ICANN|ARCHIVES

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

>>VINT CERF: I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY BUT WE THOUGHT WE MIGHT WAIT FOR A FEW MORE PEOPLE TO ARRIVE.




PAUL, IS KURT THERE WITH YOU?
TWO MORE MINUTES AND THEN WE'LL START.




>>VINT CERF: ALL RIGHT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY NAME IS VINT CERF. I'M CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ICANN AND I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS 22ND MEETING OF ICANN TO ORDER.
OUR COLLEAGUES APPARENTLY ARE STILL UPSTAIRS EATING, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF THIS WEEK.
SO WE HOPE THEY WILL JOIN US SHORTLY.
IN THE MEANTIME, I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE PAUL VERHOEF AND KURT PRITZ TO JOINTLY GIVE THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT.
NORMALLY THIS REPORT WOULD BE GIVEN BY PAUL TWOMEY, AS MANY OF YOU ARE AWARE, HE TOOK ILL ON RETURN FROM A TRIP AROUND EASTERTIME, BUT WE UNDERSTAND HE'S NOW OUT OF HOSPITAL, BUT THE DOCTOR WON'T LET HIM TRAVEL FOR A WHILE LONGER. SO IN HIS PLACE, KURT PRITZ AND PAUL VERHOEF WILL MAKE THE REPORT.
SO KURT, I TURN THIS OVER TO YOU NOW.
>>KURT PRITZ:THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I KNOW I SHOULDN'T CALL THIS THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT, PERHAPS THE NOT QUITE PRESIDENT'S REPORT, BUT AFTER THIS WEEK CERTAINLY NOT THE ASPIRING PRESIDENT'S REPORT.
I WISH TO THANK OUR HOST, CABASE, AND SPONSORS FOR PROVIDING THIS REVENUE -- THIS VENUE INFRASTRUCTURE AND OF COURSE THE DIVERSIONS WE'VE EXPERIENCED TO LAY THE FOUNDATION REQUIRED FOR THIS VERY SUCCESSFUL MEETING. AND I'M SURE A MORE FORMAL EXPRESSION OF WELL-MERITED THANKS WILL BE MADE LATER THIS EVENING. AND OF COURSE WHILE THIS MEETING MISSES THE PRESENCE OF DR. PAUL TWOMEY, ITS SUCCESS THUS FAR IS CLEARLY DUE TO THE PLANNING AND PROCESSES HE'S PUT INTO PLACE IN BUILDING THE ICANN ORGANIZATION.
PAUL IS SUCH A NECESSARY AND APPRECIATED PART OF THESE MEETINGS THAT I'M SURE NO ONE WILL MIND ME TAKING THE TIME TO REPORT THAT PAUL IS NOW OUT OF HOSPITAL AND RECOVERING FROM HIS RECENT AILMENT. AND FOR THAT, THE ICANN STAFF IS PARTICULARLY GRATEFUL.
TO TURN TO ICANN INITIATIVES AND THE EFFORTS DISPLAYED BY THE COMMUNITY MEETING, I WILL -- I WILL START DESCRIBING SOME OF THE INITIATIVES AND THEN PAUL VERHOEF WILL CONTINUE.
THE FIRST -- THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF ATTENTION AND ENERGY PUT INTO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT ICANN STRATEGIC PLAN. ICANN DEVELOPED THE PLAN WITH THE AIM TO ESTABLISH A LONGER TERM PLANNING PROCESS FOR ICANN. IT'S CERTAINLY NECESSARY TO HAVE SUCH A PLAN FOR AN ONGOING OPERATION. IT'S INTENDED TO BE A THREE-YEAR ROLLING PLAN, AND BASED ON -- IT'S BASED ON COMMUNITY-DERIVED OBJECTIVES. AND THE REQUIREMENTS LAID OUT IN OUR MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.
IT'S CERTAINLY NOT INTENDED TO REPLACE THE BUDGETING PROCESS, BUT IT WILL INFORM THE ANNUAL OPERATIONS AND BUDGET PLANNING. AND THE STRATEGIC PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED ANNUALLY TO ENSURE NEW OBJECTIVES ARE INTEGRATED WITH NECESSARY RESOURCES.
IT'S PRESENTLY STILL UNDERGOING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND CONSULTATION BEFORE RELEASE OF A FINAL DRAFT.
CONSULTATION ON THE PLAN TO DATE HAS INCLUDED A SIGNIFICANT MEETING OF STAKEHOLDERS IN AMSTERDAM, SEVERAL CONFERENCE CALLS BETWEEN ICANN AND INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUENCIES AND A PUBLIC COMMENT FORWARD. THESE COMMENTS WERE ALL CONSOLIDATED INTO A REPORT FURNISHED BY AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY.
AN UNINTENDED BENEFIT FROM THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A ROUTINIZED ICANN PLANNING CYCLE WHERE WE'RE DIVIDING THE YEAR UP INTO TWO SIX-MONTH SEGMENTS, AND THE FIRST HALF OF THE FISCAL YEAR WILL BE THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS FOR ICANN AND THE CONSULTATION ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, AND THE SECOND SIX MONTHS OF THE FISCAL YEAR, FROM JULY -- FROM JANUARY TO JULY, TO JUNE, WILL BE THE BUDGETING PROCESS WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE FORMULATION OF AN OPERATIONAL PLAN WITH MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES AND THEN THE BUDGET, THE REVENUES AND EXPENSES THAT GO WITH IT.
THE FEEDBACK WE'VE RECEIVED THIS WEEK AT THESE MEETINGS HAS BEEN VERY GOOD. AND AS A RESULT OF THE MOST RECENT MEETINGS, WHICH WAS THE DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY AND YESTERDAY, ICANN WILL BE ISSUING A REVISED PLAN, STILL DURING THE TIME PERIOD OF THIS MEETING. THAT REVISED PLAN WILL CONSIST OF TWO DOCUMENTS. ONE IS A REVISED STRATEGIC PLAN WITH AMENDMENTS MADE TO IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DISCUSSIONS IN THE MEETING HERE, AND THE SECOND ARE THOSE COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS THAT REQUIRE MORE THOUGHT AND CONSULTATION AND CANNOT BE INCORPORATED RIGHT AWAY; WILL BE IDENTIFIED, PRESERVED, AND ADDRESSED AT A LATER TIME, BUT VERY SHORTLY.
MOVING ON TO THE ICANN BUDGET, THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET WORK SO FAR SEEKS TO PROVIDE FOR THIS UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR IN 2005-2006, SEEKS TO PROVIDE RESOURCES TO ACCOMPLISH A SPECIFIC SET OF MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES; I.E., AN OPERATING PLAN, OR AN ANNUAL OPERATING PLAN. AND THAT OPERATING PLAN HAS ALSO BEEN THE SUBJECT OF FAIRLY EXTENSIVE CONSULTATIONS PRIOR TO AND AT THIS MEETING IN MAR DEL PLATA.
THE BUDGET, THE REVENUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUDGET ARE INTENDED TO ENABLE ICANN TO ACCOMPLISH ITS MISSION, COMPLETE THE MOU WITH THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AND ALSO KEEP PACE WITH A GROWING DNS PROVIDER COMMUNITY. AND BY A GROWING DNS COMMUNITY, I MEAN THE RECENT GROWTH IN NUMBER OF GTLD REGISTRARS SINCE I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE ICANN STAFF FROM APPROXIMATELY 192 TO OVER 450.
THE DESIGNATION OF ADDITIONAL GTLDS FROM THE PRESENT 15 TO WHAT WILL SURELY BE MORE THAN THAT IN THE RELATIVELY NEAR FUTURE, AND PURSUING -- ICANN IS ALSO PURSUING AGREEMENTS WITH CCTLDS.
AND OF COURSE REGISTRATIONS IN GTLDS AND CCTLDS ARE GROWING AT A VERY RAPID PACE AS BORNE OUT BY THE PUBLISHED STATISTICS.
AND THEN ALONG WITH THAT, THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS ARE DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING -- THEY'RE DEVELOPING NEW POLICIES FOR ICANN IMPLEMENTATION AND THEN CONTRACTUAL COMPLIANCE.
ADDITIONALLY, THE BUDGET IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A RESERVE, CASH RESERVE, AS REQUIRED BY SOUND BUSINESS PRACTICE.
WE HAVE AND ARE PUTTING INTO PLACE THOUGHTFUL, EFFECTIVE CONTROLS AND PROCESSES TO ENSURE ECONOMICAL DECISIONS AND PROPER CONSULTATIONS ARE MADE REGARDING HOW REVENUE IS EXPENDED. AND PART OF OUR PLEDGE IN GENERATING REVENUE HAS BEEN TO DEVELOP NEW SOURCES OF REVENUE. AND IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THAT GOAL, WE HAVE ALTERED THE FEE STRUCTURE OF SOME GTLD REGISTRIES. AND AS A RESULT, ICANN EXPECTS TO RECEIVE, OR PLANS TO RECEIVE, AT LEAST IN THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET, $23.5 MILLION IN REVENUE NEXT YEAR.
JUST TO REITERATE, WE ARE PUTTING INTO PLACE CONTROLS TO EFFECTIVELY SPEND THAT MONEY.
VERY IMPORTANTLY, IN OUR CONSULTATIONS WITH THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, THE STABLE SOURCE OF FUNDING PUTS ICANN ON A PATH ALONG WITH THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE OBJECTIVES IN THE MOU TO BECOME A FULLY AUTONOMOUS ENTITY.
REGARDING THAT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, IT REMAINS VERY IMPORTANT TO ICANN FOR THE REASONS I JUST OUTLINED. THAT MOU HAS 25 DISTINCT DELIVERABLES. THROUGH THE FIRST 18 MONTHS OF THE MOU, ICANN HAS COMPLETED 17 OF THE 25 DELIVERABLES. MOST OF THOSE DELIVERABLES WERE REQUIRED BY A CERTAIN DATE, AND ICANN MADE TIMELY DELIVERY ON ALL OF THEM.
AND YOU'LL APPRECIATE, OF COURSE, THAT THE MOU DELIVERABLES ARE NOT JUST A REQUIREMENT SET OUT BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BUT THEY'RE ESTABLISHED COLLABORATIVELY BECAUSE THEY CONTAIN WHAT IS CONSIDERED TO BE GOOD, SOUND BUSINESS PRACTICES.
SO ICANN IS NOT JUST ACHIEVING MILESTONES IN CHECKING BOXES BUT IT'S IMPROVING AS AN EFFECTIVE ORGANIZATION.
TURNING TO IANA BRIEFLY, AND THERE WILL BE A MORE COMPLETE ON IANA PROCESSES LATER, WE'RE CLOSE -- ICANN IS CLOSE TO COMPLETING ITS STAFFING PLAN FOR THE IANA ORGANIZATION, AND THAT STAFFING PLAN IS DESIGNED TO MEET THE PERCEIVED NEEDS OF ICANN STAKEHOLDERS. SO WE'RE GRATIFIED BY THE ADDITIONS OF NEW STAFF AND THE TRAINING THAT'S TAKEN PLACE AND THEIR PERFORMANCE TO DATE.
IN ADDITION, AS WORKED OUT WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, A REQUEST TRACKING SYSTEM HAS BEEN PUT INTO PLACE FOR ALL PUBLICLY FACING IANA ADDRESSES THAT RECORD ALL INFORMATION REGARDING A REQUEST AND ACKNOWLEDGES THE REQUEST FROM OUR STAKEHOLDERS.
IANA PERFORMANCE STATISTICS CONTINUE TO SHOW CONSISTENT PROCESS. IN MARCH, IANA COMPLETED MANY ROUTE MANAGEMENT REQUESTS THAT HAD AGED DUE TO VARIOUS REASONS.
THIS MEETING, I THINK, HAS BEEN PARTICULARLY EFFECTIVE FOR A NUMBER OF WORKSHOPS THAT HAVE BEEN HELD. THERE WILL BE A MORE COMPLETE REPORT ON THESE WORKSHOPS LATER IN THIS MEETING, BUT SOME OF THEM ARE WORKSHOP ON DNSSEC THAT'S WORKING TOWARD PROVIDING A SECURE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE DOMAIN SYSTEM AND A STRUCTURE UPON WHICH REGISTRANTS CAN CONTINUE TO RELY. THERE'S ALSO A WORKSHOP ON DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING AND THE PROTECTION OF REGISTRANTS. THE PROTECTION OF REGISTRANTS IS A THEME THAT HAS DEVELOPED IN THE COURSE OF THIS MEETING IN SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE HIGHLIGHTED.
THERE WAS ALSO DISCUSSIONS IN A MEETING CONCERNING IDNS. IDNS HAVE BEEN THE SUBJECT OF TWO COMPLETE WORKSHOPS IN PAST MEETINGS, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO ADDITIONAL WORKSHOPS IN LUXEMBOURG.
HERE WE FOCUS MAINLY ON THE REVIEW OF IDN GUIDELINES AND ICANN IS UNDERTAKING AN APPROPRIATE PROCESS FOR THE REVISION OF THESE GUIDELINES. THE WORK IN THAT REGARD HAS INCLUDED AN IMPRESSIVE AMOUNT OF WORK IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY TOGETHER WITH THE IAB, IETF, BROWSER AND OTHER PROVIDER COMMUNITIES AND THEY'RE WORKING TOWARD FINDING A SOLUTION TOWARD REWRITING THE GUIDELINES.
IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE WE WILL ALSO COMPLETE THE FORMATION OF THE PRESIDENT'S COMMITTEE ON IDNS AND THAT COMMITTEE WILL CONSULT WITH THE TECHNICAL COMMUNITY ON THESE VERY ISSUES.
THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING THE -- REGARDING GENERIC TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS. AS YOU ALL KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A NEW ROUND OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPONSORED TLDS. THERE WILL BE A MORE COMPLETE REPORT LATER, BUT THESE EVALUATIONS, THE EVALUATIONS OF THESE APPLICATIONS, HAVE BROUGHT SEVERAL INTERESTING ISSUES THAT WILL INFORM THE GTLD PROCESS TO TAKE PLACE LATER. BUT THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE GTLD PROCESS IS THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED TEN APPLICATIONS FOR THE DESIGNATION OF NEW STLDS, AND I'M PLEASED TO REPORT THAT NEGOTIATIONS ARE COMPLETED AND ARE AWAITING BOARD APPROVAL ON TWO OF THEM, DOT JOBS AND DOT TRAVEL. THERE ARE ONGOING NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE DESIGNATION OF AN STLD WITH DOT CAT, DOT POST AND DOT MOBI, WHO HAVE ALL BEEN DETERMINED TO MEET THE BASELINE CRITERIA SET OUT IN THE RFP. THERE ARE APPLICATIONS STILL BEING MEASURED AGAINST THE BASELINE CRITERIA, THEY'VE BEEN AFFORDED TO REVISE THEIR APPLICATIONS, AND THOSE REAPPLICATIONS ARE BEING CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW. THOS!
E TLD APPLICANTS INCLUDE TELNIC, DOT MAIL, DOT ASIA, AND DOT TRIPLE X.
MOVING ON TO THE ISSUE OF FINDING A SUCCESSOR OPERATOR FOR THE DOT NET REGISTRY, AS YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE READ THE CONTRACT THERE'S A LEGAL REQUIREMENT IN THE DOT NET CONTRACT TO REBID AND FIND A DOT NET SUCCESSOR. THIS CONTRACT EXPIRES ON JULY 1ST, 2005.
A PROCESS WAS DEVELOPED FOR LOCATING THE SUCCESSOR ENTITY, AND THE PROCESS WAS PRESENTED TO AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD. CRITERIA WERE BASED ON GNSO RECOMMENDATIONS AND AN RFP WAS PUBLISHED.
BIDS WERE RECEIVED FROM FIVE APPLICANTS, AND A FULL EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATIONS WAS CONDUCTED BY AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY. SOME EXPERTS GAVE ADVICE TO THAT THIRD-PARTY REGARDING EVALUATION OF CRITERIA, BUT NOT EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATIONS THEMSELVES. THE REPORT FROM THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS WAS RECEIVED LAST WEEK. THERE WAS VERY GOOD NEWS THERE, AND THAT IS THAT ALL FIVE APPLICANTS WERE FOUND TO BE CAPABLE, FULLY CAPABLE OF OPERATING A REGISTRY THE SCOPE OF DOT NET, AND WE THINK THAT'S A MAJOR TRIBUTE TO THE MATURITY OF THIS SECTOR. IT'S ALSO AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN THE CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPING AND DESIGNATING NEW GTLDS. NOW THAT WE HAVE THE EVALUATION REPORT, AS CONTEMPLATED, WE'RE RECEIVING QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS REGARDING THIS EVALUATION AND WE ARE UNDERGOING A PROCESS WITH THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATION TEAM AS WE CONTINUE TO MOVE ALONG IN THIS PROCESS. THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER ALL THE ELEMENTS, OF COURSE, IN THIS PROCESS PRIOR TO APPROVING AN AGREEMENT.
SO THIS CLOSES MY PART OF THE REPORT, AND I'D LIKE TO NOW DEFER TO PAUL VERHOEF, THE VICE PRESIDENT OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, KURT.
>>PAUL VERHOEF: MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, GOOD AFTERNOON. LET ME COMPLETE THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT.
WE WERE ON THE TOPIC OF GTLD. THE GTLD AREAS. FIRST OF ALL, THE STRATEGY FOR INTRODUCTION OF NEW GTLDS, THE WORK ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRATEGY CONTINUES. WE HAVE RECENTLY RECEIVED A WIPO REPORT ON THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASPECTS OF THIS WORK AND THIS IS POSTED.
WE ARE AWAITING FURTHER THE RESULTS OF THE GTLD SELECTION PROCESSES AS IT PRESENTS MAJOR INPUT TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRATEGY FOR NEW GTLDS IN GENERAL.
THE STAFF IS BUSY MAPPING OUT THE ISSUES WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS AREA.
WE HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF COMPLEX ISSUES. FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE TECHNICAL AREAS, HOW MANY GTLDS CAN BE ADDED WITHOUT RAISING SECURITY OR STABILITY PROBLEMS. ARE THERE REASONS TO LIMIT NUMBERS OF -- REASONS TO LIMIT THE LENGTH OF THE IDENTIFIERS, HOW TO ADDRESS SENSITIVITIES RELATED TO CHOICES OF IDENTIFIERS, ET CETERA.
ONCE THAT MAPPING OUT PROCESS IS COMPLETE, WE WILL COME TO THE COMMUNITY TO LOOK AT HOW WE'RE GOING TO INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY IN THE DISCUSSIONS ON THAT.
WE HAVE RECENTLY ADDED A STAFF MEMBER IN THIS AREA WITH THE MAIN TASK OF MOVING THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC FORWARD.
ON THE WIPO II IMPLEMENTATION, AS YOU ARE AWARE THERE WAS A JOINT WORKING GROUP THAT WAS NOT ABLE TO COME TO CONSENSUS ON THIS MATTER. AND THE STAFF WAS ASKED BY THE BOARD TO HOLD INFORMAL DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY TO DISCUSS HOW TO PROGRESS AND TO REPORT ON THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
ALTHOUGH THE STAFF HAS CONTINUED THIS WORK, WE HAVE NOT YET BEEN ABLE TO COMPLETE IT. AND WE'RE NOW STEPPING UP THE EFFORTS NOW THAT NEW STAFF IS ON BOARD.
IN TERMS OF GNSO-RELATED ACTIVITIES, AS ALREADY MENTIONED, PROBABLY AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN THE ADDITION OF LONG AWAITED STAFF RESOURCES, AND I THINK IT IS ALREADY SHOWN THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION TO PROVIDE MUCH BETTER SUPPORT TO THE GNSO.
WITHIN THE GNSO THERE IS AN IMPORTANT FOCUS ON WHOIS. ON THE REQUEST OF THE TASK FORCE, THE STAFF HAS PUT TOGETHER A MAJOR REPORT TO ALLOW THE TASK FORCES TO REVIEW THE OVERALL DISCUSSIONS OVER THE LAST YEARS SO AS TO ALLOW THE DISCUSSIONS TO FOCUS ON ESSENTIALS. THIS HAS BEEN A MAJOR PIECE OF WORK AND I THINK IT IS HELPING IN MOVING IT FORWARD.
WE NOTICED A COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE GNSO AND THE GAC WHICH IS INCREASING TO TRY AND ADDRESS SOME OF THE UNDERLYING PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES.
THE GNSO REVIEW IS COMPLETED, GNSO COUNCIL REVIEW IS COMPLETED BY AN EXTERNAL CONSULTANT AND HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE STAFF. WE'RE CURRENTLY WRITING UP A REPORT FOR SUBMISSION TO THE BOARD IN BRINGING THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CONSULTANT AND THE RESULTS OF THE OVERALL PROCESS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE BOARD.
WE FIND THAT THERE ARE SOME VERY GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CONSULTANTS, AND WE HOPE TO COMMENCE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE GNSO COUNCIL SHORTLY TO DISCUSS THESE RECOMMENDATIONS; PARTICULARLY IN AGREEING IN MORE DETAIL HOW TO STAFF, AND THE GNSO COUNCIL CAN COLLABORATE.
LET ME MOVE TO THE COUNTRY CODE TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN AREA.
FIRST IN TERMS OF REDELEGATIONS, THE IANA STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING HARD TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF REDELEGATION IMPLEMENTATIONS. CURRENTLY, THERE ARE SIX OUTSTANDING REDELEGATION IMPLEMENTATIONS, THREE OF WHICH WE EXPECT TO BE CLOSING SHORTLY.
ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS. YOU WILL HAVE SEEN THAT WE HAVE COMPLETED THE FRAMEWORK OF ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE DELEGATION OF THE DOT EU CCTLD, WHICH WILL BE A MAJOR EVENT IN EUROPE ONCE IT IS IMPLEMENTED.
WE HAVE FURTHERMORE 11 FORMAL COMMITMENTS EITHER IN-HOUSE OR EXPECTED SHORTLY TO COMMENCE DISCUSSIONS ON ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS. AND FURTHERMORE, WE HAVE 20 INFORMAL REQUESTS TO COMMENCE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CCTLD MANAGERS.
WE ARE CURRENTLY PILOTING WITH ONE CCTLD, ONE OF THE NEW STYLE ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS, AND WE ARE HOPING TO CONCLUDE THAT ONE SHORTLY. IT WILL WORK AS A BASELINE FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH THE REST.
THE CCNSO HAS COMMENCED WORK ON THE PRINCIPLES TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE FRAMEWORKS OF ACCOUNTABILITY, AND WE ARE HAPPY THAT THAT WORK IS PROGRESSING.
AS FAR AS CCNSO ACTIVITIES ARE CONCERNED ALSO THERE WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PUT IN PLACE STAFF RESOURCES, AND THE STAFF HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CCNSO ON A NUMBER OF ISSUES, INCLUDING CONTINUING IMPROVEMENTS TO IANA PROCEDURES AND FUNCTIONALITY, DEVELOPING GUIDELINES ASSOCIATED WITH ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS, AS I MENTIONED, MODELS FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE ICANN BUDGET AND HOW THE CCTLD MANAGERS CAN CONTRIBUTE TO THE WSIS PROCESS.
WE ARE PLEASED TO SEE THAT THE WORKING GROUPS ARE MOVING FORWARD AND THAT THEY ARE POPULATED WITH MANY INTERESTED PARTICIPANTS.
LET ME ADDRESS THE IP ADDRESSING-RELATED MATTERS.
AFRINIC IS EXPECTED TO RECEIVE ITS FORMAL RECOGNITION FROM ICANN, FROM THE ICANN BOARD, AS THE REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRY FOR AFRICA. FROM THE STAFF SIDE WE ARE AWARE THIS IS AN VERY IMPORTANT MILESTONE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET IN AFRICA AND CERTAINLY ATTRIBUTE TO THE HARD WORK ON THAT CONTINENT AS WELL AS THE SUPPORT OF THE OTHER RIRS. WE FORESEE ALSO THAT THE BOARD IS DECIDING ON THE ADOPTION OF THE GLOBAL IPV4 POLICY FOLLOWING A PROPOSAL FROM THE ASO. IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT IT IS AN IMPORTANT FIRST DELIVERABLE FOLLOWING THE SECOND YEAR OF THE MOU BETWEEN ICANN AND THE ASO.
IN THE AREA OF AT LARGE, BOTH THE WORK OF THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AS WELL THE ADVOCACY EFFORTS OF THE AT-LARGE STRUCTURES IN THE REGIONS CONTINUES TO BE SUPPORTED WITH STAFF.
WE HAVE RECEIVED A REQUEST TO REVIEW STAFF SUPPORT, INCLUDING TO CONSIDER, AS PART OF THE OVERALL CONSIDERATIONS ON REGIONAL PRESENCE, STAFFING EFFORTS IN RELATION TO THE SUPPORT OF THE AT-LARGE STRUCTURES.
IF WE MOVE ON TO THE GAC, WE CONTINUE TO LIAISE WITH THE GAC ON THE ISSUES ON THE CONSIDERATIONS. WE HAVE FORESEEN TO RECRUIT A STAFF LIAISON IN THAT AREA AND INFORMED THE GAC THEREOF.
THE LIAISON WILL CERTAINLY BE PUT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT THE GAC IS INFORMED OF ALL ONGOING MATTERS IN THE OVERALL ICANN FRAMEWORK, AND THE LIAISON WILL WORK WITH OUR POLICY STAFF TO FACILITATE THEIR INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THE GAC AND THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES.
WE HAVE RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM THE GAC TO CONSIDER FUNDING A LIMITED NUMBER OF GOVERNMENTAL PARTICIPANTS FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO ICANN MEETINGS, AND WE'LL BE CONSIDERING THAT. THIS YEAR'S NOMCOM HAS ITS FIRST PHYSICAL MEETING LATER THIS WEEK IN MAR DEL PLATA. AND THE STAFF IS PROVIDING SECRETARIAL SUPPORT TO THE NOMCOM PROCESS.
THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NOMCOM WILL BE SPEAKING TO YOU LATER DURING THIS PUBLIC SESSION.
LET ME MOVE ON TO INTERNATIONALIZATION. FIRST OF ALL, ICANN'S OUTREACH EFFORTS. WE REMAIN ACTIVE IN THE OUTREACH ACTIVITIES AND ENGAGEMENT TO INFORM INTERESTED PARTIES AROUND THE WORLD. MOSTLY THIS TAKES PLACE THROUGH DEDICATED WORKSHOPS AND PRESENTATIONS OR PRESENCE AT INTERNATIONAL GATHERINGS AND CONFERENCES, WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH REGIONAL AND LOCAL ICANN STAKEHOLDERS ON PARTICIPATION IN OUTREACH EFFORTS AND IMPROVING MATERIALS PROVIDED ON ICANN, INCLUDING TRANSLATIONS.
MOVE TO ICANN'S REGIONAL LIAISONS.
AS DISTINCT FROM A REGIONAL PRESENCE, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF HIRING REGIONAL LIAISONS THAT WILL BE BASED IN THE CURRENT OFFICES. WITH THESE LIAISONS, WE CAN START TO BETTER SUPPORT COUNTRIES AND LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS IN PROBLEM SOLVING ON INTERNET RELATED ISSUES UNDER ICANN'S MANDATE AND ENSURING PARTICIPATION BY ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN ALL REGIONS, AND ENSURE THAT ICANN IS RESPONSIVE TO THE NEEDS OF ITS CONSTITUENTS AS IT COMPLETES THE MOU AND BECOMES A TRULY GLOBAL ORGANIZATION. AT THE SAME TIME, ICANN STAFF CONTINUES ITS ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH REGIONAL PRESENCE, AND WE ARE INTERESTED TO RECEIVE INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY ON THE ISSUE, AND WE WILL PROVIDE OUR FINDINGS TO THE BOARD IN DUE COURSE.
WE COME TO THE LAST TOPIC, WSIS AND WGIG.
OBVIOUSLY, WE FOLLOWED THE DISCUSSIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WSIS AND THE WGIG WITH INTEREST AND CONTINUE TO BE AVAILABLE TO BRIEF PARTICIPANTS AND PARTIES INVOLVED IN THE DISCUSSIONS AS WE ARE CONCERNED TO ENSURE THAT THE WSIS AND WGIG PARTICIPANTS ARE ABLE TO HAVE WELL-INFORMED DISCUSSIONS. WE ARE PARTICULARLY HAPPY THAT MARKUS KUMMER, THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT OF THE WGIG IS PRESENT FOR THE THIRD TIME AT AN ICANN MEETING AND WE WELCOME HIM AND APPRECIATE HIS PRESENCE VERY MUCH.
DURING THIS ICANN MEETING, ANOTHER WORKSHOP TOOK PLACE ON THE WSIS AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK FROM THIS POSITION BOTH THE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, COMING FROM MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND THE STAFF AS WELL AS THE SPEAKERS AND PARTICIPANTS.
AS WE ARE GETTING CLOSER TO THE ACTUAL SUMMIT, I WOULD GUESS THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER WSIS WORKSHOP IN LUXEMBOURG. WHETHER WE WILL HAVE ONE IN VANCOUVER AFTER THE SUMMIT I WILL LEAVE OPEN.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND BOTH KURT AND I ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PAUL.
AND, IN FACT, THERE IS TIME IN THE AGENDA FOR QUESTIONS FOR KURT OR PAUL WITH REGARD TO THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT.
SO I'LL INVITE QUESTIONS TO COME TO THE MICROPHONES, IF YOU HAVE ANY.
APPARENTLY NOT.
IN THAT CASE, WE WILL GO ON.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PAUL.
WE WILL GO ON NOW TO THE NEXT TOPIC.
AND THAT IS THE ROOT-SERVER SYSTEM ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT.
AND I WOULD CALL ON SUZANNE WOOLF TO GIVE THAT REPORT.

>>SUZANNE WOOLF: I GUESS I'M NOT QUITE AS TALL AS PAUL VERHOEF, EITHER, MUCH AS I'M NEVER QUITE AS TALL AS PAUL TWOMEY.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU A VERY BRIEF UPDATE ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ROOT-SERVER SYSTEM ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, OURS IS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL ICANN ADVISORY COMMITTEES, FORMED TO OFFER ADVICE ON THE OPERATION OF THE ROOT NAME SERVERS AND COORDINATION AT THE TECHNICAL TOP LEVEL OF THE DNS.
AS MANY OF YOU ALSO KNOW, OUR ROLE IS PRINCIPALLY TECHNICAL.
THE CONTENTS OF THE ROOT ZONE IS OUT OF SCOPE FOR US EXCEPT AS TO ITS OPERATIONAL AND STRICTLY TECHNICAL ASPECTS.
WE TAKE NO STAND ON ANY ISSUE REGARDING SUCH TOPICS AS WHAT TLDS SHOULD EXIST OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.
THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ARE THE ROOT NAME SERVER OPERATORS AND OTHER LIAISONS AND OBSERVERS.
WE HAVE, FOR INSTANCE, THE REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRIES, A LIAISON FROM THE GAC AND VARIOUS OTHER PARTICIPANTS IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY.
WE MOST RECENTLY MET AT THE IETF IN MARCH.
WE TYPICALLY MEET AT THOSE IETFS.
DNSSEC REMAINS A KEY TOPIC, BECAUSE SOFTWARE CHANGES AND OPERATIONAL ADVICE TO IANA ARE PART OF THE DEPLOYMENT.
THE STAND HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AS A SERIES OF RFCS, WHICH IS A MAJOR MILESTONE.
AND WE'RE WORKING WITH ICANN, THE SSAC, AND OTHERS ON CONTRIBUTING KNOWLEDGE TO DEPLOYMENT DETAILS AND PLANNING.
AS INDIVIDUALS, MANY OF US ARE PARTICIPATING IN IMPLEMENTATION EFFORTS, TESTING, DEVELOPMENT OF OPERATIONAL AND BEST PRACTICES AND SO ON FOR DNSSEC.
WE VIEW IT AS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY.
BUT IT'S REQUIRING A GREAT DEAL OF WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING AND TO EXERCISE APPROPRIATE CARE IN INTRODUCING ANY CHANGE.
WE'RE CONTINUING STUDY AROUND -- YEAH, THAT'S THE NEXT PAGE.
WE'RE CONTINUING STUDY AROUND AN ASPECT OF DEPLOYING IPV6 AS WELL.
IANA HAS BEEN ADDING RECORDS FOR TLDS THAT HAVE IPV6 CONNECTIVITY SINCE LAST YEAR.
BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT WHETHER THERE MIGHT BE ANY SPECIAL ASPECTS OR LIMITATIONS TO ADDING IPV6 RECORDS FOR THE ROOT SERVERS THEMSELVES.
OBVIOUSLY, IPV6 CONNECTIVITY IS AN IMPORTANT STEP FORWARD FOR THE ROOT SERVERS.
BUT, AGAIN, WE ARE EXERCISING THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF CARE IN MAKING SURE THAT THERE ARE NO UNUSUAL OR SPECIAL ASPECTS TO ADDING THOSE ADDITIONAL CAPABILITIES.
ANOTHER TECHNICAL ISSUE WE HAVE TAKEN UP INVOLVES THE RETIREMENT OF OLD IP ADDRESSES FOR ROOT NAME SERVERS.
IT'S OCCASIONALLY NECESSARY TO RENUMBER A ROOT NAME SERVER.
AND THE CONSERVATIVE APPROACH HAS BEEN TO MAINTAIN SERVICE ON THE OLD ADDRESS FOR FIVE YEARS JUST TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR ANY DISRUPTION.
WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THE PROCESS A COUPLE OF TIMES NOW AND HAVE SOME ANALYSIS, SOME DATA OF -- REGARDING WHAT TRAFFIC THE OLD ADDRESSES CONTINUE TO GET.
SO WE ARE ANALYZING THE POSSIBILITY THAT FUTURE RENUMBERING TRANSITIONS COULD BE COMPLETED IN A SHORTER PERIOD.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS THAT CAME OUT OF THIS MOST RECENT MEETING.
THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION, AND THE VOLUME SEEMS TO BE RISING, ABOUT THE VISIBILITY OF RSSAC EFFORTS.
WE'VE BEEN HEARING MORE AND MORE THROUGH ICANN, OUR DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTS, ISOC, AND SO ON, THAT OUR TECHNICAL ROLE IS OF WIDER INTEREST THAN IN THE PAST AND NEEDS MORE TRANSPARENCY.
IT SEEMS TO US VERY MUCH THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING OF A PUBLIC RELATIONS PROBLEM.
THE FACT THAT WE ARE NEUTRAL ON POLICY MAKES US SEEM DISENGAGED WHEN, IN FACT, THE BEST THING WE CAN DO FOR THE INTERNET IS CONTINUE TO DO THE TECHNICAL JOB TO THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE STANDARD.
HOWEVER, WITH THAT IN MIND, WE'RE ASKING ICANN FOR SOME ADMINISTRATIVE HELP WITH ISSUES LIKE WEB SITE MAINTENANCE AND OTHER MANAGEMENT OF VISIBILITY AND MAKING SURE OUR ROLE IN THE COMMUNITY IS CLEAR AND PEOPLE CAN FIND US, THAT WE'RE ACCESSIBLE.
WE CONTINUE, AS BEFORE, WE DO PARTICIPATE IN ICANN MEETINGS, IETF. A NUMBER OF US ARE INVOLVED WITH THE SSAC.
WE HAVE PARTICIPATED IN TECHNICAL EFFORTS.
THERE'S AN ISOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON WGIG THAT A COUPLE OF THE ROOT SERVER OPERATORS ARE INVOLVED IN.
SO WE ARE CONTINUING TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY AND BE PART OF THE COMMUNITY.
WE PUBLISH -- WELL, SOME NUMBER OF THE ROOT SERVER OPERATORS PUBLISH TECHNICAL INFORMATION AT ROOT SERVERS.ORG.
THERE'S ALSO AN ICANN PAGE AND A COMMITTEE PAGE OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL NEWS.
AND WE ARE CONTINUING TO BE AROUND, BE AVAILABLE.
TALK TO US.
THERE IS ALSO A COMMENT ADDRESS.
YOU CAN FIND US AT RSSAC@ICANN.ORG.
SO ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FIND US.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SUZANNE.
THERE WILL BE SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHER QUESTIONS LATER.
I WANT TO CONTINUE GOING THROUGH THESE BASIC REPORTS.
BUT WE'LL HAVE SOME TIME FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR OR FROM THE BOARD.
I'D LIKE TO CALL ON STEVE CROCKER NOW TO GIVE THE REPORT OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
THIS IS A NONTRIVIAL EXERCISE TO EXTRACT YOURSELF FROM ONE END OF THE TABLE AND GET TO THE OTHER ONE.
PLEASE WATCH YOUR STEP.
WHILE YOU'RE PREPARING YOURSELF, I NOTE THAT THE ROOM CONTINUES TO BE RELATIVELY EMPTY.
DOES THIS MEANS THAT OUR COLLEAGUES ARE STILL EATING AND DRINKING UPSTAIRS ON THE 12TH FLOOR?
MAYBE WE COULD GO UP THERE AND ASK THEM TO HAVE THE GOOD COURTESY TO BRING AT LEAST SOME WINE DOWN HERE FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE DRINKING THIS PALLID SUBSTANCE CALLED "WATER."
>>STEVE CROCKER: THAT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING.

HMM.
>>VINT CERF: THIS IS OUR SECURE PROJECTION SYSTEM.
IT DOESN'T PERMIT ANY TRANSMISSIONS FROM YOUR LAPTOP, STEVE.
IT'S SPECIALLY CONFIGURED.
>>SUZANNE WOOLF: YEAH, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE STAFF FOR BEING SO FLEXIBLE ABOUT LETTING ME DRIVE MY SLIDES.
>>VINT CERF: THAT SOUNDS LIKE A FRIENDLY SUGGESTION, DOESN'T IT?
THE MINUTES WILL SHOW THAT THE TIME THAT WE GAINED BY A SHORT RSSAC REPORT WERE LOST IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING THE SECURITY CHAIRMAN'S COMPUTER UP.
IS IT TIME FOR A USB TRANSFER TO --
>>STEVE CROCKER: MAYBE SO.
>>VINT CERF: LET'S HEAR IT FOR SNEAKERNET.
>>STEVE CROCKER: WE'RE NOW INTO PLAN B HERE.
ONE SECOND.
OKAY.
SO IT -- THERE WE GO.
NUTS.
>>VINT CERF: IS IT PLUGGED INTO THE PIG TAIL THAT GOES TO THE PROJECTOR, JUST AS KIND OF AN OBVIOUS QUESTION?
>>STEVE CROCKER: I BELIEVE IT'S THE (INAUDIBLE).
>>VINT CERF: HOW MANY ENGINEERS DOES IT TAKE TO GET A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION TO WORK?
>>STEVE CROCKER: WE HAVE A COPY BEING PUT ON THE -- MYSTERIOUS.
ARE YOU GOING TO PROJECT -- GOOD.
ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
THANKS FOR THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE THERE.
I'M STEVE CROCKER.
I CHAIR ICANN'S SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
THE COMMITTEE WAS FORMED AROUND THREE YEARS AGO.
LET ME HAVE THE NEXT SLIDE.
I'LL SAY A WORD ABOUT HOW WE'RE STRUCTURED AND WHAT OUR ACTIVITIES ARE AND THEN REPORT ON TWO ACTIVITIES, DNSSEC DEPLOYMENT AND DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING THAT WE'VE BEEN PUTTING PARTICULAR ATTENTION INTO.
AND WE HAD SUBSTANTIAL WORKSHOPS ON THESE TOPICS HERE DURING THE DAY YESTERDAY.
NEXT SLIDE.
SO THE COMMITTEE IS A -- CHARTERED AS A COMMITTEE FOR THE BOARD.
WE OFFER ADVICE AS -- WHEN ASKED BY THE BOARD OR BY STAFF.
WE ALSO CHOOSE A LOT OF OUR OWN TOPICS.
SO WE'RE NOT JUST STUCK IN A WAITING-TO-BE-ASKED MODE OF OPERATION.
AND WE VIEW OURSELVES AS TRYING TO PROVIDE USEFUL AND HONORABLE ADVICE NOT ONLY TO THE BOARD AND TO THE STAFF, BUT TO THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, AND NOT SOLELY AS A SPOKESPERSON, A SPOKESBODY FOR THE BOARD OR FOR ICANN ITSELF.
WE'RE APPROXIMATELY 20 MEMBERS.
THE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP CHANGES FROM TIME TO TIME.
COMPLETE LIST OF MEMBERS IS AVAILABLE ON THE ICANN WEB SITE.
EVERYONE IS A VOLUNTEER.
EVERYONE HAS A RESPECTABLE DAY JOB IN SOME PART OF THE OVERALL SPECTRUM OF ROOT SERVER OPERATORS, ADDRESS REGISTRIES, GTLD OR CTLD -- CCTLD REGISTRIES, REGISTRARS, OR THE SECURITY COMMUNITY.
THAT IS, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY BUREAUCRATS OR FUNCTIONARIES OR PEOPLE WHOSE SOLE JOB IT IS TO BE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PER SE.
LET'S MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO IN RECENT MONTHS, WE'VE BEEN SPENDING A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME ON THE DNSSEC DEPLOYMENT AND SOME TIME ON THE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING ISSUE.
IN THE BACKGROUND, WE HAVE BEEN PUTTING SOME TIME IN, AND WE'LL INCREASE THE TIME, ON ADD STORM AND ON PHISHING -- AND I SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN DOWN IDN ISSUES AS WELL.
AND WHATEVER OTHER THINGS COME TO MIND.
NEXT SLIDE.
SO ON DNS SECURITY, AND MOVE ON.
SO IN BRIEF, DNS SECURITY IS AN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING DNS PROTOCOL THAT ADDS PROTECTION SO THAT YOU CAN TELL, THE END USER, END SYSTEM CAN TELL WHETHER THE INFORMATION IS ACCURATE OR IS AUTHENTIC WHEN IT'S RECEIVED.
IT'S BEEN UNDERWAY FOR AN EXTREMELY LONG PERIOD OF TIME, AND NOW THE SPECS ARE FINALLY PUBLISHED.
THE NEXT BIG PUSH IS TO ACTUALLY GET THE PROTOCOL ADOPTED.
AND THAT'S WHAT LEADS TO THE DNSSEC DEPLOYMENT EFFORT.
NEXT SLIDE.
SO THE DEPLOYMENT EFFORT IS THE TRANSITION FROM SPECIFICATIONS TO OPERATION.
IT'S A WORLDWIDE ACTIVITY, AND A REASONABLY COMPLEX PROCESS BECAUSE OF SO MANY PLAYERS INVOLVED.
AT THE -- IN TERMS OF GETTING SIGNATURES ADDED TO THE ZONES, THERE'S THE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS, AND THE ROOT ABOVE THAT, AND THEN THE ENTERPRISES AND ALL OF THE OTHER ZONES INVOLVED.
AND THEN THERE IS THE OTHER CHICKEN AND EGG ASPECT TO IT THAT I LIKE TO DESCRIBE, WHICH IS ON ONE HAND, GETTING THE ZONE SIGNED.
AND ON THE OTHER HAND, GETTING THE END USER SOFTWARE THAT CHECKS THE SIGNATURES OR THE RESOLVER SOFTWARE.
SO PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING IS GOING AROUND AND TRYING TO GET EVERYBODY INVOLVED AND MAKE IT A BROAD-SCALE EFFORT.
NEXT SLIDE.
THE DNSSEC DEPLOYMENT EFFORT IS, IN FACT, BROADER THAN JUST ICANN.
BUT ICANN HAS SOME VERY CRITICAL ROLES IN THE OVERALL PROSPECT.
FIRST OF ALL, THE IANA'S ROLE OF SIGNING THE ROOT IS PARAMOUNT.
COORDINATION WITH THE ROOT SERVER OPERATORS, COORDINATION WITH THE TLDS, AND, IN GENERAL, PROVIDING COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP AND EXPRESSION OF IMPORTANCE AND PRIORITY.
BUT THERE ARE MANY OTHER PARTICIPANTS, OTHER GOVERNMENTS, THE VARIOUS SERVICE OPERATORS, ENTERPRISES AND VENDOR.
WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING IN RECENT TIME IS DEVELOPING OF A ROADMAP AND WORKSHOPS AND TEST BEDS IN VARIOUS PLACES, SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT.
EARLY ADOPTERS PUTTING DNSSEC INTO OPERATION.
PREPARATIONS FOR SIGNING AND DEPLOYING THE ASSIGNED ROOT.
WORKING WITH THE TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN OPERATORS AND THEN LOOKING AT POTENTIAL SELECTED APPLICATIONS THAT ACTUALLY MAKE USE OF DNSSEC FOR NEW APPLICATIONS AS OPPOSED TO JUST PROTECTING THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE.
DURING THIS YEAR, WE'VE ALREADY HAD THE SPECIFICATIONS PUBLISHED, ROADMAP PUBLISHED. AND THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE YEAR, THE ACTIVITY WILL FOCUS ON GETTING THE ROOT SIGNED, EARLY OPERATION OF SOME TLDS, BUILDING A MUCH LARGER CONSORTIUM.
AND WE EXPECT TO HAVE SUBSTANTIALLY WORKSHOPS COMPARABLE TO WHAT WE DID YESTERDAY AT LUXEMBOURG AND VANCOUVER ICANN MEETINGS, ONE IN LUXEMBOURG TENTATIVELY FOCUSED ON REGISTRIES, BUT OPEN TO EVERYBODY; AND IN VANCOUVER, AN EMPHASIS SHIFTING OVER TO REGISTRARS, BUT AGAIN OPEN TO EVERYBODY.
EXPECT IN 2006 THERE WILL BE EARLY APPLICATIONS AND GENERAL AVAILABILITY OF SOFTWARE.
AND WE EXPECT THIS TO GO ON FOR A FEW YEARS.
SO THIS IS PROBABLY A LIVE TOPIC FOR ON THE ORDER OF FIVE YEARS BEFORE IT BECOMES WELL ENOUGH ALONG THAT WE CAN STOP FOCUSING A LOT OF ATTENTION ON DNSSEC DEPLOYMENT PER SE.
ON -- THANKS.
ON DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING, THIS IS A TOPIC THAT HAS BEEN WAITING FOR ATTENTION FOR A LONG TIME AND CERTAINLY WAS BROUGHT TO PUBLIC ATTENTION WITH THE HIJACKING OF PANIX.COM IN THE MIDDLE OF JANUARY.
IT WAS HIJACKED GOING INTO A WEEKEND, WHICH IS AWKWARD, BECAUSE GETTING EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION WAS HARD.
A LOT OF OFFICES WERE CLOSED.
VIGOROUS ACTION BY A NUMBER OF VERY WELL-PLACED AND WELL-INTENTIONED PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO GET THE SERVICE RESTORED TO PANIX WITHIN -- BY THE END OF THE WEEKEND.
IT WAS FORTUNATE FOR PANIX THAT THEY WERE A VERY WELL-REGARDED, VERY OLD ISP THAT HAD MANY, MANY FRIENDS IN HIGH PLACES.
AND IF THEY HAD BEEN LESS WELL-CONNECTED, IN A WAY, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN EVEN MORE DIFFICULT.
NONETHELESS, IT WAS A PRETTY SERIOUS PROBLEM FOR THEM.
IT ESSENTIALLY PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS.
ICANN ISSUED A REPORT, DID ITS OWN INVESTIGATION, AND DISCOVERED -- IT WASN'T TOO HARD TO DISCOVER -- BUT HIGHLIGHTED THAT THE GAINING REGISTRAR AND ITS RESELLER WERE AT FAULT IN THE SENSE OF NOT ADHERING TO PROCEDURES WHICH HAD BEEN IN PLACE AND WHICH WERE CONTRACTUALLY REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE PROTECTION AGAINST THIS KIND OF THING.
BUT THERE WERE ALSO FAILURES ELSEWHERE.
OUR PERSPECTIVE IS NOT SIMPLY TO PILE ON AND ADD MORE POINTING THE FINGER AT SPECIFIC BODIES OR SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS, BUT TO LOOK AT THE OVERALL SYSTEM AND ASK, WHAT'S THE LIKELIHOOD OF THIS SORT OF THING HAPPENING?
ARE THERE PLACES WHERE IT COULD BE STRENGTHENED?
HOW DOES THIS WHOLE SET OF REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURES AND THE SUPPORTING SYSTEMS, HOW DOES THAT FUNCTION IN TERMS OF PROVIDING THE RIGHT LEVEL OF PROTECTION FOR THE END USERS?
BECAUSE THE RESULTS ARE EXTRAORDINARILY BAD FOR ANYBODY WHO LOSES A DOMAIN NAME ABRUPTLY.
IF THEY'RE DEPENDENT ON THAT DOMAIN NAME BEING IN OPERATION AS PART OF THEIR BUSINESS, THEN, IN EFFECT, THEY'VE JUST BEEN ABRUPTLY TERMINATED AND PUT OUT OF BUSINESS.
AND THAT IS A DISPROPORTIONATE HARM AND WORTH SOME IMPROVEMENT, SOME LOOKING AT.
NEXT SLIDE.
OR IS THERE A NEXT SLIDE?
THERE SHOULD BE ONE MORE, I THINK.
YEP.
OUR WORK IN THIS AREA IS IN PROGRESS.
THIS REPORT, WORKSHOP AND REPORT YESTERDAY, IS SORT OF AT THE MIDPOINT.
WE EXPECT TO WRAP THIS UP, HOPEFULLY, BY THE LUXEMBOURG MEETING.
SOME TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS -- AND I EMPHASIZE THAT THESE ARE NOT DONE -- IS THE NEED TO INCREASE PUBLIC AWARENESS AND THE PROCEDURES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO PROTECT DOMAINS.
THERE IS VERY LITTLE COMMON UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE MECHANISMS OF, SAY, THE LOCK ON -- FOR REGISTRATIONS OR AUTH CODES.
AND CONSIDERABLE VARIATION IN THE WAY REGISTRARS MAKE THAT INFORMATION AND RESELLERS MAKE THAT INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THE REGISTRANTS, THE END USERS, AND WHAT THEY DO WITH IT.
ANOTHER POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION IS TO REEXAMINE THE PRECISE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT THE LOSING REGISTRAR DOES WHEN HE RECEIVES NOTIFICATION FROM THE GAINING REGISTRAR THAT A TRANSFER HAS BEEN REQUESTED.
CURRENT REGULATIONS CONTROL THE FORM OF THE NOTIFICATION THAT THE LOSING REGISTRAR SENDS TO THE REGISTRANT BUT DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT THEY ACTUALLY SEND IT.
IT'S AT THE OPTION OF THE LOSING REGISTRAR.
A WHOLE DIFFERENT LINE OF DISCUSSION IS, WHEN BAD THINGS HAPPEN, WHAT RECOURSE IS AVAILABLE.
THERE IS A VERY WELL-ORGANIZED DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS.
BUT IT'S GEARED MORE FOR CONTRACTUAL DISPUTES, AND ITS TIME LINES ARE MEASURED IN DAYS AND WEEKS AND POSSIBLY LONGER.
IT'S PERFECTLY REASONABLE FOR SORTING OUT ISSUES OF OVERPAYMENT OR OTHER MATTERS THAT AREN'T A CRISIS.
BUT THEY'RE NOT VERY WELL SUITED TO CRISIS SITUATIONS.
THERE IS AN ENFORCEMENT PROCESS THAT ICANN'S BEEN VERY ACTIVE IN.
IT HAS NOT DOWNLOAD IT'S BEEN HANDLED, GENERALLY, QUIETLY, IN CONTRAST TO THE WAY SOME COUNTRY ADMINISTRATIONS HANDLE THEIR ENFORCEMENT OF THEIR LOCAL REGISTRAR EQUIVALENTS.
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT MORE VISIBLE ENFORCEMENT, MORE VISIBILITY INTO THE ENFORCEMENT MIGHT BE HELPFUL.
AND THEN, IN PARALLEL, THERE HAS BEEN DISCUSSION OF AN EMERGENCY UNDO PROCEDURE, THAT IS, AFTER A DOMAIN HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED, IF THE REGISTRANT OR LOSING REGISTRAR SAY THIS IS AN ERROR, PLEASE ROLL BACK TO WHERE YOU WERE, THAT THAT HAPPENS IMMEDIATELY AND THEN THERE'S TIME TAKEN TO SORT THINGS OUT.
AND OUR IMMEDIATELY REACTION IS THIS WOULD CERTAINLY BE ONE OF THE HELPFUL THINGS TO DO.
SO THAT'S THE SPECTRUM OF THINGS THAT OUR COMMITTEE HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
AND WE TRY TO MAKE REPORTS AVAILABLE ON THE ICANN WEB SITE AS THEY COME OUT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, STEVE.
WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR QUESTIONS LATER.
SO I HOPE YOU'LL STAY WITH US FOR A BIT.
WELL, I GUESS YOU HAVE TO.
YOU'RE LIAISON, SO YOU'RE UP HERE ON THE STAGE.
LET ME ASK VITTORIO BERTOLA TO JOIN US NOW TO GIVE HIS REPORT ON THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
I SEE HE'S BRINGING HIS LAPTOP WITH HIM.
I HOPE HE HAS MORE SUCCESS THAN MR. CROCKER DID.
AND WHILE VITTORIO IS SETTING UP, IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED THAT ANYONE WITH A PRESENTATION THAT INVOLVES USING A COMPUTER MIGHT ALSO BRING TO THE STAFF A COPY OF THE REPORT IN USB FORM OR SOME MACHINE-READABLE FORM, JUST IN CASE IT HAS TO BE PROJECTED FROM THE STAFF COMPUTER RATHER THAN THE PERSONAL ONE.

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: OKAY.
YEAH, AND THANK YOU, VINT.
I'M GIVING YOU THE REPORT FROM THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, JUST TO RECAP, THIS IS THE USUAL SLIDE THAT TELLS OUR NEWCOMERS WHAT THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACTUALLY IS.
IT IS AN INTERIM, ACTUALLY, COMMITTEE CREATED BY THE BOARD IN 2003 TO ADVISE THE BOARD ABOUT THE NEEDS AND OPINIONS OF THE GENERAL COMMUNITY OF INDIVIDUAL USERS OF THE INTERNET.
AND WE BOTH PARTICIPATE TO THE POLICY PROCESSES AND WORK TO CREATE A STRUCTURE OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE THE INPUT THAT WE NEED TO DO OUR JOB AND ALSO APPOINT THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
SO WELL, THIS IS THE FIRST PART OF OUR REPORT, WE'VE FINALIZED THE APPOINTMENT OF SOME NEW MEMBERS THAT WERE APPOINTED BY THE BOARD TO REPLACE OTHER MEMBERS THAT WERE OUTGOING.
SO I WILL ASK MAYBE THEM TO STAND UP SO THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THEM.
WE HAVE JEAN ARMOUR POLLY FROM NORTH AMERICA.
SHE WAS IN CAPE TOWN, BUT I DIDN'T HAVE THE CHANCE TO INTRODUCE HER AT THAT TIME.
AND WE HAVE JOHN LEVINE, ALSO FROM NORTH AMERICA.
HE IS REPLACING ESTHER DYSON.
>>VINT CERF: I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.
JUST TO TELL PEOPLE THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM, BECAUSE YOUR COLLEAGUES ARE HIDING BACK THERE.
>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: AND WE HAVE ANNETTE MUEHLBERG DOWN THERE, SHE IS REPLACING THOMAS ROESSLER.
AND WE ALSO HAVE BRET FAUSETT.
BUT, ANYWAY, WE APPOINTED HIM AS GNSO LIAISON.
SO WE CHOSE TO APPOINT A PERSON WHO IS ACTUALLY NOT A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE, BUT HE IS GIVING US A LOT OF HELP IN GNSO-RELATED ISSUES.
AND WE JUST RECEIVED A NEW LIAISON FROM THE CCNSO. AND WE ARE PARTICULARLY HAPPY WITH THIS BECAUSE WE NEED, I THINK, A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CCS.
AND BY THE WAY, HE'S -- RON SHERWOOD HAS BEEN A PERSON WHO HAS ALREADY BEEN ACTIVE IN THE AT-LARGE BEFORE.
AND WE ALSO STARTED TO HAVE SOME, I'D SAY, JOINT PROGRAMS OR JOINT TALKS WITH THE NONCOMMERCIAL USERS CONSTITUENCY, BECAUSE WE ALSO WANT TO SHARE THE TYPE OF POLICY WE WANT TO PUSH.
SO WE, OF COURSE, ARE PROCEEDING WITH THE AT-LARGE ORGANIZING, WHICH MEANS ORGANIZING MEETINGS IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD AND DOING OUTREACH TO ORGANIZATIONS, RUNNING A WEB SITE, ACTUALLY.
AND NOW THAT WE HAVE MORE MEMBERS ON BOARD, WE WANT TO REVAMP THE WEB SITE AND PUSH A LITTLE MORE ON COMMUNICATION.
I THINK WE HAVE A PREMIER, BECAUSE WE HAVE ACTUALLY STARTED TO BROADCAST OUR MEETINGS, THANKS TO BRET FAUSETT.
SO YOU CAN FIND OUR MEETINGS ON HIS BLOG.
AND, OF COURSE, WE INTEND TO ACCREDIT STRUCTURES.
WE DIDN'T ACCREDIT NEW STRUCTURES IN THESE THREE MONTHS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T MANAGE TO HAVE A CYCLE OF VOTING.
BUT WE RECEIVED SOME NEW APPLICATIONS.
FOR WHAT REGARDS POLICY, WELL, OF COURSE, WE PARTICIPATED IN ALL OF THE GNSO WORK, ESPECIALLY IN WHOIS, WHICH IS PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE.
WE ALSO ORGANIZED THE WSIS PUBLIC WORKSHOP MEETINGS AND WE ARE RELEASING HERE SOME STATEMENTS.
I WILL BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE, MAYBE GIVE DURING THE PART OF THE PUBLIC FORUM THAT DEALS WITH POLICY.
SO THIS IS JUST A QUICK RECAP OF THE DIFFERENT REGIONS.
MAYBE I CAN JUST SKIP THE -- ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE HAD QUITE A NICE AT-LARGE MEETING IN ACCRA WITH MORE THAN 300 PARTICIPANTS, REALLY WELL ATTENDED.
IT WAS MADE IN CONJUNCTION WITH ONE OF THE WSIS PREPARATORY CONFERENCES.
BUT WE COULD REALLY GATHER A LOT OF INTERESTED PEOPLE AND INFORM THEM ABOUT ICANN.
SO WE HAD ONE MEETING IN ASIA-PACIFIC IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE APRICOT IN KYOTO.
AND, WELL -- OKAY.
THIS IS THE LIST OF PENDING APPLICATIONS.
IF YOU ARE REALLY INTERESTED, WE HAVE SOME NEW ONES, INCLUDING ONE BY AN ORGANIZATION NAMED DANNY YOUNGER.
AND WE WILL -- ACTUALLY, THIS IS ONE OF THE POINTS WE WILL HAVE TO DISCUSS AND MAYBE COME BACK TO THE BOARD IN TERMS OF HOW CAN INDIVIDUALS ACTUALLY BE INVOLVED.
SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU A QUICK LOOK OF WHAT WE THINK ABOUT THE COUPLE OF IMPORTANT POLICY ISSUES.
AND ONE IS WHOIS.
AND WE ARE, OF COURSE, I'D SAY, QUITE WORRIED ABOUT THE SITUATION, BECAUSE NO PROGRESS SEEMS TO BE MADE.
AND IT REALLY SEEMS TO BE A SORT OF SYSTEM FAILURE, A CASE IN WHICH THE SYSTEM IS NOT WORKING, IS NOT PRODUCING ANY KIND OF EXPECTED RESULT. AND FOR WHAT WE REGARD OURSELVES, WE REALLY THINK THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF PRIVACY PROTECTION IS -- CANNOT BE DEFERRED ANY MORE.
SO WE WOULD LIKE TO EXAMINE THE CASE AND UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN GET OUT OF THIS DEADLOCK.
AND SIMILARLY, WE WILL HAVE A STATEMENT ON DOT NET.
SO THESE ARE SOME QUICK POINTS.
I WILL MAYBE STATE THEM BETTER TOMORROW.
BUT IN ANY CASE, THE POINT WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE IS THAT TECHNICAL EVALUATION IS NOT ENOUGH ON SUCH AN IMPORTANT MATTER.
YOU SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER NONTECHNICAL FACTORS, SUCH AS THE PAST BEHAVIOR OF THE APPLICANTS AND THE NEED TO FOSTER COMPETITION AND GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY IN THE KEY INFRASTRUCTURES OF THE INTERNET.
SO EVEN CUSTOMER SUPPORT, ESPECIALLY MULTILINGUAL CUSTOMER SUPPORT, FOR REGISTRARS AND THEN REGISTRANTS IN DIFFERENT REGIONS.
AND ALSO MECHANISMS TO PROTECT THE PRIVACY.
SO SINCE THE REPORT STATES THAT THE APPLICANTS ARE ALL TECHNICAL (INAUDIBLE) I THINK YOU SHOULD GIVE A HIGH PRIORITY TO NONTECHNICAL FACTORS LIKE THESE ONES.
WE HAVE SOME COMMENTS ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN, TOO.
WELL, OF COURSE, WE ARE IN FAVOR OF MORE COMPETITION AND CHOICE.
AND I THINK THIS NEEDS NOT TO BE JUST -- TO BE PUT IN PRACTICE, ESPECIALLY FOR WHAT REGARDS THE INTERACTION OF OUR NEW PROCESS FOR THE CREATION OF NEW TLDS, WHICH HAS BEEN -- IS LONG OVERDUE.
AND SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT ICANN SHOULD PUT, REALLY, AS A TOP PRIORITY FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.
AND SIMILARLY, WE ARE VERY HAPPY ABOUT THE IDEA OF HAVING COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS FOR REGISTRARS AND REGISTRIES, BECAUSE WE THINK THAT'S BEEN A WEAK POINT IN THE PAST.
OF COURSE, I ALREADY MENTIONED THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE WITH THE PDP.
SO I THINK WE HAVE THE NEED TO REASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF OUR INTERNAL PROCESSES.
WE HAVE THE NEED TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY.
IN PARTICULAR, WE WANT TO STRESS THE IMPORTANCE, AGAIN, OF MULTILINGUALISM, WHICH DOESN'T JUST MEAN TO TRANSLATE THE LEAFLETS AND THE WEB SITE.
IT MEANS, REALLY, TO MAKE THE INTERNAL PROCESSES MULTILINGUAL, SO THAT THE WORK IN PROCESS SHOULD BE AT LEAST IN TWO OR THREE LANGUAGES, AND, IF POSSIBLE, MORE.
EVEN THE STRATEGIC PLAN WAS NOT TRANSLATED IN ANY LANGUAGE.
SO HOW CAN YOU EXPECT PEOPLE FROM -- I MEAN, PEOPLE THAT DON'T SPEAK ENGLISH WELL CAN READ A 70-PAGE OR 30-PAGE OR WHATEVER DOCUMENT AND GIVE SOME FEEDBACK?
IT'S REALLY HARD.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, ALSO, ON INTERNATIONAL -- FOR INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES, WE THINK THEY NEED TO BE PUT AT A HIGHER LEVEL OF PRIORITY.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE.
IT'S NOT JUST TO SET IN POLICY, BUT PUSHING FOR THINGS TO HAPPEN, COORDINATING WITH OTHER MAYBE BODIES.
AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT ICANN SHOULD REALLY DO.
WE COMMEND THE IDEA OF REGIONAL PRESENCE, OF COURSE. BUT I THINK IT'S NOT JUST A MATTER OF OFFICES.
IT'S A MATTER OF TURNING ICANN INTO SOMETHING EVEN MORE INTERNATIONAL THAN IT IS NOW IN TERMS OF PARTICIPATION, IN TERMS OF CULTURE.
AND, OF COURSE, THERE'S A QUESTION THERE.
AND I GUESS MANY OTHER PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY HAVE THAT QUESTION.
SO NOBODY KNOWS WHAT WILL HAPPEN AFTER THE MOU WITH THE U.S. GOVERNMENT EXPIRES.
AND, OF COURSE, THIS IS SUBJECT TO OTHER PROCESSES.
BUT I THINK THAT THERE WILL BE THE NEED FOR AN OPEN AND FRANK DISCUSSION IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT DO WE WANT TO PROPOSE FOR THAT.
AND OUR FINAL POINT IS ALSO VERY IMPORTANT.
IT IS ABOUT THE STAFF SUPPORT.
WE ARE VERY HAPPY WITH THE FACT THAT THE BOARD HAS BEEN GIVEN SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR THE AT-LARGE.
I THINK WE ARE LESS HAPPY WITH THE KIND OF PRACTICAL SUPPORT WE ARE RECEIVING, BECAUSE WE THINK SIMPLY IT'S NOT SUFFICIENT.
AND, I MEAN, WE HAVE BEEN PUSHING FOR SOME MONTHS NOW TO GET SOME MORE STAFF SUPPORT.
AND WE'D REALLY LIKE TO UNDERSTAND, TOGETHER WITH THE BOARD AND THE STAFF, HOW CAN WE ACTUALLY GET IT.
BUT I THINK TO BE EFFECTIVE, WE REALLY NEED A PROPER FORMAL SECRETARIAT.
SO I'LL GO MAYBE MORE QUICKLY THROUGH THESE LAST SLIDES.
WELL, OF COURSE, WE ARE QUITE ACTIVE IN THE WSIS/WGIG PROCESS.
ALSO BECAUSE I AM ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE WGIG, WHICH I THINK IN THE END IS A GOOD RECOGNITION OF THE ROLE OF ICANN IN GENERAL.
AND, ACTUALLY, THIS BRINGS ME BACK TO THE LAST POINT, BECAUSE EVEN IN THESE INTERNATIONAL FORUMS, THERE ARE ALL USERS AND CIVIL SOCIETIES GIVEN INCREASED IMPORTANCE.
AND SO, BASICALLY, YOUR TASK IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE IMPORTANT, AND ALSO MORE DIFFICULT FROM ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW.
SO THIS IS WHY WE HAVE -- WE HAVE STARTED TO THINK AGAIN, WHAT DO WE NEED TO BE EFFECTIVE.
AND SO THIS -- I'D SAY A LIST OF CHALLENGES WE HAVE.
BECAUSE, OF COURSE, THE ORGANIZING IS PROVING MORE DIFFICULT THAN IT WAS INITIALLY THOUGHT.
WE ARE HAVING NEW PROBLEMS.
SO IN THE LAST YEAR, SO WE HAD PROBLEMS OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT DID NOT WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN ICANN BECAUSE OF THE CANCELLATION OF THE AT-LARGE ELECTIONS.
NOW, IN SOME PARTS OF THE WORLD, WE START TO HAVE PROBLEMS WITH ORGANIZATIONS THAT DON'T WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN ICANN BECAUSE THEIR COUNTRY DOES NOT SUPPORT ICANN BUT SUPPORTS OTHER MODELS AND OTHER PROPOSALS FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE.
THAT MAKES OUR JOB EVEN MORE DIFFICULT.
BUT WE THINK THAT IT'S DUE TIME TO INCLUDE THEM.
EVEN IF THIS IS QUITE A HARD CHALLENGE, WE THINK WE HAVE TO DELIVER THESE STRUCTURES, IF POSSIBLE, BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, OR OTHERWISE THINK WHY IT IS NOT POSSIBLE.
BECAUSE MAYBE THAT COULD BE THE REASON FOR CONCLUDING THAT THIS STRUCTURE DOESN'T WORK.
SO WE ARE WILLING TO PUT EXTRA EFFORT IN THE NEXT MONTHS TO MAKE IT WORK BY THE END OF THE YEAR. AND IF NOT, I THINK WE ALL WILL HAVE TO RE-DISCUSS THE ENTIRE THING.
SO BASICALLY WHAT WE REALIZED IS THAT THE INITIAL ASSUMPTION THAT YOU HAD, THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE PUSHING FOR PARTICIPATION IN ICANN, IS NOT TRUE. YOU NEED A LOT OF EDUCATION TO GET INFORMED PARTICIPATION, WHICH IN TURN IS WHAT YOU NEED; IS NOT JUST NUMBERS, BUT IT'S PEOPLE TO CAN BE ACTIVE AND PRODUCE GOOD POLICY INPUT.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, ICANN NEEDS THE USERS NOW MORE THAN EVER.
SO WE THINK WE HAVE SOME SOLUTIONS, BUT WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOOD FOR ALL THE COMMUNITY TO DO.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VITTORIO.
I KNOW THAT THIS REPRESENTS NOT ONLY A LOT OF WORK ON YOUR OWN PART BUT THE WORK OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AS WELL.
AND I APPRECIATE THAT IT'S ALL VOLUNTEER. AND WE DO RECOGNIZE THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SUPPORT IN THIS EFFORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LET'S SEE. YES. OH, SHARIL IS HERE. OKAY. I WAS ABOUT TO ASK WHETHER I NEED TODAY DELAY THIS.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VITTORIO.
THE NEXT REPORT COMES FROM SHARIL TARMIZI WHO IS THE CHAIR OF THE GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
>>SHARIL TARMIZI: THANK YOU, VINT. I APOLOGIZE TO ALL OF YOU HERE FOR KEEPING YOU WAITING, BUT WE WERE FINISHING A SESSION WITH THE CCNSO EARLIER, SO WE WERE ENGAGING WITH THE VARIOUS PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOW READ THE COMMUNIQUE FROM THE GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS ACHIEVED AT ITS MEETING HERE IN MAR DEL PLATA.
THE GAC MET IN MAR DEL PLATA BETWEEN THE 2ND TO THE 5TH OF APRIL AND PARTICIPANTS COMPRISED 32 MEMBERS AND TWO OBSERVERS. SINCE THE CAPE TOWN MEETING, NEW MEMBERS ARE GEORGIA, JORDAN, IRAQ AND SUDAN. GAC NOW HAS 100 MEMBERS AND NINE OBSERVERS, SO THAT MAKES A TOTAL OF 109. THREE GAC WORKING GROUP MEETINGS TOOK PLACE ON THE SECOND OF APRIL; NAMELY, ON CCTLDS, GNSO, AND IDN.
THE REGIONAL FORUM TOOK PLACE ON THE 3RD OF APRIL. THE GAC PLENARY ITSELF MET BETWEEN THE 4TH TO THE 5TH OF APRIL.
ON MATTERS DISCUSSED, CONSULTATION WITH ICANN. THE GAC CONSULTED WITH ICANN BOARD AND STAFF IN OPEN SESSION ABOUT A VARIETY OF PENDING ISSUES INCLUDING THE STRATEGIC PLAN. GAC WELCOMED THE ANNOUNCEMENT BY ICANN THAT THE AFRINIC REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRY WOULD BE ESTABLISHED AT THE MAR DEL PLATA MEETING.
ICANN BRIEFED GAC AS TO THE STATUS AND PROGRESS ON THE REDELEGATION OF CCTLD REGISTRIES. THE GAC ASKED ICANN TO PROVIDE DESCRIPTION OF THE IANA POLICIES AND PROCEDURES REGARDING DELEGATION AND REDELEGATION, COMPLEMENTING THE EXISTING RFC 1591 AND ICP 1 DOCUMENTS AND THE GAC CCTLD PRINCIPLES.
ICANN UNDERTOOK TO PRESENT SUCH A DESCRIPTION.
THE GAC WAS BRIEFED WITH THE CURRENT WORK OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND WELCOMED THE PRESENTATION BY THE CHAIR ON DNSSEC AND RECOGNIZED A SIGNIFICANT ROLE FOR GOVERNMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF DNSSEC. THE GAC/GNSO WORKING GROUP MET WITH THE GNSO COUNCIL DURING THE MAR DEL PLATA MEETING. THE GAC ALSO CONTINUED ITS DIALOGUE WITH THE CCNSO AND THE CCTLD COMMUNITY.
THE GAC ENDORSED A REPLY THAT THE CHAIR OF THE GAC WOULD SEND TO THE ICANN CEO IN RESPONSE TO HIS LETTER OF THE 1ST OF DECEMBER THAT WILL BE PUBLISHED ON THE GAC WEB SITE.
ON GNSO ISSUES, THE GAC IS ENCOURAGED BY THE PROGRESS WITHIN THE GNSO COMMUNITY IN DEVELOPING A RANGE OF PROPOSALS RELATED TO WHOIS DATA. THE GAC RECOGNIZES BOTH THE COMPLEXITY AND BROAD RANGE OF PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH ACCESS TO WHOIS DATA AND ITS ACCURACY.
THE GAC IS PLEASED TO HAVE REACHED AGREEMENT WITH THE GNSO COUNCIL TO CONVENE A JOINT WORKING SESSION DURING THE LUXEMBOURG ICANN GAC MEETING WITH A SPECIFIC FOCUS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF WHOIS DATA FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES.
THE GAC AND THE GNSO COUNCIL ALSO AGREED TO WORK TOGETHER TO EXAMINE OTHER SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES, SUCH AS DATA PROTECTION, AT FUTURE ICANN MEETINGS.
GAC ALSO AGREED TO DRAFT A PAPER OUTLINING THE BROAD PUBLIC POLICY CONCEPTS IT CONSIDERS RELEVANT TO THE MAINTENANCE AND USE OF THE WHOIS DATABASE.
FOR FIRST CONSIDERATION AT THE LUXEMBOURG MEETING.
ON COUNTRY CODE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS, THE GAC FINALIZED AND ADOPTED THE PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR THE DELEGATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COUNTRY CODE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS. THIS REPLACES THE CCTLD PRINCIPLES THAT WERE INTRODUCED IN 2000. THIS NEW DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE AND PUBLISHED ON THE GAC WEB SITE. THE GAC ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES WITH THANKS THE COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM THE VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS.
AS FOR THE FUTURE WORK, THE GAC HAS IDENTIFIED ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS BETWEEN ICANN AND CCTLD AS A KEY ISSUE FOR THE FUTURE.
ON THE SPECIFIC ISSUE INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES, THE GAC RECOGNIZES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AND INTRODUCTION OF IDN REQUIRES A COLLABORATIVE AND COORDINATED EFFORTS BY VARIOUS PARTIES AND INPUT FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS, PUBLIC POLICYMAKERS, LINGUISTIC AND TECHNICAL EXPERTS AND OTHER RELEVANT PARTIES.
IN LIGHT OF THE GROWING NEED TO ALLOW POPULATIONS USING NON-ASCII SCRIPT ALPHABETS IN THE WORLD TO ACCESS THE INTERNET IN THEIR NATIVE SCRIPTS, THE GAC ENCOURAGES THE ICANN BOARD TO IMPLEMENT THE DECISION TAKEN IN KUALA LUMPUR TO ESTABLISH A PRECEDENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IDN. THE GAC ENCOURAGES ICANN TO PLAY A PROACTIVE WORLD TOWARDS THE ENABLEMENT OF IDN AROUND THE WORLD KEEPING IN MIND THE LINGUISTIC, CULTURAL, SOCIAL AND TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATIONS.
AND FOR THE CHAIR AND OTHER GAC MEMBERS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE PANEL DISCUSSION.
WE RECALL THE CHAIR'S REPORT PRESENTED TO THE WGIG IN FEBRUARY 2005 THAT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED BY WGIG AND IS ON THE GAC WEB SITE.
ON A FINAL POINT, REGIONAL FORUM AND OUTREACH. REGIONAL FORUM WAS -- TOOK PLACE ON SUNDAY, APRIL THE 3RD. FIVE SESSIONS WERE CHAIRED BY MEMBERS OF THE ICANN BOARD AND MEMBERS OF GAC.
THE CHAIRS AND SPEAKERS CAME FROM A WIDE RANGE OF COUNTRIES, FROM LATIN AMERICA, EUROPE, AND ASIA, INCLUDING ARGENTINA, CHILE, ITALY, PERU, BRAZIL, MEXICO, VENEZUELA, GUATEMALA, URUGUAY, JAPAN AND MALAYSIA. THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE REGIONAL FORUM ARE SUMMARIZED IN THE ANNEX TO THE COMMUNIQUE WHICH WILL BE PUBLISHED ON THE GAC WEB SITE. GAC THANKS ALL THOSE FROM THE INTERNET COMMUNITY WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE PREPARATION AND REALIZATION OF THE FORUM.
FINALLY, THE GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS ITS WARMEST THANKS TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARGENTINA AND THE ORGANIZERS FOR HOSTING THIS MEETING IN MAR DEL PLATA. WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO THANK ALL THOSE AMONG THE ICANN COMMUNITY WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE DIALOGUE WITH US IN MAR DEL PLATA.
WE ANTICIPATE THAT OUR NEXT MEETINGS WILL BE DURING THE PERIOD OF THE ICANN LUXEMBOURG MEETING, WHICH WILL BE BETWEEN THE 9TH TO THE 12TH OF JULY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. THAT ENDS MY REPORT.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SHARIL.
I APPRECIATE THE CONTINUED EFFORTS OF THE GAC AND ITS REMARKABLE INCREASE IN OUTREACH TO ALL OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE PART OF ICANN.
I HOPE YOU'LL THANK YOUR COLLEAGUES ON OUR BEHALF.
I'D LIKE TO CALL UPON GEORGE SADOWSKY. THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS LATER, SHARIL, BUT I'D LIKE TO HOLD THEM FOR A BIT. I'D LIKE TO CALL ON GEORGE SADOWSKY TO GIVE A REPORT FROM THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE.
>>GEORGE SADOWSKY: THANK YOU, VINT.
FIRST SLIDE, PLEASE.
I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A VERY SHORT NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT, BECAUSE THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE HAS REALLY JUST BEGUN.
AS YOU MAY KNOW, THE COMPOSITION OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE IS PRESCRIBED IN THE BYLAWS. THE VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES OF ISOC PROPOSED MEMBERS FOR THE COMMITTEE. THERE ARE 23 MEMBERS TOTAL, AND 20 ARE VOTING, AND WE'RE JOINED BY ONE PERSON FROM THE ICANN STAFF. THIS YEAR IT'S DONNA NELSON.
WE HAD OUR INITIAL TELECONFERENCE TWO WEEKS AGO. WE WERE JUST -- WE GOT OUR LAST MEMBER AT THAT TIME. AND WE'RE GOING TO BE MEETING FACE-TO-FACE SATURDAY, THE DAY AFTER THE BOARD MEETING HERE.
WE HAVEN'T DEFINED OURSELVES YET IN TERMS OF THE WEB PAGE. EVERY YEAR, THE COMMITTEE PUTS UP A WEB PAGE WITH ITS PROCEDURES, WITH THE NAMES AND THE BIOGRAPHIES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. AND THOSE SHOULD BE UP WITHIN SEVERAL WEEKS.
BECAUSE OUR COMMITTEE IS SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT FROM THE ORGANIZATIONS YOU'VE JUST HEARD FROM, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO TELL YOU VERY MUCH ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING UNTIL WE'RE DONE. WE OPERATE IN SECRECY PURPOSELY, FOR GOOD REASON. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE PROCESS WHICH WE ADOPT AND WHICH WE IMPLEMENT BE AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE; THAT THERE BE TRUST IN THE PROCESS SO THAT THERE WILL BE THEN TRUST IN THE RESULTS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
EXCUSE ME. I'M HAVING TROUBLE SYNCHRONIZING WHAT I HAVE HERE WITH WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN.
THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ARE ALSO DEFINED IN THE DETAIL IN THE BYLAWS. DURING THIS TRANSITION PERIOD, WE ARE SELECTING EACH YEAR A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT NUMBER OF PEOPLE FOR THE BOARD AND THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS. THIS YEAR, WE'LL BE SELECTING TWO BOARD MEMBERS, TWO GNSO MEMBERS, IN PART BECAUSE ONE OF THE MEMBERS HAS RESIGNED AND WILL BECOME A MEMBER OF THE BOARD, THREE MEMBERS FROM THREE DIFFERENT REGIONS OF THE ALAC, AND ONE NEW BOARD MEMBER FOR THE CCNSO.
THE RESIGNATION OF THE BOARD MEMBER IN THE GNSO GIVES RISE TO A SITUATION WHICH WE HAVEN'T HAD IN THE PAST; THAT IS TO SAY, WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR REPLACING A NOMINATING COMMITTEE PLACEMENT ON THE BOARD OR IN A SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION. THE ANSWER IS AT THE MOMENT, WE HAVE NO PROCEDURE FOR DOING THIS, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE COMMITTEE WILL BE LOOKING AT FAIRLY CAREFULLY, FAIRLY QUICKLY.
WE NEED TO ACHIEVE, IN THE FINAL NOMINATIONS, A BALANCE BETWEEN A NUMBER OF DIMENSIONS, SKILLS NEEDED, EXPERTISE, WHETHER TECHNICAL, LEGAL, PROCEDURAL, WHATEVER, GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION, DISTRIBUTION OF EXPOSURE TO CULTURES, GENDER EQUALITY TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN DO IT, AND SO WE'RE DEALING IN A MULTIDIMENSIONAL SPACE OF CANDIDATES, AND WE'RE ONLY SELECTING A FEW.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE NOMINATIONS MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CONSTITUENCIES. AND TO THAT END, I HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH THE HEADS OF THE CONSTITUENCIES THIS WEEK.
OUR WORK, AS I MENTIONED, IS ALL STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL, AND YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT EVERY MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE SUBSCRIBES TO A CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT AND A CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE COMMITTEE. THE COMMITTEE, IN FACT, APPOINTS A SUBCOMMITTEE FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST ISSUES. AND AS CANDIDATES COME TO OUR ATTENTION, THE COMMITTEE -- ANYBODY ON THE COMMITTEE WHO KNOWS THE CANDIDATE OR HAS A RELATIONSHIP FILES A POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT, WHICH IS EVALUATED BY THAT SUBCOMMITTEE.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
OUR SCHEDULE IS, I THINK, A BIT BETTER THAN LAST YEAR. LAST YEAR, DUE TO THE UNFORTUNATE DEATH OF THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE'S WORK WAS SET BACK QUITE A BIT. AND IN SPITE OF THAT, JEAN-JACQUES DAMLAMIAN, MY PREDECESSOR, WAS ABLE TO DO QUITE A GOOD JOB. AND IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN KNOWING WHAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR, HIS REPORT, WHICH IS QUITE VOLUMINOUS BUT INTERESTING, IS AVAILABLE ON THE ICANN WEB SITE AND WE WILL BE BY AND LARGE TAKING THAT SAME PROCESS, UPDATING IT, AND IMPLEMENTING IT AGAIN THIS YEAR.
WE HOPE TO HAVE THE CALL FOR NOMINATIONS OUT BY MID-APRIL. IF WE CAN DO THAT, OUR DEADLINE FOR NOMINATIONS WILL BE EARLY SUMMER. IT'S NOT CLEAR EXACTLY WHEN.
THE SELECTION PROCESS WILL OCCUR IN THE EARLY FALL, AND WE WILL BE MAKING AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE NOMINEES ONE MONTH BEFORE THE GENERAL ANNUAL MEETING IN VANCOUVER, AS REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS.
WE'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH A FIRM SCHEDULE WHEN WE MEET ON SATURDAY.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
YOU CAN HELP US. WE ARE DEALING IN A MULTIDIMENSIONAL SPACE OF CULTURE, OF LANGUAGE, OF TIME ZONE, OF SKILLS, OF GENDER, AND WE DO NEED, IN ORDER TO MAKE THE BEST POSSIBLE ASSIGNMENT OF CANDIDATES TO BOARDS AND SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, WE NEED A CANDIDATE POOL THAT IS RICH ENOUGH SO THAT WE CAN MAKE THAT SELECTION.
IT IS OUR ESTIMATE THAT THE CANDIDATE POOL OF LAST YEAR, WHICH WAS 80 PEOPLE, WAS NOT REALLY BIG ENOUGH FOR SUCH AN OPTIMAL SELECTION, AND WE'D LIKE TO DOUBLE THAT.
YOU CAN HELP US BY PROVIDING SUBMISSIONS TO THE COMMITTEE OF PEOPLE YOU FEEL ARE QUALIFIED AND INTERESTED IN WORKING FOR ICANN AND HAVE A REASON TO WORK FOR US AND HAVE SOMETHING TO CONTRIBUTE WHICH WE NEED.
SELF-SUBMISSIONS ARE ALLOWED, AS WELL AS NOMINATIONS BY YOU OF OTHER PEOPLE WHOM WE WILL CONTACT, AND THEN ASK IF THEY'RE INTERESTED.
SO IF YOU CAN HELP US IN THIS RESPECT, WE CAN HELP YOU TO POPULATE YOUR VARIOUS BOARDS IN WAYS THAT WILL BE USEFUL FOR YOUR OWN PRODUCTIVITY AND EFFICIENCY IN THE FUTURE.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF:THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GEORGE. AND OF COURSE THANK YOU AND ALL OF THE COMMITTEE FOR THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING ON BEHALF OF ICANN. AS YOU SAY, DOUBLING THE NUMBER OF CANDIDATES IS YOUR OBJECTIVE, THAT WILL CERTAINLY INCREASE THE WORK LOAD BOTH OF YOUR COMMITTEE AND OF THE STAFF THAT SUPPORTS YOU. BUT IF IT PRODUCES A BETTER RESULT FOR EVERYONE, IT CERTAINLY IS MUCH APPRECIATED.
IT IS JUST NOW 2:00. NORMALLY WE WOULD BE ABOUT TO TAKE A BREAK, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO FIND OUT IF THERE ARE ANY ACCUMULATED QUESTIONS FROM THE PRESENTATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE SO FAR. AND IF THERE ARE A SHOW OF HANDS OF PEOPLE WHO WANT QUESTIONS, I CAN GAUGE HOW LONG THAT MIGHT TAKE.

OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS. I'M SORRY, THERE'S ONE FROM VENI. IS THERE -- I'M SORRY; WAS THERE A HAND UP THAT I DIDN'T SEE? THERE. ONE. OKAY. SO WE HAVE TWO, FROM VENI. ANYONE ELSE ON THE BOARD? PETER. SO WE HAVE ROUGHLY THREE QUESTIONS. I THINK WE'LL TAKE THOSE NOW AND THEN WE'LL TAKE A BREAK.
SO LET ME START WITH THE GENTLEMAN ON THE FLOOR THERE. IT'S SAM WEILER.
>>SAM WEILER: FOR THE GENTLEMAN FROM THE GAC, I BELIEVE I HEARD YOU SAY SOMETHING ABOUT DNSSEC. WHAT ROLE WAS THAT THAT YOU WERE HOPING FOR THE GAC OR THE GOVERNMENTS TO PLAY IN DNSSEC DEVELOPMENT AND WHY IS IT THAT YOU THINK THE IETF PROCESS HAS BEEN INSUFFICIENT?
OR PERHAPS I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR STATEMENT.
>>STEPHEN CROCKER: SAM, AND FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, STEVE CROCKER OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
ONE SMALL THING TO ADD HERE IS THAT YESTERDAY WE MADE A PRESENTATION TO THE GAC ABOUT DNSSEC. AND AMONG OTHER THINGS WE SAID THERE WAS A STRONG ROLE FOR GOVERNMENTS TO PLAY IN TERMS OF FACILITATING THE ADOPTION PROCESS.
YOUR QUESTION MAY STILL STAND, BUT I WANTED TO HAVE THAT CONTEXT AS PART OF WHAT'S HERE.
>>SHARIL TARMIZI: THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK WE ENVISAGE A DIRECT ROLE AS SUCH. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THAT WE THINK WE BRING WITH US SOME EXPERIENCE THAT WE CAN SHARE, VIS-A-VIS SECURITY ISSUES AS WELL AS SECURITY CONCERNS MAYBE IN THE BROADER PERSPECTIVE.
SO I THINK AS STEVE HAD MENTIONED JUST NOW, WE WOULD LIKE TO BE CONTRIBUTING, MAYBE NOT IN THE FORM THAT YOU'RE USED TO IN THE KIND OF WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU THINK WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP, WE'RE WILLING TO WORK IN THAT -- IN THAT WAY.
>>SAM WEILER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>VINT CERF: OKAY. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES VENI MARKOVSKI.
>>VENI MARKOVSKI: THANK YOU, VINT. IT'S ACTUALLY NOT A QUESTION BUT A CONTRIBUTION TO GEORGE SADOWSKY'S PRESENTATION, WHICH I BELIEVE I MAY HAVE MENTIONED BEFORE. GEORGE, YOUR TASK TO GET THE 160 PEOPLE IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT IF THEY READ THE TRANSCRIPTS FROM TODAY'S MEETINGS AND MY NOTE. THAT IS, YOU HAVE TO FIND PEOPLE WHO CAN FIND AT LEAST TWO MONTHS A YEAR IN THEIR TIME FOR PARTICIPATING IN BOARD MEETINGS. SO THEY SHOULD BE AWARE OF THAT BEFOREHAND, BECAUSE I WAS NOT WHEN I WAS APPLYING. AND THAT'S WHY I ENDED UP WITH THE LONGEST TERM ON THE BOARD EVER. I GUESS THERE WAS NO OTHER FOOL TO ASK FOR THIS, BUT ME.
SO THAT'S MY CONTRIBUTION TO GEORGE.
>>VINT CERF: YOU REALIZE, VENI, THAT WE KNOW THAT IT'S AN INCREDIBLE TASK TO BE A BOARD MEMBER, AND SO WE TRY TO KEEP THAT PART SECRET UNTIL SOMEBODY ACTUALLY ACCEPTS, AND THEN WE SURPRISE IS THEM WITH IT.
PETER, PERHAPS YOU HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT ALONG THESE LINES.
>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: NO; I HAD A QUESTION FOR VITTORIO. VITTORIO -- I'M NOT SURE WHETHER HE'S STILL HERE.
YOU HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE DOT NET REEVALUATION.
WAS ALAC OR THE AT-LARGE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE RFP, THE DOT NET REEVALUATION?
>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: OKAY. IF I'M NOT WRONG, WE DID NOT SUBMIT A FORMAL CONTRIBUTION. WE SENT SOME COMMENTS AROUND.
IN GENERAL, I THINK THAT THIS IS EXACTLY ONE CASE WHEN YOU CAN NOTICE HOW USERS ACT. SO WE WOULD MUCH LIKE TO BE IN TIME BUT USERS ONLY STEP UP WHEN THEY SEE SOMETHING IS GOING WRONG. AND I THINK THAT -- WELL, EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT THE PROCESS WAS GOING FINE.
SO I THINK THAT, NOT JUST FROM US, BUT MAYBE MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WILL BE GETTING REACTIONS NOW. AND YOU'RE RIGHT TO ASK WHY DIDN'T YOU STAND UP BEFORE, BUT I THINK IT'S ALSO BECAUSE YOU USUALLY DISCUSS THINGS WHEN YOU PERCEIVE THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM. YOU MAY NOT PERCEIVE IT IN ADVANCE.
>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: HOW FAIR DO YOU THINK IT IS, THEN, FOR US TO MAKE A JUDGMENT ON A WHOLE SET OF CRITERIA THAT WEREN'T INCLUDED IN THE RFP?
>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: I THINK THAT YOU SHOULD ALSO CHECK WHETHER THE CRITERIA THAT WERE DEVISED BY THE GNSO WERE ACTUALLY REFLECTED IN THE REPORT BECAUSE I HAVE THE FEELING THAT, IN ANY CASE, PERHAPS THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
>>VINT CERF: JUST ONE MOMENT, JOHN. I'LL GET TO YOU.
LET ME JUST REMIND EVERYONE THAT THERE IS A PROCESS WITH REGARD TO DOT NET WHICH IS UNDERWAY. THE PROCESS WAS EXPOSED TO THE PUBLIC AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD, AND THAT PROCESS SAID THAT WE WOULD ENGAGE AN INDEPENDENT REVIEWER, TELCORDIA, THAT WE WOULD TAKE THE REPORTS OF THAT INDEPENDENT REVIEW. STAFF HAS BEGUN NEGOTIATING WITH THE PARTY THAT WAS JUDGED TO BE SUPERIOR. AT THE SAME TIME WE RECOGNIZE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED BY VARIOUS PARTIES.
COUNSEL HAS ASKED THAT ALL OF THOSE CONCERNS BE EXPRESSED IN WRITING SO WE CAN PUT THEM UP ON THE WEB SITE AND THAT WE WILL INVESTIGATE AS APPROPRIATE EACH OF THOSE MATTERS AND PROVIDE PUBLIC RESPONSES ON THE WEB SITE AS WELL.
IN THE MEANTIME, STAFF IS CONTINUING THE NEGOTIATIONS, IN PART BECAUSE THERE ARE TIME CONSIDERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE REDELEGATION OF DOT NET. THE TIME LINE BASICALLY SAID THAT BY THE END OF JUNE THIS HAD TO BE COMPLETED. HOWEVER, I REMIND ALL OF YOU ONCE AGAIN THAT, ULTIMATELY, THE BOARD HAS THE FINAL DETERMINATION WHETHER A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT OR CONTRACT IS ACCEPTABLE. AND IN THE EVALUATION OF THE VARIOUS CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED, THE BOARD WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVENE ON THE BASIS OF WHAT WE LEARNED.
SO THE PROCESS IS, IN MY VIEW, NOT BROKEN. THE PROCESS IS WORKING AND THE BOARD HAS OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVENE AT NEED.
I DON'T KNOW -- I THINK JOHN KLENSIN, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.
>>JOHN KLENSIN: YES. I WANTED TO COME BACK FOR A MOMENT TO VENI'S OBSERVATION TO GEORGE ABOUT THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE PROCESS, BECAUSE I JUST HAD AN IDEA.
GEORGE, AS I TRUST THE COMMUNITY KNOWS, ICANN AT THIS POINT HAS BEEN UNDER GREAT PRESSURE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET MORE THAN 24 HOURS IN A DAY, OR OTHERWISE TO GET MORE SESSIONS INTO THESE MEETINGS WITHOUT MAKING THEM LONGER.
I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO US, IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE TURN YOU DOWN BECAUSE THIS IS TOO TIME CONSUMING, TO ELICIT AS MUCH INFORMATION ABOUT THAT AS YOU CAN AND THEN REPORT IT TO THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY, ANONYMOUSLY, OF COURSE, AS EARLY AS IS POSSIBLE IN DOING THAT, BECAUSE IT MIGHT HELP INFORM THIS PROCESS OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET MORE HOURS IN THE DAY.
>>VINT CERF: PETER.
>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: YES. JUST A VERY MINOR QUIBBLE ABOUT MR. SADOWKSY'S REPORT. COULD I ASK HIM TO STAMP OUT CREEPING HEMISPHERISM. I THINK IT'S CONTRADICTORY TO ICANN'S PRINCIPLE OF GEO-DIVERSITY. WHEN YOU DESCRIBE SOMETHING AS BEING DUE IN THE SUMMER, TO ALL OF US IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE, THAT MEANS DECEMBER TO FEBRUARY. AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT FALL, WE THINK YOU MIGHT BE ABOUT TO TRIP. THEN WE REALIZE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER SEASON. AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT SEASON YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO IN THE INTEREST OF, AS I SAY, STAMPING OUT HEMISPHERISM, COULD YOU JUST PUT THE MONTHS OR DATES IN, EVEN IF IT'S JUST FOR ME. THANKS.
>>VINT CERF: OH, OKAY, PETER.
JUST A LITTLE OBSERVATION. I'VE HUNG OUT IN YOUR PART OF THE WORLD ONCE OR TWICE, AND I NOTICE THAT DURING THE -- YOUR WINTERTIME, WHEN IT'S BLAZING HOT, YOU'RE STILL CELEBRATING CHRISTMAS HOLIDAYS WITH SNOWMEN CUT OUT OF WOOD AND PAINTED WHITE. SO YOU MUST HAVE HEMISPHERE ENVY. THAT'S ALL I CAN THINK OF
(LAUGHTER.)
>>VINT CERF: WITH THAT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET'S TAKE A BREAK AND WE'LL RECONVENE AT 2:30.

DID I MISS SOMEONE? I'M SORRY -- WELL, I ONLY SAW THREE HANDS, SO IS IT OKAY, I'LL PICK IT UP ON THE NEXT TIME.
>>JEFF NEUMAN: HI, JEFF NEUMAN WITH NEULEVEL. JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON SOMETHING, MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU SAID THAT THE GENERAL COUNSEL HAD ADVISED THAT ALL COMMENTS COME IN WRITING. TOMORROW THERE IS A SCHEDULED PART OF THE PUBLIC FORUM THAT IS ON THE DOT NET REBID PROCESS. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THAT IS STILL GOING ON OR HAS THAT BEEN CANCELED BECAUSE OF THE ADVICE OF COUNSEL?
>>VINT CERF: NO, NO, NO. IT'S STILL GOING ON BUT THE FORMAL PROCESS OF PROCESSING ANY COMPLAINTS AND CONCERNS, EVEN IF THEY'RE ADDRESSED ORALLY IN THAT MEETING, SHOULD COME TO COUNSEL IN WRITTEN FORM. THAT'S ALL. WE WILL CONTINUE THAT.
>>JEFF NEUMAN: THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: OKAY. WE WILL BREAK NOW UNTIL 2:30.
>>VINT CERF: THIS IS VINT CERF AGAIN.
THE COFFEE HAS ARRIVED OUTSIDE IF ANY OF YOU ACTUALLY NEED IT.
SO I WILL DELAY ANOTHER FIVE MINUTES BEFORE WE ACTUALLY START AGAIN.


WELCOME BACK FROM OUR LENGTHY COFFEE BREAK.
FIRST I HAVE A VERY IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THIS EVENING.
SOME OF YOU MAY INTERESTED IN THE SOCCER GAME.
SOME OF YOU MAY EVEN BE PLAYING IN THE SOCCER GAME.
AND TO DO THAT, YOU NEED TO GET TO THE SOCCER FIELD.
SO THE TEAMS WILL ASSEMBLE IN THE LOBBY AT 6:30, AND YOU WILL BE TAKEN TO THE SOCCER PLAYING FIELD.
THE GAME BEGINS AT 7:00 P.M. AND I WAS ASKED TO KICK THE BALL AT THE BEGINNING.
SO I WILL BECOME THE ONLY MAN IN THE WORLD EVER TO START A SOCCER GAME IN A THREE-PIECE SUIT.

(APPLAUSE.)
>>VINT CERF: OKAY.
SO LET'S CONTINUE WITH OUR PROGRAM.
FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE PATRICK VANDE WALLE TO COME AND EXCITE US ABOUT THE MEETING THAT'S COMING UP IN LUXEMBOURG.
SO PATRICK.

>>PATRICK VANDE WALLE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>>VINT CERF: YOU NEED TO TURN THAT ON.
WOULD YOU PREFER --
>>PATRICK VANDE WALLE: YEAH, OKAY.
>>VINT CERF: PATRICK, WOULD YOU PREFER TO BE UP THERE AND FACE THE AUDIENCE?
>>PATRICK VANDE WALLE: OKAY.
GREAT.
>>VINT CERF: THEN YOU CAN SEE WHAT THEIR REACTION IS.

>>PATRICK VANDE WALLE: OKAY.
WELL, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I'M -- MY GOAL HERE IS TO INTRODUCE YOU SHORTLY ON THE ICANN MEETING WHICH WILL HAPPEN IN LUXEMBOURG NEXT JULY.
THIS MEETING IS ORGANIZED BY THREE LOCAL HOSTS, OF WHICH THE INTERNET SOCIETY CHAPTER OF LUXEMBOURG IS ONE OF THE MOST ACTIVE PARTS IN THE LOGISTICS, I WOULD SAY.
BUT WE HAVE STRONG SUPPORT FROM THE LUXEMBOURG GOVERNMENT, WHO IS FUNDING THE MEETING PARTLY, AND ALSO FROM THE CTLD MANAGER, THE (INAUDIBLE) FOUNDATION, WILL ALSO PROVIDE THE CONNECTIVITY FOR THE EVENT, BY THE WAY.
SO A FEW STATISTICAL DATA OVER LUXEMBOURG.
AS YOU CAN SEE, LUXEMBOURG IS A SMALL COUNTRY.
AND WHILE IT'S DOING QUITE WELL IN GENERAL FROM THE ECONOMIC POINT OF VIEW, AND ALSO ON THE INTERNET SIDE, AS YOU CAN SEE, 97% OF THE BUSINESSES ARE CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET.
SO PEOPLE ARE VERY MUCH INTERNET-AWARE.
WELL, THE MEETING WILL BE IN JULY.
SO THE WEATHER, THE WEATHER IS FINE.
IT'S THE WARMEST MONTH OF THE YEAR.
AND THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE IS 22 DEGREES CELSIUS.
THAT'S 71 FAHRENHEIT.
USUALLY IT DOESN'T RAIN MUCH.
SO IT WILL BE MUCH FUN IN THE CITY OF LUXEMBOURG.
WE HAVE A LOT OF PARKS, WOODS, AND SO ON.
SO IT'S REALLY ENJOYABLE TO BE OUTSIDE.
THE CITY OF LUXEMBOURG IS ALSO SMALL, AND POPULATION IS ABOUT 83,000 PEOPLE, A BIT MORE DURING THE OFFICE HOURS.
AND IT WAS RECENTLY RANKED BY MERCER HUMAN RESOURCES CONSULTING AS BEING THE SAFEST CAPITAL IN THE WORLD.
SO AT ALL TIMES YOU CAN BE SURE THAT YOU RUN NO RISK AT ALL.
AND JUST IN CASE YOU MIGHT HAVE HEALTH PROBLEMS, I'M HAPPY TO REPORT THAT THERE IS A HOSPITAL 200 METERS AWAY FROM THE VENUE.
SO....
A FEW PICTURES.
LUXEMBOURG IS PART OF THE UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE PROGRAM.
AND IT WAS PREVIOUSLY A FORTIFIED CITY.
AND HERE YOU SEE WHAT'S -- A PART OF WHAT'S LEFT OF THE FORTIFICATIONS, WHICH YOU CAN VISIT IF YOU HAVE TIME TO.
AND I WOULD REALLY SUGGEST THAT YOU DO, BECAUSE SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE BUILT RIGHT INTO THE ROCK, AND IT'S QUITE UNBELIEVABLE WHAT HAS BEEN DONE.
THESE FORTRESSES HAVE BEEN BUILT BY FRENCH ARCHITECT FOR LOUIS XIV IN THE 17TH CENTURY.
ANOTHER VIEW OF THE SAME FORTIFIED ROCKS.
AND THESE HOUSES, FOR EXAMPLE, WERE BUILT IN THE 16TH CENTURY AND ARE STILL VERY WELL MAINTAINED, AND SOME ARE EVEN OPEN TO VISIT.
THE VENUE.
THE VENUE IS CURRENTLY USED FOR THE -- BY THE EU PRESIDENCY TO HOST SEVERAL MEETINGS IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, EUROPEAN COUNCILS AND IS BEING USED CURRENTLY BY THE HEADS OF STATES.
SO YOU CAN BE ENSURED THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE COMFORT WILL BE UP TO THE LEVEL YOU MIGHT EXPECT.
REGARDING ACCOMMODATIONS, WELL, WE HAVE SELECTED A FEW HOTELS, RANGING FROM FIVE TO THREE STARS.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S ALREADY MENTIONED THAT ONE OF THE HOTELS IS SOLD OUT.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU BOOK EARLY IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THE BEST HOTELS.
SOFITEL, HILTON WILL HAVE FREE IN-ROOM INTERNET ACCESS.
SINCE ALL HOTELS ARE AWAY FROM THE VENUE, THERE WILL BE FREQUENT BUS SHUTTLES TO AND FROM THE VENUE.
IN THE CASE OF SOFITEL, NOVOTEL, THE VENUE IS FIVE MINUTES AWAY FROM THE HOTEL.
IN THE CASE OF HILTON, IT'S TEN MINUTES, BUT STILL VERY MUCH MANAGEABLE. AND THERE WILL BE FREQUENT SHUTTLES.
THREE STARS HOTELS ARE SMALLER AND I WOULD SAY MAYBE MORE TYPICAL IN THE SENSE THAT THEY ARE LOCATED IN THE CENTER OF THE CITY, CLOSE TO SHOPPING AND LEISURE AREAS.
AND EVEN FROM THE CENTER OF THE CITY, YOU CAN EASILY GET TO THE VENUE SINCE THE CITY IS ACTUALLY QUITE SMALL.
TRAVELING TO LUXEMBOURG IS QUITE EASY.
THERE ARE FREQUENT FLIGHTS FROM THE MAIN AIRLINE HUBS IN EUROPE, EITHER FRANKFURT OR PARIS OR AMSTERDAM OR LONDON.
AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WOULD NEED TO ATTEND THE WGIG MEETINGS LATER IN JULY, I'M HAPPY TO REPORT THAT THERE IS A DIRECT FLIGHT TO GENEVA.
YOU CAN ALSO COME TO LUXEMBOURG BY TRAIN.
THERE ARE DIRECTED TRAINS FROM PARIS AND BRUSSELS MOSTLY AND ALSO FROM MILAN.
LUXEMBOURG IS SAID TO CROSS ROADS OF MAIN EUROPEAN HIGHWAYS.
SO EVEN BY CAR, IT'S QUITE EASY TO TRAVEL FROM FRANKFURT OR PARIS TO LUXEMBOURG.
THESE ARE -- IT'S THE USUAL BUSINESS IN EUROPE.
IF YOU'RE COMING FROM EUROPEAN OR NORTH AMERICAN COUNTRIES, YOU DON'T NEED A VISA.
YOU JUST NEED A VALID PASSPORT FOR OTHER COUNTRIES.
I WOULD REALLY ADVISE YOU TO CHECK THE WEB SITE OF THE MINISTRY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS, AS MENTIONED, TO GET UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION.
OUR CONTACT POINTS IN THIS CASE ARE THE LUXEMBOURG CONVENTION BUREAU, WHICH TAKES CARE OF HOTEL ACCOMMODATION.
AND IF YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION, YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE IT, BUT WE ALREADY HAVE A WEB SITE ON WHICH YOU CAN FIND THE INFORMATION.
THE URL IS QUITE EASY TO REMEMBER.
IT'S WWW.ICANN.LU.
IT'S IN THREE LANGUAGES.
IT'S IN ENGLISH, IT'S IN FRENCH, IT'S IN GERMAN, LIKE WE TRY TO REFLECT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN LUXEMBOURG, MOST PEOPLE SPEAK SEVERAL LANGUAGES.
SO I WOULD ADVISE YOU TO CHECK THE WEB SITE IF YOU NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, INCLUDING MORE DETAILED VISA INFORMATION, INVITATION LETTERS, SHOULD YOU NEED SOME, AND SO ON.
YES.
SO IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE TO ANSWER INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONS, BUT YOU'RE VERY MUCH WELCOME TO COME RIGHT NEXT TO THIS MEETING ROOM, WE HAVE A BOOTH.
WE HAVE FLIERS AVAILABLE WITH INFORMATION, EVEN HOTEL BOOKING FORMS, JUST IN CASE.
SO YOU'RE VERY MUCH WELCOME TO COME OVER THERE IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PATRICK.
I KNOW YOU AND YOUR COLLEAGUES HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO PREPARE FOR OUR ARRIVAL.
AND YOU KNOW HOW MUCH WORK IT IS, BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN TO THESE MEETINGS BEFORE.
SO WE THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL OF THIS HOSPITALITY AND PLANNING.
AND I RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO GO AND STOP IN AND SEE THE BOOTH.
ALEX.
-- I'M SORRY.
I WAS LOOKING BADLY.
IT WAS VENI.
>>VENI MARKOVSKI: I GUESS YOU'RE USED TO THE FACT THAT ALEX IS SITTING NEXT TO YOU, SO --
>>VINT CERF: THAT'S RIGHT.
>>VENI MARKOVSKI: I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT BEFORE HE DECIDED TO CHOOSE LUXEMBOURG OR TO OFFER LUXEMBOURG TO BE OUR NEXT HOST, HE HAD VERY NICE BLACK HAIR.
NOW WE CAN SEE HIS HAIR IS ALMOST WHITE.
SO THAT'S ALSO A KIND OF A WARNING FOR OTHER CANDIDATES TO HOST MEETINGS.
>>VINT CERF: THE TERM IS "VICTIM."
BUT THAT'S ALL RIGHT.
OKAY.
THANK YOU, PATRICK.
LET'S MOVE ON NOW TO THE UPDATE ON AFRINIC.
AND I'M GOING TO CALL FIRST ON BARBARA ROSEMAN, AND THEN ON ADIEL AKPLOGAN.
SO, BARBARA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START.
>>BARBARA ROSEMAN: GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'D LIKE TO GIVE THE AFRINIC STATUS UPDATE FROM IANA.
IN SEPTEMBER 2004, THE ICANN BOARD GAVE PROVISIONAL APPROVAL TO AFRINIC'S APPLICATION AS THE REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRY FOR THE AFRICA REGION.
IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR, AFRINIC PRESENTED AN UPDATED APPLICATION DEMONSTRATING THAT THE TRANSITION PLAN WAS NEARING COMPLETION.
AND SO WE OPENED A PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM.
AND IT'S BEEN ONE OF OUR MOST SUCCESSFUL PUBLIC COMMENT FORUMS.
WE'VE HAD MORE THAN 20 COMMENTS TO THE FORUM. AND ALL BUT ONE OF THEM HAS BEEN POSITIVE ABOUT AFRINIC'S SUCCESS.
EXCUSE ME.
IN THE IANA REPORT ON AFRINIC, WE FIND THAT AFRINIC HAS MET ALL OF THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN ICP-2, THE DOCUMENT THAT GOVERNS HOW WE RECOGNIZE NEW RIRS.
AFRINIC'S OPERATIONS, POLICIES, AND BOTTOM-UP SELF-GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE COMPLY FULLY WITH THE SPECIFIED GUIDELINES.
AFRINIC'S TECHNICAL OPERATIONS AND EXPERTISE ARE IMPRESSIVE.
THE TRANSITION PLAN HAS BEEN SATISFACTORILY EXECUTED AND IS VIRTUALLY COMPLETE.
AFRINIC'S COOPERATION WITH THE INCUMBENT RIRS HAS BEEN EXEMPLARY, AND THE NRO HAS GIVEN ITS FULL ENDORSEMENT TO APPROVAL AND RECOGNITION OF AFRINIC AS AN INDEPENDENT RIR.
ACCORDINGLY, THE IANA CONCLUDES THAT AFRINIC HAS MET ALL THE NECESSARY REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL AND RECOGNITION.
AND I'D LIKE TO CALL ADIEL UP NOW TO GIVE A BRIEF UPDATE.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, BARBARA.

>>ADIEL AKPLOGAN: THANK YOU, BARBARA.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I'M JUST GOING TO COMMENT JUST BRIEFLY AN UPDATE GIVEN BY IANA.
I WOULD LIKE FIRST OF ALL TO THANK THE IANA FOR THIS POSITIVE EVALUATION OF OUR APPLICATION AND HOPE THAT THE BOARD ALSO WILL HAVE A VERY POSITIVE ANALYSIS, TOO.
YES, SINCE JULY LAST YEAR, WE PRESENT OUR TRANSITION PLAN AND ARE WILLING TO BECOME THE FIFTH REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRY, SERVING AFRICA REGION.
AND SINCE THEN, WE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH ALL THE OTHER AREA TO CONDUCT THIS TRANSITION PLAN TO THE END.
THIS BRINGS US SINCE FEBRUARY 1ST TO THE STAGE WHERE WE START OPERATING AS A FULL RIR.
ALL THE DATA AND ALL THE OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED EFFECTIVELY AND POSITIVELY TO AFRINIC.
FOR AFRICA, MOVING TO THIS STAGE OF THE TRANSITION WITH A FINAL ACCREDITATION BY ICANN WILL DEFINITELY REINFORCE OUR WILLINGNESS TO BE PRESENT AND PARTICIPATE INTO THE GLOBAL INTERNET TECHNICAL COORDINATION SYSTEM.
I WOULD LIKE TO USE THIS OPPORTUNITY, TOO, TO THANK ALL THE ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNMENTS IN AFRICA, MAINLY SOUTH AFRICAN GOVERNMENT, EGYPT GOVERNMENT, AND MAURITIUS GOVERNMENT, WHICH SUPPORTED OUR PROCESS TO THE BEGINNING AND BRINGS US TO THE STAGE WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
OUR REAL GRATITUDE ALSO GOES TO THE RIR, THE ALREADY-ESTABLISHED RIR, WHICH THROUGH THE NRO GIVE US THEIR FULL SUPPORT THROUGHOUT THE TRANSITION PROCESS.
AFRICA DEFINITELY WANTS TO BE PART OF THE GLOBAL INTERNET COORDINATION SYSTEM, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK TO INCREASE OUR PORTION IN THIS SELF-GOVERNANCE PROCESS AND PROCEDURE THROUGH ICANN.
THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY TODAY.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
(APPLAUSE.)
>>VINT CERF: ONE MOMENT, AXEL.
FIRST OF ALL, EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CELEBRATE THIS MORE TIMES THIS WEEK.
SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT.
AXEL.
>> AXEL PAWLIK: THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS AXEL PAWLIK, I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE RIPE NCC AND ALSO OF THE -- I DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH TO ADD TO THE PRESENTATIONS.
WE JUST WANT TO SAY ONCE MORE THAT IT WAS EXTREMELY EXCITING TO WORK WITH OUR FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES FROM AFRINIC.
IT WAS A VERY EXCITING, LET'S SAY, TWO YEARS OR SO.
NOT MUCH TO ADD TO THAT.
AS VINT HAS INDICATED, WE HOPE THAT THE BOARD WILL MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION ON FRIDAY.
AND IN ANTICIPATION OF THAT, WE HAVE LAID ON A BIT OF A RECEPTION ON THURSDAY NIGHT IN THE HOTEL HERE.
EVERYBODY IS VERY HEARTILY INVITED.
WE HAVE INVITATIONS OUT AT THE FRONT DESK.
SO I HOPE TO SEE YOU ALL THERE.
THURSDAY EVENING.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AXEL.
>> THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: OKAY.
THAT'S JUST A WONDERFUL STEP IN THE EVOLUTION OF OUR INTERNET ENVIRONMENT.
LET ME NOW ASK FOR THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION REPORTS.
AND I WILL BEGIN BY ASKING BRUCE TONKIN TO COME TO REPORT ON THE GNSO.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: OKAY.
THAT WORKED SURPRISINGLY EASILY.
THANK YOU, VINT.
AS USUAL, THERE'S LOTS HAPPENING IN THE GENERIC NAMES SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S BEEN USEFUL AS PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS OF ICANN IS REFLECTING ON GNSO'S PURPOSE AND ROLE.
AND IN THE PAST, WE'VE POINTED OUT THAT THE GNSO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING POLICIES RELATED TO GENERIC TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS.
BUT I THINK THE KEY IS THAT IT'S THOSE POLICIES WITH RESPECT TO ENHANCING THE STABILITY AND SECURITY OF THE INTERNET'S UNIQUE IDENTIFIER SYSTEMS WHILE FOSTERING COMPETITION WHERE APPROPRIATE TO GIVE USERS GREATER CHOICE.
SO USING THAT AS JUST SETTING THE SCENE, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE BEFORE THE GNSO.
WE'RE STILL INVESTIGATING WHOIS.
ONE OF THE ISSUES THERE IS MAKING SURE THAT WE PROVIDE SUFFICIENT ACCESS TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THIS USE OF SECURITY AND STABILITY WHILE ALSO PROTECTING THE PRIVACY OF REGISTRANTS.
AND WE ALSO ARE LOOKING AT MECHANISMS OF IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION.
ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT HAS BECOME CLEAR IS THAT REGISTRANTS AREN'T ALWAYS AWARE OF THE PURPOSES AND USES OF WHOIS AND WHAT THE DIFFERENT CONTACT FIELDS MEAN.
AND WE HAVE TECHNICAL CONTACT AND ADMIN CONTACT, BUT THEY'RE NOT REALLY DEFINED ANYWHERE.
SO WE DO NEED TO GIVE BETTER INFORMATION TO REGISTRANTS WHEN THEY'RE REGISTERING THEIR DOMAIN NAME.
SO ONE OF THE, I GUESS, RECOMMENDATIONS THAT'S COMING OUT OF THE WHOIS PROCESS AT THE MOMENT IS IMPROVING THAT INFORMATION.
ANOTHER THING THAT'S EMERGED, ONE OF THE -- I GUESS THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES IS CERTAINLY THAT, OBVIOUSLY, REGISTRARS AND REGISTRANTS NEED TO OBEY THE LAWS IN THEIR LOCAL COUNTRIES.
BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME OF THE ISSUES RELATING TO PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION, THAT THERE ARE POSSIBLY DIFFERENCES IN THE WAY THOSE ISSUES HAVE BEEN HANDLED IN SOME COUNTRIES VERSUS HOW IT'S BEING HANDLED IN THE CURRENT ICANN AGREEMENTS.
AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW DO WE DEVELOP MECHANISMS FOR AVOIDING PROBLEMS THERE.
THE OTHER MAIN POLICY AREA IS LOOKING AT A PROCESS FOR USE BY STAFF IN APPROVING CHANGES TO GTLD AGREEMENTS.
AND IN THIS AREA, THERE IS A PROCESS THAT'S CURRENTLY INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT DOT NET AGREEMENT.
SO I RECOMMEND PEOPLE READ THAT SECTION CAREFULLY, BECAUSE WE WILL BE USING THAT INFORMATION AS INPUT INTO TRYING TO DEVELOP A CONSENSUS POLICY THAT WILL APPLY TO ALL REGISTRIES.
THEN THERE ARE THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE SEEKING ISSUES REPORTS ON, ESSENTIALLY.
ONE IS LOOKING AT THE PROCESS FOR REALLOCATION OF DOMAIN NAMES BETWEEN REGISTRANTS, AND THE OTHER IS NEW GTLDS AND LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE ISSUES, POLICY ISSUES, ASSOCIATED WITH THAT THAT WE NEED TO INVESTIGATE SPECIFICALLY WITH RESPECT TO SECURITY AND STABILITY.
WE'RE ALSO -- HAVE A PROCESS OF REVIEWING POLICIES WE'VE ALREADY DEVELOPED.
THE TRANSFERS POLICY WAS DEVELOPED PROBABLY ALMOST A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO NOW IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL POLICY PART.
THEN IT TOOK ANOTHER YEAR OR SO BEFORE IT WAS -- WENT THROUGH, I GUESS, A LEGAL IMPLEMENTATION.
AND IT FINALLY BECAME A REQUIREMENT OF REGISTRARS TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW POLICY, I THINK, IN AROUND NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR.
THE ICANN STAFF MANAGED A PROCESS OF GETTING PUBLIC COMMENTS THREE MONTHS AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW POLICY.
AND THAT THREE-MONTH REPORT APPARENTLY IS AVAILABLE TODAY.
I DID QUESTION THIS, BUT KURT PRITZ HAS ACTUALLY SHOWN ME A PRINTOUT TO PROVE THAT IT EXISTS.
SO HE'S USED AN EXISTENCE PROOF.
SO THAT EXISTS.
AND WE'RE ABOUT TO START THE SIX-MONTH REVIEW OF THAT TRANSFERS PROCESS.
AND THERE'S CERTAINLY BEEN QUITE A BIT OF PUBLICITY IN RELATION TO TRANSFERS IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS OR SO.
AND SOME -- THERE WAS QUITE A LONG DISCUSSION LAST NIGHT, AND DEBATE, ON, YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE'VE GOT THE BEST POLICY.
AND CERTAINLY THAT WAS ALL TRANSCRIBED.
AND THAT WILL FORM INPUT INTO THE GNSO TO CONSIDER.
WE'LL ALSO BE GETTING ADVICE FROM THE SECURITY AND STABILITY COMMITTEE ON THE SECURITY MECHANISMS THAT ARE AVAILABLE AND THEIR ADVICE ON HOW WE CAN IMPROVE THE TRANSFER PROCESS.
ONE OF THE THINGS IN WHOIS -- AND I WAS INTERESTED TO HEAR THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THEIR FRUSTRATIONS AT THE PROGRESS ON WHOIS WITH RESPECT TO PRIVACY.
I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ON THAT.
I GUESS ONE IS, THE GNSO'S ROLE ISN'T ACTUALLY PRIVACY; IT'S SECURITY AND STABILITY.
BUT CERTAINLY WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE DO, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE IS PROTECTING PRIVACY.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S COME OUT IN SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS IN THE WHOIS TASK FORCE -- AND WE ALSO PRESENTED THIS IN THE PUBLIC FORUM THIS MORNING -- IS THE GROWING SERVICES IN THE MARKET PROVIDED BY REGISTRARS THAT DO OFFER PRIVACY PROTECTION.
AND, ESSENTIALLY, WHAT THEY DO IS THEY PRESERVE CONTACTABILITY, BECAUSE THEY PROVIDE A MECHANISM FOR MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY TO CONTACT A REGISTRANT IF THEY HAVE AN ISSUE REGARDING SECURITY AND STABILITY OF A DOMAIN NAME.
BUT THEY PROTECT THE REGISTRANT'S PERSONAL POSTAL ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBERS AND E-MAIL ADDRESS.
IT WAS ALSO POINTED OUT THIS MORNING THAT IN TERMS OF CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW IN MANY COUNTRIES, IF YOU ARE OFFERING A SERVICE, YOU DO NEED TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE YOUR -- SOME SORT OF CONTACT AND ADDRESS INFORMATION AS PART OF CONSUMER PROTECTION.
SO, CLEARLY, THERE'S DIFFERENT APPROACHES FROM THE CONSUMER PROTECTION POINT OF VIEW.
AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT THERE ARE LAWS REGARDING PRIVACY OF DATA AND MAKING SURE THAT YOU'RE NOT DISPLAYING PERSONAL INFORMATION.
SO IT'S A VERY COMPLEX AREA.
THE MARKET IS RESPONDING TO THE NEED, THOUGH.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO IN ICANN IS ARRANGE MORE PRESENTATIONS ON WHAT SOME OF THE SERVICES THAT ARE EMERGING IN THE MARKET THAT MEET SOME OF THE NEEDS THAT ARE BEING RAISED BY USERS IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND THE MARKET'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND A LOT FASTER THAN WE CAN AT A POLICY LEVEL.
AND AT A POLICY LEVEL, WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AND TRY AND MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER WE CHANGE DOESN'T HARM THE SYSTEM.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY ENOUGH OF WHOIS.
THE HEADING OF THIS SLIDE IS "REALLOCATION OF DOMAIN NAMES."
THIS, AGAIN, IS BECOMING A GROWING AREA AS THE VALUE OF A DOMAIN NAME FOR E-COMMERCE HAS RISEN DRAMATICALLY.
REGISTRANTS MAY CURRENTLY TRANSFER THE RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH A DOMAIN NAME TO OTHER REGISTRANTS.
THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR YEARS.
BUT THE GROWTH OF THIS IN THE LAST TWO YEARS HAS BEEN DRAMATIC AS PEOPLE REALIZE THAT THE VALUE OF AN ACTUAL NAME ON THE INTERNET CAN BE MEASURED IN TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN TERMS OF THE POTENTIAL USERS THAT MIGHT COME IN AND USE THAT DOMAIN NAME TO ACCESS A WEB SITE.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS EVOLVED VERY SIMILAR TO HOW OTHER MARKETS HAVE EVOLVED, IF WE LOOK AT REAL ESTATE AS AN EXAMPLE, ANY OTHER LICENSE SYSTEMS, A DOMAIN NAME IS VERY SIMILAR TO A FISHING LICENSE OR A TAXI LICENSE, IT'S ESSENTIALLY A RIGHT TO DO SOMETHING.
AND THOSE RIGHTS ARE LIMITED, OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE ONLY ONE PERSON HAS THE RIGHT TO USE A PARTICULAR NAME.
AND AS THOSE NAMES -- MORE AND MORE PEOPLE WANT THE SAME NAME, SO IF I WAS TO SAY THAT I HAD A DOMAIN NAME LIKE, SAY, BOOK.COM, MANY PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT NAME.
AND PROVIDED WHAT I WAS PREPARED TO SELL THE NAME FOR TO TRANSFER MY RIGHTS WAS BELOW WHAT MANY PEOPLE WERE PREPARED TO OFFER, THEN I HAVE AN AUCTION SCENARIO.
AND AUCTIONS ARE BECOMING A DOMINANT MODEL FOR TRANSFERRING THE RIGHTS BETWEEN REGISTRANTS.
AND SO, OF COURSE, THE MARKET'S EVOLVING, TOO, TO MEET THAT NEED.
AND SPECIALIST AUCTION PROVIDERS ARE EMERGING WHERE THEY TRY AND AGGREGATE AND PROVIDE AS MANY NAMES AS POSSIBLE THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR SALE.
AND OF COURSE THAT DRAWS MORE AND MORE CUSTOMERS TO SHOWS SYSTEMS, BECAUSE THEY SAY, OKAY, THIS IS THE PLACE TO GO IF I WANT TO GET A GOOD NAME.
BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET A GOOD NAME JUST BY REGISTERING IT ON THE OPEN MARKET NOW.
YOU CAN GET A NAME.
BUT MANY PEOPLE DON'T CONSIDER THOSE TO BE GOOD NAMES.
AND THE MARKET FOR GOOD NAMES IS BASICALLY BEING SERVICED OUTSIDE OF THE REGISTRATION PROCESS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S ALSO EMERGED IN THE LAST, I GUESS, SIX MONTHS OR SO IS THAT WHEN A DOMAIN NAME HAS EXPIRED, THE CHOICE AT THAT STAGE IS THE NAME CAN BE RENEWED OR CAN BE DELETED.
AND WHAT REGISTRARS HAVE INTRODUCED INTO THE MARKET IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE REGISTRANT TO HAVE THREE CHOICES.
AND THOSE THREE CHOICES ARE, YOU MAY RENEW THE NAME, YOU MAY TRANSFER THE NAME TO ANOTHER PARTY, PRESUMABLY FOR SOME VALUE, OR YOU MAY CHOOSE TO HAVE THE NAME DELETED.
SO YOU NOW HAVE THREE CHOICES.
AND IN THE CASE OF CHOOSING TO HAVE THE NAME TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER PARTY, THE REGISTRAR BASICALLY USES ITS KNOWLEDGE OF THE MARKET TO GAIN THE BEST PRICE THAT THEY CAN FOR THAT NAME ON BEHALF OF THEIR CUSTOMER.
SO THAT'S KIND OF SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY EMERGED ONLY IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS.
IT WAS STARTED TO BE DISCUSSED IN THE CAPE TOWN MEETING.
IT'S NOW VERY MUCH BECOMING ENTRENCHED IN THE MARKETPLACE.
SO SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE ARISING FROM HERE AND I THINK ONE OF THE STRUGGLES FOR THE GNSO, AS WE'VE SEEN, IS IT DOES TAKE TIME TO REALLY UNDERSTAND AN ISSUE.
BUT EVEN BETWEEN AN ICANN MEETING, THREE MONTHS, PRETTY MUCH, BETWEEN ICANN MEETINGS, THE MARKET IS MOVING VERY FAST.
AND WE REALLY NEED TO KEEP INFORMING THE COMMUNITY OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN THE MARKET SO THAT AT LEAST THE COMMUNITY CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHAT'S THERE.
BUT THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE LOOKING AT WHAT ARE THE PUBLIC POLICY OR SPECIFICALLY WHAT ARE THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHANGES IN THE MARKET.
AND DO WE NEED TO TAKE ANY ACTION.
BUT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT IN THE PERSPECTIVE, AGAIN, IF WE GO BACK TO THE ICANN CORE PRINCIPLES, THAT WHERE POSSIBLE, RELY ON MARKET MECHANISMS.
SO WE SHOULD ONLY INTERFERE IN THE MARKET IF THE MARKET IS ACTUALLY CAUSING A SECURITY AND STABILITY CONCERN. AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND.
SO I GUESS THE FIRST QUESTION HERE IS, ARE THERE ANY SECURITY AND STABILITY ISSUES EMERGING.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE ASKED FOR AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL IS AN ISSUES REPORT FROM THE STAFF. AND THIS IS PROBABLY A DIFFICULT THING FOR THE STAFF TO DO, I MUST SAY, BECAUSE YOU'D NEED A LOT OF EXPERTISE IN THE MARKET TO REALLY ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
THEN THERE'S ISSUES THAT INTERRELATE.
SO WE HAVE A TRANSFERS PROCESS.
THERE ARE MECHANISMS THAT SOME PARTICIPANTS IN THE MARKET ARE INTRODUCING.
ARE THEY IN SOME WAY STOPPING TRANSFERS OR ARE THEY IN SOME WAY INTERFERING WITH OTHER POLICIES THAT THE GNSO HAS.
AND DO REGISTRANTS REALLY KNOW THEIR RIGHTS?
MY KIND OF ANALOGY AT THE MOMENT IS THAT MANY PEOPLE THINK WHEN THEY'RE BUYING A DOMAIN NAME THEY'RE BUYING VERY SIMILAR TO BUYING A CARTON OF MILK FROM THE SAME DAIRY.
THEY SEE NO DIFFERENCE.
THEY THINK IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO YOU BUY THE CARTON OF MILK FROM, IT'S STILL A CARTON OF MILK.
BUT THE REALITY IS YOU'RE ACTUALLY NOT BUYING A DOMAIN NAME; YOU'RE ACTUALLY BUYING THE REGISTRATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND YOU THAT REGISTRAR.
AND EACH REGISTRAR HAS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SETS OF RIGHTS AND TERMS AND CONDITIONS THAT GO WITH THAT LICENSE.
AND YOU NEED TO BE LOOKING AT, WELL, WHAT ARE YOU BUYING WHEN YOU'RE BUYING A NAME.
YOU'RE BUYING A LICENSE; YOU'RE NOT BUYING A NAME.
AND YOU NEED TO LOOK AT DO THOSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS MEET YOUR BUSINESS NEEDS AND/OR YOUR INDIVIDUAL NEEDS.
AND DO REGISTRANTS KNOW THEIR RIGHTS.
DO THEY KNOW THAT THEY HAVE THREE OPTIONS, RENEW, DELETE, OR TRANSFER?
THIS IS IN THE REGISTRANTS' CONTROL, BUT UNLESS REGISTRANTS KNOW THEY HAVE THOSE RIGHTS AND HAVE THE CONTROL, THEN THEY CAN BE EXPLOITED IN THE MARKET.
SO PROBLEMS AT THE REGISTRIES. WE'VE HEARD FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW IN SOME OF THE PUBLIC FORUMS THAT REGISTRARS ACTING ON BEHALF OF THEIR CUSTOMERS HAVE BEEN SLAMMING THE REGISTRY VIA THE BATCH POOL TO ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN NAMES AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN DELETED. THIS HAS LED TO ALL SORTS OF STRANGE BEHAVIOR, SUCH AS REGISTERING OR ACCREDITING MANY ICANN REGISTRARS. IN FACT, THERE'S ACTUALLY A MARKET NOW IN ACCREDITATIONS. YOU CAN BUY AND SELL THE RIGHTS TO SLAM THE REGISTRY.
AND THIS IS A GAME OF CHANCE. THERE'S NO CERTAINTY FOR REGISTRANTS THAT GENUINELY WISH TO OBTAIN A SPECIFIC DOMAIN NAME. IT'S BASICALLY LIKE GOING DOWN TO THE CASINO AND THROWING SOME MONEY ON ROULETTE. IT'S JUST A GAME OF CHANCE.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S EMERGED FOLLOWING DISCUSSIONS IN CAPE TOWN IS I GUESS THE REGISTRY/REGISTRAR INDUSTRY IS CONSIDERING USING THE OPTION MECHANISM TO PROVIDE FAIR ACCESS TO DELETED NAMES FOR ALL REGISTRANTS REGARDLESS OF WHICH REGISTRAR YOU CHOOSE TO USE, EVERYONE WOULD HAVE FAIR ACCESS. AND BE ABLE TO OBTAIN A NAME PROVIDED THEY, I GUESS, HAVE THE MOST INTEREST IN THAT NAME.
AND WHAT THEY'RE AUCTIONING AT THIS STAGE IS AUCTIONING THE RIGHT TO REGISTER A NAME. AND THE AUCTION STARTS AT ZERO DOLLARS. YOU CAN ACTUALLY OBTAIN THE RIGHT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER PEOPLE PARTICIPATING OR NO OTHER PERSON WANTS THE NAME, THEN THE AUCTION IS FOR ZERO DOLLARS. THEN YOU STILL PAY YOUR $6 REGISTRATION FEE.
SO THIS IS A MECHANISM THAT THE INDUSTRY IS LOOKING AT, AT THE REGISTRY, BUT THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THE CUSTOMER, WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR THE REGISTRANT.
GNSO PLANNING. I GUESS ONE OF THE THINGS, BECAUSE ICANN HAS BEEN DOING PLANNING, SO HAS THE GNSO, OF COURSE. WE ARE TRYING TO LOOK AT, WITHIN THE GNSO, WHAT ARE THE MAJOR ISSUES FOR THIS YEAR, AND THEY APPEAR TO BE WHOIS, NEW GTLDS, AND PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE OF THE ORGANIZATION.
OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR, I GUESS, THE NEXT YEAR, MAYBE NEXT TWO YEARS ARE LOOKING AT NEW REGISTRY SERVICES, CONTINUING TO IMPROVE THE TRANSFER POLICY, LOOKING AT PROVEN DELETION PROCESSES. ALSO LOOKING AT HOW WE CAN STRENGTHEN COMPLIANCE, BECAUSE ONE OF THE STRUGGLES OF TRANSFERS HAS NOT SO MUCH BEEN THE POLICY BUT HAS BEEN THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE THE POLICY. SO WE'RE LAG TO SEE HOW WE CAN ASSIST ICANN IN PROVIDING THEM WITH MORE MECHANISMS THAT THEY CAN USE. BECAUSE PEOPLE OFTEN COMPLAIN THAT ICANN IS NOT DOING ANYTHING BUT ICANN CAN ONLY DO WHAT WE ASK THEM TO DO, AND WE DO THAT BY FORMING CONSENSUS POLICY.
WE'RE LAG AT IMPROVING THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, AND JUST GENERALLY TRYING TO CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVE PROCEDURES, ESPECIALLY TRYING TO MAKE THEM MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKERS. AND THAT INCLUDES, AT THE VERY LEAST, HAVING PROPER METHODS OF AT LEAST CONVERTING FROM VOICE TO TEXT. BECAUSE ONCE YOU'VE GOT IT INTO TEXT FORM, THERE AT LEAST IS SOME HOPE THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO GET IT TRANSLATED.
LONGER TERM, THE GNSO WILL DEVELOP ITS OWN OPERATIONAL AND STRATEGIC PLAN FOR ITS OWN POLICY DEVELOPMENT. BUT WE ALSO WILL DEVELOP PROCESSES TO PROVIDE INPUT TO ICANN ON ICANN'S OVERALL OPERATIONAL AND STRATEGIC PLANS.
AND FINALLY I'D LIKE TO THANK TONY HARRIS WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE GNSO COUNCIL AND HAS BEEN FOR SOME TIME, BECAUSE TONY HAS PLAYED A MAJOR ROLE IN ORGANIZING THIS EVENT HERE IN MAR DEL PLATA, AND THE COUNCIL WISHED TO SHOW OUR THANKS.
SO THANKS, VINT.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BRUCE. AND I THINK ALL OF US WILL ECHO YOUR THANKS TO TONY AND THE REST OF THE TEAM THAT HAS MADE ALL OF THIS WORK SO WELL FOR US.
THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE ON NOW TO CHRIS DISSPAIN AND THE CCNSO REPORT. CHRIS.

>>CHRIS DISSPAIN: THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. WE DO HAVE A REPORT THAT I WILL PUT UP THERE BUT I DON'T PROPOSE TO READ THROUGH IT. I JUST WISH TO HIGHLIGHT THREE PARTICULAR AREAS THAT THE CCNSO HAS SPENT ITS TIME WORKING ON.
THE FIRST IS CCTLD FEES TO ICANN, SOMETHING WHICH I KNOW IS CLOSE TO THE HEART OF MANY PEOPLE AT ICANN.
WE HAD A VERY USEFUL SESSION AT OUR MEETING AND WE BRAINSTORMED ALL SORTS OF POSSIBLE MODELS THAT COULD BE USED TO APPORTION THE QUANTUM OF CC FEES AMONGST CCTLDS, AND WE HAVE FORMED A WORKING GROUP TO SPECIFICALLY DEAL WITH THAT ASPECT.
WE HAVE A SEPARATE WORKING GROUP LOOKING AT QUANTUM, BUT THIS ONE WILL JUST LOOK AT THE MODELS.
AND HOPEFULLY, AT OUR NEXT MEETING IT WILL REPORT BACK TO US WITH SOME EXAMINATION, ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE SECOND AREA I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT IS ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS. WE HAD A VERY LONG SESSION ON THAT. WE SPENT MOST OF OUR TIME DISCUSSING OBLIGATIONS, WHAT ARE THE OBLIGATIONS THAT CCTLD MANAGERS EXPECT FROM ICANN, AND WHAT ARE THE OBLIGATIONS THAT CCTLD MANAGERS ARE PREPARED TO GIVE BACK TO ICANN.
THE ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS WORKING GROUP, ARMED WITH THE INPUT FROM OUR MEETING, IS GOING TO GO AWAY AND FLESH OUT THE THINGS THAT WE'VE GOT CONSENSUS ON THAT WE THINK THE OBLIGATION SHOULD SHOW.
I DO NEED TO SAY, HOWEVER -- MAKE TWO POINTS. THE FIRST IS THAT OUR JOB IS NOT TO DRAFT AN ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK. OUR JOB IS SIMPLY TO COME UP WITH A SERIES OF GUIDELINES. AND THE SECOND POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS THAT THERE ARE SOME VERY, VERY DIFFICULT ISSUES TO DEAL WITH.
ONE, FOR EXAMPLE, BEING WHAT LAW DO YOU WRITE THE ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK IN. ONE EASY ANSWER IS YOU WRITE IT UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW, BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY SUITABLE FOR ALL CCTLDS.
SO THESE ARE ISSUES THAT WE ARE WORKING ON, AND WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO COME UP WITH SOME CONCLUSIONS FOR OUR RECOMMENDATIONS OR OUR GUIDELINES AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
THE THIRD MATTER INVOLVES THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE CCNSO. MOST OF YOU ALL KNOW THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CCTLDS THAT ARE INTERESTED IN JOINING THE CCNSO BUT WILL NOT JOIN THE CCNSO AT THE MOMENT BECAUSE THEY HAVE ISSUES WITH THE CCNSO BYLAW AND THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
ICANN, OR ICANN STAFF, REQUESTED CENTR, THE EUROPEAN REGIONAL ORGANIZATION, TO CANVASS ITS MEMBERS AND ASK THEM IF THEY COULD COME UP WITH AN OVERVIEW PAPER OF THE ISSUES WHICH THEY CONSIDER TO BE A PROBLEM. AND CENTR HAS DONE THAT, AND THEY HAVE SENT THAT PAPER TO ICANN STAFF WHO HAVE PASSED IT TO THE CCNSO, SINCE IT IS CLEARLY A CCNSO ISSUE.
THE COUNCIL AT OUR COUNCIL MEETING THIS MORNING CONSIDERED THIS AT SOME LENGTH.
THE ONLY WAY THAT THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, WHICH IS ANNEX B, I THINK, TO THE BYLAWS, CAN BE AMENDED IS BY RUNNING A PDP ON IT. AND WHILST IT MAY BE TECHNICALLY POSSIBLE FOR THE ICANN BYLAW ARTICLE TO BE AMENDED IN ANOTHER WAY, THE COUNCIL WOULD BE UNCOMFORTABLE ABOUT AMENDING THE BYLAW WITHOUT PUTTING IT THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE PDP REQUIRES.
SO THE COUNCIL WILL MEET IN TWO OR THREE WEEKS' TIME ON THE TELEPHONE TO DECIDE WHETHER TO LAUNCH A PDP ON THE CCNSO BYLAW AND THE PDP ITSELF.
WE HAVEN'T YET DECIDED TO DO IT. WE ARE CONSIDERING IT. AND WE WILL BE PUTTING OUT A CALL TO ALL LISTS, WW TLD, CCNSO, AND PRACTICALLY EVERYONE ELSE WE CAN THINK OF, IN THE NEXT DAY OR SO TO PROVIDE US WITH SOME INPUT OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, TO ASSIST US IN MAKING THE DECISION AS TO WHETHER WE WOULD LAUNCH THE PDP.
JUST FOR CLARITY, THE FIRST STEP, IF WE WERE TO DECIDE TO DO THAT, IS ACTUALLY TO CALL FOR AN ISSUES REPORT. AND OF COURSE ONCE YOU GET THE ISSUES REPORT, IT'S ONLY THEN THAT YOU ACTUALLY LAUNCH THE PDP.
BUT IF IT GOES AHEAD, THE DECISION WOULD BE MADE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS, AND WE ANTICIPATE THAT IF IT DOES HAPPEN, THEN THERE WILL BE A MAJOR DISCUSSION MEETING IN LUXEMBOURG, ASSUMING WE CAN GET TO THE RIGHT POINT IN THE PDP TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
OTHER THAN THAT, WE'VE DONE A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER THINGS WHICH I WON'T BORE YOU WITH RIGHT NOW. THEY'RE IN THE MEETING REPORT.
I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SAY ONE THING MORE, WHICH IS THAT THIS MEETING, OR, IN FACT, OUR TELEPHONE MEETING IN TWO-WEEKS' TIME WILL BE THE LAST WEEK THAT BART BOSWINKEL WILL ATTEND AS A COUNCILLOR. HE IS RESIGNING, I THINK THEY SAY "TO PURSUE OTHER INTERESTS." AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT BART HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AND HAS CONTRIBUTED A HUGE AMOUNT TO GETTING THIS THING UP AND RUNNING, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO PUBLICLY THANK HIM FOR HIS SERVICE AND HIS INPUT AND HIS HUMOR.
THANK YOU.
(APPLAUSE.)
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHRIS.
YOU KNOW, EVERY TIME I THINK OF BART WHEN HE STANDS UP, I THINK OF SOMEONE WHO ONCE SAID, "IF I HAVE SEEN FARTHER THAN OTHERS, IT'S BECAUSE I'VE STOOD ON THE SHOULDERS OF GIANTS." BART DIDN'T HAVE TO STAND ON ANYBODY'S SHOULDERS. HE CAN SEE FARTHER THAN ANYBODY ANYWAY.
THANK YOU, BART.
OKAY. THE ASO REPORT IS NEXT, AND I SEE HARTMUT GLASER COMING TO THE LECTERN.
>>HARTMUT GLASER: I AM ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE ADDRESS COUNCIL FOR THE LACNIC AREA, AND BECAUSE OUR CHAIR IS NOT PRESENT, I WILL BRING THIS REPORT FOR THE ADDRESS SUPPORT ORGANIZATION.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO EXPLAIN AND TO SAY THIS EVERY TIME AGAIN THAT THE ADDRESS COUNCIL DOES NOT REPRESENT THE RIRS DIRECTLY. ALL THREE REPRESENTATIVES FROM EACH REGION ARE ELECTED. NOW ONE IS NOMINATED. BUT THEY DON'T NEED TO BE MEMBERS OF THE RIRS. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES CAN BE ANTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS. AND NOW, AFTER THE NEW MEMORANDUM THAT WAS SIGNED LAST YEAR, OCTOBER 21ST, TWO ARE ELECTED IN THE PUBLIC FORUM. IT'S AN OPEN PROCESS WITH CANDIDATES, AND ONE MEMBER IS NOMINATED BY EACH REGIONAL RIR. SO WE HAVE A VERY DEMOCRATIC, BOTTOM-UP TRANSPARENT PROCESS.
I HAVE ONE SLIDE ABOUT THE NRO. WE LIKE TO USE THE RIRS IN CONCERT.
WE ARE TOGETHER PUTTING OUR EFFORTS TO PROTECT THE UNALLOCATED NUMBER RESOURCE POOL TO PROMOTE AND PROTECT THE BOTTOM-UP POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND ACT AS A FOCAL POINT OF INTERNET COMMUNITY INPUT INTO THE NUMBER SYSTEM.
ON THIS SLIDE I SHOW YOU THE NAMES AND THE TERMS OF THE DIFFERENT MEMBERS.
WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS FROM THE APNIC REGION, AND ONE OF OUR CO-CHAIRS, TAKASHI ARANO IS FROM THIS PART OF THE WORLD, AND THREE OTHERS FROM ARIN, WITH AND WE HAVE ALSO LACNIC THREE MEMBERS, MYSELF, I AM ONE OF THE MEMBERS, AND FROM RIPENCC, AND YOU'LL SEE ON THIS SLIDE EVERY TIME ONE IS APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF THE RIRS.
THIS YEARS, THE FULL SUPPORT FOR THE ADDRESS COUNCIL AND FOR THE NRO SECRETARIAT IS SUPPORTED BY LACNIC. EVERY YEAR, ONE OF THE RIRS TAKE OVER THIS JOB, AND THIS YEAR IS IN OUR PART OF THE WORLD AND LACNIC IS THE SECRETARIAT FOR ALL THE ADMINISTRATION, ALL THE MINUTES, THE WEB SITE, AND ALL THE OTHER BUSINESS.
THE ASO SELECTS TWO BOARD MEMBERS. THIS IS AN OLD SLIDE. YOU SEE THE NAMES. MOUHAMET DIOP WAS ELECTED AND HIS TERM IS UNTIL NEXT YEAR. AND RAIMUNDO BECA WAS ELECTED, AND HIS TERM IS UNTIL MAY 2007.
UNTIL THE LAST YEAR, UNTIL 2004, UNDER THE OLD MEMORANDUM, THERE WAS A PROVISION FOR A GENERAL ASSEMBLY EVERY YEAR. THE LAST ONE WAS IN AMSTERDAM IN MAY. YOU HAVE THE WEB SITE TO SEE DETAILS. BUT NOW THERE IS A CHANGE, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROVISION FOR A GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN THE NEW MEMORANDUM, BUT WE TRY TO HAVE ANOTHER SOLUTION.
AFTER THIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY LAST YEAR IN MAY, THE FIRST ADDRESS COUNCIL MEETING ELECT THE BOARD DIRECTOR AND ELECT ALSO THE NOMCOM 2005 REPRESENTATIVE. AND YOU SEE THE TWO NAMES ON THE SLIDE.
I AM VERY HAPPY TO SAY, AFTER ALL THE SUPPORT THAT THE PLENARY, THE FORUM SHOWS FOR AFRINIC, THAT ASO AND THE NRO WORK TOGETHER WITH A JOINT EFFORT TO SUPPORT AFRINIC IN ALL THE ADVICE AND ALL THE PLANNING. AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO SAY THAT AFRINIC REPRESENTATIVES HAVE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATED IN ALL CURRENT ASO AND ICANN ACTIVITIES. AND HERE YOU SEE THE THREE NAMES OF THE COUNCIL OBSERVERS. BEFORE AN RIR, THEY RECEIVE THIS TITLE OF RIR, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE OBSERVERS. THE ONLY RESTRICTION, THEY CANNOT VOTE. AND ADIEL, ALAN AND GREGORY PARTICIPATE IN MOST OF THE CONFERENCE CALLS WE HAVE LAST YEAR.
OTHER ADMINISTRATION ACTIVITIES. WE HAVE NOW A SELECTION PROCESS FOR OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS. THIS IS ON OUR WEB SITE. WE HAVE A ROADMAP FOR THE ACTIVITIES IN 2005. WE SPENT SOME TIME DISCUSSING ICANN STRATEGIC PLAN. WE HAVE A SPECIFIC TELECONFERENCE ABOUT THIS POINT. WE HAVE PLANNED TWO WORKSHOPS, ONE IN MAPUTO THIS MONTH, THE END OF APRIL, WILL BE THE AFRINIC AND AFNOG MEETING AND WE WILL BE THERE AS ADDRESS COUNCIL. WE WILL BE THERE AGAIN AND PROVE WE ARE SUPPORTING AFRINIC NOT ONLY UNTIL NOW BUT WE WILL STAY TO GO ON THE NEW WAY. AND THE NEXT WE WILL BE IN VANCOUVER AT THE END OF THE YEAR, PROBABLY DURING THE NEXT ICANN MEETING.
A VERY IMPORTANT POINT THAT WE DISCUSS AND IS THE LAST POINT, GLOBAL POLICIES FOR IPV4 AND IPV6. AND I HAVE TWO SLIDES.
THE POLICY THAT WE SENT TO THE ICANN BOARD DESCRIBES THE PROCEDURE BY WHICH IANA WILL MAKE IPV4 ALLOCATION TO THE RIRS. THE DRAFT POLICY FOR THIS IPV4 WAS SUBMITTED BY THE NRO, THE NUMBER RESOURCE ORGANIZATION, TO THE ASO, ADDRESS COUNCIL.
THE ADDRESS COUNCIL TAKE A RESOLUTION APPROVED BY THE ASO IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOUR RIRS' LOCAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. AND THEN THIS WAS FORWARDED TO THE ICANN BOARD. AND AFTER THEN, WE HAVE A VERY STRONG RELATIONSHIP WITH IANA AND OTHER MEMBERS, AND I KNOW THAT THIS POINT IS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE BOARD ON THE NEXT MEETING. AND WE EXPECT THAT THIS POLICY WILL BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD. SO I LIKE TO EXPRESS ALL THE SUPPORT THAT WE RECEIVED FROM IANA AND FROM THE ICANN BOARD AND ALL THE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OUR STAKEHOLDERS.
THE SAME IS NOW UNDERWAY FOR IPV6.
THE COMMUNITY IS CONSIDERING GLOBAL -- THE GLOBAL IANA IPV6 ADDRESS ALLOCATION POLICY.
WE HAVE, AS YOU KNOW, PUBLIC FORUMS IN EVERY PART OF THE WORLD. SOME OF OUR RIRS MET TWICE A YEAR. AND DURING THIS PUBLIC FORUM, WE HAVE DISCUSSIONS, AND THE PROPOSAL WAS DRAFTED AND NOW WE ARE DISCUSSING THIS DOING OUR DISCUSSION LIST, OUR IPV6 MAILING LIST, AND PROBABLY, A VERY SHORT TIME, WE HAVE A NEW POLICY THAT WE CAN SEND AND FORWARD TO THE ICANN BOARD. BUT THE LAST LINE ON THIS SLIDE ASKED THAT ALL INTERESTED PARTIES JOIN THIS DISCUSSION. LET'S BE ON -- PUBLIC MEETINGS OR USING DISCUSSION LISTS, BUT WE THINK THAT THIS POINT IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND WE NEED TO DISCUSS THIS ON OUR AGENDA BEFORE WE CAN FORWARD THIS TO THE ICANN BOARD.
SO WE ARE WORKING ON GLOBAL POLICY AND REQUEST TO RECEIVE INFORMATION AND CONTRIBUTION COMING FROM EVERY ONE OF YOU.
SO PLEASE TAKE ADVANTAGE TO SUPPORT AND PARTICIPATE IN OUR DISCUSSIONS.
THANK YOU. GRACIAS. OBRIGADO.
>>VINT CERF: GRACIAS.
HARTMUT, I JUST WANT TO UNDERSCORE THE LAST POINT ABOUT IPV6 POLICIES.
THIS IS A VERY CRITICAL TIME FOR INTERNET AS WE TRY TO PUT THIS NEW PROTOCOL INTO PLACE. IT IS STARTING TO MOVE AFTER MANY, MANY YEARS, SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET POLICY DOWN NOW RATHER THAN LATER, BEFORE WE MAKE POTENTIAL MISTAKES.
SO I WANT TO DOUBLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO ENGAGE IN THAT DISCUSSION.
SO THANK YOU, HARTMUT.
>>HARTMUT GLASER: OKAY.
>>VINT CERF: THE NEXT REPORT IS ON THE WSIS SITUATION. WE'VE ALREADY HAD SOME EXPOSURE TO WSIS, OF COURSE, EARLIER THIS WEEK.
THERESA SWINEHART HAS BEEN FOLLOWING THE ACTIVITY AND SUPPORTING VARIOUS ASPECTS OF OUR ICANN ENGAGEMENT IN WSIS. SO THERESA, WE WELCOME YOUR OBSERVATIONS AND REPORT.
>>THERESA SWINEHART: LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIGURE THIS OUT.

>>VINT CERF: SOME DAY WE WILL HAVE AN INTERNET-ENABLED PROJECTION UNIT WITH AN 802.11 WIFI CARD IN IT AND WE WON'T HAVE TO MESS AROUND WITH THOSE SILLY LITTLE CABLES AND CONNECTORS.
THAT'S A SUGGESTION FOR A NEW PRODUCT IN CASE ANY OF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING TO DO.
>>THERESA SWINEHART: SORRY.

I'M SORRY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE SHOWING THE SLIDES BUT I'LL JUST BE READING FROM THEM. MY APOLOGIES.
JUST AS BACKGROUND, AND I'M SURE MOST PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT, THE SUMMIT PROCESS BEGAN THROUGH A CALL BY THE U.N. SECRETARY GENERAL. THE FIRST PHASE OF THE SUMMIT RESULTED IN A CALL TO THE U.N. SECRETARY GENERAL TO ESTABLISH A WORKING GROUP ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE, REFERRED TO AS THE WGIG, NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH THE WSIS PROCESS.
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE WGIG IS TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE PROPOSALS FOR ACTION AS APPROPRIATE ON THE GOVERNANCE OF INTERNET BY 2005.
THE REASON I EMPHASIZE THIS IS WGIG ACTUALLY HAS A LIMITED MANDATE.
IT'S BEEN ASKED TO PRESENT THE RESULTS OF ITS -- THE U.N. SECRETARY GENERAL VIA REPORT FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION FOR THE SECOND PHASE OF WSIS IN TUNIS.
IT'S MANDATED TO DEAL WITH A VERY LIMITED AREA OF ISSUES. DEVELOP A WORKING DEFINITION ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE, IDENTIFY THE PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES THAT ARE RELATED TO INTERNET GOVERNANCE, AND DEVELOP A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF THE RESPECTIVE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF GOVERNMENTS, EXISTING INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER FORUMS AS WELL AS PRIVATE SECTOR AND CIVIL SOCIETY FROM BOTH DEVELOPING AND DEVELOPED COUNTRIES.
AS MANY OF YOU KNOW THE WGIG WAS FORMED IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR. IT HAS 40 MEMBERS. AND ALEJANDRO PISANTY FROM OUR BOARD AND MANY MEMBERS OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY ARE EITHER CLOSELY FOLLOWING IT OR PARTICIPATING IN IT.
THE WORKING GROUP ITSELF HAS IDENTIFIED FOUR CLUSTER AREAS TO FOCUS IN ON. ONE IS ISSUES RELATING TO INFRASTRUCTURAL ISSUES AND THE MANAGEMENT OF THE CRITICAL INTERNET RESOURCES. THESE INCLUDE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE DNS AND IP ADDRESSING, ADMINISTRATION OF THE ROOT SERVER SYSTEM, TECHNICAL STANDARDS, PEERING AND INTERCONNECTION, TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE, INNOVATION AND CONVERGING TECHNOLOGIES FROM BOTH THE PHYSICAL AND SECURED INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES AND THE LOGICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SIDES.
THEY'RE ALSO LOOKING AT ANOTHER CLUSTER THAT RELATES TO THE USE OF THE INTERNET INCLUDING SPAM, NETWORK SECURITY, AND CYBERCRIME. ISSUES WHICH ARE RELEVANT TO THE INTERNET BUT WHICH AN IMPACT MUCH WIDER THAN THE INTERNET, SUCH AS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND ISSUES RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT ASPECTS OF THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE IN CAPACITY BUILDING SUCH AS AFFORDABLE AND UNIVERSAL ACCESS.
THE PROCESS MOVING FORWARD IS THAT THE WGIG HAS PRODUCED PAPERS ON THOSE CLUSTER AREAS AND THOSE ARE POSTED ON THE WGIG WEB SITE. COMMENTS ARE WELCOME ON THESE PAPERS AND FURTHER WGIG MEETINGS WILL BE HELD TO DISCUSS THEM. THE WGIG REPORT TO THE SECRETARY GENERAL IS DUE IN JULY 2005. THE WSIS PREP-COM II WILL DISCUSS THE WGIG REPORT.
AND THAT WILL BE -- SO THAT'S A SEPARATION OF THE WGIG VERSUS THE WSIS.
WSIS SUMMIT IN -- SECOND PHASE OF THE SUMMIT WILL OCCUR IN NOVEMBER. SO THE TIMING IS THAT BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, AT LEAST WITHIN THE WSIS CONTEXT, THE DISCUSSION ON THE WGIG REPORT AND INTERNET GOVERNANCE SHOULD BE CONCLUDED.
ICANN'S INVOLVEMENT INCLUDES ALL STAKEHOLDERS SEEM TO BE PARTICIPATING IN IT. MANY OF THE CCTLDS, THE RIRS, THE NRO, BOARD MEMBERS, CIVIL SOCIETY, ALAC ARE VERY INVOLVED, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY IS.
ICANN STAFF IS ALSO INVOLVED, THE OBJECTIVE BEING TO PROVIDE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ICANN IS AND IS NOT ABOUT, AND VERY SPECIFICALLY WHAT ICANN IS NOT ABOUT AND WHAT ITS RESPONSIBILITIES DO NOT INCLUDE.
THERE'S ALSO PARTICIPATION IN THE WGIG PROCESS, AND ICANN STAKEHOLDERS THEMSELVES HAVE BEEN FACILITATING DISCUSSIONS AT THE ICANN EVENTS.
THERE WAS THE FOURTH WORKSHOP HELD IN MAR DEL PLATA AND AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, CONSTITUENCIES ARE WORKING ON A JOINT STATEMENT THAT CAN BE SUBMITTED EITHER TO THE WGIG OR THE WSIS PROCESS ITSELF, WHICH LENDS SUPPORT TOWARDS THE ICANN MODEL AS THE APPROPRIATE MODEL FOR ICANN'S MISSION.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE UPDATE.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THERESA.
I'M SURE THAT WE WILL DISCOVER IN THE END THAT AFTER THAT SESSION IS OVER IN TUNIS THAT THE PROBLEMS AND QUESTIONS CONTINUE AND THAT THERE WILL HAVE TO BE PROBABLY A FOLLOW-ON, CONTINUING FORUM OF DISCUSSION.
SO IT'S NOT OVER YET. THANK YOU.
OKAY. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY NOW TO HAVE SOME OPEN MICROPHONE -- NOT QUITE OPEN MICROPHONE COMMENTS SPECIFICALLY ON THE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION REPORTS AND THE WSIS UPDATE AND AFRINIC AND SO ON. SO THOSE ARE THE SUBJECTS FOR THE INITIAL COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR. AND AS SOON AS WE HAVE COMPLETED THOSE, THEN WE WILL GO TO OPEN MICROPHONE.
SO LET ME ASK IF WE HAVE ANY -- YES, WE DO. SO BRUCE TONKIN. THE SUBJECT IS?
>>BRUCE TONKIN: THE SUBJECT IS ONE IMPORTANT ADDITIONAL PIECE OF INFORMATION, THAT THE GNSO COUNCIL IN ITS MEETING TODAY CONFIRMED THE ELECTION OF MIKE PALAGE FOR BOARD SEAT NUMBER 14 FOR A THREE-YEAR TERM.
SO I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU.

(APPLAUSE.)
>>VINT CERF: IT HAS TO BE VERY CLEAR, MICHAEL, THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG IN THE WIRING OF YOUR BRAIN IF YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP DOING THIS TO YOURSELF.
BUT THANK YOU.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT AND EFFORTS.
OKAY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE GNSO, CCNSO, AFRINIC, ASO, AND WSIS?
NO.
I SEE NOTHING.
SO NOW LET ME INVITE OPEN MICROPHONE.
LET ME REMIND YOU THAT WE ARE SCHEDULED, ACTUALLY, TO GO UNTIL 4:30 TODAY.
SO THAT'S ABOUT 45 MINUTES.
AND THEN -- OR ANOTHER REMINDER IN CASE YOU WEREN'T IN THE ROOM EARLIER THAT THE SOCCER TEAMS ARE ASSEMBLING AT 6:30 IN THE LOBBY AND WILL BE TRANSPORTED TO THE SOCCER PLAYING FIELD TO BEGIN THE GAME AT 7:00.
SO WE HAVE AS MUCH AS 45 MINUTES TO HAVE OPEN MICROPHONE DISCUSSIONS.
OR, OF COURSE, IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU DON'T NEED FURTHER DISCUSSION AND YOU WOULD PREFER A LIBATION IN THE BAR, I WOULD CONSIDER ADJOURNING.
SO I LEAVE THIS TO YOUR HANDS.
ALEJANDRO PISANTY.
SORRY, DID I SEE ALEX OR -- I'M SORRY.
PLEASE GO AHEAD, MOUHAMET.
AND THEN VENI, AND THEN WE'LL TAKE A COMMENT FROM THE FLOOR.
>>MOUHAMET DIOP: THANK YOU.
I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR BRUCE.
BECAUSE IT'S JUST LIKE WE'RE LACKING A LEADER IN THE FIELD OF IDN.
AND SOMETIME I AM SAYING IS THE CCNSO GOING TO LEAD OR IS THAT THE GNSO THAT'S GOING TO LEAD THAT?
AND I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE THE GNSO BE THE LEADER IN THE EFFORT THAT ICANN HAS TO IMPLEMENT IN THE IDN EFFORT.
AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF YOU ARE PREPARED TO GET THAT ROLE, BECAUSE WE'RE EXPECTING TO -- I MEAN, TO DO A LOT THIS YEAR AND THE NEXT COMING YEAR.
AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THESE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN INTO YOUR MEETING OR NOT.
BUT WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOME ANSWERS.
>>VINT CERF: GO AHEAD, BRUCE.
>>BRUCE TONKIN: YEAH, I THINK THE GENERAL ANSWER TO THAT IS THAT IDNS ARE ONE OF THE ISSUES WE NEED TO CONSIDER INTRODUCING NEW GTLDS.
I EXPECT IDNS ARE ALSO AN ISSUE FOR THE CCTLDS, PROBABLY, THOUGH, IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT WAY.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN OUR PLANNING IS TRY TO PLAN OUT OUR ACTIVITIES FOR THE REST OF THIS YEAR, AND ALSO GIVE A SENSE OF WHAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO DO OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
SO CERTAINLY THIS YEAR, WE RECOGNIZE THAT NEW GTLDS ARE A PRIORITY.
AND I EXPECT THAT WE'LL BE COMMENCING LOOKING AT THAT IN MORE DETAIL IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE YEAR.
RIGHT NOW, OUR FOCUS IS ON MAKING SOME PROGRESS ON WHOIS PROBABLY FOR THE -- BETWEEN NOW AND LUXEMBOURG.
AND THEN WE WOULD START PICKING UP THE NEW GTLD ISSUE IN THE SORT OF SECOND HALF OF THE YEAR.
AND THEN WHEN WE START LOOKING AT THE NEW GTLD ISSUE, WE THEN NEED TO SAY, OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH NEW GTLDS, HOW DO WE PRIORITIZE THOSE?
AND WE HAVE YET TO HAVE HAD THAT DISCUSSION, SO....
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, BRUCE.
LET'S SEE.
I HAD VENI, THEN I'LL TAKE A QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR.
THEN I'LL GO TO JOHN.
SO VENI.
>>VENI MARKOVSKI: NO, YOU CAN GO AHEAD WITH THE RESPONSE.
IT'S NOT A --
>>VINT CERF: OKAY.
IN THAT CASE, -- DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING SPECIFIC TO IDN, JOHN?
>>JOHN KLENSIN: A FOLLOW-UP ON BRUCE'S RESPONSE.
>>VINT CERF: OKAY.
IS IT OKAY?
GO AHEAD.
>>JOHN KLENSIN: BRUCE, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THAT SCHEDULE, BECAUSE THE IDN SITUATION IS MOVING VERY QUICKLY RIGHT NOW.
WE'LL SAY A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT DURING THE REPORT TOMORROW.
BUT IF THE -- IF THE GNSO DOESN'T START LOOKING SERIOUSLY AT THE IDN ISSUES VERY SOON, YOU'RE LIKELY TO FIND YOURSELVES OVERTAKEN BY EVENTS.
A PREVIEW OF ONE OF THE THINGS I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT TOMORROW HAS TO DO WITH NOTIONS BY THE BROWSER OPERATORS OF BLACK LISTING DOMAINS WHO ARE NOT, IN THEIR JUDGMENT, ADEQUATELY PROTECTING USERS AGAINST CONFUSING AND CONFLICTING NAMES.
AND GOING DOWN THAT PATH WILL BE QUITE SCARY FOR ALL OF US, I THINK.
>>BRUCE TONKIN: OKAY.
IS THIS LIVE?
LET ME JUST CLARIFY MY ANSWER.
MY ANSWER TO THE QUESTION FROM MOUHAMET WAS IN THE CONTEXT OF NEW GTLDS, MEANING THAT YOU MAY HAVE AN IDN-BASED NEW GTLD.
THE TOPIC OF IDNS AS USED WITHIN THE EXISTING GTLDS, SUCH AS IDNS USED WITHIN, SAY, DOT COM OR NET OR BIZ OR INFO, HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AT THE COUNCIL.
AND I GUESS WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO TAKE IT FORWARD, I GUESS, IS MORE INFORMATION, BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD A REPORT FROM THE REGISTRIES CONSTITUENCY, CARY KARP, A MEMBER OF COUNCIL HAS BEEN, I GUESS, THE MAIN PERSON THAT'S BEEN LOOKING AT THIS ISSUE ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL, AND HAS PROVIDED A REPORT.
BUT I THINK WE AS A COUNCIL WOULD WELCOME ANY INFORMATION OR BRIEFINGS THAT YOU HAVE, AND ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR WHAT SORT OF ACTION YOU THINK WE SHOULD TAKE.
SO THAT'S A DIFFERENT TOPIC FROM NEW GTLDS.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
>>JOHN KLENSIN: OKAY.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: LET'S SEE.
I KNOW THAT WE WANT TO KEEP A REGULAR DIALOGUE GOING.
AND I FEEL A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT I HAVE LEFT SOMEBODY SITTING ON THE FLOOR.
SO, PLEASE, WILL YOU INTERJECT YOUR COMMENT AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK TO MOUHAMET, IF WE CAN.
>>JORDYN BUCHANAN: CERTAINLY.
ALTHOUGH I WILL NOTE THAT THE CHAIRS IN THE FRONT ROW ARE EQUALLY AS COMFORTABLE AS THE CHAIRS FURTHER BACK.
I WANT TO TALK BRIEFLY -- BRING UP A TOPIC THAT THE SESAC REPORT EARLIER TODAY COVERED BRIEFLY, BUT THAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE A COUPLE COMMENTS THAT I MADE IN THE DOMAIN HIJACKING FORUM LAST NIGHT.
BUT I THINK THERE ARE PLACES WHERE IT'S RELEVANT TO BOARD ACTION IN THE FUTURE.
I THINK THAT THE -- SOME OF THE DOMAIN HIJACKING INSTANCES THAT THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE LOOKED AT HIGHLIGHTED SOME FLAWS IN THE CURRENT TRANSFER POLICY THAT I WILL SUM UP BASICALLY AS SAYING THAT RELYING ON THE GAINING REGISTRAR TO PERFORM AUTHORIZATION IS DIFFICULT IN THAT THE GAINING REGISTRAR DOESN'T HAVE THE ONGOING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE REGISTRANT THAT THE LOSING REGISTRAR, INCUMBENT REGISTRAR WOULD HAVE.
AND AS A RESULT, DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF INFORMATION THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE IN ORDER TO PERFORM THE AUTHENTICATION PROCESS ADEQUATELY.
AND IN SOME CASES WE SEE, I BELIEVE THAT THE INCENTIVES ARE SOMEWHAT OUT OF WHACK IN THAT THE GAINING REGISTRAR HAS EVERY INCENTIVE TO MAKE THE BARRIER TO TRANSFERS AS LOW AS POSSIBLE.
AND SOMETIMES THAT MEANS THE SECURITY PRACTICES ARE NOT QUITE WHAT THEY PROBABLY OUGHT TO BE.
AND SO I THINK THE CURRENT POLICY LEAVES US SOMEWHAT EXPOSED.
AND I THINK -- I POSTED ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT FORUM WITH REGARDS TO THE TRANSFER POLICY SOME SOLUTIONS TO THAT.
AND I WON'T NECESSARILY RECAP THEM RIGHT NOW.
BUT I THINK THAT A WEAKNESS IS REVEALED HERE IN THAT I THINK MANY OF THE PROBLEMS THAT -- OR MANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAVE MADE IN THEIR PRESENTATION, I THINK THEY MAY HAVE REALIZED HAD THEY LOOKED AT THIS TOPIC SOMEWHAT EARLIER IN THE PROCESS.
AND IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG, AND IF SO, I'D BE VERY HAPPY TO BE CORRECTED ON THIS POINT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE CURRENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS REQUIRES AN IMPACT ANALYSIS FROM EACH OF THE CONSTITUENCIES, BUT THERE'S NO EXPLICIT IMPACT ANALYSIS ON THE SECURITY AND STABILITY EFFECT PRIOR TO THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION.
AND SO I WOULD CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE THE BOARD AS THEY CONSIDER ADOPTING NEW PDPS AS CONSENSUS POLICY TO PERHAPS FOR EACH OF THESE EXPLICITLY REQUEST THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO PERFORM SOME IMPACT ANALYSIS AS TO WHAT THE LIKELY EFFECT ON SECURITY AND STABILITY ISSUES COULD BE.
I KNOW CERTAINLY THEY HAVE THE OPTION -- AND YOUR LIAISON MAY BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION ISSUES FROM TIME TO TIME.
BUT IT MAY BE THAT IF WE MAKE THIS PART OF OUR PRACTICE, WE AVOID ISSUES LIKE THIS IN THE FUTURE INSTEAD OF NOW HAVING PERHAPS TO GO THROUGH A NEW PDP IN ORDER TO CORRECT WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE A FAIRLY SERIOUS PROBLEM.
THE OTHER SMALL ISSUE THAT I'LL TAKE NOTE OF IS THAT THE SECURITY -- THE REPORT THAT YOU SAW EARLIER TODAY AS IT RELATES TO DOMAIN HIJACKING I THINK CONVEYS AN IMPRESSION THAT THE LOCKING FEATURE THAT REGISTRARS ARE USING TODAY IS A GOOD FIX TO THE PROBLEM.
AND I KNOW IT WASN'T NECESSARILY ENDORSED AS SUCH, OR I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS, BY SESAC.
BUT THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT IT MAKES GOOD SECURITY ESSENTIALLY OPTIONAL, VARIABLE BY REGISTRAR OR REGISTRANT, AND ESPECIALLY BY REGISTRAR.
AND I THINK ICANN HAS SOME LEVEL OF BASELINE OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT EACH AND EVERY REGISTRANT HAS THAT -- HAS A CERTAIN LEVEL OF SECURITY AND AREN'T EXPOSED TO DOMAIN HIJACKING.
SO I THINK THAT AS YOU LOOK -- IF THIS ISSUE COMES UP AND YOU LOOK AT -- I HOPE YOU'LL KEEP THAT IN MIND AS ONE TOPIC.
THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS THE LAST POINT THAT WAS MADE ON THIS TOPIC IN THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S REPORT, WAS THAT WE OUGHT TO CONSIDER SOME SORT OF UNDO COMMAND.
AND I HOPE THAT REGISTRIES MAY -- I HOPE THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE A PDP.
BECAUSE WE HAVE A LONG -- IT'S A LONG PROCESS, AND THE GNSO'S AGENDA IS ALREADY QUITE FULL, AS WE'VE SEEN TODAY.
SO CERTAINLY I WOULD HOPE THAT IF REGISTRIES REQUEST OF ICANN TO MAKE APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE CONTRACTS IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THAT SORT OF FUNCTIONALITY THAT THE BOARD WOULD WORK RAPIDLY TO HELP US CORRECT THAT PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE TODAY WITH REGARDS TO SECURITY AND STABILITY.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU.
STEVE CROCKER IS NOT HERE TO RESPOND, SO I'M SURE THAT WE WILL MAKE NOTE OF THIS AND MAKE SURE THAT HE HEARS ABOUT IT.
I HAVE ONLY A SLIGHT UNEASINESS ABOUT THE SECURITY AND STABILITY IMPACT REPORT.
AND THE ONLY REASON I HAVE THIS SLIGHT UNEASINESS IS THAT IT REMINDS ME OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS, WHICH RUN HUNDREDS OF PAGES.
SO I HOPE WE DON'T ACCIDENTALLY MOVE OURSELVES INTO A REGIME WHERE WE HAVE VERY, VERY LENGTHY PROCESSES FOR ANALYZING, EVALUATING, AND REPORTING ON ALL PDPS.
ON THE OTHER HAND, HOW COULD ANYONE NOT WANT TO BE SURE THAT A PDP WAS SAFE AND SECURE.
SO I THINK THE POINT'S WELL MADE AND WELL TAKEN.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR OR FROM THE BOARD?
MOUHAMET.
>>MOUHAMET DIOP: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.
I JUST WANT TO COME BACK ON THE COMMENT MADE BY JOHN ABOUT THE AGENDA THAT WE FACE IN TERMS OF WHO'S GOING TO TAKE CARE ABOUT THE IDN ISSUE.
I THINK THAT, BRUCE, MY COMMENT WAS NOT ONLY RELEVANT TO THE NEW GTLDS.
I THINK THAT IF WE SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW ON THE IDN IMPLEMENTATION IS WE SEE THE IMPLEMENTATION AT THE SECOND LEVEL, LIKE ON THE CC.
WE'VE GOT THE EXAMPLE OF THE .DE WITH SOME POLICIES THAT ARE REALLY OPEN IN ORDER TO COLLECT INFORMATION AND TO GET A VERY GOOD EXPERIENCE IN TERMS OF WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE IMPACT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IDN AT THE SECOND LEVEL.
WE'VE GOT THE SAME EXPERIENCE ON THE GNSO SIDE, LIKE THE DOT COM.
WE HAVE ANOTHER SORT OF IMPLEMENTATION THAT IS BEYOND THESE TWO, LIKE THE DOT CHINA EXPERIENCE THAT WE RECENTLY SEE.
AND WE'VE GOT SOME CCTLDS WHO ARE NOT WAITING FOR ICANN TO DECIDE IF YES OR NO THEY'RE GOING TO ALLOW THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW GTLDS IN IDN FOR SOME SPECIFIC LANGUAGES AND COMMUNITIES.
SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE BEEN -- DECIDED BEFORE TO IMPLEMENT A PRESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE ON IDN.
IT HAD BEEN A RECOMMENDATION.
WE HAVE WAITED FOR MONTHS.
AND WHEN I TRY TO SAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LEADER IN THAT PROCESS AND WE NEED TO GET A LEADER IN THAT PROCESS, IT'S BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS HERE AND PEOPLE ARE NO LONGER WAITING FOR ICANN TO TAKE ITS TIME TO DECIDE AND TO SCHEDULE FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND YEARS AND YEARS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SOMETHING.
SO WE WILL SEE PEOPLE IMPLEMENTING SOLUTIONS BEFORE WE JUST DECIDE TO GIVE THEM A CLEAR AGENDA ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD.
SO THAT'S WHY I TRY TO PUSH ON THE GNSO SIDE, MAYBE WHERE THE ISSUE OF IDN IS MUCH BROADER.
BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE THE EXAMPLE OF THE CCNSO, LIKE THE .DE, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IDN WAS VERY LIMITED, BECAUSE IT IS INSIDE ONE COUNTRY WITH SOMETIMES ONE OR TWO COMMUNITIES THAT ARE CONCERNED.
ON THE GNSO SIDE, IT'S MUCH BROADER.
AND WE ALL EMPHASIZE THE NEED FOR STRONG POLICY ON THE IDN IMPLEMENTATION.
AND WHEN YOU COME ON THE WHOIS IMPLEMENTATION ALSO, I THINK THAT IT'S TIME, BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE WE HAVE ON DOT COM IMPLEMENTATION AT THE SECOND LEVEL FOR IDN.
WHAT ARE THE IMPACT ON THE WHOIS TOOLS AND THE WHOIS POLICY IMPLEMENTATION.
AND I THINK THAT WE CANNOT SCHEDULE THIS AS A MONOPROCESSOR, BUT WE HAVE TO SEE IT AS A PARALLEL PROCESSING SYSTEM.
BECAUSE ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE COMING ON THE TABLE OF ICANN, AND WE CANNOT SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON THE AGENDA AFTER THE OTHER.
BECAUSE THE NEEDED ASSESSED BY THE COMMUNITY ARE HERE.
AND THAT'S MY MAIN CONCERN WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WE NEED A LEADER ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IDN.
THANKS.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, MOUHAMET.
JUST A MOMENT, BRUCE.
JUST ONE OBSERVATION TO MAKE.
IT'S BECOMING CLEARER TO ME.
I MAY BE WRONG ABOUT THIS, BUT IT'S BECOMING CLEARER TO ME, WE HAVE TO BECOME VERY CAREFUL ABOUT OVERGENERALIZING THE NOTION OF IDN RULES FOR REGISTRATION.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THAT THE SAFE RULES THAT WILL NOT CAUSE PROBLEMS MAY VARY FROM ONE -- LET ME USE THE WORD "LANGUAGE TO ANOTHER.
I KNOW I SHOULD PROBABLY SAY GLYPH OR SYMBOL.
BUT THE POINT HERE IS THAT IN THE ORIGINAL DESIGN OF VERY SIMPLE LATIN CHARACTERS, THE REASON IT WORKED WAS BECAUSE IT HAD A VERY CONSTRAINED SIT OF VARIATIONS THAT WERE PERMITTED.
IN THE CASE OF .DE, IT'S STILL A FAIRLY CONSTRAINED SET.
BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS IT WAS CONSTRAINED TO A PARTICULAR SET OF LANGUAGE CHARACTERS.
I SUSPECT IF WE LOOK, FOR EXAMPLE, AT THE JET GROUP'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON JAPANESE, KOREAN, AND CHINESE, OR IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE OTHER PROPOSED CONSTRAINTS ON REGISTRATIONS, WE WOULD DISCOVER THAT, LANGUAGE BY LANGUAGE OR CHARACTER SET BY CHARACTER SET, THAT THERE WERE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES CONFERRED SAFETY AND, LET'S SAY, UNIQUENESS, AS OPPOSED TO AMBIGUITY, ON THE REGISTRATIONS.
I ONLY RAISE THIS TO SAY THAT THE WORK THAT YOU'RE URGING US TO DO IS CERTAINLY IMPORTANT AND WE NEED NOW TO COORDINATE NOT ONLY THE PRESIDENT'S COMMITTEE, BUT COORDINATE WITH THE WORK THAT'S GOING ON IN THE IETF TOGETHER WITH ACTIVITIES AT GNSO.
BUT WE SHOULD BE CAUTIOUS, I THINK, NOT TO ASSUME THAT THERE IS A SIMPLE RULE THAT WILL WORK FOR EVERY POTENTIAL CHARACTER SET.
AND THAT JUST MAKES THE JOB MORE PARTICULAR THAN IT MIGHT OTHERWISE HAVE BEEN.
SO, BRUCE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
PLEASE TAKE THE MICROPHONE.
>>BRUCE TONKIN: YEAH, THANK YOU, VINT. AND ALSO THANK YOU, MOUHAMET, FOR EXPLAINING WHAT THE ISSUES ARE.
I THINK IN TERMS OF A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, IF I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY, YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT EACH CCTLD IS AT THE MOMENT DEVELOPING POLICIES FOR WITHIN ITS CCTLD.
AND I THINK VINT EXPLAINED FAIRLY WELL THAT INDIVIDUAL CCTLDS TEND TO FOCUS ON ONE OR IF NOT ONE, A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF LANGUAGES WITHIN THAT PARTICULAR CCTLD.
AND THE CHALLENGE FOR THE GTLDS IS THEY ARE TRULY GLOBAL.
AND ULTIMATELY, WE'RE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE ALL LANGUAGES TO BE ABLE TO USE THOSE GTLDS.
IN TERMS OF DEVELOPING POLICY, I THINK AT THIS STAGE OF THE GAME, AS VINT IS POINTING OUT, YOU COULD PROBABLY DO LITTLE MORE THAN PERHAPS ACCEPT HIGH-LEVEL PRINCIPLES.
AND I BELIEVE THERE WERE SOME PRINCIPLES ALREADY DEVELOPED BY THE BOARD, AND MAYBE THE GNSO NEEDS TO TAKE THOSE PRINCIPLES IN, BECAUSE THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT FORMALLY A CONSENSUS POLICY AT THIS STAGE.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS WE COULD DO IS TAKE THOSE PRINCIPLES AS AN INPUT INTO THE GNSO, LOOK AT THOSE.
AND WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST WE COULD DO -- AND I'M JUST SORT OF RESPONDING ON THE FLY HERE, SO I'M JUST SPEAKING PERSONALLY, BECAUSE THIS HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED WITHIN THE GNSO.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING WHERE WE WOULD NEED A COOPERATION BETWEEN THE CCNSO AND THE GNSO TO SORT OF LOOK AT THAT.
NOW, EVEN IF THE GNSO CREATED THE RULES FOR THE GTLDS, I THINK WE NEED TO BE INFORMED BY WHAT'S GOING ON IN THOSE CCTLDS AND PERHAPS REVIEW THOSE PRINCIPLES.
THE OTHER COMMENT IS SIMILAR TO JORDYN'S, THAT THIS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING WHERE THE GNSO WOULD NEED TECHNICAL ADVICE FROM THE SECURITY AND STABILITY COMMITTEE ON THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ISSUES.
SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE REALLY SUGGESTING, I THINK, IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE OPERATIONAL PLAN, IF YOU LIKE, AND STRATEGIC PLAN OF ICANN, SAYING THIS IDN IS AN IMPORTANT AREA, IT NEEDS TO BE RESOURCED, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO HAVE A POLICY DEVELOPMENT PERSON FROM ICANN FOCUSED ON THAT AREA.
AND THE GNSO AND CCNSO, PERHAPS WITH THE SECURITY COMMITTEE, WOULD THEN MEET AT AN ICANN MEETING, PERHAPS AT LUXEMBOURG IF THERE'S TIME, TO LOOK AT THAT MORE BROADLY SO THAT WE DO GET ALL THOSE PERSPECTIVES THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
BUT I AGREE WITH VINT; I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET DOWN TO THE LEVEL OF FOR THIS PARTICULAR LANGUAGE, HERE'S THE PARTICULAR CHARACTER SET AND HERE'S THE PARTICULAR RULES, BECAUSE THOSE ARE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, I SUSPECT.
BUT WE COULD PROBABLY GET TO THE LEVEL OF AGREEING TO SOME HIGHER-ORDER PRINCIPLES THAT WOULD GOVERN THOSE PROCESSES.
SO I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
I DO AGREE IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO SORT OF THINK ABOUT IT AT AN OVERALL ICANN LEVEL AND THINK WHAT'S THE RIGHT PROCESS TO DESIGN TO DEVELOP THE ISSUE FURTHER AND WHERE DO WE START FROM, WHAT'S THE STARTING POINT.

>>VINT CERF: I'LL CALL ON JOHN KLENSIN IN JUST A MOMENT.
THE ONE OTHER THING, IF YOU'LL FORGIVE ME FOR GOING ON HERE, THAT OCCURS TO ME -- AND THIS NOW GETS TO GTLDS USING -- OR TLDS USING INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAME LABELS.
IT'S ALMOST INCONGRUOUS TO HAVE DOMAIN NAMES WITH IDN COMPONENTS IN THEM AND THEN A LATIN CHARACTER STRING AT THE END.
IT'S NOT THE EXPECTATION THAT PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE OF BEING ABLE TO USE DOMAIN NAMES THAT ARE EXPRESSED FULLY IN A PARTICULAR LANGUAGE OR CHARACTER SET.
SO I CAN EASILY SEE THAT WE NOW -- IF THAT WERE A CORRECT OBSERVATION, THAT WE WOULD NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE CREATION OF TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS IN OTHER THAN LATIN CHARACTERS IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE MOST LIKELY PREFERENCE FOR REGISTRATIONS DOMAIN NAMES THAT ARE FULLY INTERNATIONALIZED, INCLUDING THE TOP LEVEL.
SO, JOHN, IF I'VE BOLLIXED EVERYTHING UP, I'M SURE THAT YOU'LL HELP ME SEE THE LIGHT.
>>JOHN KLENSIN: NO, VINT.
YOU HAVEN'T BOLLIXED THINGS UP.
THAT'S A DISCUSSION WHICH WE SHOULD ALLOW MORE TIME FOR ) THAN THE REST OF THIS MEETING WOULD PERMIT EVEN IF WE WERE DEDICATED TO IT.
I WISH PEOPLE WOULD THINK ABOUT IT ALONG THAT DIMENSION THAT IF ONE IS CONCERNED THAT A STRING WHICH CONSISTS OF ONE OR MORE NON-ASCII LABELS WOULD FEEL ABNORMAL IF THE LAST LABEL IS IN ASCII, THEY SHOULD REMEMBER THAT THE TYPICAL USER OF THE INTERNET DOESN'T USE DOMAIN NAMES; THEY USE E-MAIL ADDRESSES AND URLS.
AND WE HAVE NO THEORIES AT ALL ABOUT HOW TO MAKE THOSE "@" SIGNS AND THE "HTTP" AND THE COLONS AND THE SLASHES GO AWAY.
AND, INDEED, THE NASTIEST PHISHING ATTACK WE'VE SEEN ACTUALLY OR HYPOTHETICALLY DOESN'T USE CHARACTERS ONE SCRIPT SUBSTITUTED INTO A NAME WHICH IS (INAUDIBLE) IN ANOTHER; IT USES THINGS WHICH LOOK LIKE SLASHES SUBSTITUTED INTO OTHER NAMES. AND IT IS A REALLY FRIGHTENING EXAMPLE.
THE OTHER OBSERVATION I WANTED TO MAKE IS THAT I THINK WE -- AS WE ARE LOOKING AT THE POLICY ISSUES HERE -- AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH BRUCE THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE A MULTIPLE-SUPPORTING- ORGANIZATION, MULTIPLE-ENTITY PROCESS, OR WE WILL MAKE OTHER PROBLEMS FOR OURSELVES.
AND THE IETF, AS THE OWNER OF THESE STANDARDS, CERTAINLY INTENDS TO BE INVOLVED.
WE ALSO NEED TO REMEMBER THAT SOME OF THE MORE INTERESTING ISSUES WITH IDNS ARE NOT WHAT GOES INTO THE ZONE FILES, BUT ALL OF THE PERIPHERAL MATERIALS.
WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT WHOIS DATABASES.
WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT WHAT IT WILL MEAN IF YOU PULL A RECORD BACK FROM A REGISTRY OR REGISTRAR ABOUT THE INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH A DOMAIN NAME AND YOU CAN'T READ IT.
YOU CAN'T READ THE NAME, YOU CAN'T READ THE ADDRESS, YOU CAN'T READ THE TELEPHONE NUMBER, YOU CAN'T READ ANY OF THE OTHER INFORMATION WHICH WE TYPICALLY EXPECT TO GET OUT OF WHOIS.
AND IF THAT'S NOT A SITUATION WE FIND SATISFACTORY, WE NEED TO START LOOKING AT ALL OF THOSE PERIPHERAL ISSUES ABOUT DISPUTES AND ABOUT DATABASES AND ABOUT ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS WHICH WE DRAG ALONG WITH DOMAIN NAMES AS WELL AS THE NAMES THEMSELVES.
>>VINT CERF: WELL, ON THAT CHEERFUL NOTE -- OH, YES. PROFESSOR QIAN.
>>HUALIN QIAN: IDN, CHINA DOMAIN NAME, HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN CHINA AND NOW IT'S USING -- PEOPLE ARE USING THE SYSTEM. BUT IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT IT'S USEFUL. AND USABLE.
AND I THINK THE ICANN SHOULD TAKE SOME FURTHER STEPS TO PROMOTE THOSE SYSTEMS, BECAUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN CHINESE, NOW, PEOPLE CAN TYPE IN IDN.IDN. THAT MEANS TOP-LEVEL LABEL ARE IN CHINESE CHARACTER. (SPEAKING IN) MEANS CHINA, EQUIVALENT TO THE DOT COM AND THE CCTLD AND DOT NET EQUIVALENTS IN CHINESE.
DOING SO, BECAUSE -- ACTUALLY, WE DON'T HAVE ANY REGISTRATION IN THE ROOT SERVER. SO PEOPLE CAN TYPE IN, BUT THE PLUG-IN SOFTWARE AUTOMATICALLY APPENDED DOT CN TO THE RIGHT OF THE DOMAIN NAME.
SO THIS IS A DIFFICULT THING FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND. MANY PEOPLE SAY ROOT -- WITH REGISTRATION ON THE ROOT, WHY DO YOU USE THE TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN NAME, TOP LEVEL USE THE CHINESE. ARE YOU OPERATING ANOTHER ROOT? ACTUALLY, WE DON'T DO THAT, BUT WE AUTOMATICALLY APPENDED DOT CN TO THE RIGHT OF IT.
SO IF -- I THINK ICANN CAN DO SOMETHING. FOR EXAMPLE, WE CAN DO SOME EXPERIMENT. MAYBE ALLOW SO PUNYCODE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHARACTER CHINA, IT'S PUNYCODE, REGISTERED UNDER THE ROOT, TO DO SOME EXPERIMENT.
IN THAT CASE, IT'S VERY EASY. PEOPLE REALLY TYPE IN TOP LEVEL, TOP-LEVEL LABEL IN CHINESE, AND WITHOUT THE -- NOT NECESSARY TO APPEND DOT CN TO THE RIGHT OF IT.
SO I THINK ICANN SHOULD DO SOMETHING.
AND FOR THE -- I BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE CHINESE IS VERY COMPLICATED, WE HAVE A TEAM THAT WORK TOGETHER, CHINA AND TAIWAN OF CHINA AND JAPAN AND KOREA WORKED TOGETHER. AND EVEN CHINESE AND THE JAPANESE, OUR SYSTEMS ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT. SO WE CANNOT PUT THOSE THINGS TOGETHER.
SO I THINK A GTLD SHOULD BE LATER. CCTLD IDN SHOULD BE FIRST DOING SO. THEN WHEN WE ACCUMULATE SOME EXPERIENCE, THEN WE CAN FIND SOME WAY TO DO THESE THINGS IN GTLD.
THANK YOU.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, PROFESSOR QIAN.
I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER COMMENTS.
YES, I DO.
ALEJANDRO PISANTY.
>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: WITH THE EXPERIENCE WE HAVE BEEN ACCUMULATING AND THE GROUPS, TO WHICH YOU ARE CLOSER TO PROBABLY ANY OF US, CAN YOU ELABORATE WHAT THIS UNIVERSE IN DEVELOPMENT YOU SEE AS A PROBLEM WHERE ICANN HAS TO DO SOMETHING THAT STILL IS PENDING AND WHETHER THAT IS THE GNSO, CCNSO, TECHNICAL SECURITY, WHAT PART OF THE ORGANIZATION? AND WHAT IS IN THE HANDS OF OTHERS?
>>HUALIN QIAN: I THINK, REALLY WE CAN DO SOMETHING, ESPECIALLY FOR THE CCTLD IDN.
FOR EXAMPLE, TO REGISTER A FEW NAMES IN THE ROOT IN PUNYCODE. BECAUSE FOR MANY COMPANIES ARE ALSO PROMOTING THE IDN. MICROSOFT PROMISED TO ISSUE A NEW VERSION NEXT YEAR, AND THAT WILL HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF DEALING WITH IDN AS A DOMAIN NAME.
SO I THINK IT'S VERY -- NOT VERY DIFFICULT FOR ICANN TO DO SOMETHING. BECAUSE WE ARE ALREADY USING A SYSTEM, SO, SURE, WE HAVE ENOUGH EXPERIENCE.
>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: A FOLLOW-UP, COMPLETING THE QUESTION. THAT'S VERY VALUABLE BECAUSE IT GIVES US VERY CONCRETE MATTERS TO DISCUSS AND TO FIND OUT WHETHER THERE ARE THE HUMAN AND OTHER RESOURCES AND HOW TO SET PRIORITIES FOR THIS KIND OF WORK, IF AT ALL POSSIBLE.
I'M ALSO A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED, I THINK THAT YOU HAVE MENTIONED, NOT NECESSARILY RIGHT NOW BUT IN A PREVIOUS DISCUSSION, THAT ACCESS TO THE IDN SYSTEM THAT'S ALREADY BEING STARTED FOR USE IN CHINA REQUIRES A PLUG-IN. AM I RIGHT?
>>HUALIN QIAN: YES.
>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT, I MEAN, WHETHER THE WHOLE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS ARE BEING STUDIED AND TESTED.
I CAN JUST TRY TO IMAGINE THAT YOU GO OUT TO AN INTERNET CAFE IN THIS CITY WITHOUT YOUR OWN COMPUTER AND TRY TO WRITE SOMEONE SOME E-MAIL, OR EVEN ACCESS A WEB PAGE. ALL THE THINKING I SEE AROUND IDNS IS VERY MUCH WEB CENTERED, AND I THINK WE ALWAYS HAVE TO LOOK AT FTP AND TELNET AND SHH AND E-MAIL AND ALL THESE OTHER APPLICATIONS WHICH WE MUST MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT EXTRAPOLATING NAIVELY.
BUT AGAIN, THINKING OF JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS, I HATE THE IDEA THAT YOU OR SOME VISITOR FROM CHINA GOES OUT IN MEXICO CITY OR HERE, AND MANY OTHER PLACES IN THE WORLD, AND TRIES TO TYPE IN TO PEOPLE OUT THERE OR TRY TO READ IT THROUGH A WEB INTERFACE OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. DO PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAVE TO CARRY AROUND THAT PLUG-IN? THEY HAVE TO HAVE IT INSTALLED IN AN INTERNET CAFE WHICH CERTAINLY WON'T ALLOW SOFTWARE DOWNLOADS AND INSTALLATIONS BY THE USERS? HOW FAR HAS THIS BEEN STUDIED IN THE PRACTICAL CASE?
>>HUALIN QIAN: THE SYSTEM SHOULD BE INSTALLED WITH A SPECIAL PLUG-IN. AND ALSO, THE COMPUTER -- FOR EXAMPLE, MY COMPUTER, HAVE TO INSTALL THE CHINESE VERSION, MICROSOFT CHINESE VERSION, AND DOWNLOAD THE PLUG-IN. AND THEN WHEN I CARRY MY OWN MACHINE, GOING ANYWHERE -- FOR EXAMPLE, HERE -- I CAN ALSO VIEW THE CHINESE DOMAIN NAME WEB SITE AND SHOW IN THOSE WEB CONTENT.
>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: TO PICK UP ON THIS EXAMPLE, JUST FOR A FRAMEWORK OF REALITY, THERE WAS RECENTLY SEVERAL VISITS OF DELEGATIONS FROM CHINA TO DIFFERENT PLACES IN LATIN AMERICA FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF NEGOTIATIONS. EMERGING FROM THE ONES IN MEXICO WE HEARD AND READ THAT MEXICO HAS NOW BEEN VETTED AS SAFE OR ACCEPTABLE PLACE FOR CHINESE CITIZENS TO TRAVEL AS TOURISTS. AND THE FIGURES THAT PEOPLE ARE MENTIONING ARE ASTOUNDING. SPEAKING ABOUT TEN MILLION CHINESE TOURISTS ALL OVER THE WORLD PER YEAR.
AND I WOULD GUESS THAT NOT EVERY ONE OF THOSE IS CARRYING A LAPTOP OF HIS OWN, AND STILL A LOT OF THEM WILL BE WANTING TO SEND E-MAIL OR PHOTOS HOME.
HOW DOES THIS WORK?
>>HUALIN QIAN: NOW, THERE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS FOR USING CHINESE DOMAIN NAME. PRESENTLY, WE ONLY USE CHINESE DOMAIN NAME IN WEB BROWSER AND NOT E-MAIL.
RECENTLY, WE FORMED A NEW TEAM, CHINA, JAPAN AND SOME COUNTRIES, WORKING ON IDN FOR E-MAIL SYSTEM.
SO THIS IS NOT REALLY DONE NOW. ONLY BROWSING THE WEB SITE.
SO FOR PEOPLE ABROAD, CHINESE PEOPLE IN OTHER COUNTRIES, IF THEY WANT TO USE CHINESE DOMAIN NAME WITH THOSE WEB SITES, THEY HAVE TO INSTALL THE SYSTEM. OTHERWISE, THEY CANNOT DO THAT.
>>VINT CERF: OKAY. I THINK WE'RE -- I THINK WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUT OF OUR SCHEDULED TIME IF WE'RE NOT CAREFUL.
JOHN, LAST COMMENT AND THEN I -- OH, MICHAEL? OKAY. TWO LAST COMMENTS.
JOHN.
>>JOHN KLENSIN: YES, I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW-UP PART OF ALEX'S QUESTION A LITTLE BIT.
ALEX, THE FIRST PROBLEM IS THAT IF SOMEBODY COMES TO MEXICO, FOR EXAMPLE, AND WALKS INTO AN INTERNET CAFE AND IS USING A LANGUAGE DIFFERENT FROM THOSE NORMALLY ENCOUNTERED IN MEXICO, INDEPENDENT OF WHETHER OR NOT THE DOMAIN NAMES WORK, THE ODDS THAT THE ARABIC FONTS OR THE CHINESE FONTS OR OTHER FONTS WILL BE INSTALLED IN A MACHINE IN THAT INTERNET CAFE SUCH THAT THAT CONTENT CAN BE READ EVEN IS LOW. AND THAT'S MORE OF A PROBLEM THAN THE DOMAIN NAME PROBLEM AS WE DISCUSS OTHER CONTEXTS.
THE OTHER OBSERVATION IS THAT HORRIFYING AS IT IS, MANY OF US ARE CONCLUDING THAT THE FUTURE OF THIS IDN STUFF IS PROBABLY WITHIN COMMUNITIES, WITHIN COMMUNITIES WITH THE RIGHT PLUG-INS, WITHIN COMMUNITIES WITH THE RIGHT CONVENTIONS, WITH THE RIGHT TRANSLATION FACILITIES.
AND IF SOMEONE WHO IS AN ACTIVE USER OF ONE LANGUAGE AND SCRIPT SENDS SOMETHING TO SOMEBODY WHO IS AN ACTIVE USER OF SOME OTHER LANGUAGE AND SCRIPT, THAT PAIR OF USERS ARE LIKELY TO HAVE TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE INTERNAL FORMS OF THESE NAMES AND GO BACK TO PUNYCODE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER WAY TO DO IT. AND THAT HAS AT LEAST AS MUCH TO DO WITH DISPLAY CAPACITY AND INSTALLED FONTS AND KEYBOARDS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SCREENS AND A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER ISSUES ALONG THOSE DIMENSIONS.
WE'RE STILL FEELING THIS OUT. THERE'S DEVELOPING PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE. BUT THE INTERCULTURAL TRANSLATION -- TRANSPOSITION AND PASSING OF THESE NAMES IS GOING TO BE A REALLY NASTY PROBLEM IF WE TRY TO ASSUME THAT THERE'S MAGIC OUT THERE.
>>VINT CERF: WELL, WE CAN TELL THAT THE IDN PROBLEM IS STILL A COMPLICATED ONE, BUT THAT JUST MEANS WE HAVE TO REDOUBLE OUR EFFORT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO IT.
IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER DISCUSSION POINTS FROM THE FLOOR, I THINK I WILL CALL FOR ADJOURNMENT UNTIL TOMORROW.
SO WE WILL RETURN TOMORROW TO THE PUBLIC FORUM AT 9:00. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE PLAYING -- I'M SORRY? WAS THERE -- OH, MICHAEL. I APOLOGIZE. I FORGOT THAT YOU WERE ON THE LIST.
>>MICHAEL PALAGE: I ACTUALLY WANTED TO SECOND IT AND LET THE RECORD REFLECT THIS IS MY FIRST PUBLIC FORUM WHERE I DIDN'T SPEAK, SO....
>>VINT CERF: EXCEPT --
>>JOHN KLENSIN: YOU BROKE YOUR RECORD.
>>VINT CERF: YOU SHOULD HAVE WAITED UNTIL I ADJOURNED.
>>MICHAEL PALAGE: YES, PLEASE, A SECOND.
>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY WASN'T CALLING FOR A VOTE, BUT THANK YOU.
>>MICHAEL PALAGE: OFF TO THE SOCCER FIELD.
>>VINT CERF: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE WILL ADJOURN UNTIL 9:00 TOMORROW. SOCCER TEAMS ASSEMBLE AT 6:30 IN THE LOBBY, AND OTHERS IN THE BAR OR WHEREVER ELSE YOU PREFER TO GO.
THANK YOU. WE'LL SEE YOU IN THE MORNING.

(APPLAUSE.)
>>VINT CERF: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M SORRY, I MISUNDERSTOOD SOMETHING. I'M LOOKING AT THE SCHEDULE AND I NOTICE THERE'S A STRATEGIC PLANNING CONSULTATION MEETING TAKING PLACE IN THIS ROOM IMMEDIATELY, SO THOSE OF YOU INTERESTED FURTHER IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN SHOULD REMAIN HERE, AND THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO ARE FREE TO GO.
(4:29 P.M.)