,
DRIVE THAT PRICE DOWN.

AND SECONDLY THAT, THE PRICE THAT VERISIGN IS ALLOWED TO CHARGE SHOULD BE NO
GREATER THAN THE LOWEST OF THOSE PRICES.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, KARL.

NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

>>ANDY OZMENT: HELLO, MY NAME IS ANDY OZMENT FROM MIT, LINCOLN LABORATORY.

FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO DISAGREE WITH ONE OF THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS WHO SAID WE
SHOULDN'T QUIBBLE OVER THE SMALL COST OF .COM.

I WOULD SAY THAT FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE WORLD, FOR THE DEVELOPING WORLD,
THAT THE COST OF .COM REGISTRATION IS NOT SMALL.

I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND PROPOSE A HYPOTHESIS THAT LAWSUITS AND CONFLICT ARE
NOT A DISTRACTION FOR ICANN. THEY ARE, IN FACT, A CORE FUNCTION OF ICANN.

THAT WHETHER ICANN CONSIDERS ITSELF A REGULATOR OR AN ENTITY THAT CONTRACTS
SERVICES, ITS OPERATING IN A FLUID ENVIRONMENT AND IT WILL BE IN CONFLICT
WITH THOSE THAT ARE PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES.

THIRD, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT PROPOSED CONTRACTS HAVE OFTEN BEEN CONSIDERED
SURPRISING AND DISPLEASING WHEN REVEALED TO THE BROADER ICANN WORLD.

I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THERE SHOULD BE A POLICY DOCUMENT PROVIDING CLEAR
GUIDANCE AND QUITE POSSIBLY RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRACTS SO THAT WHEN THEY ARE
BEING NEGOTIATED, WHICH WILL CLEARLY HAVE TO BE DONE CONFIDENTIALLY, SO THAT
WHEN THOSE CONTRACTS ARE BEING NEGOTIATED, THEY WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE GOALS AND DESIRES OF THE BROADER ICANN CONSTITUENCIES.

FOURTH AND FINALLY, ONE SUGGESTION IS I CAN SEE BENEFITS OF PRESUMPTIVE
RENEWAL BUT IT WOULD SEEM CLEAR TO ME THAT IF YOU WILL HAVE PRESUMPTIVE
RENEWAL, YOU SHOULD COUPLE THAT WITH A POLICY THAT PRICE INCREASES ARE ONLY
POSSIBLE IF THE CONTRACT IS COMPETITIVELY AWARDED. THAT PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL
SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE ACCOMPANIED WITH PRICE INCREASES.

THANK YOU.

(APPLAUSE.).

>>VINT CERF: NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

>>ANDRE CARTER: HELLO, MY NAME IS ANDRE CARTER AND I AM WITH IRIMI,
INCORPORATED, A CONSULTING FIRM.

WE WORK LARGELY WITH SMALL STARTUP TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES, LARGELY SOFTWARE
COMPANIES, AND WE TALK A LOT ABOUT CONSTITUENCIES AND I KNOW THE BUSINESS,
QUOTE UNQUOTE, CONSTITUENCY IS REPRESENTED, BUT I THINK THERE IS A SEGMENT I
THINK IS NOT REPRESENTED WHICH IS WHY I STOOD UP, WHICH IS THE SMALL SOFTWARE
COMPANIES, NOT END USERS BUT PEOPLE WHO CONTRIBUTE THROUGH TECHNOLOGIES AND
OTHER THINGS, AS ONE GENTLEMAN SAID, MOST SOFTWARE THAT'S WRITTEN TODAY
TOUCHES THE INTERNET IN SOME WAY.

AND A LOFT THAT TECHNOLOGY IS LATER ON BOUGHT BY FOLKS THAT'S USED. AND THEY
DON'T SELL DOMAIN NAMES IN ANY WAY.

SO THEY ARE NOT A REGISTRY OR REGISTRAR.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE NUMBERS THAT WE SAW IN THE LAST SPEAKER'S REMARKS WAS
THE 200 MILLION THAT'S INVESTED, AND WHAT I BEGAN TO THINK ABOUT IS IF YOU
READ ABOUT IT, THEY SAY OVER A TRILLION DOLLARS HAS BEEN INVESTED. IN THE
INTERNET IN THE LAST SIX, SEVEN YEARS.

AND MOST OF THAT HAS COME FROM SMALL ENTREPRENEURS LIKE ONES THAT I WORK WITH
OR V.C.'S THAT I WORK WITH. AND A LOT OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE PERCEPTION
THAT THERE IS RETURN THERE.

BUT TWO KEY THINGS TO THAT, AND WHAT I THINK IS GOOD ABOUT PERHAPS THE
SETTLEMENT IS THE IDEA THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING THE NOTION OF RENEWAL AND
CONSISTENCY AND RELIABILITY AND HAVING STABILITY. AND THE OTHER THING IS THE
NOTION OF CREATING A CODIFIED WAY IN WHICH NEW ADVANCES CAN BE MADE PUBLIC
OVER THE INTERNET THAT WE CAN RELEASE NEW SERVICES.

AND THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT THING TO FOLKS WHO HAVE A SECOND MORTGAGE OR
USE THEIR FAMILY SAVINGS TO START THEIR BUSINESS.

AND SO I GUESS THE ACTUAL PIECE THAT I WOULD SAY IS TO MAKE SURE IN YOUR
DELIBERATIONS ABOUT THIS TO NOT ALWAYS JUST -- EVEN THOUGH IT'S MAYBE
AGREEMENT WITH VERISIGN, TO THINK ABOUT THE CONSTITUENCY THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD
A LOT ABOUT, AND THINK ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THOSE FOLKS AND PERHAPS REACH OUT
AND MAKE THAT A PART OF YOUR ANALYSIS. BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF BUSINESSES
OUT THERE THAT ARE ON THE QUOTE, UNQUOTE, PENUMBRA OF ALL THIS THAT YOU MAY
NOT HEAR FROM THEM DIRECTLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T SELL DOMAINS AND THEY ARE NOT
PURE END USERS BUT THEY HIRE PEOPLE, PAY TAXES AND DO A LOT OF THINGS THAT
HAVE A CUMULATIVE EFFECT AND THAT'S EVEN MORE THE CASE IF YOU GO ABROAD,
IRELAND, INDIA, PLACES DEVELOPING. IT'S SMALL BUSINESSES. THAT'S WHAT TECH
IS ALL ABOUT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH ELIOT'S SUGGESTION
THAT SOME ANALYSIS BE DONE TO UNDERSTAND IMPACTS.

I'M GOING TO ASK THAT YOU BE PATIENT FOR A MOMENT BECAUSE I HAVE A FEW
E-MAILED COMMENTS WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE INJECTED TO BE FAIR.

THE FIRST ONE COMES FROM OLE JACOBSON.

I AM HEARING A LOT OF NOISE HERE.

THE FIRST COMMENT COMES FROM OLE JACOBSON. HE SAYS SINCE NSF GAVE THE .COM
CONTRACT TO NSI MANY, MANY YEARS AGO, ONE COMPANY, UNDER VARIOUS NAMES, HAS
RAKED IN MILLIONS, IF NOT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

ICANN IS PROPOSING YET ANOTHER SWEET HEART DEAL FOR VERISIGN.

IS THERE ANY WONDER THAT THE COMMUNITY IS IN UPROAR?

I HOPE THE RECORD WILL SHOW I AM QUOTING OLE JACOBSON. THAT'S NOT VINT
CERF'S OPINION.

THE NEXT COMMENT COMES FROM IZUMI. HE SAYS AS A MEMBER OF ALAC, HE WOULD
LIKE TO SEE AN INFORMED DECISION BY THE BOARD. THAT MEANS WE'D LIKE TO SEE
WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE AND DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT FOR THIS MATTER.
BUT I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT HAVING U.S. GOVERNMENT BODIES PROVIDE ADVICE MAY
NOT BE SUFFICIENT FOR DECIDING WHAT COULD BE GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD.

COULD WE CONSIDER TO FIND MORE SUITABLE BODIES, INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
OR NEUTRAL THIRD PARTY, ACADEMIC RESEARCH INSTITUTION OR CONSULTING BODY, AND
ASK THEM TO PROVIDE EXPERT OBSERVATIONS AS A REFERENCE MATERIAL SO WE COULD
MAKE WELL INFORMED DECISIONS FOR THIS SEEMINGLY VERY CRITICAL AND LONG TERM
DECISION. OR COULD WE ESTABLISH SOME PANEL OF EXPERTS, SOME KIND OF PROCESS,
NOT MAKING DECISIONS BUT GIVING REFERENCES.

SO I WILL STOP THERE WITH THE READING OF ONLINE COMMENTS. THERE ARE A FEW
MORE, BUT I WILL INJECT THEM LATER. PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>TED NEWARD: HI, MY NAME IS TED NEWARD AND I AM ONE OF THE SHEEP THAT WAS
MENTIONED EARLIER THAT APPARENTLY ARE BEING LED TO THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE OR
HAVING THE BLOOD SUCKED OUT OF THEM. I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT THE ANALOGY WAS
THERE.

TRUTHFULLY, I WORK AS A SOFTWARE CONSULTANT WORKING WITH VARIOUS FIRMS, LARGE
AND SMALL, AND AGAIN LIKE THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME, A LOT OF WHAT I DEAL WITH
DEALS WITH THE INTERNET AS A WHOLE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC SOLUTIONS FOR YOU. I HAVE WHAT I WOULD LIKE ICANN
TO CONSIDER AS THREE GUIDELINES FOR WHATEVER THEY GET COMING FORWARD.
SPECIFICALLY, I WOULD LIKE ICANN TO CONSIDER A COMPLEXITY, CONSISTENCY, AND
CLARITY. COMPLEXITY REGARDING THE PROCESS BY WHICH I HAVE TO REGISTER DOMAIN
NAMES. IF YOU CAN STANDARDIZE AND STREAMLINE THAT, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT
TO HOW I CAN CHANGE HOSTING PROVIDERS BECAUSE, FRANKLY, I THINK IT A BIT
ABSURD THAT I HAVE TO PROVIDE THREE NOTARIZED DOCUMENTS, A BLOOD SAMPLE AND
MY FIRST BORN CHILD IN ORDER TO TRANSFER DOMAINS.

>>VINT CERF: THAT'S THE BLOOD PART THE OTHER FELLOW WAS MENTIONING.

>>TED NEWARD: I GET IT. THANK YOU.

CONSISTENCY FROM THE STANDPOINT OF HOW ICANN AND THE VARIOUS REGISTRIES AND
REGISTRARS RELATE TO EACH OTHER AND HOW THE REGISTRIES RELATE TO ME AS A
CONSUMER.

FRANKLY, IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH WAYS TO REDUCE THE COMPLEXITY AND CREATE A
CONSISTENT PROCESS, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO CHUCK ANOTHER $5 INTO THE
POT RIGHT NOW TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. AND I HAVE A FEELING THAT A SIGNIFICANT
NUMBER OF MY CLIENTS WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THE SAME.

LASTLY, CLARITY.

RIGHT NOW, SPEAKING AS SOMEONE WHO IS OUTSIDE THIS ENTIRE BODY, I HAVE NO
IDEA HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS. AND ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO MAKE THE ENTIRE
THING MORE CLEAR TO THOSE OF US WHO HAVE TO USE THE INTERNET TO MAKE A LIVING
RATHER THAN TRY TO DEFINE IT, WOULD BE GROSSLY WELCOME.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TED

(APPLAUSE.).

>>VINT CERF: IF YOU WILL FORGIVE ME MARILYN FOR INJECTING A CHALLENGE TO
THOSE OF US WHO ARE PARTICIPATING. I HAVE BEEN WANTING SO MUCH TO CREATE OR
HAVE SOMEBODY CREATE A CHART SHOWING THE LIFE CYCLE OF A DOMAIN NAME. SO
THAT PEOPLE COULD UNDERSTAND WHAT STATE COULD YOUR DOMAIN NAME GET INTO AND
WHICH OF THEM DO YOU NOT WANT IT TO GET INTO AND HOW DO YOU GET OUT OF THAT.

MARILYN.

>>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU, MY NAME IS MARILYN CADE. I AM AN ELECTED
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY, AND I WILL SPEAK TO THE
BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY POSITION THAT WE HAVE POSTED. AND WHAT WE THINK IT
SAYS TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE BOARD, AND TO OUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS
PROCESS.

LET ME START BY THANKING THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY FOR DOING WHAT, IN FACT,
THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY THINKS DOES NEED TO BE DONE, AND THAT IS TAKE THE
SERIOUS POLICY TOPICS AT A FACE-TO-FACE MEETING AND PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY
FOR THE COMMUNITY BEFORE THE MEETING TO COMMENT, TO ANALYZE, TO PARTICIPATE
WITH EACH OTHER, AND THEN TO PARTICIPATE WITH THE BOARD INTERACTIVELY.

WE DON'T THINK THE DECISION SHOULD BE TAKEN AT THIS MEETING, AND THOUGH -- SO
WE THANK THE BOARD, BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT IS THE CONCLUSION ALREADY
REACHED.

WE SAY THAT BECAUSE WE THINK THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT WE ARE COMMITTED, AS OTHERS
ARE COMMITTED, AND THEY ARE DEMONSTRATING THEIR INTEREST IN WORKING TOWARD
THE KIND OF CONSENSUS AROUND SOLUTIONS TO THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE RECEIVING
THAT CAN HELP TO COME UP WITH A MODIFIED .COM AGREEMENT AND MODIFIED
AGREEMENTS THAT CAN BE BROADLY ENDORSED. AND OUR STATEMENT WHICH WE HAVE
PREVIOUSLY POSTED, WE IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS AND WE PRESENTED SOLUTIONS.

ON TUESDAY OF LAST WEEK WE HELPED TO ORGANIZE -- OF THIS WEEK, WE HELPED TO
ORGANIZE THE CROSS-CONSTITUENCY AND ALAC LEARNING EVENT, AND WE TOOK THE TIME
BEFORE, WORKING WITH OTHERS AND OTHERS TOOK THE TIME TO COME TO THAT MEETING
TO TRY TO PRESENT THEIR ANALYSIS AND THEIR PROPOSED SOLUTIONS.

I COMMEND THE STAFF FOR DOING THE POINT BY POINT LIST OF THE COMMENTS THAT
HAD BEEN MADE, BUT LIKE STEVEN METALITZ, I WILL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SAY
THAT ANOTHER TOOL IS NEEDED.

I THINK THAT, IN FACT, IF WE LOOK AT THE SHORT LIST OF AREAS WHERE ANSWERS
HAVE BEEN PUT FORWARD, WE WOULD SEE GREAT COMMONALITY ACROSS MANY OF THE
COMMENTS ABOUT SOLUTIONS THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. YOU DON'T SEE THAT WHEN
YOU SEE THE ISSUES LISTED AND YOU SEE THE SOLUTIONS LISTED.

YOU HAVE TO DO ALMOST A SIDE BY SIDE TO DO THAT.

LET ME OFFER THE SUPPORT OF THOSE OF US WHO HELPED TO ORGANIZE ON TUESDAY TO
WORK TOWARD CREATING THAT DOCUMENT.

FINALLY, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT, TO US IN BUSINESS, WE DO THINK THAT THE
SETTLEMENT OF LITIGATION IS GENERALLY THE RIGHT ANSWER, IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT
TERMS IN THE SETTLEMENT.

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

IF I COULD ASK YOU TO BE PATIENT FOR ONE MORE MOMENT, I HAVE ANOTHER ONLINE
CONTRIBUTION. THIS IS FROM RICHARD HENDERSON. HE SAYS IN THE INTEREST OF
COMPETITION, WHY NOT OPEN UP THE .COM CONTRACT AGAIN AND OPEN A BIDDING
PROCESS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON TIED-IN REDUCTIONS IN PRICES RATHER THAN TIED-IN
INCREASES IN PRICES. USE COMPETITION AT A BIDDING STAGE TO DRIVE DOWN
PRICES. ICANN IS MANDATED TO PROMOTE COMPETITION IN THIS WAY.

JUST A REMINDER TO EVERYONE, WE ARE ALSO MANDATED TO ATTEMPT STABILITY AND
INTEGRITY IN THE SYSTEM.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>RAY PLZAK: I AM RAY PLZAK, THE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF ARIN. I AM HERE AS A
MEMBER OF THE NRO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL.

THE NUMBER RESOURCE ORGANIZATIONS ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE ADDRESS
SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION HAS READ THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
ICANN AND VERISIGN.

THE ASO HAS NOTED THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE AGREEMENT AND COMMENTS THAT HAVE
BEEN MADE BY VARIOUS ICANN CONSTITUENCIES.

WE ARE CONCERNED THAT REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL PROPRIETY OF THE SETTLEMENT,
THERE EXISTS A STRONG PERCEIVED SENTIMENT THAT DISAGREEMENT MAINTAINS
EXISTENCE OF WHAT CAN BE CHARACTERIZED AS QUESTIONABLE BUSINESS PRACTICES.

THE ASO BELIEVES THAT THIS DETRACTS FROM ICANN'S ABILITY TO FULFILL ITS ROLE
TO PROVIDE STABILITY IN THE TECHNICAL COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE
INTERNET. THE ASO HAS CONCERNS REGARDING SUBPARAGRAPH "C" OF THE ROOT SERVER
MANAGEMENT TRANSITION COMPLETION AGREEMENT, WHICH STATES IN PART THAT ICANN
AND VERISIGN WILL, QUOTE, "WORK TOGETHER TO ESTABLISH A TIMETABLE FOR THE
COMPLETION OF THE TRANSITION TO ICANN OF THE COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT OF
THE ARPA TLD."

THE ASO BELIEVES THIS TO BE IN CONTRAVENTION OF A LETTER FROM THE U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE TO ICANN DATED 28 APRIL 2001 WHICH STATES, QUOTE, "THE
INTERNET ARCHITECTURE BOARD IN COOPERATION WITH THE INTERNET CORPORATION FOR
ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS IS CURRENTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR MANAGING THE TOP
LEVEL NAME ARPA." THE LETTER FURTHER STATES THAT, QUOTE, "THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE REQUESTS THAT AS PART OF THE IANA FUNCTIONS, ICANN UNDERTAKE
ADMINISTRATION OF THE ARPA TLD IN COOPERATION WITH THE INTELLECTUAL INTERNET
TECHNICAL COMMUNITY UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF THE IAB AS A LIMITED USE DOMAIN FOR
INTERNET INFRASTRUCTURE APPLICATIONS."

THE ASO REQUESTS THAT ICANN SPECIFICALLY CLARIFY THIS APPARENT EXCLUSION OF
THE IAB FROM THIS PROCESS AND THE APPARENT EXCLUSION OF THE IAB FROM FUTURE
MANAGEMENT OF THE TLD NAME ARPA.

I YIELD BACK THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANKS, RAY. CAN I JUST VERY SIMPLY SAY THERE IS NO INTENTION
TO DO THAT IN THE DOCUMENT, BUT WE APPRECIATE THE INPUT.

>>RAY PLZAK: RIGHT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, RAY.

LET ME, JUST FOR ONE MOMENT, SAY THAT I AM NOW GOING TO CLOSE THE LINE.

NO, YOU DON'T NEED TO SIT -- ARE YOU TRYING TO DUCK SO I COULDN'T SEE YOU?

THE YOUNG WOMAN WHO IS AT THE END OF THE LINE RIGHT NOW IS THE END OF THE
LINE FOR TODAY'S OPEN MICROPHONE.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>BRANDON SANDERS: MY NAME IS BRANDON SANDERS AND I AM A COLLABORATION
ENTHUSIAST. AND WHAT I HAVE BEEN HEARING FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE IS KIND OF A
CRY FOR A BETTER PROCESS. AND AS A COLLABORATION ENTHUSIAST, I WOULD LIKE TO
SUGGEST THAT THOSE HERE WHO ARE INVOLVED IN ORCHESTRATING THE COLLABORATION
OF THE ENTIRE WORLD AROUND THIS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT SHARED RESOURCE, I'D
LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT YOU TAKE A LOOK AT CONSENSUS POLLING. IT'S ON THE ICANN
WIKI UP AT THE TOP RIGHT. YOU CAN CLICK ON IT. IT'S NOT OWNED BY ANYBODY.
I HAVE SEEN IT WORK TO BRING TOGETHER CONSENSUS ON A VERY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE
THAT HAD GENERATED 10,000 FORUM POSTS AND A COMMUNITY VERY DIVIDED. I CAN'T
GUARANTEE IT WILL WORK FOR YOUR NEEDS BUT IT SHOULD AT LEAST BE LOOKED AT.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S COME UP SEVERAL TIMES NOW. IT'S A
VERY INTERESTING SOCIOLOGICAL PHENOMENON.

PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>BHAVIN TURAKHIA: HI, I AM BHAVIN TURAKHIA. I HAD A SET OF POINTS PREPARED
TO TALK ABOUT AS A REGISTRAR AND AS A CHAIR OF THE REGISTRAR CONSTITUENCY,
MOST OF THE COLLEAGUES WHO MENTIONED TO GET AN EARLIER SPOT IN THE LINE HAVE
PREEMPTED IN THIS RESPECT AND AS A RESULT I HAVE TWO BRIEF COMMENTS TO MAKE.

MY FIRST COMMENT, EVERYONE HAS ADDRESSED AND PRETTY MUCH DISCUSSED ALL
ASPECTS AND CONCERNS. IN FACT, PAUL TWOMEY'S PRESENTATION, I AM HAPPY, I
BELIEVE HAS NOT MISSED OUT ANY CONCERN OF IMPORTANCE. I WISH TO ILLUSTRATE,
HOWEVER, THE IMPORTANCE OF TAKING EACH OF THESE CONCERNS AND CONSIDERATIONS
THROUGH A COMMUNITY CONSENSUS PROCESS. FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF THE POINTS OF
CONTENTION BOTH IN PAUL'S PRESENTATION AND COMMENTS WE HEARD HERE ABOUT
PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL BEING ANTI-COMPETITIVE BUT AT THE SAME TIME REQUIRED FOR
SAY STABILITY IN INVESTMENTS. CONCERN THE COMMUNITY HAS WITH PRESUMPTIVE IS
ADVANTAGES OF COMPETITION WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE TO THE COMMUNITY, AND
REDUCING PRICES IN A REBID MODEL WOULD CONSTANTLY GO DOWN, WOULD LIKELY
REMAIN WHERE THEY ARE IF NOT INCREASE.

AT THE SAME TIME, HOWEVER, WITHOUT RENEWAL, REGISTRY OPERATORS WOULD BE
LIKELY TO BE DISINCENTIVIZED TO MAKE SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENTS THEREFORE
POSSIBLY RESULTING IN REDUCED SECURITY, STABILITY, ET CETERA. I BELIEVE,
HOWEVER, IF THIS ISSUE AND SIMILAR ISSUES WENT THROUGH A POLICY DEVELOPMENT
PROCESS THERE COULD EMERGE IN THE MODELS FOR INSTANCE LONG-TERM CONTRACTS
WHICH COULD INCENTIVIZE INVESTMENT, AT THE SAME TIME NOT HAVE PRESUMPTIVE
RENEWAL. ANOTHER POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE COULD BE PRESUMPTIVE RENEWALS WITH A
GUARANTEE BY THE OPERATOR TO REDUCE PRICES BASED UPON AN INDUSTRY INDEX,
BASED ON COMMUNITY REVIEW OF SOME DEFINED FORM. JUST WANT TO USE THIS SINGLE
CONCERN IN TWO MINUTES I SPENT THINKING ABOUT IT AS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW
CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMUNITY MIGHT BE ADDRESSED. IF THE CONSENSUS BASED
PROCESS IS FOLLOWED TO DETRIMENT POLICY. THAT'S MY FIRST COMMENT. THE
SECOND COMMENT THAT I HAVE IS PAUL INVITED US TO COMMENT ON ANY AREAS THAT
MIGHT HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT IN HI!

S PRESENTATION WHICH I MIGHT AGAIN MENTION WAS COMPLETE WITH REGARDS TO THE
CONSENSUS OF THE COMMUNITY. THIS COMMENT GOES IN RESPONSE TO THE FACT THAT
PAUL IN HIS EARLIER PRESENTATION TWICE MENTIONED ALBEIT HUMOROUSLY BUT OF
CONCERN TO ME, AND I'M PRETTY CERTAIN TO EVERYBODY ELSE, THAT CERTAIN
STAFFING POSITIONS WOULD BE FILLED PROVIDING THERE WAS MONEY TO PAY FOR THEM.

I WOULD, IN LIGHT OF THIS, LIKE TO ADD TO PAUL'S PRESENTATION, IF I MAY,
CERTAIN STATEMENTS THAT REGISTRARS AND OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY HAVE BEEN
REPEATING THAT HAD SOME BEARING WITH RELATION TO THE .COM SETTLEMENT AND TO
THE COMMENT THAT PAUL MADE EARLIER, THESE STATEMENTS. ONE IS ALL OF US IN
THE COMMUNITY, AND I HAVE BEEN HEARING THIS FROM EVERYBODY THROUGHOUT THE
LAST WEEK AND PRESUMING FOREVER, ALL OF US IN THE COMMUNITY WISH FOR A STRONG
STABLE AND WELL FUNDED ICANN. ALL OF US IN THE COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE FOR
ICANN TO HAVE SUFFICIENT FUNDS AS WELL AS ADEQUATE RESERVES FOR ANY
CONTINGENCIES. THE REGISTRAR COMMUNITY AND I BELIEVE PRETTY MUCH ALL THE
OTHERS IN THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY, WANT THE BOARD IN ICANN TO IMPLEMENT THE
CURRENT BUDGET AND COLLECT ANY PENDING REVENUES. THE COMMUNITY, IN FACT, AND
I THINK THIS HAS BEEN EMPHATICALLY STATED AT LEAST IN THE MEETING WE HAD IN
THE REGISTRARS AND I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE (INAUDIBLE) COMMUNITY, HAVE
-- THE COMMUNITY!

ALSO STATED THEY WOULD SUPPORT ANY CREATIVE OUT OF THE BOX SOLUTIONS, IF
FEASIBLE, TO FUND ICANN IN THE SHORT TERM WHILE LOGISTICS FOR ANY ALTERNATIVE
SOURCES OF FUNDS OR BUDGET APPROVES ARE WORKED OUT. ADDITIONALLY THE
COMMUNITY HAS SPECIFICALLY OFFERED TO WORK OUT PROCESSES TO ADDRESS CONCERNS
IN THE CURRENT YOU FUNDING MODEL TO ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY BUT AT THE SAME
TIME INCREASE EFFICIENCY IN TERMS OF THE BUDGET COLLECTION PROCESS AND
APPROVAL PROCESSES. AND I WANTED TO SPECIFICALLY MAKE THIS COMMENT BECAUSE
THE PRESENTATIONS THAT WE HAVE SEEN AND THE COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE HEARD
CONTAIN SPECIFIC CONCERNS, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY REALIZES THE
LAST WEEK HAS NOT BEEN SPENT IN COMPLAINING TO THE BOARD ABOUT ISSUES, BUT
RATHER THE COMMUNITY WISHES TO IDENTIFY PROBLEMS.

YOU KNOW, THOSE PROBLEMS COULD BE WITH REGARDS TO SETTLEMENT OR WITH REGARDS
TO FUNDING FOR ICANN.

AND THE COMMUNITY IS ATTEMPTING TO IDENTIFY THESE PROBLEMS, RECOMMEND
SOLUTIONS FOR THESE PROBLEMS, AND STANDS BY AND IMPLEMENT THESE SOLUTIONS.

THAT'S IT.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU, BHAVIN.

I WONDER IF I CAN JUST MAKE A RESPONSE TO CLARIFY SOME OF THE ISSUES RAISED,
BECAUSE I AM CONCERNED THAT PEOPLE EITHER ONLINE OR IN THE ROOM MAY NOT HAVE
QUITE THE DETAIL OF UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU AND I HAVE ON THIS ISSUE.

SO JUST TO CLARIFY.

WE HAVE A BUDGET PRESENTLY FOR ICANN, AND BECAUSE -- AND THIS BUDGET HAS
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT.

SO LET'S BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.

AND ANY COMMENT ABOUT MONEY TO PAY FOR IT, THOSE SORT OF INSIDE JOKES,
RELATES TO THE FACT THAT UNDER THE PRESENT ARRANGEMENTS, THE REGISTRARS HAVE
TO VOTE TWO-THIRDS FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS, WHICH IS THE 25 CENTS NUMBER.

WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THAT NOTE YET, WE HAVEN'T ISSUED ANY INVOICES BECAUSE WE
HAVEN'T RECEIVED THAT VOTE.

I WE DON'T NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT NOW.

I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY FOR OTHERS THAT THIS DISCUSSION -- I DON'T WANT TO
GIVE ANYBODY THE IMPRESSION THAT THE STAFF OR ANYONE ELSE HAS PUT UP THIS DOT
COM SETTLEMENT AS SOME SORT OF CRISIS SOLUTION TO THAT ISSUE.

THAT'S A SEPARABLE ISSUE ABOUT HOW WE DEAL WITH THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.

I WANT TO BE QUITE CLEAR ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT COULD BE CONFUSED BY OTHERS
WHO ARE HEARING IT.

THAT'S ALL.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, PAUL.

MAY WE HAVE THE NEXT SPEAKER.

>>JONATHAN ZUCK: HELLO, MY NAME IS JONATHAN ZUCK.

AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY, AN I.T.
INDUSTRY TRADE ASSOCIATION.

THERE IS BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT COMMUNITY HERE IN THIS ROOM.

AND I GUESS I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THE SLEEPING GIANT, THE COMMUNITY OUTSIDE
OF THIS ROOM.

I REPRESENT ABOUT 4,000 I.T. COMPANIES WHO PAID ABSOLUTELY NO ATTENTION TO
ICANN.

YOU ASKED THEM WHO ICANN IS, THEY WOULD GO, WHO?

RIGHT?

I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

BUT THEN THE EU PUT FORWARD A PROPOSAL AND IT WAS IN THE NEWS, AND THEN
SUDDENLY THEY WERE ALL WALKING AROUND IN ICANN ROCKS TEE SHIRTS.

SO THE CONVERSATION HAS CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY OUTSIDE OF THIS ROOM.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, NOW THAT WE'RE ALL FANS OF ICANN, THIS GROUP THAT WE
WEREN'T PAYING ANY ATTENTION TO, THERE ARE STILL SOME ISSUES; RIGHT?

AND BRANDON SAID HE WAS A FAN OF COLLABORATION.

I'M PRETTY SURE IF THERE WAS A MANAGEMENT CONSULT FROM MCKENZIE IN THE BACK
OF THE ROOM, THE ONE THING YOU WOULD NOT BE RECOMMENDING IS THAT MORE PEOPLE
NEED TO BE INVOLVED IN EVERY DECISION.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>JONATHAN ZUCK: I'M PRETTY SURE THAT WOULDN'T BE THE RECOMMENDATION.

WHO ARE WE ALL FANS OF?

WHO DO WE ALL ADMIRE?

WELL, THE GUY OR GAL WHO DOES THE NEW YORK TIMES CROSS WORD PUZZLE IN PEN;
RIGHT?

THAT'S REALLY AN IMPRESSIVE THING.

IF I HAD TO SUMMARIZE, THE PROBLEM WITH ICANN TO DATE IS THAT IT DOES
EVERYTHING IN PENCIL.

RIGHT?

THE RELATIONSHIP WITH VERISIGN HAS BEEN IN PENCIL.

THE NOTION OF PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL HAS BEEN IN PENCIL.

THE BUDGET HAS BEEN IN PENCIL BECAUSE OF THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE REGISTRARS.

EVERYTHING HAS BEEN TENTATIVE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE A REFEREE AT A FOOTBALL MATCH WITH A PINK CARD WHICH IS
FOR "MAYBE" OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>JONATHAN ZUCK: AND THAT'S ENDED UP BEING THE NET RESULT.

SO, I MEAN, WHAT I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND IS -- AND SUGGEST THAT THIS SETTLEMENT
AND CONTRACT GO A LONG WAY TOWARDS IS PUTTING THINGS IN PEN.

I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF HUBBUB ABOUT NOTHING BECAUSE THESE WERE ALL THINGS
THAT EXISTED IN PENCIL.

MAYBE IT WAS ALL WRITTEN LEFT-HANDED AND GOT A LITTLE SMUDGED.

BUT THE REALITY IS PRESUMPTIVE RENEWAL, WAIT-LIST SERVICE GOT, YOU KNOW --
GOT GRANTED FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES, ET CETERA, THERE WAS ALL KINDS OF PENCILED
RELATIONSHIPS.

AND I THINK THE FUNDAMENTAL THING ABOUT THIS AGREEMENT AND THIS SETTLEMENT IS
IT STARTS TO PUT THINGS DOWN IN PEN.

IT STARTS TO GET SPECIFIC.

WHAT IS ICANN'S BUDGET GOING TO BE SO THAT IT CAN BECOME THE INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATION THEY'RE TRYING TO BE?

WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VERISIGN AND ICANN?

BECAUSE IT'S THE FIRST TIME THAT RELATIONSHIP HAS BECOME EXPLICIT AS A
FUNCTION OF THAT SETTLEMENT DOCUMENT.

SO I ADMIRE THE EFFORT THAT PAUL AND THE REST OF THE STAFF PUT INTO GETTING
DOWN TO BRASS TACKS, AS ELLIOT SUGGESTED, GETTING TO THE CORE ISSUES THAT HE
PUT -- AT THE PODIUM HERE, PUT THINGS DOWN IN PEN, MADE SOME REAL DECISIONS
SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE ON AND BECOME THE ORGANIZATION THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO BE.

THANKS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.



(APPLAUSE.)

>>MIKE RAWSON: MY NAME IS --

>>VINT CERF: JUST ONE SECOND.

I CAN'T RESIST THIS.

MY TAKEAWAY NOTE SAYS THAT THE ICANN BOARD SHOULD START DOING THE NEW YORK
TIMES IN PEN.

THANK YOU.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>VINT CERF: PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>MIKE RAWSON: ON THAT NOTE, MY NAME IS MIKE RAWSON, I'M WITH GAUGE
CONSULTING AND PREVIOUSLY I WORKED FOR SENATOR BURN ON ICANN REFORM ISSUES.

SO I'VE DEALT WITH YOU IN THAT CONTEXT.

I THINK THERE WERE A COUPLE COMMENTS HERE THAT WERE ADDRESSED.

FIRST OF ALL, PAUL WENT INTO GREAT DETAIL ABOUT THE TREMENDOUS STRAINS AND
CONTINUED STRESSORS ON THE STAFF AND ON THE INDIVIDUAL -- ICANN'S CONTINUING
TASK.

SO, REALLY, THE KEY ELEMENT OF THE SETTLEMENT, WHICH I VIEW AS
EXTRAORDINARILY POSITIVE, IS THAT IT CREATES THE CONDITIONS FOR ONGOING
FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR ICANN AS AN ONGOING ENTERPRISE.

IT REALLY SERVES TO ELIMINATE A SOURCE OF CONTINUING DISTRACTION ON AN
ONGOING BASIS AND REALLY PUTS ICANN ON SOUND FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
FINANCIALLY SECURE, ICANN IS IN THE BENEFIT OF THE ENTIRE INTERNET COMMUNITY.

SEPARATELY, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN CONSTANT CONCERN ABOUT THE TRANSITORY NATURE
OF AGREEMENTS IN TERMS OF THE NEW REGISTRY SERVICES.

THERE NEEDS TO BE CERTAINTY AND MUCH QUICKER TIME FRAMES.

THE SETTLEMENT ALSO ADDRESSES THOSE ISSUES.

AND IF THERE IS GOING TO BE THE IMMENSE AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT AND INNOVATION
NECESSARY TO TAKE THE INTERNET TO THE NEXT LEVEL FOR ONE BILLION USERS AND A
TRILLION DOLLARS IN INFRASTRUCTURE, THESE CONDITIONS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE
ACKNOWLEDGED AND EXIST.

SO THAT'S THE WAY I VIEW IT.

AND I THINK THE SETTLEMENT IS A TREMENDOUS POSITIVE AND REALLY CONGRATULATE
THE BOARD ON A LOT OF GOOD WORK.

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

AND I THINK OUR LAST SPEAKER FOR TONIGHT, ANYWAY.

PLEASE.

>>CATHI GERO: HELLO, I'M CATHI GERO.

I'M A CPA AND A SOFTWARE CONSULTANT.

AND I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT I SUPPORT THE PROPOSED RENEWAL PROCESS.

THIS ALLOWS THE COMPANIES TO INVEST IN THE FUTURE WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT
THEY WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO RECOVER THEIR STARTUP COSTS.

THIS WILL PROVIDE A PROCESS THAT WILL PROMOTE A THRIVING AND GROWING
INDUSTRY.

YOU WILL NEED TO HAVE RULES IN PLACE FOR THEIR ACCOUNTABILITY SO THAT IF
THERE ARE ANY ISSUES THAT COME UP, THERE IS A COST FOR THAT.

BUT I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT I THINK THE CONTRACT, YOU SHOULD MOVE FORWARD
ON, AND PROVIDE A WAY OF GOING FORWARD.

SO THANK YOU.



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

WELL, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'VE COME TO NEARLY 6:00, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
PATIENCE, AND I INVITE YOU TO RETURN TO THIS ROOM TOMORROW MORNING AT 9:00
FOR THE NEXT SESSION OF THE PUBLIC FORUM.

I HOPE THAT YOU ALL ENJOY THIS EVENING.

I THINK WE HAVE A RATHER INTERESTING GAMES CASINO AWAITING US.

SO UNTIL TOMORROW MORNING, I HOPE YOU HAVE A PLEASANT EVENING.

AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TODAY.



SORRY, FOLKS.

THERE IS A STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR 6:00.

SO GIVEN THE LATENESS OF THIS SESSION, PERHAPS WE CAN START AT 6:15.

WOULD THAT BE OKAY?

ARE WE -- YES, THE BOARD DOES NOT NEED TO STAY UP HERE.

AND IT'S IN THE TARGET AREA.

(5:55 P.M.)

© Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers