ICANN|ARCHIVES

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

>>VINT CERF: GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
I'D LIKE TO CALL OUR AFTERNOON SESSION TO ORDER.
MY NAME IS VINT CERF.
I'M CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF ICANN.
AND THIS IS OUR OPENING OF OUR PUBLIC FORUM.
TODAY WE HAVE A VERY EXTRAORDINARY OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM A PERSON WHO HAS SPENT A GREAT MANY YEARS OF HIS LIFE WORKING IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
HE SERVES TODAY AS THE MINISTER FOR INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGIES IN ITALY.
THIS IS A NEWLY CREATED POST.
IT'S ONE WHICH SEEKS TO HARNESS INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES FOR THE ECONOMIC BENEFIT OF THE CITIZENS OF ITALY AND FOR THEIR EDUCATION, FOR THEIR IMPROVED LIFESTYLE, AND IT BRINGS WITH IT A REMARKABLE RANGE OF RESPONSIBILITIES, FROM POLICY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TO THE CREATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE FOR LEGAL OPERATION OF PARTS OF THE INTERNET, FOR PARTS OF THE ELECTRONIC BUSINESS.

HE ALSO HAS TO LOOK OUTWARD TO ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ON AN INTERNATIONAL SCALE.
SO MINISTER LUCIO STANCA, ALTHOUGH HE HAS SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF HIS TIME IN EUROPE, SERVING AS THE HEAD OF IBM EUROPE AND, BEFORE THAT, IN OTHER RESPONSIBLE ROLES FOR IBM, HAS ALSO SPENT SOME TIME IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD, NOTABLY IN THE UNITED STATES, AND SERVED IN THESE VARIOUS ROLES UNTIL MARCH 2001, WHEN HE TELLS ME HE WAS APPROACHING RETIREMENT, AND IT WAS TIME TO CONSIDER SOMETHING ELSE.

I AM PERSONALLY ASTONISHED THAT MINISTER STANCA FAILED TO UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF RETIREMENT AND ACCEPTED A VERY SUBSTANTIAL AND I'M SURE VERY CHALLENGING POSITION IN HIS CURRENT ROLE.

WHAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US, I THINK, IN -- HEARING FROM HIM IS TO SEE ANOTHER VIEW OF GOVERNMENTAL INTEREST IN THE ELECTRONIC AGE.

SO WE THANK YOU, MINISTER STANCA, MOST HEARTILY FOR TAKING TIME OUT OF YOUR BUSY SCHEDULE TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.
PLEASE WELCOME MINISTER STANCA.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>MIN. STANCA: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME JUST FORMALLY THANK THE CHAIRMAN OF ICANN FOR HIS NICE INTRODUCTION.

YES, I MADE A MISTAKE.

I WAS THINKING ABOUT -- DREAMING ABOUT MY RETIREMENT AFTER LIFE THAT I HAD BEEN WORKING IN THE IT INDUSTRY.
AND THAT WAS DREAMING OF MY FREE TIME AND PLAYING GOLF AND DOING MANY THINGS.
AND THEN I MADE A DECISION TO STEP INTO GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT LIFE, BELIEVE ME.
SO HERE I AM, PROVIDING YOU WITH A GOVERNMENT VIEW OF THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE, WHICH IS -- AND ALSO THIS IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY, THE SO-CALLED DEVELOPMENT OF INFORMATION SOCIETY.
SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. PRESIDENT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE AND CONTRIBUTE TO SUCH AN IMPORTANT EVENT.

ON BEHALF OF MY GOVERNMENT, THE GOVERNMENT OF ITALY, I AM PLEASED TO WELCOME ALL OF YOU TO THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY OF ROME.
I KNOW, IF I AM RIGHT, IT'S YOUR FIRST MEETING IN ROME.
AND THAT'S ONE MORE REASON TO WISH EVERY SUCCESS TO THIS CONFERENCE.

ITALY RECOGNIZES THE ROLE OF ICANN -- THAT ICANN PLAYS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH OF THE INTERNET, ACKNOWLEDGING ITS CRUCIAL TASK IN ENSURING TECHNICAL STABILITY AS A COORDINATING BODY ACTING FROM A GLOBAL AND LOCAL PERSPECTIVE.

AS YOU KNOW, EVERY DAY, MORE THAN 750 MILLION PEOPLE USE THE INTERNET.
THIS IS NO DOUBT DUE TO THE REMARKABLE ACTION OF ICANN IN SUPPORTING ITS DEVELOPMENT.

THIS MEETING IS TAKING PLACE ABOUT 3 MONTHS AFTER THE FIRST WORLD SUMMIT ON INFORMATION SOCIETY, ORGANIZED BY THE UNITED NATIONS IN GENEVA.
WE WERE ALL ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE SUMMIT.
IT WAS A UNIQUE OCCASION, I SHOULD SAY THE FIRST OCCASION, TO REAFFIRM THE GREAT OPPORTUNITIES OFFERED BY INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES AND TO ADDRESS THE CHALLENGES AND THE OPPORTUNITIES WE FACE IN DEVELOPING AN INFORMATION SOCIETY FOR ALL.

WE AGREED ON THE NEED TO IDENTIFY A SET OF VALUES AND RULES TO BASE ITS FUTURE.

ITALY AND THE EUROPEAN UNION FIRMLY BELIEVE, AND EXPRESSED THIS CONVICTION DURING THE SUMMIT, THAT HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ARE THE CORNERSTONES OF SUCH AN INCLUSIVE SOCIETY AS INFORMATION SOCIETY IS.

FREEDOM TO ACCESS INFORMATION, FREEDOM OF COMMUNICATION AND PARTICIPATION, TRANSPARENCY, GOOD GOVERNANCE, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECURITY AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ARE AT THE CORE OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY.

IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THESE SENSITIVE ISSUES, AN APPROPRIATE BALANCE BETWEEN DIFFERENT INTERESTS AND NEEDS MUST BE ACHIEVED.
INTERNET, AS WE KNOW, IS ONE OF THE PILLARS OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY.
IT IS INCREASINGLY CLEAR THAT IT IS GOING TO UNDERPIN EVERY ASPECT OF OUR LIVES.
IT IS SWEEPING THE GLOBE FAR MORE RAPIDLY THAN WOULD HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATED ONLY A FEW YEARS AGO.
ITS RATE OF EXPANSION DAILY OUTSTRIPS THE CAPACITY TO MAP IT.

HERE IN EUROPE, THE NUMBER OF INTERNET USERS IS FAST INCREASING.
IT IS EXPECTED TO GROW FROM A PENETRATION OF ALMOST 50% OF THE POPULATION LAST YEAR TO ALMOST 70% OF THE POPULATION IN THE YEAR 2007.

IN ITALY, MORE THAN HALF OF ALL HOUSEHOLDS USE A PERSONAL COMPUTER, WITH THE GROWTH OF 24% IN THE LAST TWO YEARS AND A MORE RAPID INCREASE IN BROADBAND ACCESS IS TAKING PLACE.
ABOUT ONE MILLION OF DOMAIN NAMES ARE ALLOCATED IN THE ITALIAN NATIONAL REGISTRY, TEN TIMES THE LEVEL OF JUST FOUR YEARS AGO.

THOSE DEVELOPMENTS SUGGEST THAT THE DECISIONS REGARDING POLICIES, REGULATION, AND RELATED INTERNET ACTIVITIES, WILL BE OF A CRUCIAL CONCERN FOR THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.
THE FINAL DECLARATION OF THE GENEVA SUMMIT HAS RECOGNIZED CONNECTIVITY AS A CENTRAL ENABLING AGENT IN BUILDING THE INFORMATION SOCIETY.
UNIVERSAL, UBIQUITOUS, EQUITABLE, AND AFFORDABLE ACCESS TO ICT INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES CONSTITUTES ONE OF THE CHALLENGES OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY AND SHOULD BE AN OBJECTIVE OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN BUILDING IT.

ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION, WHICH IS ENHANCED BY THE GLOBALIZATION OF INFORMATION, OFFERS NEW OPPORTUNITIES, BUT ALSO PRESENTS NEW CHALLENGES.

DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES AND NETWORKS ARE THE KEY TOOLS TO DEVELOP APPLICATIONS IN AREAS SUCH AS E-GOVERNMENT, E-LEARNING, E-HEALTH, AND E-BUSINESS, JUST TO MENTION A FEW EXAMPLES.

THE MORE APPLICATIONS ARE AVAILABLE, THE CLOSER TECHNOLOGY COMES TO THE PEOPLE'S NEEDS.
HOWEVER, WHILE THE INFORMATION SOCIETY IS TRACING NEW FRONTIERS OF DEVELOPMENT, IT IS MARKING NEW LINES OF POSSIBLE SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE.

WE ALL, AND GOVERNMENTS ARE IN THE FRONT LINE, MUST TOGETHER WORK TO BRIDGE ANY FORM OF DIGITAL DIVIDE.
WE ARE FULLY COMMITTED TO TURNING THIS DIGITAL DIVIDE INTO A DIGITAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL, PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE WHO RISK BEING LEFT BEHIND.

ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT REASONS OF INTERNET SUCCESS IS THAT NO SINGLE ENTITY CONTROLS IT.
HOWEVER, IT HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF THE NEW MODEL OF GOVERNANCE AND COORDINATION IN ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGES THAT THE INFORMATION SOCIETY POSES.

THE GENEVA SUMMIT LAUNCHED A CALL FOR A WORKING GROUP ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE, OPERATING UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS SECRETARY GENERAL.
WE RECOMMEND THAT THE WORKING GROUP SHOULD INVOLVE ALL STAKEHOLDERS, FIRST OF ALL, THE PRIVATE SECTOR, GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SOCIETY, AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS.

ITALY HAS A CLEAR POSITION ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE.
GOVERNMENT MUST BE INVOLVED ONLY WHEN PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES ARE AT STAKE.
BUT IT IS NOT THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT TO MANAGE INTERNET OR TO INTERFERE IN ITS FREE DEVELOPMENT.
THAT'S THE POSITION OF MY GOVERNMENT.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT ICANN'S TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES OFTEN INVOLVE POLICY IMPLICATIONS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED WITH THE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS.
WE BELIEVE THAT ICANN SHOULD CONTINUE TO PLAY A CENTRAL ROLE IN THE INTERNATIONAL DEBATE AND, IN PARTICULAR, WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP CALLED FOR BY THE GENEVA SUMMIT.

ANOTHER POINT THAT ITALY SUPPORTS AS CRUCIAL IS THE SPECIAL ATTENTION THAT SHOULD BE DESERVED TO THE ROLE OF PEOPLE.
INFORMATION SOCIETY IS NOT ONLY A QUESTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL INVESTMENT, BUT OF TRAINING AND SKILLS NEEDED TO ACCOMPLISH THIS COMMON GOAL.
PEOPLE, AS USUAL, ARE THE MOST CRITICAL PLAYERS OF ANY MAJOR INNOVATION.
IT HAS BEEN SAID IN GENEVA THAT EACH PERSON SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACQUIRE THE NECESSARY KNOWLEDGE IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND, PARTICIPATE ACTIVELY IN, AND BENEFIT FULLY FROM THE INFORMATION SOCIETY.

THE SUMMIT IN GENEVA CONCLUDED ITS WORKS WITH A DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES, A SORT OF MAGNA CARTA OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY.
THE DECLARATION UNDERLINES THAT THE INFORMATION SOCIETY BASED ON KNOWLEDGE AND DIGITAL INNOVATION IS A MAJOR OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF THE WORLD'S CITIZENS TO REAFFIRM THE VALUE OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMOCRACY.

AGREEMENT ON THE DEFINITION OF VALUES AND PRINCIPLES WAS NOT A FOREGONE CONCLUSION ON THE EVE OF THE SUMMIT.
RATHER, IT WAS THE OUTCOME OF THE EFFORT OF ALL PARTICIPANTS, A SUCCESS OF THE SUMMIT, WITH THE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION OF THE EUROPEAN UNION UNDER THE ITALIAN PRESIDENCY, BECAUSE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT, WE HAD THE PRESIDENCY IN THE LAST YEAR.

IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS, WE ALL ARE COMMITTED TO THE SECOND PHASE OF THE WORLD SUMMIT IN TUNIS IN 2005.
THE CHALLENGE IS NOW TO EXPLORE NEW INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVE TO DISCUSS AND DECIDE THE WAY FORWARD TO BUILD AN INCLUSIVE AND BALANCED INFORMATION SOCIETY.
NATIONAL EFFORTS NEED TO BE SUPPORTED BY EFFECTIVE INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL COOPERATION TO ACCOMPLISH ALL THE WORK AND OBJECTIVES THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.

ICANN, OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, HAS BEEN A SUCCESSFUL EXAMPLE OF SUCH COOPERATION.

WE WELCOME, FOR INSTANCE, ICANN APPROVAL OF A FRAMEWORK FOR THE FORMATION OF LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND GLOBAL GROUPS AT THE MONTREAL MEETING.
THIS IS A CLEAR STEP FORWARD, MORE INVOLVEMENT FROM THE USER COMMUNITY IN DECISIONS AFFECTING HOW INTERNET IS RUN.

WE SHALL ALL BE ABLE TO CAPITALIZE ON SUCH VALUABLE ASSET THAT IS ICANN.
YOUR STRENGTH DERIVES FROM YOUR INTERNATIONALITY, COMPETENCE, INDEPENDENCE, AND COMMITMENT.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY I WISH YOU THE GREATEST SUCCESS FOR THIS MEETING, AND, OF COURSE, AN ENJOYABLE STAY IN ROME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU, MINISTER.

AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE ON THE VIDEO STREAMING FOR THIS EVENT AROUND THE WORLD, I'M PAUL TWOMEY, THE PRESIDENT OF ICANN.

MINISTER, MAY I JUST SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL, CLEAR, AND, I THINK, VERY TIMELY SPEECH.
ON BEHALF OF ICANN AND THE ICANN COMMUNITY, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THANK THE GOVERNMENT OF ITALY ESPECIALLY FOR ITS IMPORTANT ROLE THAT IT PLAYED AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION LAST YEAR, IN A KEY PERIOD OF TIME FOR THE WORLD SUMMIT FOR INFORMATION SOCIETY.

ALSO, I'D LIKE TO STATE HOW ICANN AND ITS STAFF HAVE GOOD AND CLOSE RELATIONS WITH THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ITALY, AND PARTICULARLY WITH YOUR OFFICE.
AND WE APPRECIATE THOSE LINKS.

I'D LIKE TO SAY HOW MUCH I APPRECIATE YOUR EMPHASIS ON BALANCE AND YOUR CLEAR STATEMENT ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT'S INVOLVEMENT IN PUBLIC POLICY AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR'S ROLE, AND POINT OUT AGAIN THE IMPORTANT RECOGNITION WE GIVE TO THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN PUBLIC POLICY THROUGH THE GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR ICANN, THROUGH WHICH THE ICANN COMMUNITY SEEKS INPUT AND ADVICE ON PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES.

MAY I SAY PERSONALLY I APPRECIATE THE BREADTH OF YOUR EXPERIENCE.

I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT AS YOU WERE SPEAKING TO US EARLIER.
YOUR EXPERIENCE IS TECHNICAL, THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND ALSO IN GOVERNMENT.
YOU ARE THE EMBODIMENT OF THE ICANN IDEAL, THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER TO THESE PROBLEMS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR DEDICATION TO THE PUBLIC BENEFIT BY COMING OFF YOUR RETIREMENT LIST, BACK INTO THE TRENCHES, AND BY BRINGING YOUR SKILLS AND INSIGHT INTO THE NEEDS OF THE GLOBAL AS WELL AS THE ITALIAN INFORMATION SOCIETY.
AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR BEING HERE WITH US TODAY.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: SO NOW -- THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PAUL.
WE ARE NOW GOING TO RECONFIGURE FOR THE PUBLIC FORUM.

I INVITE THE BOARD TO TAKE ITS PLACE ON THE STAGE.
PAUL TWOMEY AND I, AND THE MINISTER STANCA HAVE BEEN ASKED TO PARTICIPATE IN A PRESS CONFERENCE MOMENTARILY.
SO I HAVE ASKED IVAN CAMPOS TO SERVE AS YOUR MASTER OF CEREMONIES FOR A LITTLE WHILE, UNTIL WE CAN COMPLETE OUR PRESS CONFERENCE AND RETURN.
I DON'T ANTICIPATE THIS WILL BE MORE THAN A HALF HOUR OR SO.
SO, NORMALLY, WE WOULD BEGIN WITH THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT.
BUT SINCE THE PRESIDENT WILL BE ABSENT IN THE PRESS CONFERENCE, WE'LL BEGIN WITH COMMITTEE REPORTS INSTEAD.
SO AS THE BOARD IS PREPARED, IVAN, I WILL TURN THIS OVER TO YOU FOR THE BEGINNING OF THE PUBLIC FORUM.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. NOW THAT YOU ARE ALL DELIGHTED THAT I AM YOUR ACTING CHAIRMAN, LET ME --

(APPLAUSE.)

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: THANK YOU!
THANK YOU, AMADEU.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: LET US START, THEN, BY THE ICANN BOARD COMMITTEE REPORTS.
THE FIRST ONE I HAVE ON MY LIST, AND I CONSULT MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBER NJERI RIONGE, ARE YOU READY TO GIVE THE AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT?

>>NJERI RIONGE: SURE.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: SO PLEASE.

>>NJERI RIONGE: I WILL PROCEED TO READ THE REPORT TO THE PUBLIC FORUM, AND I SHALL BEGIN.
THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE REVIEWED THE ACTION POINTS AND SUGGESTIONS OF THE LAST MEETING HELD IN CARTHAGE, TUNISIA, AND THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN AGREED DURING OUR MEETING HELD HERE IN ROME.

GIVEN A BULLET -- WELL, NUMBERING POINTS, REQUEST THE CEO TO CALL FOR PROPOSAL, AND DETERMINE THE TOP THREE AVAILABLE AUDITORS BY JULY 2, '04 IN KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA. RECEIVE AND REVIEW THE RFPS BY DECEMBER 2, '04 IN CAPETOWN, SOUTH AFRICA. RETAIN THE CURRENT AUDITOR, KPMG, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR THAT ENDS 30TH JUNE, 2004, AND WE NOTE THAT ICANN WILL STILL BE (INAUDIBLE) THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REQUIREMENTS AS KPMG WOULD BE ACTING FOR THE FOURTH CONSECUTIVE AUDIT THIS YEAR.

ANALYZE ICANN'S RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS BY ASSESSMENTS AND REVIEWS OF THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CONTROL STRUCTURE, WITH STAFF, WITH A VIEW TO ENHANCING THE CURRENT INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEM WITH CLEARLY DEFINED KEY RESULT AREAS AND KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS.

THE COMMITTEE DISCUSSED WITH AUDITORS IN DETAIL THE CURRENT FINANCIAL SYSTEMS AND FINDINGS THAT THE AUDITORS WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMITTEE, AND CONFIRM THAT THEIR FINDINGS ARE WELL STIPULATED BY THE AUDIT REPORT. HOWEVER, WE NEED TO A JUST THE CURRENT FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND POLICY TO MEET CURRENT GROWTH OF ICANN, WHICH NEEDS RESTRUCTURING, WHICH IS CURRENTLY ONGOING AS INDICATED ABOVE.

THE COMMITTEE WILL FORWARD THE FINAL ADJUSTMENTS IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND POLICY ALONG WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AUDITORS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 BY JANUARY 2, '05 TO THE BOARD FOR REVIEW AND ADOPTION.

THE COMMITTEE IS COMMITTED TO MEETING THE ACTION PLANS FOR THIS YEAR'S 2/'04 AND 2- '05 WHICH WE WILL BELIEVE WILL GIVE THE ICANN SUPPORT AND COMMUNITY AT LARGE PER THE BYLAWS.

THANK YOU.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: THANK YOU, NJERI FOR THE REPORT. WE WILL HAVE AFTER THE REPORTS ROOM FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

SO I'D LIKE TO CALL ON TRICIA DRAKES TO DELIVER THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE REPORT. TRICIA, PLEASE.

>>TRICIA DRAKES: THANK YOU, IVAN. FIRSTLY, JUST TO SAY THAT I'M DELIVERING THIS ON SHORT NOTICE ON BEHALF OF ALEJANDRO PISANTY, WHO IS ACTUALLY THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.

THE OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR COMMITTEE ARE MOUHAMET DIOP, IVAN, TOM NILES, HAGEN HULTZSCH, AND MYSELF, OBVIOUSLY, AND ALEJANDRO.

WE'VE MET FOUR TIMES, INCLUDING HERE IN ROME, SINCE THE LAST MEETING. AND IN FACT, OUR ENERGIES HAVE REALLY BEEN IN TWO MAIN AREAS.

FIRSTLY IS IN WORKING WITH THE PRESIDENT AND ICANN STAFF IN DEVELOPING AND WORKING IN THE AREA OF GOOD GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES AND PROCESSES APPROPRIATE FOR ICANN.

AND I BELIEVE WE'RE MAKING GOOD PROGRESS ON THAT.

THE SECOND AREA IS IN RELATION TO COMMITTEES, AND PROBABLY THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE HAS TAKEN THE LARGE PART OF OUR TIME, AND I'M DELIGHTED TO SAY THAT AT THE BOARD MEETING, WE WILL BE MAKING A PROPOSAL FOR THE CHAIR OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, AND ALSO ONE OR TWO ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE -- BOARD COMMITTEE ADJUSTMENTS.

THAT ENDS THE REPORT. THANK YOU.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: THANK YOU, TRICIA.
NOW I WOULD LIKE TO CALL UPON MYSELF, WITH ANOTHER HAT, TO DELIVER THE FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT. I HAVE PREPARED -- YES, THERE THEY ARE. OKAY. SO NEXT ONE.

HERE ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. I AM THE CURRENT CHAIR. THERE'S TRICIA DRAKES, HAGEN HULTZSCH, TOM NILES AND MIKE PALAGE.

NEXT ONE. AFTER CARTHAGE, WE HAD TWO TELECONFERENCES BESIDES AN EMBARRASSING NUMBER OF PHONE CALLS AND CONVERSATIONS, AND THEN WE HAD MEETINGS HERE IN ROME ON THE FIRST OF MARCH, ON THE 3RD, AND WE MIGHT HAVE -- I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN TODAY BECAUSE WE ARE STILL WORKING ON IT. WE WOULD HAVE A MEETING WITH THE BUDGET ADVISORY GROUP, BUT THIS IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. SO I HAVE THIS CORRECTION TO MAKE. WE'RE STILL WORKING ON ISSUES.

NEXT.

WELL, WHAT HAVE BEEN THE MAIN ISSUES DISCUSSED BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE SO FAR? WELL, FOR REASONS THAT YOU WILL ALL RECOGNIZE AND WHICH INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO STRATEGIC PLANNING, SIGNING OF THE MOU, ICANN 2.0, AND CONSULTING WITH THE COMMUNITIES, WE ARE A FEW WEEKS BEHIND WHERE WE WOULD BE AT THIS POINT IN TIME IN THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. AND I WILL COMMENT ON THAT IN THE END.

SO -- BUT WE, AS SPECIFIED IN THE BYLAWS, WE FOLLOW-UP WITH THE CEO AND THE STAFF THE CURRENT BUDGET EXECUTION, AND ALSO THE IMPACT OF THE STRATEGIC PLANNING THAT IS BEING CARRIED OUT BY THE BOARD STAFF IN CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMUNITY AND ITS IMPACT ON FORTHCOMING BUDGETS.

I BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT WILL MAKE COMMENTS WHEN HE COMES BACK ON EXTENSIVE CONSULTATIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE AND ARE TAKING PLACE IN IDENTIFYING ITEMS WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT THE COMMUNITY THINKS THAT NEED CHANGE, SOMETIMES IMPLEMENTATION, IMPROVEMENTS, AND SO FORTH. AND ALSO, A VERY IMPORTANT THING, WE ARE THINKING HARD IN ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF FUNDING. WE'RE TRYING TO BE VERY CREATIVE, VERY CONSTRUCTIVE, AND SOME OF YOU IN THE AUDIENCE ARE ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THIS DIALOGUE, ALSO.

NEXT ONE, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT CALENDAR.

NEXT.
NEXT, PLEASE. THIS WAS JUST A TITLE.
IT'S TO REMIND MYSELF.

APPOINT -- WELL, HERE'S A LIST IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OF THINGS THAT WE INTEND TO DO BY THOSE DATES. THE PRESIDENT HAS APPOINTED ALREADY THE BUDGET ADVISORY GROUP. THIS IS A CONSULTING -- THIS IS NOT A GROUP THAT IS A COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD. THIS IS A GROUP THAT CONSULTS WITH THE PRESIDENT, OR THE PRESIDENT CONSULTS WITH THIS GROUP. SO THIS IS DONE.

WE HAVE REVIEWED THE BUDGET ADOPTION CALENDAR, AND WHAT YOU ARE SEEING ON THE SCREEN IS A RESULT OF THAT.
WE SHOULD HAVE -- THERE'S ACTUALLY THREE STAGES IN THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. THERE IS SOMETHING CALLED THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET, THERE'S SOMETHING CALLED THE PROPOSED BUDGET, AND AFTER APPROVAL BY THE BOARD, IT BECOMES THE BUDGET.

SO WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE INITIAL PRELIMINARY BUDGET REVIEW, WITH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. SO WE'RE STILL WORKING ON IT, ON PROPOSING A PRELIMINARY BUDGET. SO THERE IS A MEETING WITH THE BUDGET ADVISORY GROUP. THAT HAS HAPPENED ON THE 1ST OF MARCH.

THERE SHOULD BE, ON THE 22ND OF MARCH, A REVIEW OF THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET THAT IS STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT WITH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. THEN ON THE 25TH, A BUDGET ADVISORY GROUP, PLUS FINANCE COMMITTEE BUDGET REVIEW MEETING, AND WE INTEND TO POST THE PRELIMINARY DRAFT, THE DRAFT -- THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET, POST IT BY THE 30TH OF MARCH FOR COMMENTS BY THE COMMUNITY.

NEXT, PLEASE.

REVIEW WITH CONSTITUENCY GROUPS, THEN ANOTHER BUDGET ADVISORY PLUS FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING.

FINAL REVIEW BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE ON THE 20TH OF APRIL. POSTING OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET ON THE 27TH OF APRIL. THERE IS A BYLAW REQUIREMENT THAT IT IS POSTED 45 DAYS BEFORE THE END OF THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. AM I RIGHT, GENERAL COUNSEL? YES. 45 DAYS.

SO THEN AS WE ALL KNOW, THERE -- OUR ANNUAL MEETING FOR THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN JULY, WHICH IS AFTER THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, IN KUALA LUMPUR. SO SOME APPROVAL BY THE BOARD ON HOW TO OPERATE IN THE FIRST WEEKS OF JULY, WITH -- BEFORE -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO APPROVE THE BUDGET BEFORE THE 1ST OF JULY, BECAUSE THE MEETING HAPPENS IN JULY, THE KUALA LUMPUR. SO SOME PROVISIONS WILL BE TAKEN AND SOME APPROVALS WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE BOARD SO THAT WE CAN OPERATE IN SPITE OF THAT.

THERE ARE WELL-DEFINED PROCEDURES TO DO THAT. THIS IS NOT THE END OF THE WORLD. THIS IS A CLEAR -- WE KNOW WHAT HAS TO BE DONE.
SO THIS IS BY THE 18TH OF MAY.

THEN THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PUBLIC FORUM, AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE A FINAL BUDGET APPROVAL IN MALAYSIA ON THE 23RD OF JULY.

SO THAT CONCLUDES MY FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT, AND I CHANGE MY HAT, AND I CALL UPON VENI MARKOVSKI, CHAIRMAN OF THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE, TO DELIVER HIS REPORT.

VENI.

>>VENI MARKOVSKI: THANK YOU. WE HAD A MEETING IN ROME ON THE 1ST OF MARCH, AND DURING THE DISCUSSION, WE DECIDED THAT THE DATES AND DIVISIONS FOR THE NEXT ICANN MEETINGS WILL BE SHOWN IN A MOMENT ON YOUR SCREEN.

WE HAD TO TAKE IN CONSIDERATION MANY DIFFERENT CONDITIONS: NATIONAL HOLIDAYS, REGIONS TO BE COVERED, RELIGIOUS HOLIDAYS, WEATHER CONDITIONS, THE REQUIREMENTS OF IVAN CAMPOS, WHICH WERE THE MOST DIFFICULT TO SATISFY.

HOWEVER, WE MANAGE TO CAME WITH THE FOLLOWING DATES. I'LL READ THEM AND YOU WILL PROBABLY SEE THEM ON THE SCREEN IN A MOMENT.

IN 2005, THE FIRST MEETING WILL BE FROM APRIL 4 TO APRIL 8 IN LATIN AMERICA. FROM JULY 11 TO JULY 15 IN EUROPE. AND FROM DECEMBER 5 TO DECEMBER 9 IN NORTH AMERICA.

THERE IS A LITTLE ITEM TO BE DISCUSSED ABOUT THE JULY MEETING, BECAUSE THE IETF STILL HAS NOT KIND OF DECIDED EXACTLY WHEN THEIR MEETING WILL BE, SO WE HOPE THAT ICANN STAFF AND THE IETF WILL BE ABLE TO CLEAR THIS OUT SO WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME THING LIKE WHAT HAPPENED TODAY -- I MEAN THIS TIME IN ROME WHERE THE IETF MEETING IS JUST TAKING PLACE IN SOUTH KOREA.

IN 2006, WE WILL HAVE THE LAST WEEK OF MARCH IN ASIA, THE LAST WEEK OF JUNE IN AFRICA, AND THE FIRST WEEK OF NOVEMBER IN LATIN AMERICA.

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN APPROACHING ME AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE AND START REQUESTING WHEN CAN THEY APPLY TO HOST ICANN MEETINGS. WE ARE JUST WORKING ON NEW SPECIFICATION WHICH WILL BE PUBLISHED SHORTLY; HOPEFULLY, WITHIN A FEW WEEKS, COUPLE OF WEEKS.

THEY WILL INCLUDE ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COMING MEETINGS. AND ALTHOUGH -- OKAY, THERE ARE THE DATES ARE THERE, INCLUDING 2007.

ALTHOUGH WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THE DATES UNTIL END OF 2007, PROPOSAL (INAUDIBLE) END UNTIL 2006. WE DO THAT BECAUSE AS ICANN CHANGES, AS THE INTERNET CHANGES, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH MEETING ALSO CHANGE, AND WE DON'T WANT TO GET PEOPLE APPLY FOR 2007 WITH ONE CONDITIONS, LIKE HAVE -- LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN ROME, AND THEN FACE IN THREE YEARS THAT THERE IS A NEW REQUIREMENT WHICH THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW ON.

THE COMMITTEE THANKS ALL INTERESTED PARTIES WHO HAVE APPROACHED US, AND ALL THE ICANN STAFF, AND WE HOPE THAT THE ICANN MEETINGS WILL CONTINUE TO BE THE NATURAL PLACE FOR GETTING TOGETHER FOR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AND MANAGEMENT OF DNS AND ROOT SERVERS.

THANK YOU.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: THANK YOU, VENI.

SO WE HAVE NOW TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ALL THESE REPORTS BY COMMITTEES; NAMELY, AUDIT COMMITTEE, THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS?
NO?
ALL RIGHT. RAUL ECHEBERRIA.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA: IT SEEMS TO NOT WORK.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: WELL, NOW IT ISN'T.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA: MY NAME IS RAUL ECHEBERRIA, I'M THE CEO LACNIC. I HAVE TWO MINOR COMMENTS ON THE MEETING COMMITTEE REPORT. ONE OF THEM IS I UNDERSTOOD THAT THE LATIN AMERICA MEETING IN 2005 IS ALREADY IN -- ALMOST DECIDED. I THINK, ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS THE FOURTH TIME IN WHICH THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE APPLICATION FROM LATIN AMERICA. THEN IT'S A FACT FOR US THAT THE MEETING WILL BE HELD IN ARGENTINA. MAYBE IT IS GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE WHO IS IN CHARGE OF ORGANIZING THE MEETING TO KNOW THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AND THIS IS MY RECOMMENDATION TO ANNOUNCE THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AS I SAY.

THE SECOND THING IS I'M SEEING THE SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS OF 2005, AND MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS IS THERE ANY RELATION BETWEEN OUR MEETINGS AND THE WSIS? MAYBE IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO HAVE OUR THIRD MEETING BEFORE THE SUMMIT. I DON'T KNOW.

>>VENI MARKOVSKI: SHALL I? OKAY; THANKS.

FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH THE LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES AND WE ARE VERY HAPPY YOU ARE SO UNIFIED IN PROPOSING CANDIDACY AND SUPPORTING IT FROM ALL THE REGIONS. DIANE SCHROEDER WILL PROBABLY GET TOGETHER WITH YOU AS SOON AS THE DOCUMENT IS READY SO YOU CAN COMPLY WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS OF IVAN, THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.

AND THE SECOND QUESTION, AS FAR AS I KNOW, I AM ALSO ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THE WSIS AND IT'S GOING TO BE IN NOVEMBER, AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE A NUMBER OF MEETINGS LIKE FROM MID OF OCTOBER UNTIL END OF NOVEMBER. SO IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO ORGANIZE ANOTHER MEETING. I MEAN, WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING AND THAT WAS BRIEFLY DISCUSSED DURING THE MEETINGS COMMITTEE GATHERING HERE.

SO THE FIRST POSSIBLE WEEK OF DECEMBER WAS THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE IN DECEMBER AND THE LATE POSSIBLE AFTER ALL THE OTHER MEETINGS HAVE TAKEN PLACE, BECAUSE IT'S NOT ONLY THE IETF AND THE WSIS. THERE WERE SEVERAL OTHERS. IF DIANE IS HERE, SHE CAN TELL US. I JUST FORGET, OR IF SOMEBODY ELSE ON THE MEETING COMMITTEE REMEMBERS. BUT BELIEVE ME BELIEVE ME, FROM THE MID OF OCTOBER TO END OF NOVEMBER, EVERYTHING IS FULL. WE DON'T WANT TO CROSS ROADS WITH OTHER MEETINGS WHICH ARE ALREADY SCHEDULED.

THANK YOU.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: MAY I ADD, RAUL, THAT THERE'S ALL SORTS OF VARIABLES THAT ARE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, INCLUDING AVOIDING COLLISIONS WITH MEETINGS ALREADY ESTABLISHED BY OUR CONSTITUENCIES AND WORKING GROUPS AND SO FORTH. BELIEVE ME, IT'S VERY COMPLICATED.

TONY HARRIS.

>>TONY HARRIS: IS THIS WORKING? I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT WE HAD DECIDED IN ARGENTINA ABOUT THIS MEETING. WE DO NEED TO HAVE FINAL INSTRUCTIONS BECAUSE SINCE DEVALUATION OF THE CURRENCY IN OUR COUNTRY, EVERYBODY'S ORGANIZING MEETINGS AND COMING DOWN TO BUY THINGS.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>TONY HARRIS: SO UNLESS WE CAN MOVE QUICKLY ON THIS, I DON'T THINK WE'LL GET A HOTEL. OKAY? THANK YOU.

>>VENI MARKOVSKI: I BELIEVE -- I SAID IT SHOULD BE A COUPLE OF WEEKS BEFORE IT'S READY. AND THE MEETING IS IN APRIL, SO WE'LL HAVE AT LEAST ONE YEAR IN ADVANCE BEFORE THE MEETING ACTUALLY STARTS. AND I THOUGHT THIS WILL BE ENOUGH. THANK YOU.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: YOUR POINT, TONY, YOUR POINT IS TAKEN. WE MUST HURRY. EVERYBODY IS WANTING TO GO TO ARGENTINA, INCLUDING ME. THINGS ARE REALLY AFFORDABLE THERE NOW. IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO GO.

>>ALICK WILSON: MY NAME IS ALICK WILSON, I'M A MEMBER OF GNSO COUNCIL, NONCOM APPOINTEE. THE BOARD MAY REMEMBER I SPOKE IN TUNISIA ON THE SUBJECT OF FINANCES, AND OF COURSE IT'S COME ABOUT AGAIN.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE FINANCE COMMITTEE. FIRST OF ALL, THE IMPACT ON -- OF LEGAL ACTIONS ON THE BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2004. AND SECONDLY, WHAT IMPACT THE COST OF THOSE LEGAL ACTIONS MIGHT HAVE ON THE BOARD IN ACHIEVING ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. AND FINALLY, ON THE ALTERNATIVE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES THAT THE BOARD IS LOOKING INTO.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: THERE'S ONE THING THAT I LEARNED IN THE PAST FEW DAYS. I WILL ASK OUR GENERAL COUNSEL TO ANSWER YOU.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>JOHN JEFFREY: CAN YOU HEAR ME? TO ANSWER THE QUESTION VERY SPECIFICALLY, I DON'T THINK WE KNOW THE COMPLETE IMPACT OF THE RECENT LAWSUITS. THERE CERTAINLY HAS NOT BEEN A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF TIME TO ASSESS THE COSTS THAT WILL BE INVOLVED WITH THEM. THAT'S NOT TO BE EVASIVE, BUT LITERALLY, WE'VE BEEN SERVED WITH ONE OF THEM AND NOT THE OTHER YET.

AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION, I BELIEVE, WAS RELATING TO -- IT SHOULD NOT IMPACT THE MOU.

WE INTEND TO GO FORWARD WITH BUSINESS AS USUAL, AND WE INTEND TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE MOU.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: YES?

>>ALICK WILSON: MR. CHAIRMAN, THE THIRD QUESTION WAS ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES THAT THE BOARD IS SEEKING. CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT, PLEASE.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: NOT REALLY. THERE -- THINGS ARE AT A STAGE WHERE IT'S VERY TENTATIVE, AND IT WOULD BE -- IT WOULD NOT BE PRUDENT ON MY PART TO START THIS DISCUSSION HERE AND NOW BEFORE WE ARE UP TO SPEED AND ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT THESE THINGS.

AND IT'S IMPORTANT. I'M NOT AVOIDING, DODGING THE ISSUE. IT'S THAT THERE ARE STAGES IN WHICH YOU HAVE TO LET THINGS LOOSE AND THINK ABOUT ALL POSSIBILITIES AND SOME OF THEM AFTER WE FINISH, LOOK PRETTY OUTRAGEOUS, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

SO WE ARE AT THAT TIME WHERE BRAINSTORMING HAS TO HAVE A FEW MORE DAYS OR PERHAPS A FEW WEEKS OF LIBERTY TO RUN ITS COURSE. THANK YOU.

>>ALICK WILSON: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: AMADEU.

>>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: HI. OH, MY GOD. THAT'S THE NEW TACTIC TO PREVENT ME FROM GOING TO THE MIKE; RIGHT?

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: HAD YOU LIVED IN LOS ANGELES, YOU WOULD NEVER DO THAT.

>>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: REMEMBER THAT TORTURE IS FORBIDDEN BY SOME INTERNATIONAL TREATIES. QUESTION HERE, ONE SUGGESTION FOR ALTERNATIVE FUNDING AND IT'S REGARDING THE LAWSUIT, IT'S A FACT OF LIFE THAT SOME OF THE LAWSUITS ARISE FROM A PECULIAR CHARACTERISTIC OF AMERICAN LEGAL CULTURE. YOU GO TO COURTS BEFORE BRIEFING IN THE MORNING; YEAH?

AND IT ALSO RELATES THE COST OF THE LAWSUITS THERE HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE PECULIAR SYSTEM THEY HAVE THERE AND THE PECULIAR TYPE OF LAWYERS THAT LIVE IN THAT COUNTRY.

GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE ALL HAD STRANGE IDEAS ABOUT HAVING ICANN, BY WHATEVER NAME, OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES, AND THIS WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE LEGAL COST THREAT IN ABSTRACT, AND REGARDING THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, ICANN BEING A U.S. LEGAL ENTITY DEPENDS ON HOW THE PEACE TREATY AND HOW IT WAS, LET'S SAY, THE IMPOSITION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. I HOPE THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT WILL MAKE A GENEROUS CONTRIBUTION TO THE ICANN LEGAL FUND TO PAY ALL THESE LAWSUITS BECAUSE THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY WOULD PREFER SOMETHING LIKE EXPORTING ALL OF THESE TO SWITZERLAND OR SOME PLACES LIKE THAT WHERE SUING IS NOT THAT EASILY AVAILABLE AND EXECUTING FOREIGN DECISIONS IS NOT THAT EASY.

ANOTHER QUESTION AND LESS CREATIVE REGARDING FUNDING.

THIS IS FOR TRICIA IN THE BOARD GOVERNING COMMITTEE. YOU SAID YOU WHAT YOU WERE DOING REGARDING THE BOARD GOVERNING GUIDELINE PROCEDURES. COULD YOU EXPLAIN IN WHICH SENSE YOU ARE VIEWING THIS CORPORATE GOVERNANCE THEME? BECAUSE ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT MY WHOLE LIFE BEING HERE AND NOW BACK HERE, DOWNSTAIRS, IS I THINK THE BOARD IS NOT AS EFFECTIVE AS IT COULD BE GIVEN THE RESOURCES IT HAS. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS. ONE OF THE REASONS IS WE HAVE MANY FUNCTIONAL COMMITTEES WITH (INAUDIBLE) ORGANIZATIONS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PROBABLY MATERIAL COMMITTEES; THAT IS, GROUPS OF BOARD MEMBERS ALSO WORKING ON THE MATERIAL ISSUES THAT ARE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ICANN. AND THIS IS DEALT WITH IN THE WHOLE WHICH IS PERHAPS LESS EFFICIENT.

SECOND, BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS, THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE A BOARD THAT GETS OPTIONS FROM THE STAFF, AND THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT -- WHERE THE BOARD GETS RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STAFF. AND IN MY EXPERIENCE, ICANN IS THE SECOND TYPE, WHICH IS VERY -- I MEAN, IT'S VERY COMFORTABLE IF YOU ARE ON THE BOARD, BUT PERHAPS IT'S NOT THE BEST SOLUTION, GIVEN THE STRANGE BALANCE THAT THE BOARD, THE STAFF, AND THE OTHER CONSTITUENCIES CONSTITUTED HERE.

AND I WOULD LIKE KNOWING SOME MORE DETAILS ABOUT IN WHICH DIRECTION ARE YOU WORKING THERE.

THANKS.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: THANK YOU, AMADEU.

WELL, THE FIRST ONE, I TOOK NOTE THAT WE SHOULD APPROACH THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SO THAT THEY GIVE US -- LET ME CALL YOU -- A CONTRIBUTION, SO THAT WE CAN DEAL WITH THE U.S. LEGAL SYSTEM.
I WROTE IT DOWN.
WE WILL PROCESS THAT.

AS FAR AS BOARD GOVERNANCE, I WOULD LIKE TRICIA TO HELP ME WITH THAT, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD.
FIRST, LET ME COMMENT THAT THIS IS A NEW COMMITTEE.
AND THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT TRICIA MENTIONED IN HER REPORT, LIKE RULES OF CONDUCT, ETHICS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WE ARE GETTING INSPIRATION FROM MANY SOURCES.
BUT THERE IS ONE POINT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE HERE.
I AM A MEMBER, AS YOU SAW, OF THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE ALSO.

IS THAT WE SEE IT AS A VERY IMPORTANT TASK FOR US TO MAKE THE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN BOARD AND STAFF, AS AN EXAMPLE, TO BE EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT, RUN SMOOTHLY, SO THAT WE HAVE FOLLOW-UP MECHANISMS, TIME-OUT MECHANISMS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN IMPACT ON HOW WE PERFORM AND, ULTIMATELY, ON GOVERNANCE OF ICANN.
THERE ARE ISSUES THAT, OF COURSE, WE MUST AND WILL CONSULT WITH THE COMMUNITIES SO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE GET INSPIRATION, GOOD IDEAS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ALL OF YOU.

BUT THERE IS A SIZABLE AMOUNT OF WORK TO BE DONE IN TERMS OF STREAMLINING PROCESSES.
LIKE, IF YOU TAKE AS AN EXAMPLE THERE ARE MANY WAYS OF DOING THINGS.

WE ARE AIMING AT HAVING THINGS DEFINED BEFOREHAND, DELEGATING THINGS, AND HAVING MECHANISMS TO MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER IS IN CHARGE OF SOMETHING DELIVERS.

NOW, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF EXAMINING INTERNAL PROCESSES, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT REQUIRE ONE OR MORE INTERACTIONS, YOU KNOW, MIDWAY, INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THE BOARD OR COMMITTEES FOR EVENTUAL FINAL APPROVAL.

SO THERE IS A FLAVOR OF WORK FLOW WHEN YOU GET TO THE NITTY-GRITTY OF IT.
THERE'S SOME WORK FLOW TO BE WORKED UPON.
AND WE ARE PREPARED TO DO THAT.

WE ARE PREPARING OURSELVES WITH AMMUNITION, AND ALSO THE FACT THAT THE NEW CEO AND ALL THE CHANGES THAT HAPPENED SINCE ICANN 2.0, THE MOU, AND SO FORTH.
THERE'S A LOT OF NEW THINGS, WHICH IS GOOD.
I MEAN, WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT GOVERNANCE WITH OLD, ENTRENCHED THINGS.
SO JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHERE WE ARE.

OF COURSE, THERE ARE THE THINGS -- IF YOU READ WHAT OUR CHARTER IS, WE HAVE SOME ROUTINE TASKS LIKE POPULATING COMMITTEES, SUGGESTING THINGS TO THE BOARD.
THIS, OF COURSE, WILL BE DONE.

I MENTIONED HERE THE NEW THINGS THAT WEREN'T DONE BEFORE, AND WE WERE TRYING TO PUT A PRIORITY ON THAT IN ORDER TO CONTRIBUTE IN WHICHEVER WAY WE CAN TO MAKING ICANN PROCESSES MORE EFFICIENT.
TRICIA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING?

>>TRICIA DRAKES: THANK YOU, IVAN.
I THINK THE ONLY THING I'D LIKE TO ADD IS, REALLY, AT THIS STAGE, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING IS REALLY LOOKING AT THE AREA OF CORE PRINCIPLES OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND BEST PRACTICE, BOTH FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF A TRUST AND AN ORGANIZATION THAT ICANN IS.

AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN LOOKING AT THE DETAILED LEVELS OF EITHER THE PRINCIPLES OF OPERATION OR WHAT I CALL, AND ME COLLEAGUES THEN LAUGH, THE NITTY-GRITTY ASPECTS.
SO, AMADEU, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT -- FIRST OF ALL WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TOP LEVEL IN THAT RESPECT.

ALSO, AS IVAN SAID, I'M SURE AS THINGS MOVE FORWARD, WE WOULD WANT GOOD CONSULTATION ON THIS ASPECT.
AND THIS IS NOT JUST THE BOARD WORKING ON THIS.

IN FACT, PAUL TWOMEY, THE PRESIDENT, AND KURT PRITZ, THE V.P. OF OPERATIONS, HAVE BEEN LOOKING IN THIS AREA.
AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO GET RIGHT.
AND THERE'S NO EASY ANSWER.
BUT WE ARE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE CORE -- THE APPROPRIATE CORE PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNANCE AND NOT YET AT THE NITTY-GRITTY.

AND AS MY COLLEAGUE HAS CONFIRMED, IT IS ALSO ONE OF THE MOU REQUIREMENTS.
SO THAT ALSO NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH AS WELL.
THANK YOU.

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: ANY OTHER COMMENT?

ON THE COMMITTEE REPORTS?
IF NOT, THEN I LOOK AT MY AGENDA HERE.
WE ARE INTENDING TO HAVE A -- AT 4:00 P.M., THERE IS A SCHEDULED BREAK WITH COFFEE AND THINGS.

SO BEFORE VINT AND PAUL COME BACK, WE'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN TO PAUL DELIVER THE CEO'S REPORT, THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT.
SO WE'LL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY, THEN, TO ASK IF KURT PRITZ COULD DELIVER AN UPDATE ON THE NEW STLD RFP REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. KURT.

>>KURT PRITZ: DOES THIS WORK?

YEAH, THERE WE GO.
JUST GIVE ME A SECOND TO GET WIRED UP HERE.

CAN YOU HELP ME OUT HERE?
IS THIS ME?
IT'S YOU.
OKAY.
AS YOU KNOW, AS THE RESULT OF MUCH DISCUSSION PRIOR TO AND IN CARTHAGE, THE BOARD RESOLVED TO HOLD A ROUND OF REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS FOR NEW STLDS.

THIS AFTERNOON, I AM GOING TO GIVE A BRIEF UPDATE AS TO THE STATUS OF THAT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS.
IN ORDER TO KEEP THE PROCESS AS FAIR AS POSSIBLE, WE'VE BEEN VERY SCRUPULOUS ABOUT THE WAY IN WHICH WE HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH EACH OF THOSE INTERESTED IN APPLYING FOR AN STLD.

THEREFORE, MY -- BECAUSE COMMUNICATIONS HAVE TO GO TO ALL THE PARTICIPANTS AT ONCE, MY PRESENTATION WILL DESCRIBE STATUS AND NOT SO MUCH THE ISSUES SURROUNDING THE APPLICATION PROCESS OR THOSE ISSUES FACED BY AN APPLICANT OF AN STLD.

SIMILARLY, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS AT THE END, I MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER SOME STRATEGIC DISCUSSIONS HOW ICANN SEES THIS STLD ROUND FITTING INTO THE BIGGER PICTURE.
BUT IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE FAIRNESS OF THE PROCESS, I WON'T BE ABLE TO ANSWER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS RELATING TO THIS PROCESS OR SOMEBODY'S SPECIFIC APPLICATION.

NOW, IN CARTHAGE, THE BOARD RESOLVED TO HOLD THIS STLD ROUND. THAT WE'RE REALLY AFTER FOR TWO THINGS.

FIRST IS THIS RESOLUTION THAT IT ACTUALLY HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT OTHER FACTS AND DECIDED TO HOLD IT NOT LATER THAN DECEMBER 15TH, TO OPEN UP THE ROUND FOR APPLICATION.
VERY TYPICALLY, WE OPEN THAT ROUND ON EXACTLY DECEMBER 15TH AND NOT A DAY BEFORE.
THE BOARD IS AFTER ONE MORE THING, THOUGH.
AND THAT IS A SIDE BENEFIT OF THIS PROCESS WILL BE TO GATHER INFORMATION AND FEED INTO THE INQUIRIES WE HAVE IN THE STUDY WE'RE DOING FOR NEW GTLDS.

SO THIS PROCESS WILL CREATE SOME NEW STLDS, BUT WILL ALSO UNEARTH MUCH GOOD INFORMATION THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO APPLY TO THE GTLD PROCESS THAT'S BEING STUDIED RIGHT NOW.
SO THE PROCESS IS FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

ON DECEMBER 15TH, THE ICANN STAFF POSTED THE APPLICATION MATERIALS ON THE WEB.
THEY ARE OPEN FOR REVIEW BY EVERYONE.
BUT IT'S NOT AN APPLICATION IN ITSELF.
APPLICATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY REQUESTING A USER NAME AND PASSWORD DIRECTLY FROM ICANN.

THERE WAS NO REAL REQUIREMENT, NO REAL THRESHOLD FOR RECEIVING A PASSWORD.
AND WE ANSWERED, ESSENTIALLY, EVERY REQUEST WITH A PASSWORD AND USER NAME.
SO ALL THOSE REQUESTING A PASSWORD RECEIVED ONE, AND ALL THOSE REQUESTING A PASSWORD WERE ENABLED TO JOIN THE PROCESS.

AND I THINK THERE WAS ONE APPLICANT THAT DIDN'T GET A PASSWORD.
THE APPLICATION WAS REALLY VAGUE, AND WE ANSWERED BACK IN A COUPLE E-MAILS, ASKING FOR SOME VERIFICATION, AND DIDN'T GET IT.

THOSE REQUESTS FOR PASSWORDS WERE GENERALLY TURNED AROUND IN A DAY OR SO, AND PEOPLE RECEIVED THE ONLINE APPLICATION -- THE ONLINE APPLICATION IS A WEB-BASED APPLICATION WITH QUESTIONS AND THEN BLANKS IN THE FORM.

IT'S -- WHAT'S THAT CALLED, DAN, THE FORMAT?
ALL RIGHT.
ANYWAY, EACH APPLICANT WAS ASKED TO ANSWER A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS.

THE APPLICATION FOCUSES ON THE COMMUNITY THAT THE APPLICANT IS A PART OF, THE BUSINESS PLAN, THE FINANCIAL PLAN OF THAT PROCESS.

AFTER THE ONLINE APPLICATIONS ARE REVIEWED, THERE WILL BE AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION.

ICANN IS IN THE PROCESS OF APPOINTING EVALUATORS NOW.
THOSE EVALUATORS WILL FILL OUT APPLICATIONS TO SEE IF THEY MEET CERTAIN THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS.
TO CLOSE THAT INDEPENDENT EVALUATION, CERTAIN STLDS WILL BE SELECTED TO GO ON TO THE NEXT ROUND.
THAT ROUND IS A TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIAL NEGOTIATION.

SO EACH APPLICANT THAT MAKES IT TO THIS ROUND WILL HAVE SEPARATE NEGOTIATIONS IN ORDER TO FIRST DETERMINE IF AN STLD WILL BE AWARDED; AND, SECONDLY, THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT OF THAT STLD, BOTH WITH RESPECT TO TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND WITH RESPECT TO THE BUSINESS MODEL AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS.
AND AT THE END OF THAT, WE'LL EXECUTE AGREEMENTS, AND THOSE AGREEMENTS WILL BE ENDORSED BY THE BOARD.

THE PROCESS HAS THESE CHARACTERISTICS: IT'S A WEB-BASED PROCESS.
SO WHEN WE RECEIVE APPLICATIONS, ALL APPLICATIONS, ON ITS FACE, WILL LOOK THE SAME AND HAVE THE SAME FORMAT.
AND THAT'S AN ATTEMPT AT FAIRNESS AND IMPARTIALITY.

AFTER THAT WILL BE A BLIND, INDEPENDENT REVIEW.

SO THE ICANN STAFF WILL NOT BE -- ONCE THE REVIEWERS ARE APPOINTED, THE ICANN STAFF WILL NOT BE PRIVY TO THAT WORK THAT GOES ON THERE ONCE WE GIVE THEM GUIDELINES.
THERE'S TWO MAJOR STEPS TO THE PROCESS.
THE FIRST IS THE APPLICATION PROCESS AS YOU SEE IT NOW.

THAT'S -- I'LL JUST READ THAT.
THAT'S TO -- THIS FIRST ROUND OF THE PROCESS IS TO DEMONSTRATE INVOLVEMENT IN THE COMMUNITY, TECHNICAL COMPETENCE, FINANCIAL VIABILITY, AND A ROBUST BUSINESS MODEL.

AFTER THAT, AS I STATED BEFORE, WE'LL ENTER INTO THIS COMMERCIAL AND TECHNICAL NEGOTIATION PHASE.
AS WE SAID WHEN WE LAUNCHED THE PROCESS, THE NUMBER OF STLDS IS NOT LIMITED.
AND WE ARE GOING TO MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE APPLICATIONS.

SO WE HAVE ASKED FOR FINANCIAL DATA AND BUSINESS PLANS THAT I'M SURE APPLICANTS WISH TO BE HELD CONFIDENTIAL.
WE ARE ONLY GOING TO EXPOSE PART B OF THE BUSINESS FORM, WHICH IS THE MORE GENERAL INFORMATION HAVING TO DO WITH THE STLD.

HERE'S THE TIME LINE TO DATE.

ON DECEMBER 15TH, WE LAUNCHED AND THE QUESTION PERIOD OPENED.
IT'S SORT OF LIKE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.
ALL QUESTIONS ARE PUBLIC, AND ALL QUESTIONS THAT COME TO US ARE PUBLICLY POSTED, SO ALL THE BIDDERS CAN SEE THE QUESTIONS AND THE ANSWERS.

ON -- IT WAS SCHEDULED THAT THE QUESTION PERIOD WOULD CLOSE ON FEBRUARY 27TH.
BECAUSE OF THE TIMING OF THIS MEETING AND THE ACTIVITY THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW, WE DECIDED TO EXTEND THAT QUESTION PERIOD TO THE 5TH OF MARCH.
SO IT'LL CLOSE WITH THE CLOSE OF THIS MEETING.

ON MARCH 10TH IS THE APPLICATION FEE CUTOFF DATE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICATION, THAT CALLS FOR FEES TO BE DELIVERED 5 DAYS BEFORE THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL APPLICATIONS CLOSE.
AND THAT IS MIDNIGHT UTC ON MARCH 15TH.
THUS FAR, WE'VE RECEIVED REQUESTS FOR 14 PASSWORDS.

WE'VE RECEIVED 38 QUESTIONS.
WE'VE ANSWERED 35 OF THEM, AND WE RECEIVED 3 MORE IN THE LAST DAY OR SO.
AND WE'VE RECEIVED THREE SETS OF APPLICATION FEES.
FINALLY, GOING FORWARD, THIS IS OUR TENTATIVE TIMETABLE.
THIS TIMETABLE IS TENTATIVE BECAUSE IT WILL VARY SOMEWHAT WITH THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS RECEIVED.

WE'RE GOING TO APPOINT A SET NUMBER OF REVIEWERS, AND THEN WE WILL GO THROUGH THE APPLICATIONS IN A SET SPEED.
SO THE TIMES HERE MAY CHANGE SOMEWHAT BASED ON THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS RECEIVED.
BUT, ESSENTIALLY, STAFF WILL REVIEW THE APPLICATIONS IN THE TWO WEEKS FOLLOWING THE CLOSE OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS AND VERIFY THE COMPLETENESS OF THE APPLICATIONS.

AND THEN WE'LL OPEN UP A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ONE MONTH.
AND THAT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS JUST ON PART B OF THE APPLICATION, WHICH DEFINES WHAT THE STLD IS AND CERTAIN PERTINENT INFORMATION ABOUT THAT APPLICATION.
THE OTHER PORTIONS OF THE APPLICATION, THE FINANCE MODEL AND THE BUSINESS MODEL, WILL REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL.

MAY THROUGH JULY, THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATION WILL OCCUR.
THAT TIME MAY SHRINK OR GROW A LITTLE BIT, DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS RECEIVED.
AND THEN WITH THE 1ST OF AUGUST, WE'LL IDENTIFY THOSE STLDS THAT COMPLETED THE FIRST ROUND AND MET THE CRITERIA, AND WE'LL GO ON TO THE ROUND OF TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIAL NEGOTIATIONS.

THOSE NEGOTIATIONS WILL BE CONDUCTED INDIVIDUALLY WITH EACH OF THE APPLICANTS SO THAT THERE'S NO SET TIMETABLE FOR THEM.
THEY'LL EACH PROCEED ON THEIR OWN PACE, AND THEY'RE BASED ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ICANN STAFF.

IT WAS ALWAYS ANTICIPATED THAT WE WOULD CONCLUDE THIS PROCESS BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR FOR A COUPLE REASONS.
ONE IS, THAT SEEMS TO BE THE OUTER BOUND OF WHAT IS TIMELY.
AND SECONDLY, WE DO WANT TO FEED THIS INFORMATION INTO THE GTLD PROCESS.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
THAT'S THE UPDATE ON THE GTLD -- STLDS.
AND NOW MIRIAM SAPIRO IS GOING TO DISCUSS THE GTLD PROCESS.

>>MIRIAM SAPIRO: OKAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WHILE KURT IS SETTING UP THE SLIDES, I'LL START WITH A BRIEF INTRODUCTION.

MY NAME IS MIRIAM SAPIRO, AND I AM FROM SUMMIT STRATEGIES INTERNATIONAL, AND I'M PLEASED TO BE HERE TODAY TO PRESENT A PRELIMINARY OVERVIEW OF THE EVALUATION OF THE NEW GTLDS, PARTICULARLY THE POLICY AND LEGAL ISSUES.

ALSO ON THE EVALUATION TEAM ARE MICHEL BRICHE AND SEBASTIEN BACHOLLET AS OVERALL COORDINATOR.
NEXT, PLEASE.

THANK YOU.

ACTUALLY, GO ONE BACK.
OKAY.

AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THE NEW GTLDS WERE INTRODUCED IN NOVEMBER 2000 AS PART OF A PROOF OF CONCEPT.

THIS WAS AFTER A DNSO DECISION TO INTRODUCE THEM IN A MEASURED AND RESPONSIBLE WAY, TRYING DIFFERENT TYPES OF TLDS AND ALSO DIFFERENT TYPES OF STARTUP MECHANISMS.

THIS WAS, AFTER ALL, THE FIRST TIME SINCE THE 1980S THAT NEW GTLDS WERE INTRODUCED INTO THE GNS.
AND THE ORDER OF LAUNCH WAS INFO, BIZ, NAME, MUSEUM, COOP, AERO, AND, HOPEFULLY, SOON, PRO.

NEXT, PLEASE.
THE -- SHORTLY BEFORE LAUNCH, THERE WAS A TASK FORCE SET UP WITH AN ABSOLUTELY UNPRONOUNCEABLE ACRONYM THAT YOU SEE UP THERE, TO DEVELOP -- WELL, FIRSTLY, TO ESTABLISH RECOMMENDATIONS ON WAYS TO CONDUCT AN EVALUATION OF THE GTLDS THAT WERE ABOUT TO BE LAUNCHED.

AND THE TASK FORCE DEVELOPED A SET OF 25 QUESTIONS AND WENT ON TO DESIGNATE ABOUT A DOZEN OF THOSE AS MOST CRITICAL AND THAT SHOULD BE ANSWERED FIRST.

THE EVALUATION TEAM HAS DIVIDED THE CRITICAL QUESTIONS INTO TWO GROUPS.

FIRST, THE LEGAL AND THE POLICY ISSUES.

AND THAT EVALUATION IS BEING DONE BY SUMMIT.
AND SECOND, THE OPERATIONAL AND TECHNICAL ISSUES. AND THAT PART OF THE EVALUATION IS BEING DONE BY SOLUCOM AND FINAKI.

THE GOALS OF THE EVALUATION ARE TO, FIRST OF ALL, ASSESS HOW WELL THE PROOF OF CONCEPT WORKED IN PRACTICE, AND, SECOND OF ALL, TO PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT COULD BE USED IN CONSIDERING NEW GTLDS.
THE TIMETABLE INVOLVES, OF COURSE, THE SUBSTANTIVE LAUNCH OF THE EVALUATION AT THE CARTHAGE MEETING.
AND BY THIS POINT, THE POLICY AND LEGAL SECTION IS NEARLY DONE, BUT AWAITING THE RECEIPT OF TECHNICAL DATA.
AND THAT ISSUE AND THE OTHER OPERATIONAL AND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS ARE BEING WORKED RIGHT NOW.

SO WITH RECEIPT OF THIS DATA, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO FINISH THE WHOLE EVALUATION IN A FEW MONTHS.
NEXT, PLEASE.

SO WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE DEEMED CRITICAL?
WELL, THERE ARE SEVEN IN THE POLICY AND LEGAL AREA, WHICH INVOLVE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE STARTUP MECHANISMS, THE EFFECTIVENESS OF REGISTRATION RESTRICTIONS, THE MARKET IMPACT OF THE NEW GTLDS, THE REASONABLENESS OF THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK THAT WAS SELECTED, AND ANY REGULATORY OR LEGAL PROBLEMS NOT INVOLVING STARTUP.

THE FOUR QUESTIONS ON THE OPERATIONAL AND TECHNICAL SIDE REVOLVE AROUND THE IMPACT OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES, WHOIS ACCESS, WHETHER THERE ARE ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS AND SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE, AND, LASTLY, THE PROCESS QUESTIONS.

WHAT I'LL DO NOW IS HIGHLIGHT BRIEFLY SOME OF THE METHODOLOGICAL AND SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES IN THE FIVE POLICY AND LEGAL AREAS.
FIRST, WITH RESPECT TO THE STARTUP PERIODS, THE METHODOLOGY INVOLVES INTERVIEWS WITH, AS MANY OF YOU ALREADY KNOW, REGISTRIES, REGISTRARS, ICANN STAFF AND BOARD MEMBERS, GOVERNMENTS, INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, TRADEMARK HOLDERS, AND END USERS.

ALSO INVOLVES RANDOM SAMPLING IN AN EFFORT TO ASSESS THE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN REGISTRATIONS AND TRADEMARKS, REGISTERED TRADEMARKS.
ALSO INVOLVES STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF TRADEMARK DISPUTES AND RELATED QUESTIONS.

THE PRELIMINARY ISSUES INCLUDE WHAT METHODS WERE USED FOR THE STARTUP PERIOD IN TERMS OF BOTH SUNRISE AND LANDRUSH; HOW UNDERSTANDABLE WERE THE PROCEDURES; WHAT WORKED WELL AND WHAT DIDN'T; WHAT WERE OTHER OPTIONS; AND HOW WELL WERE DISPUTES HANDLED.
NEXT SLIDE.

THE SECOND AREA INVOLVES THE REGISTRATION RESTRICTIONS.
AND I SHOULD SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT THE FOCUS IS ON DOT BIZ AND DOT NAME, BECAUSE THE QUESTION OF SPONSORED GTLDS WAS ADDRESSED BY SUMMIT ALREADY IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF LAST YEAR.

THIS SECTION INVOLVES INTERVIEWS WITH REGISTRIES AND ICANN CONSTITUENCIES, AND TWO DATA SAMPLES, A LARGER ONE THAT LOOKS, IN A PRIMA FACIA -- AND A SMALLER THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF MORE DETAILED REVIEW.

THE ISSUES HERE, PRELIMINARILY, INCLUDE WHETHER SELF-CERTIFICATION HAS BEEN AN EFFECTIVE DETERRENT; HAS ENFORCEMENT BY THIRD PARTIES WORKED WELL; AND WHAT OTHER OPTIONS MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE FEASIBLE.

WITH RESPECT TO THE SCOPE AND COMPETITIVENESS OF THE MARKET, THE METHODOLOGY INVOLVES RESEARCH ON GENERAL MARKET TRENDS, INTERVIEWS WITH STAKEHOLDERS, AND QUESTIONS FOR REGISTRANTS ON WHETHER THEY ARE NEW TO THE DNS AND WHAT THE PURPOSE OR PURPOSES OF THEIR REGISTRATIONS WERE.

THE ISSUES INCLUDE HOW STAKEHOLDERS VIEW THE IMPACT OF THE NEW GTLDS, INCLUDING IN TERMS OF CONSUMER CHOICE, PRICE, INNOVATION, SUBSTITUTABILITY AND DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS.
NEXT, PLEASE.

THE FOURTH AREA INVOLVES THE REASONABLENESS OF THE AGREEMENTS, IT INVOLVES EXAMINING THE TEXT OF THE SEVEN AGREEMENTS AND OVER 140 APPENDICES, ALSO INVOLVES INTERVIEWS WITH THE REGISTRY AND ICANN LEGAL STAFFS, AND A REVIEW OF THE NEGOTIATING DYNAMICS.

THIS IS AN EFFORT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS OF HOW REASONABLE WERE THE AGREEMENTS, ARE THERE MATERIAL DIFFERENCES AMONG THEM, WHAT ARE SOME OF, IF ANY, OF NONESSENTIAL ELEMENTS.
AND I MUST SAY THE REGISTRIES LOVE THIS QUESTION.

IS THERE ANYTHING IN HINDSIGHT THAT YOU WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO OMIT FROM THE AGREEMENT.
AND THE REVERSE OF THAT IS, IN HINDSIGHT, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED BUT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO HAVE IN THERE.

THE FIFTH AREA INVOLVES LEGAL AND REGULATORY ISSUES, ALSO FURTHER INTERVIEWS AND A REVIEW OF ANY RELEVANT COURT FILINGS INVOLVING THE SEVEN NEW GTLDS.

THE ISSUES CONCERN WHAT KINDS OF LEGAL PROBLEMS MIGHT THERE HAVE BEEN THAT WERE NOT COVERED IN THE STARTUP ANALYSIS, WERE THERE ANY REGULATORY ISSUES, PERHAPS INVOLVING COUNTRY NAMES, FOR EXAMPLE, PRIVACY ISSUES, OR THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SPONSORED GTLDS AND THE REGISTRARS.
NEXT, PLEASE.

THIS IS AN EFFORT THAT REALLY DEPENDS FOR ITS SUCCESS ON THE COOPERATION OF EVERYONE INVOLVED.
AND I WANT TO EXTEND A VERY WARM THANK YOU TO THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY BEEN QUITE HELPFUL AND HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONTINUE TO BE.

SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR HAVE INFORMATION YOU WISH TO PROVIDE, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO CONTACT ANY OF US.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MIRIAM.
AND THANK YOU, IVAN, FOR ACTING AS MASTER OF CEREMONIES UNTIL I COULD RETURN.

MIRIAM, ACTUALLY, I HAD A QUESTION.
I'M SORRY.
I DIDN'T NOTICE YOU HAD RUN AWAY BEFORE I TURNED AROUND.

THIS IS REALLY A VERY BROAD QUESTION FOR EVERYONE IN THE ROOM, EVERYONE LISTENING TO THIS REPORT.
AND I HOPE WE WILL PROPAGATE THE WORD OUT BROADLY.

I HAVE BEEN HEARING SORT OF SECONDHAND REPORTS THAT THE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS THAT ARE IN ACCESS OF THREE CHARACTERS, THOSE WHICH ARE FOUR-CHARACTERS LONG OR LONGER, ARE APPARENTLY EXPERIENCING SOME DIFFICULTIES IN THE USE -- IN THEIR USE.

BUT THE INFORMATION I HAVE IS EXTREMELY FRAGMENTARY.

IF THERE ARE TESTS OR, YOU KNOW, RESULTS OR SPECIFICS THAT ARE KNOWN, THESE SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF ICANN.

I WOULD EVEN URGE THAT THERE BE CONCERTED TESTING GOING ON BY VARIOUS PARTIES AROUND THE INTERNET, GLOBALLY, TO DETERMINE WHETHER WE HAVE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THE CURRENTLY-EXISTING SOFTWARE.

I CAN IMAGINE MANY DIFFERENT PLACES WHERE A PROBLEM CAN ARISE AND THAT MEANS THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT PLACES WHERE REPAIR NEEDS TO BE SOUGHT, BUT WE NEED SPECIFICS IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THOSE PROBLEMS. SO WE'LL TRY TO DO MORE THAN JUST THIS ORAL ANNOUNCEMENT.

BUT MIRIAM, DID THAT COME UP AT ALL IN THE COURSE OF YOUR EVALUATIONS?

>>MIRIAM SAPIRO: IS THIS ON?

YES, THAT ISSUE HAS COME UP. IT ACTUALLY CAME UP LAST YEAR WHEN SUMMIT CONDUCTED THE ANALYSIS OF REGISTRATION RESTRICTIONS AND ENFORCEMENT IN THE SGTLDS, BECAUSE WHILE IT WAS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED, IT WAS SOMETHING THAT EARLY LAST YEAR WAS ALREADY CLEARLY A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM. I UNDERSTAND IT HAS DISSIPATED SOMEWHAT, BUT IT IS STILL AN ISSUE AND IT ALREADY HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION.

YOU MAKE A VERY GOOD SUGGESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE WAYS TO TEST THIS TECHNICALLY, AND I WILL CERTAINLY TALK TO THE TECHNICAL TEAM AND SEE WHETHER THAT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE.

>>VINT CERF: THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. I MEAN, IT'S EASY TO TEST. YOU JUST TRY A BUNCH OF APPLICATIONS AND MAKE REFERENCE TO TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS THAT HAVE SOME FUNCTION TO THEM.

IF YOU REMEMBER TO ANNOUNCE YOURSELF, YOU HAVE SOME INFORMATION? FIRE AWAY.

>>JAAP AKKERHUIS: YES, THIS IS JAAP AKKERHUIS FROM THE COMMITTEE WITH THE TERRIBLE ACRONYM. AND THIS HAS COME UP AT (INAUDIBLE), I THINK BY DOT INFO AND DOT NAME PEOPLE.

IT SEEMS TO BE CAUSED BY A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT REASONS. PART OF IT IS BROWSERS WITH THINGS THAT KNOW HOW LONG DOMAIN NAMES SHOULD BE SO THEY JUST CUT IT OFF AND TRANSFER IT AUTOMATICALLY TO SEARCH KEY WORDS. AND IT COULD BE A PROXY AND WEB CASTING SERVICE, THEY ASSUME DOMAIN NAMES SHOULD NOT BE LONG NAMES, AND THEY GET (INAUDIBLE).

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

>>THOMAS ROESSLER: THE TOPIC CAME UP ON THE GNSO COUNCIL SOME TIME AGO AND I GOOGLED A SNIPPETS FOR CODE NAME APPLICATIONS. I THINK THE FIRST TIME THAT CODE SNIPPETS AND (INAUDIBLE) BASICALLY AMOUNTED TO A LIST OF SHAME WITH RESPECT TO NEW GTLDS. IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE A TLD CAN ONLY HAVE TWO OR THREE CHARACTERS AS HEURISTICS, STUFF LIKE THAT.

SO THE KIND OF STUFF YOU'RE DEALING WITH HERE AND REALLY A WIDESPREAD USE OF BAD HEURISTICS.

>>VINT CERF: SO MY SUGGESTION HERE IS I HOPE WE DON'T HAVE TO USE PUBLIC SHAMING AS A METHOD FOR ACHIEVING THE OBJECTIVE, WHICH IS TO GET EVERYTHING TO WORK PROPERLY. BUT I DO THINK A CONCERTED EFFORT TO UNCOVER THE PROBLEM AND TRY TO AIM PEOPLE WHO CAN SOLVE IT TO DEAL WITH IT WOULD BE A USEFUL STEP FOR ICANN.

SO WE WILL TAKE THAT UNDER OUR WING.

ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MIRIAM FROM EITHER THE BOARD OR THE FLOOR? AMADEU.

>>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: HI. WELL, THE QUESTION ISN'T RELATED TO MIRIAM ONLY, BUT ALSO TO WHAT KURT MADE BEFORE.

REGARDING THE PROBLEM YOU SAY, WELL, MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE I REGISTERED A DOT INFO NAME FOR ME, FOR MY WIFE, (INAUDIBLE) A REGISTRAR CREDIT HERE, AND (INAUDIBLE) I CAN'T PAY THROUGH THE GATEWAY BECAUSE THE BANK CAN'T UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS SOMETHING BEYOND DOT (INAUDIBLE) IN THE WORLD. JUST SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON, AND THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING WITH DOMAINS, BUT THEY ARE CHECKING THE E-MAIL ADDRESSES AND THEY ARE SOMEWHERE THIS LIMIT THAT THOMAS WAS DESCRIBING HERE.

SO A SORT OF PRIMARY, A SORT OF NEW TLDS, ONE ZERO ONE FOR NEWBIES WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP PEOPLE WHEN YOU ENCOUNTER THAT AS A USER, LOOK, LOOK HERE, AND THIS IS WHAT YOU SHOULD CHECK AND WHAT YOU SHOULD DO. BECAUSE IT IS NOT VERY EASY EACH TIME TO EXPLAIN THE SUBSCRIPTION METHOD OR NEWSPAPER WHERE IT IS PROBLEM BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW.

THEN GOING TO BIZ, I HAVE A SMALL QUESTION FOR MIRIAM AND A COMMENT FOR KURT. THE SMALL QUESTION FOR MIRIAM, YOU WERE DESCRIBING THE SORT OF THINGS THAT, WELL, WE ARE CHECKING HOW EFFICIENT THE RESTRICTIONS WERE REGARDING THE SELF-CERTIFICATION, JUST ONE EXAMPLE. THE QUESTION IS I HOPE YOU WILL ALSO CHECK THE REAL CONFLICTIVITY THAT EVEN LOW COMPLIANCE OR PARTIAL COMPLIANCE WILL BRING BECAUSE MY EXPERIENCE IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THESE SORT OF CHECKS, EVEN IF THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF NONCOMPLIANCE, THERE IS AN EFFICIENT DISCOURAGEMENT OF THE MOST FRINGE PART OF, YOU KNOW, HARMFUL BEHAVIORS.

I MEAN, I KNOW PEOPLE THAT HAVE A DOT NAME OR DOT AERO DOMAIN NAME THAT IS NOT WELL FIT IN THE ELIGIBILITY RULES.

THE REALITY IS BECAUSE THESE RULES, THE REAL CONFLICTIVITY IS VERY, VERY LOW, BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE WHO PERHAPS DOES NOT ABIDE. BUT WE KEEP LOTS OF DANGEROUS USERS OF THESE DOMAINS AT BAY IN THE HOPE THAT YOU WILL INTRODUCE THAT. I MEAN, THE REAL CONFLICTIVITY THAT PRODUCES IT AND THE REAL CONFLICTIVITY IN THE SPONSORED OR EVEN THE NAME IS CLOSE TO ZERO OR CLOSE TO ZERO POINT ZERO ZERO ZERO SOMETHING.

THE QUESTION FOR KURT IS A GENERAL CLARIFICATION, IF YOU WILL, ABOUT THE PROCESS. WHEN YOU SAY WE ARE LOOKING OR HIRING EVALUATORS TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW THE INITIAL DISCRIMINATION, MY QUESTION IS WHAT SORT OF EVALUATORS WILL YOU LOOK FOR? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF THEY COME THERE AND SAY, WELL, TECHNICAL PLAN, DON'T WORRY, MY GRANDMOTHER WILL HELP ME HANDLE THE TLD, WELL, YOU CAN CHECK THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM. BUT THERE ARE OTHER PARTS, LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, IT MIGHT BE THAT I HAVE A PERFECT PLAN BUT THIS IS NOT A SPONSORED TLD AT ALL, OR I WONDER HOW THE USUAL CONSULTANCY, WHICH LAST TIME WAS USING EVALUATORS, CAN CHECK SOMETHING LIKE VALUE ADDED TO THE DNS SPACE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

AND MY GENERAL RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WHILE YOU MAY USE ALL SORT OF EXTERNAL EVALUATORS, PLEASE DON'T KEEP IT BLIND TO THE ICANN STAFF AND THE ICANN BOARD, BECAUSE WE IN THE COMMUNITY, WE TRUST THIS STRUCTURE TO HAVE SOME ACQUIRED VALUES REGARDING HOW THE DNS WORK.

AND LAST TIME WE SEE -- WE SAW VERY STUPID EVALUATIONS FROM THIS INDEPENDENT TEAMS, SOMETHING LIKE HOW OFTEN WILL YOU REFRESH THE WHOIS INFORMATION? AND THE ONE GETTING THE BEST QUOTE WAS ONE WHO SAID INSTANTANEOUS, AND INSTANTANEOUS DOES NOT EXIST. IT'S THAT SIMPLE; RIGHT? BUT IT'S BETTER THAN SOME SECONDS, APPARENTLY.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AMADEU. PLEASE.

>>ERIC BRUNNER-WILLIAMS: THANK YOU, VINT. A COMMENT FOR MIRIAM. I'M ERIC BRUNNER-WILLIAMS. AS YOU KNOW, I'VE WORKED ON THE DOT BIZ PROPOSAL, THE DOT US PROPOSAL AND I ASSISTED WITH THE DOT COOP AND DOT MUSEUM ACTIVITIES. ONE THING I URGE YOU TO LOOK FOR IS THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF THE EXQUISITE TORTURE, THE FORMALISM THAT PROPOSAL RESPONDENTS GO THROUGH IN ORDER TO RESPOND AS IF THEY WERE VERY WELL CAPITALIZED ORGANIZATIONS WHEN IN FACT THEY ARE NOT VERY WELL CAPITALIZED ORGANIZATIONS.

RESPONDING TO THE PROPOSALS THEMSELVES, MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE FIRST ROUND OF STLDS AND GTLDS WAS THAT THE CAPITALIZATION WAS, IF YOU WILL, THE SERVICE LEVEL TO WHICH THE AGREEMENTS WERE MADE WERE DISPROPORTIONATE FOR SOME OF THE STLD PROPOSEMENTS. AND THE ENTIRE PROCESS IMPOSED UNNECESSARY COST, WHICH HAS DAMAGED THE FIRST ROUND OF STLD ROLLOUTS, AND POSSIBLY EVEN ONE OR TWO OF THE GTLD ROLLOUTS, ALTHOUGH THEY MAY SUFFER FROM SELF-INFLICTED INJURY. SO PLEASE TRY TO GO BEYOND THE FORMAL COMPARISON OF THE SEVEN SETS OF DOCUMENTS TO INFER THE CAPITALIZATION REQUIREMENTS THAT MEETING THE SLA BOGIES AND APPENDICES AND ALSO RESPOND TO GO THE COMPLETE TEXTUAL REQUIREMENT FOR THE RFP IMPOSED ON THAT GENERATION OF APPLICANTS AND PRESUMABLY WILL BE INFLICTED ON THE NEXT GENERATION OF APPLICANTS AS WELL.

>>MIRIAM SAPIRO: I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION AND WE WILL TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT AS WE DO THE PROCESS PART. THAT'S REALLY SOLUCOM'S PART, AS WELL AS LOOKING AT THE NEGOTIATIONS, I SHOULD SAY.

>>STEVEN METALITZ: THANK YOU, STEVE METALITZ A MEMBER OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSTITUENCY. MY QUESTION IS DIRECTED TOWARDS KURT'S PRESENTATION. I NOTICE IN YOUR FIRST, YOUR SLIDE ABOUT THE STEPS, PUBLIC COMMENT WAS NOT MENTIONED ALTHOUGH I DID SEE IN THE TIMETABLE THAT THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

BUT GIVEN THE NEW PROCESS THAT'S BEING USED IN CONTRAST TO THE PROCESS IN 2000, TO WHOM ARE THESE PUBLIC COMMENTS TO BE DIRECTED? ARE THEY DIRECTED TO THE STAFF IN DETERMINING WHETHER THE THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET? ARE THEY DIRECTED TOWARD THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS WHO WILL REVIEW THE APPLICATIONS THAT MEET THOSE THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS? OR ARE THEY ULTIMATELY DIRECTED TO THE BOARD THAT WILL HAVE TO ENDORSE, I THINK WAS THE WORD YOU USED, THE AGREEMENTS THAT ARE ULTIMATELY NEGOTIATED AND SIGNED BY THE STAFF?

>>KURT PRITZ: THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE FOLDER AND BECOME PART OF THE APPLICATION AND BE APPENDED TO IT SO WHEN THE EVALUATORS READ THE APPLICATION, THEY WILL FIRST READ THE APPLICATION AND THEN THOSE COMMENTS WILL BE PART OF IT.

SO IT WILL BE PART AND PARCEL OF THE APPLICATION.

>>MARK MCFADDEN: MARK MCFADDEN FROM THE ISP CONSTITUENCY, AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY ENGAGED IN TESTING SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED WITH THE NON-THREE CHARACTER TLDS. AND WHILE I'M NOT GOING TO REPORT ON WHAT THE RESULTS OF THE TESTING ARE, THE RESULTS ARE SURPRISING, AND AMADEU IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

THEY'RE SURPRISING IN A NUMBER OF WAYS.

AND WHAT OUR INTENT WAS WAS TO ACTUALLY COME UP WITH A BEST CURRENT PRACTICE DOCUMENT, BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THE PROBLEM WAS PRIMARILY AT THE APPLICATION LAYER.

THE DISCOVERY IS THAT WHILE YOU'RE RIGHT, THIS ISN'T ROCKET SCIENCE, THE PROBLEM IS IN A VARIETY OF SETTINGS, NOT JUST AT THE APPLICATION LAYER BUT ALSO AT THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAYER AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A PART THAT'S AT THE POLITICAL LAYER.

AND WHAT THE COMMUNITY REALLY NEEDS IS A TAXONOMY OF THE PROBLEM, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT HAPPENS, WHEN PEOPLE HAVE COME TO US AND ASKED FOR THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM, OUR INTENT WAS -- OUR FIRST SORT OF NAIVE INTENT WAS TO PROVIDE A BEST CURRENT PRACTICE DOCUMENT FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE OPERATORS OF BIND AND APPLICATION LAYER TOOLS.

THE DISCOVERY IS THE PROBLEM RUNS MUCH, MUCH DEEPER AND IS MUCH, MUCH COMPLEX THAN THAT. AND I THINK THAT THERE ARE REALLY A VARIETY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO BE EDUCATED.

AND SO IT'S THAT TAXONOMY DOCUMENT THAT I WOULD APPEAL FOR. THE TESTING HAS TO GO ON. OUR CONSTITUENCY HAS COMMITTED TO DOING THAT TESTING IN THE FUTURE. WE HAVE DONE IT IN THE PAST AND WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO IT BUT WHAT WE REALLY NEED IS A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROBLEM AND HOW WIDESPREAD IT IS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT OCCURS TO ME THAT EVEN KNOWING ABOUT PROBLEMS THAT ARE REPORTED IS IMPORTANT, BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE WILL KNOW ABOUT EVERY PROBLEM. SO FINDING A WAY TO CAPTURE EXPERIENCE, EVEN FROM USERS WHO DISCOVER PROBLEMS, SOUNDS TO ME LIKE A WORTHWHILE EXERCISE.

SO ALTHOUGH I'M NOT SURE THE EXTENT TO WHICH STAFF IS PREPARED TO COPE WITH THIS PROBLEM, WE DO NEED TO LOOK FOR SOME MECHANISM FOR CAPTURING THE ISSUES THAT ARE ARISING SO THAT PEOPLE CAN BECOME AWARE OF THEM. BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT VALUABLE INPUT.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I THANK YOU FOR RAISING THIS POINT. I BELIEVE A NUMBER OF THE REGISTRY CONSTITUENCIES HAVE BEEN TRYING, IF YOU WILL, TO GET THE LIGHT OF DAY, AND I'M GLAD THAT WE ARE BRINGING THIS TO ATTENTION AT THIS TIME.

I WOULD HOPE THAT POSSIBLY, BECAUSE WHEN WE LOOK AT ICANN AND WE TALK ABOUT GLOBAL RESOLUTION AND TECHNICAL COORDINATION, I THINK THIS REALLY GOES TO THE HEART OF WHAT WE DO AND HOPEFULLY WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MAYBE ALLOCATE THIS NOT ONLY TO ICANN STAFF BUT MAYBE TO THE SECURITY AND STABILITY, BECAUSE IF WE ARE PROVIDING A CONTRACT FOR A REGISTRY OPERATOR THAT DOES NOT HAVE GLOBAL RESOLUTION OR RUNS INTO DIFFICULTIES, I THINK WE SHOULD FACILITATE HELPING THEM AND NOT, IF YOU WILL, REMOVE OBSTACLES WHERE POSSIBLE.

SO AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOU FOR RAISING THIS, AND ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO EXPEDITE IT I THINK WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED.

>>VINT CERF: JUST TO RESPOND TO MIKE, ONE OBSERVATION IS THAT THERE ARE OTHER ENTITIES IN OUR UNIVERSE WHO DEAL WITH OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS. I'M THINKING NANOG FOR INSTANCE IN NORTH AMERICA AND THERE ARE SIMILAR ORGANIZATIONS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD. SO DRAWING ATTENTION TO GROUPS THAT HAVE OPERATIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE INTERNET MAY ALSO BE A TOOL HERE. I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT THE ONLY PLACE IN THE WORLD THAT CAN COORDINATE AND COLLABORATE ON FINDING THESE PROBLEMS IS ICANN, BUT WE SURELY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO DRAW ATTENTION IN THOSE PLACES WHERE SOLUTIONS MIGHT BE FOUND.

I HAVE RON ANDRUFF NEXT.

>>RON ANDRUFF: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. GOOD AFTERNOON. RON ANDRUFF FROM TRALLIANCE CORPORATION.

I WANT TO THANK THE BOARD AND THE STAFF FOR PROVIDING THE ICANN COMMUNITY WITH THE FINAL STEPS IN THIS LONG SOUGHT AFTER RFP. WE'LL TAKE SOME TIME TO CONSIDER WHAT WE FOUND OUT TODAY, OVER THE NEXT DAYS, AND WE'D LIKE TO BRING BACK SOME COMMENTS HOPEFULLY AT THE END OF THE COMMENT PERIOD TOMORROW, HOWEVER OUR KNEE JERK REACTION IS CONSIDERING THE STAFF WITH ALL OF THE WORKLOAD THAT THE COMMUNITY IS WELL AWARE OF WAS ABLE TO PREPARE AN RFP IN JUST A FEW WEEKS, WE WONDER WHY IT TAKES OVER 120 DAYS FOR EVALUATORS TO VETTE CRITERIA-BASED APPLICATIONS. EFFECTIVELY, THAT COMES DOWN TO REVIEWING ONE PAGE PER DAY FOR OUR DOT TRAVEL APPLICATION.

AND CONSIDERING WE'RE PAYING $45,000 FOR THIS AND ON TOP OF THE $50,000 THAT WAS PAID FOR THE DOT TRAVEL APPLICATION IN 2000, WE FIND THAT TO BE SOMEWHAT STRANGE AND WE'RE HAVING DIFFICULTY UNDERSTANDING THAT.

THE CONTINUING PROCESS, OR THIS CONTINUING PROCESS IS APPLYING SIGNIFICANT HARDSHIP TO STARTUP COMPANIES LIKE OURS AND OTHERS THAT ARE PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROCESS. AND FRUSTRATING THE SPONSORS OF THE APPLICATION.

THIS OVERLY LONG REVIEW SENDS A BAD SIGNAL THAT ICANN LOOKS TO EXPAND THE NAME SPACE AS WE GO FORWARD. THEREFORE, I ASK THE BOARD GIVE SOME CONSIDERATION TO THIS TIME LINE AND PERHAPS ASK THE STAFF IF THEY MIGHT FIND WAY TO TIGHTEN IT SO WE CAN ALL MOVE FORWARD ON THIS PROCESS AS WE UNDERSTOOD THIS WAS GOING TO BE A SHORT INTERIM STEP FOR A MUCH LONGER PROCESS. IT'S EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR US TO EXPLAIN TO OUR CONSTITUENTS WHO ARE ANXIOUS TO MOVE FORWARD IN THEIR INDUSTRY INITIATIVES THAT THIS TLD WILL TAKE ANOTHER SIX MONTHS BEFORE WE SEE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AN AWARD. SO I WOULD HOPE THAT THE BOARD WOULD CONSIDER THIS AND, AS I SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK TOMORROW WITH SOME COMMENTS, IF POSSIBLE, AND TRUST THAT WE MIGHT FIND A WAY TO MOVE FORWARD MORE RAPIDLY.

>>VINT CERF: WE APPRECIATE THAT ADVICE, RON. THANK YOU.

PLEASE. DON'T FORGET TO SAY WHO YOU ARE.

>>MARIA ZITKOVA: MY NAME IS MARIA ZITKOVA, I'M FROM SITA, AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP THE ISSUE OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF CERTAIN NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS.

I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK LONG. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, WE HAVE (INAUDIBLE) SPONSORED TLDS BECAUSE SMALL AND NOT KNOWN. AND WE HAVE TAXONOMY ISSUES AND (INAUDIBLE) HELPED US WITH THE TESTING. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK JOHN KLENSIN WHO HEADED AN INFORMATIONAL RFP THAT DESCRIBED TO A CERTAIN EXTENT THE PROBLEM. WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY IS MAYBE NOT RIGHT HERE BUT WE CAN PROVIDE IN WRITING THE EXPERIENCE THAT WE HAVE HAD SO FAR, WHICH CAN HELP TO UNDERSTAND IT BETTER.

>>VINT CERF: I'LL NEVER TURN DOWN OFFERS OF HELP. THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. IN THAT CASE, WE CAN MOVE AHEAD, AND I HAVE -- OH, I'M SORRY. THERE'S ONE, AND I'M NOT SEEING T THERE YOU ARE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO USE THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE?

>>CARLOS AFONSO: CARLOS AFONSO. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A CLARIFICATION ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ISSUE. THERE ARE SEVERAL CCTLDS, LIKE DOT N U, DOT PW, DOT PV, ET CETERA, WISHING TO PRACTICE IN THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNTRIES AND THEIR AGREEMENTS WITH COMPANIES TO SELL THEIR DOMAIN AND BECOMING PRACTICE GTLDS. HOWEVER, THEY ARE NOT IN THE REALM OF THE GTLD DISCUSSION. WHAT IS THE SITUATION OF THESE DOMAINS THAT ARE REALLY NOT COUNTRY CODE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS BUT ARE GENERIC DOMAINS, WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS? I FEEL THERE IS A BLACK HOLE IN DOMAINS THAT ARE FORMALLY COUNTRY CODE BUT THEY'RE NOT COUNTRY CODE. AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY REAL REVELATION ABOUT IT. THANK YOU.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: IF I MAY RESPOND, AND I CAN APPRECIATE YOUR REACTION, I THINK IT COMES TO THE REAL DISTINCTION THAT MANY OF THE CCS WOULD FEEL ABOUT THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN ICANN'S ROLE WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNICAL POLICY RELATING TO GENERIC TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS AND WHERE ASSOCIATED POLICIES GET MADE AT THE COUNTRY OR THE HOME JURISDICTION RELATE TO GO A CCTLD.

IF A GOVERNMENT OR ADMINISTRATION MAKES A DECISION THAT IT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT PROCESS, THERE'S BEEN RECENT EXAMPLES, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH DOT LA, ICANN, I DON'T THINK, IS EMPOWERED TO INTERVENE IN THAT DOMESTIC -- IN THE DOMESTIC DECISION-MAKING PROCESS RELATE TO GO THE CC IN ITS HOME GOVERNMENT. AND I THINK THAT IS ONE OF THE CLEAR DISTINCTIONS THAT I THINK NEARLY EVERY CC HAS MADE IN THE PROCESS IN THE LONG DISCUSSION TAKING PLACE WITH THE CCNSO AND THE FORMATION OF THE CCNSO. SO WHILE I APPRECIATE YOUR OBSERVATION, I THINK IT COMES TO THE POINT OF DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE SEATS OF POWER FOR DECISION-MAKING BETWEEN GTLDS AND CCTLDS.

ERIC BRUNNER-WILLIAMS: IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO RESPOND. AGAIN, ERIC BRUNNER-WILLIAMS. I AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER ABOUT THE REPURPOSED CCTLDS. THE RESPONSE FROM THE CHAIR OR FROM THE PRESIDENT, EXCUSE ME, IS THAT THIS REALLY IS AN INTERNAL MATTER OF THE HOST GOVERNMENT, MORE OR LESS.

IT'S BEEN OVER A YEAR NOW SINCE DOT IQ DISAPPEARED, AND IT'S BEEN THAT LONG SINCE I'VE BROUGHT THIS MATTER TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ICANN BOARD BY IT'S FORMER GC, LOUIS.

SO THERE IS NO -- I MEAN, THAT'S GOT TO BE ANSWERED DIFFERENTLY. YOU CAN'T POINT TO THE NON-EXISTENCE OF THE CCTLD AND SAY THAT'S A MATTER OF THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF THE CCTLD NATION STATE OR -- MY POINT IS WHERE IS DOT IQ? WE KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH DOT CC AND SO FORTH, SO WHERE IS DOT IQ?

>>VINT CERF: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, DOT IQ, AS NEAR AS I AM AWARE, ISN'T FUNCTIONING.
THE PROBLEM WE HAVE WITH INSTITUTING OPERATIONS FOR DOT IQ, AT LEAST AS I SEE IT, IS THAT WE HAVE A PROCEDURE FOR DELEGATING RESPONSIBILITY FOR OPERATING EACH CCTLD, AND PART OF THAT PROCEDURE INVOLVES A GOVERNMENTAL INTERACTION, AND IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT ENTITY SHOULD SERVE AS THAT GOVERNMENTAL PARTY FOR DOT IQ.

SO FRANKLY, I THINK WE ARE STALLED IN TERMS OF REVIVING THAT UNTIL THERE IS A GOVERNMENT THAT CAN PARTICIPATE TOGETHER WITH THE OTHER PARTIES THAT WE NORMALLY CONSULT WITH, INCLUDING THE LOCAL INTERNET COMMUNITY, BEFORE A DELEGATION OCCURS.

IF YOU KNOW DIFFERENTLY ABOUT THE CURRENT OPERATION OF IQ, THIS WOULD BE HELPFUL TO SAY SOMETHING.

>>ERIC BRUNNER-WILLIAMS: A YEAR AGO, I STARTED DOCUMENTING THE EFFECT OF THE NETWORK OPERATIONS IN IRAQ AS WELL AS THE EFFECT ON THE NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE OR THE NIC IN IRAQ. CURRENTLY, THE SPONSORS ARE IN U.S. CUSTODY. THEY WERE, AT THE TIME, IN TEXAS AND THEY'VE BEEN TAKEN INTO FEDERAL CUSTODY FOR REASONS WHICH ARE IRRELEVANT. AND I'VE WRITTEN A SUMMARY OF HOW TO TAKE CONTROL OF DOT IQ, PRESUMING ONE IS WILLING TO COMMIT A MINOR CRIME, WHICH YOU CAN FIND AT THE FOLLOWING URL. IQ.NIC-NAA.NET. AND UNDERNEATH THERE THERE SHOULD STILL BE THE NOC PAGE WHICH DESCRIBES THE DESTRUCTION OF THE IRAQI INFRASTRUCTURE, AS WELL AS (INAUDIBLE) AS WELL AS THE STEPS ONE WOULD GO THROUGH IN ORDER TO SEIZE DOT IQ, EITHER BY SEIZING ITS ADDRESS SPACE OR THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SPONSOR AND ICANN.

SO IT'S ALL THERE AS FAR AS I KNOW, AND THAT'S STILL CURRENT DATA. THEY'RE STILL IN JAIL.
THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY. NOT TO HOLD EVERYBODY UP. MAYBE WE CAN TAKE THIS OFF-LINE TO GET MORE DETAIL.
COULD I TAKE THE NEXT QUESTION.

>>STEPHEN DYER: STEPHEN DYER, NOMINET. THIS IS A FOLLOW-UP TO THE LAST ONE, BUT NOT ON THE IRAQI, VINT. I'M STEPHEN DYER.

THE POINT I MADE, IS THAT COUNTRY CODES WERE BEING USED DIFFERENTLY FROM THE WAY IN WHICH THEY WERE ALLOCATED. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE POINT THAT USUALLY MISUSE OF DOMAINS IS A LEGAL MATTER TO DO WITH DO I HAVE OWNERSHIP OF IT. IS IT MY TRADEMARK OR HAS SOMEONE ELSE STOLEN MY TRADEMARK. IT'S QUITE DANGEROUS, I THINK, IF WE TREAD INTO THE AREA OF SAYING WE SHOULD TAKE THIS DOMAIN NAME AWAY FROM THESE PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH IT FROM WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE. I THINK THAT'S A VERY DANGEROUS ROAD TO GO DOWN, AND I THINK IT NEEDS VERY CAREFUL CONSIDERATION BEFORE WE DO SO. THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS DOES GET TO THE QUESTION OF INTENT BEHIND THE ORIGINAL ALLOCATION OF THE CCTLDS, AND THE RECOGNITION THAT THE AREA'S GOVERNANCE OR HOW DO I -- THERE'S A FORMULA THE GAC USES ABOUT AREAS OF ECONOMIC INTEREST. BUT THE PARTIES WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL DEGREE TO SAY ABOUT HOW THEY GET USED. AND MY SENSE IS THAT OUR PRACTICES SHOULD NOT BE TO DICTATE SUCH MATTERS.

THE CCNSO MIGHT CONCEIVABLY ADDRESS QUESTIONS LIKE THAT, BUT THAT WOULD BE A DECISION THAT THEY WOULD MAKE TO PURSUE SUCH A QUESTION. I DON'T SEE ICANN HAVING A NEED TO DO THAT. QUITE INDEPENDENTLY, OF COURSE, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE OF SOME 35 YEARS, I NEVER ANTICIPATED THAT COUNTRY CODES WOULD BE USED IN THE FASHION THAT SOME OF THEM ARE. AND IT'S QUITE CREATIVE, TO FIRST ORDER. BUT NONETHELESS WE HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CC COMMUNITY THAN WE HAVE WITH THE GTLD COMMUNITY, AND THEREFORE, WE HAVE TO RESPECT THAT.

OKAY. I'M TOLD THAT THERE IS A POWER FAILURE OUTSIDE, SO TAKING A BREAK IS NOT A GOOD IDEA. SO IF YOU'RE WONDERING ABOUT THIS, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE ON.

THE NEXT REPORT THAT I HAVE ON MY CALENDAR SAYS THAT THERESA SWINEHART IS GOING TO MAKE A REPORT. THERESA, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE PREPARED TO DO?
I THINK THE ANSWER MUST BE YES, BECAUSE HERE SHE COMES.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: SORRY.
I WAS TRYING TO DEAL WITH SOME LOGISTICS HERE.
HI.
DO WE HAVE -- OH, WE HAVE IT UP.
THANKS, STEVE.

I AM DOING THE PRESENTATION ON SOME OF OUR GLOBALIZATION AND REGIONAL OUTREACH EFFORTS.

AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, ONE OF THE LARGEST OBJECTIVES THAT WE HAVE IS TO IMPROVE OUR GLOBALIZATION.

WE'VE SEEN THIS BY HAVING MEETINGS IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
THE GOVERNMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS BEEN HAVING OUTREACH MEETINGS AT THEIR SESSIONS.
CCTLDS HAVE BEEN DOING OUTREACH AT THEIR SESSIONS AS WELL.

IN ADDITION, THE CCTLDS HAVE THEIR OWN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL MEETINGS, AND THE RIRS HAVE THEIR OWN REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS.
I THINK THIS ALL HIGHLIGHTS THE NEED THAT WE ARE A GLOBAL ORGANIZATION, BUT ICANN AS SORT OF THE STAFF FUNCTION ALSO NEEDS TO DEMONSTRATE STRONG GLOBALIZATION.

SO I'LL RUN THROUGH A FEW SLIDES ON WHAT SOME OF THE STAFF THINKING IS AND SOME THOUGHTS ON OUR STEPS MOVING FORWARD.

THE BRUSSELS OFFICE -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF PAUL VERHOEF IS HERE IN THE ROOM.
NO.
PAUL VERHOEF IS THE PERSON WHO STAFFS THE BRUSSELS OFFICE.
HE IS OUR SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR GLOBAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT OFFICE WAS OPENED IN JANUARY.

THE ISSUE OF HAVING REGIONAL PRESENCE HAS BEGUN FROM TWO ASPECTS.
ONE HAS BEEN A VERY STRONG INTEREST IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY TO HAVE AN INCREASED GLOBAL PRESENCE.
AS STAFF, WE HAVE FOUND OURSELVES BEING ASKED TO COME TO VARIOUS REGIONAL MEETINGS ON A REGULAR BASIS.
WE HAVE ALSO FOUND THAT IT'S IMPROVED OUR COMMUNICATIONS AND INTERACTIONS WITH THE GLOBAL INTERNET COMMUNITY IN RESPECTIVE REGIONS.
WE THINK IT'LL ENHANCE OUR GLOBAL OPERATIONS AND POTENTIAL COST SAVINGS.

HOWEVER, HAVING A REGIONAL OFFICE INVOLVES PRACTICALITIES SUCH AS PRESENCE AND HOW DO YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, LANGUAGES, AND STAFFING.
AND SO THE THIRD POINT I'LL ADDRESS IN THESE SLIDES IS HOW REPLAN TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE CRITERIA TO ESTABLISH.
NEXT SLIDE.

THERE WE GO.
THERE'S THREE ASPECTS WE VIEW WITH HAVING A REGIONAL PRESENCE.
ONE IS THAT IT WILL HAVE A GLOBAL FUNCTION.
THE ROLE OF THE BRUSSELS OFFICE AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE VICE PRESIDENT IN THAT OFFICE IS A GLOBAL ROLE.
IT'S TO FACILITATE IMPROVED GLOBAL OPERATIONS AS WELL AS DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS.
AND IT ENHANCES THE ABILITY TO HIRE LOCALLY.

IT'S ALSO A PRACTICAL ASPECT.
WE CAN ACTUALLY ENSURE THAT THERE'S SEAMLESS, 24-HOUR ABILITY TO BE RESPONSIVE.
AND MANAGING SENSITIVITIES WITH REGIONAL NEEDS.
AND IT'S ALSO GOING TO FACILITATE OUR REGIONAL OUTREACH AND THE ABILITY TO INTERACT DIRECTLY AT THE REGIONAL LEVEL AND SUPPORT DEMANDS.

THE EXPERIENCE AT BRUSSELS HAS BEEN WHILE THE POSITION IS A GLOBAL POSITION AND THAT RESPONSIBILITY IS FIRST AND FOREMOST, THE ABILITY OF THE STAFF IN THAT OFFICE TO WORK WITH THE STAFF IN MARINA DEL REY, OR WHOEVER HAPPENS TO BE TRAVELING, ALLOWS US TO BE MUCH MORE RESPONSIVE AND CARRY EACH OTHER'S WORK FORWARD.

AND THAT'S PROVED TO BE QUITE POSITIVE.
WE'VE ALSO FOUND THAT THE ABILITY TO BE RESPONSIVE IN THE SAME TIME ZONE HAS PROVEN TO BE VERY VALUABLE, IN PARTICULAR, IN RELATION TO CCTLD ISSUES.

SO THAT'S THE NEXT SLIDE, WHERE I FIND WHERE IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN BENEFICIAL.
OUR HOPE IS, IS THAT IN THIS PROCESS -- YEAH, IT STILL WORKS -- IN THIS PROCESS, IT MAY ACTUALLY, IN THE LONG RUN, ASSIST IN DECREASING COSTS, BECAUSE LOCAL STAFF CAN ATTEND LOCAL MEETINGS.

AND SO WE DON'T ALL NEED TO BE FLYING.
SO HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD IN THIS DIRECTION?

WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE AN ASSESSMENT OF WHAT ROLE, FUNCTION, AND RESOURCES REGIONAL PRESENCE SHOULD HAVE.
IT SHOULD ALL BE INTERRELATED WITH ICANN'S LIMITED ROLE AND AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROVIDE BETTER SUPPORT TO THE LOCAL AREAS AS WELL AS HAVE A GLOBAL ROLE.
WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT SHOULD BE OUR GENERAL APPROACH ALSO FOR THE LOCATIONS OF REGIONAL OFFICES.
AND IN WHICH REGIONAL AREAS SHOULD THESE OFFICES BE LOCATED, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION NATURAL REGIONAL GROUPINGS.
YOU HAVE SOME GROUPINGS THAT ARE NATURALLY ALIGNED WITH EACH OTHER AND OTHERS THAT ARE NOT.
AND SO THOSE ARE AREAS WE NEED TO CONSIDER.

AND HOW SHOULD THE OFFICES BE STAFFED AND THE BUDGETARY IMPACTS AND TIME LINE OF IMPLEMENTATION.
AND SO THE NEXT STEPS FORWARD ARE FOR THE STAFF TO GIVE SOME THOUGHT TO THIS AND THEN TO PROCEED IN THE APPROPRIATE DIRECTION.
AND I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THERESA.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR THERESA ON THIS SUBJECT?
I HAVE PETER DENGATE THRUSH.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: JUST TO MAKE SURE THERE'S A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE THE CCTLDS WERE MENTIONED IN THE BEGINNING OF THIS PRESENTATION, THAT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US, AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT THE SUGGESTION IS THERE.

LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR, THERE'S BEEN NO REQUEST FROM THE CCTLDS THAT I AM AWARE OF FOR ICANN TO INCREASE ITS GLOBALIZATION.
I'M NOT SURE IF WE WERE ASKED, THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT SUCH A PROCESS.
THE MEMBERS OF ICANN IN TERMS OF THE CCTLDS ARE CLEARLY GLOBAL.

WHY THAT MEANS ICANN NEEDS TO BE GLOBAL, I'M NOT SURE.

I THINK THE QUESTIONS OUGHT TO BE, IF WE ARE GOING TO START SPENDING MONEY ON THIS, HOW IS IT GOING TO IMPROVE THE SERVICE TO THE CCTLD MEMBERS AND THE OTHER GLOBAL MEMBERS.

AND I SUPPOSE THAT'S THE KEY ISSUE FOR US, IS THAT COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

AND I GUESS THE QUESTION FOR THERESA IS, WHERE'S THE BANG FOR THIS BUCK.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: OKAY.
I KNOW THIS IS A REALLY POPULAR SUBJECT.
SO I'LL JUST ANSWER ONE QUESTION AT A TIME.
ACTUALLY, WE HAVE RECEIVED REQUESTS FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN PARTICULAR.
AND WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE STAFF THAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE BRUSSELS OFFICE IS ACTUALLY DEALING ON A DAILY BASIS WITH SEVERAL DEVELOPING COUNTRY REQUESTS ON INFORMATION FROM A WIDE RANGE OF AREAS.

BUT, PETER, IT'S -- THERE ARE REQUESTS THAT ARE COMING IN.
BUT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CCTLD REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY DOING MANY OF THEIR OWN THINGS.
THESE HAVE TO DO WITH SPECIFIC ONE-ON-ONE REQUESTS THAT COME IN.

>>VINT CERF: ELLIOT NOSS.

>>ELLIOT NOSS: HI.

THANKS, VINT.
ELLIOT NOSS FROM TUCOWS.

FIRST I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT WE GREATLY ENCOURAGE THIS INITIATIVE AND WE THINK THAT WE HAVE CUSTOMERS IN 110 COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD, MANY OF WHOM FIND IT DIFFICULT TO -- CHALLENGING TO DEAL WITH, YOU KNOW, ICANN IN ONE LANGUAGE OR ONE TIME ZONE.

SO THIS IS GREAT.

I DID NOT HEAR ANYTHING IN YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT COST.
AND I AM WONDERING, WHILE I KNOW THAT SOME OF THIS WILL PASS THROUGH, YOU KNOW, THE BUDGET PROCESS THAT WE, AS REGISTRARS, HAVE SOME VISIBILITY TO, I'M WONDERING IF YOU COULD MAKE ANY COMMENTS IN THAT REGARD.

WE'D LOVE TO HEAR THEM.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: ACTUALLY, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT, WHAT THE COSTS ARE.
THERE'S INITIAL STARTUP ASPECTS OF IT, WHICH WE FOUND IN RELATION TO OUR FIRST EXPERIENCE ON THIS.
AND THEN THERE'S SAVINGS THAT ACTUALLY OFFBALANCE THAT.

>> I'M BOB CONNELLY OF PSI, JAPAN.
THE GTLD REGISTRARS IN JAPAN WERE VERY EXCITED TO HEAR THAT SUCH WAS BEING CONSIDERED AND HAVE ASKED ME TO CONVEY TO YOU THEIR INTEREST IN OFFERING ANY COUNSEL THAT MIGHT BE OF ASSISTANCE.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THE ONE THING I DIDN'T ACTUALLY HIGHLIGHT IN THE SLIDES, BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO KEEP IT RELATIVELY SHORT, IS, WE'VE RECEIVED VARIOUS OFFERS OF ASSISTANCE AND EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST, WHICH IS ALSO WHAT WE'LL BE CONSIDERING IN HOW WE APPROACH THAT.

DO WE PUT OUT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS?

AND IN CASES WHERE THERE HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST, HOW DO WE PREPARE THAT ANALYSIS?

>>VINT CERF: RAUL ECHEBERRIA.

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA: THANK YOU.
I THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD IDEA TO OPEN REGIONAL OFFICES IN ALL THE WORLD, MAINLY FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE ASSIGNMENT THAT ICANN HAS GIVEN TO THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL, AND, OF COURSE, ALSO TO THE GOVERNMENTS OF EVERY REGION, IT SHOWS SOME INTENTION TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE WAY OF MORE INTERNATIONALIZATION.

I THINK THAT DEPENDING ON THE -- WHAT YOU ARE WILLING TO PAY, IT SHOULD NOT NECESSARILY INCREASE SIGNIFICANTLY YOUR BUDGET.
AND I'M SURE THAT YOU CAN CUT THE BUDGET IN OTHER AREAS.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>RAUL ECHEBERRIA: BUT I THINK THAT'S -- ANOTHER MINOR ISSUE IS THE LANGUAGE.
IT WAS ADDRESSED THIS MORNING, AND WE HAVE TALKED, MAINLY PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT ENGLISH SPEAKERS, LIKE ME, HAVE TALKED WITH MOST OF YOU MANY TIMES ABOUT IT.
I THINK THAT THIS ISSUE SHOULD BE ADDRESSED VERY QUICKLY, SOON.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: YES.
ACTUALLY, ONE OF THE AREAS WHERE WE COULD SEE SOME POTENTIAL COST SAVINGS OR BENEFITS OF ALL OF THIS IS ABILITY TO HAVE THINGS IN LOCAL LANGUAGE AND ALSO ACCESS TO LOCAL TRANSLATION, WHICH WOULD BE, OBVIOUSLY, LESS EXPENSIVE THAN TRYING TO DO IT OUT OF THE UNITED STATES.

SO THERE IS A LOT OF SORT OF TRIGGER DOMINO EFFECTS THAT START TO ARISE.

>>GRANT FORSYTH: GRANT FORSYTH, BC REPRESENTATIVE ON THE GNSO.
WHAT'S THE SUBJECT -- HAS SOME GENUINE INTEREST FOR MYSELF -- THANK YOU.
-- FOR MYSELF, NOT BEING A -- IS IT AMERICAN OR NORTH AMERICAN?
I GUESS I HAVE SOME CONCERNS.

FIRSTLY, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY EXPRESSION OF INTEREST FROM THE GNSO.
AND WHILE I SUPPORT SOME OF THE OUTPUTS OF WHAT MIGHT BE THOUGHT OF AS GLOBALIZATION, AND ONE OF THEM THAT YOU'VE MENTIONED IS TRANSLATION, PROVIDING MATERIAL IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGES, FIRSTLY, I HAVE A QUESTION AS TO PRIORITY.

WE ALL KNOW THAT AS WITH ANY ORGANIZATION, ICANN DOES NOT HAVE AN UNLIMITED BUDGET.
AND ALSO, I WOULD REFLECT THAT THE PRODUCTION OF INFORMATION AND RESPONSES, ET CETERA, IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGES DOES NOT REQUIRE PHYSICAL PRESENCE IN MULTIPLE COUNTRIES.

THE OTHER AREA WHICH I HAVE SOME CONCERN IS, IN YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE VICE PRESIDENT FOR ASSISTANCE AND --

>> POLICY.

>>GRANT FORSYTH: -- POLICY, POLICY ADVICE ASSISTANCE, THANK YOU, PAUL VERHOEF, I HAVE SOME CONCERN AS TO YOUR DESCRIPTION OF HIS OTHER ROLES, WHICH, GIVEN THAT THE GNSO THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE OF THE IC EXPRESSED A VERY STRONG SINGLE PRIORITY, WHICH WAS TO BE PROVIDED WITH POLICY SUPPORT, IF YOU NOW TELL US THAT THE MAN WHO HAS BEEN APPOINTED TO THAT ROLE ACTUALLY IS, AMONGST OTHER THINGS, LOOKING AFTER THE ICANN OFFICE IN THE 12 HOURS WHEN MARINA DEL REY SLEEPS, THAT GIVES ME SOME CONCERN.

SO I JUST EXPRESS THOSE CONCERNS AS TO THIS GLOBALIZATION ISSUE, FIRSTLY STEMMING FROM THE FACT THAT THIS IS THE FIRST I HAVE HEARD OF IT AS ANY SORT OF, QUOTE, PRIORITY, AS YOU OPENED YOUR PRESENTATION AS; AND, TWO, JUST SUGGEST THAT WHILE SOME OF THE OUTPUTS I AND OTHERS WOULD STRONGLY SUPPORT, I'M NOT SURE THAT THEY REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, A WHOLEHEARTED MOVING INTO THE REST OF THE WORLD.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: THANK YOU.
OKAY.

>>VINT CERF: I'M SORRY?
OKAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GRANT.
I WILL JUST MAKE ONE OR TWO COMMENTS.
FIRST OF ALL, I -- WITH MY OTHER HAT ON, MY DAY JOB, I HAVE STAFF LITERALLY SCATTERED AROUND THE WORLD.

SO IT'S NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE PARTIES ENGAGED, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE ADVICE, ASSISTANCE AREA TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEIR MANAGEMENT IN ONE PLACE AND THE PHYSICAL LOCATION ELSEWHERE, THANKS TO THINGS LIKE INTERNET IN PARTICULAR.

BUT THE OTHER OBSERVATION I'D MAKE IS THAT, FREQUENTLY, ICANN IS ASKED TO BE PRESENT IN THE TIME ZONE TO PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSIONS.
AND THE ECONOMIC AND PHYSICAL IMPACT OF EITHER TRAVELING TO GET THERE OR HAVING TO HAVE AN AVAILABLE PRESENCE THAT CAN PARTICIPATE IN THAT TIME ZONE OFTEN MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE.

SO AS THE STAFF AND THE BOARD CONSIDER WAYS IN WHICH TO WORK MORE EFFECTIVELY IN THIS VERY GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT, WE'LL BE TRADING OFF THINGS OF THAT SORT IN ORDER TO MAKE THE BEST CHOICE THAT WE CAN IN ORDER TO RESPOND TO THE REQUIREMENTS.

SO I HOPE THAT AT LEAST GOES A LITTLE WAYS TOWARDS ADDRESSING SOME OF THE ISSUES.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER -- YES, I KNOW THERE ARE TWO QUESTIONS, ONE FROM MOUHAMET AND ONE FROM ROBERTO.

I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE STOP AFTER THOSE TWO.
I AM TOLD THE POWER IS BACK ON AND THE COFFEE IS AVAILABLE OUT THERE.

SO -- AND I SEE SOME CHEERING IN THE PEANUT GALLERY FROM AMADEU.
SO MOUHAMET AND THEN ROBERTO AND THEN COFFEE.

>>MOUHAMET DIOP: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.
I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE ANOTHER DESCRIPTION ON THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE ARE.
I THINK THAT THERESA HAS PRESENTED THE GLOBALIZATION AS OUR AIM TO BE PRESENT AT A DIFFERENT LEVEL, TO TRY TO REACH THE COMMUNITY WE ARE SERVING.

I THINK THAT I WILL COME AND ENFORCE THE IDEA THAT LANGUAGE CAN BE SEEN AS SPACE, AS WE ARE SEEING, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE NAMING ENVIRONMENT SPACE. IF YOU LOOK AT LANGUAGE AS SPACE, I MEAN, WHERE WE HAVE TO INVEST AND DO SOMETHING IN ORDER TO REACH LOCAL COMMUNITY, WE WILL SEE IT AS PART OF THE GLOBALIZATION.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT IDN; I AM TALKING ABOUT LANGUAGE AND THE EFFORT WE HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO MAKE AVAILABLE MATERIALS THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH AND WE ARE DEALING WITH EVERY DAY.

BUT THE BIG CONCERN WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LANGUAGE IS THE BUDGET.
AND AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, I THINK THAT IN THE PAST, ICANN HAS BENEFITED FROM SOME OUTSIDE SPONSORS WHO HAVE HELPED MAKING TRANSLATION.

I REMEMBER THAT FRANCOFONY HAS DONE THAT IN THE PAST, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.

AND I REMEMBER LAST TIME WE WERE TRYING TO RAISE THAT POINT, WE HAVE ALSO SOME ORGANIZATION FROM LATIN AMERICA WHO ARE WILLING TO GIVE SOME INPUT TO HELP ICANN GET MATERIAL AVAILABLE.

AND IF WE LOOK AT THE WEB PAGE OF ICANN, THERE HAVE BEEN IMPROVEMENTS THAT PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO HAVE MATERIALS AVAILABLE IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.

BUT THIS IS JUST A FIRST STEP.

AND IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GET MORE, IT'S NOT AVAILABLE.

SO I AM JUST CONVEYING TO THERESA TO LOOK AT THE PRESENTATION OF THE GLOBALIZATION AND TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE SPECIFICALLY AS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE IN THE GLOBALIZATION AND TRY TO RAISE THE POINT AND SHOW UP WITH A STRATEGY HOW WE'RE GOING TO IMPLEMENT, STEP BY STEP, A BETTER PRESENCE OF ICANN IN TERMS OF MATERIAL AND DOCUMENTS AND INPUT, I MEAN, TRY TO MAKE IT MORE INTERACTIVE IN ORDER TO BETTER THE PARTICIPATION AS ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES AND THE BIG CONCERNS OF ICANN.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MOUHAMET.
THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT PROBLEM, AS I'M SURE EVERYONE IS AWARE.
IF WE ARE LUCKY, SOME AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION TECHNOLOGIES MIGHT HELP A LITTLE BIT.

BUT MY EXPERIENCE SO FAR IS THAT THE QUALITY OF THE TRANSLATIONS IS OFTEN WANTING.
SO THIS IS GOING TO BE A CONTINUING CHALLENGE FOR US.

ROBERTO.

>>ROBERTO GAETANO: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
MINE IS NOT A QUESTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT.

THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS ONE OF THE BODIES THAT ARE PART OF ICANN THAT ARE ALSO LOOKING FORWARD TO LOCALIZATION AND REGIONALIZATION.
AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN IN THE LAST MONTHS GOING THROUGH OUTREACH EFFORT.
AND AT LEAST I, IN MY CONTACTS IN EUROPE WITH ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE WILLING OR THAT WE THINK THAT COULD PARTICIPATE MORE IN THIS PROCESS, WELL, THE QUESTION THAT I'VE HAD MORE OFTEN IS, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT YOU COULD COORDINATE THE USER COMMUNITY IN EUROPE FROM MARINA DEL REY.

AND, IN FACT, I THINK THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT DECISION OF HAVING A REGIONAL OFFICE IN BRUSSELS IS GOING TO BE THE SINGLE FACT THAT IS GOING TO HELP US MORE IN EUROPE TO BE EFFECTIVE IN THE OUTREACH AND TO PRESENT A MESSAGE TO THE USER COMMUNITY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR MISSION TO BE CLOSER WHERE THE USERS ARE.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ROBERTO.
SO I NOW SUGGEST THAT WE TAKE OUR BREAK.
I HAVE APPROXIMATELY 4:20.
SO IF WE COULD RETURN, LET'S SAY, AT 4:35, IN 15 MINUTES, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.

(BREAK).

>>VINT CERF: TWO-MINUTE WARNING.
WE'LL RECONVENE IN TWO MINUTES.

I WOULD LIKE TO RECONVENE THIS MEETING.
I AM MISSING THE NEXT PRESENTER.
SO IF ANYONE HAS SEEN PAUL TWOMEY, PLEASE PUSH HIM INTO THE ROOM.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE YOUR CONVERSATIONS, WOULD YOU DO THEM OUTSIDE.
THE REST OF YOU, PLEASE BE SEATED.
AND WE'LL HEAR FROM THE PRESIDENT.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: PERHAPS WHILE THE CHAIRMAN'S DOING A MAGNIFICENT JOB ON CROWD CONTROL, MIGHT I JUST SHARE SOMETHING BEFORE THE FORMAL PRESIDENT'S REPORT.

THERE WAS A STATEMENT BEFORE THE BREAK CONCERNING DOT IQ.

I WANTED TO READ TO THE COMMUNITY A MESSAGE THAT WE IN THE IANA FUNCTIONS PRESENTLY SEND REQUESTS AROUND THE IQ.
I'M GOING TO READ THIS CAREFULLY BECAUSE IT'S A CAREFULLY DRAFTED MESSAGE.
AND THEN WE WILL ARRANGED FOR A WAY FOR IT TO BE POSTED LATER.

BUT THIS IS A MESSAGE THAT IS PRESENTLY SENT.

IN CONSIDERATION DELEGATION OR REDELEGATION OF A COUNTRY CODE TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN SUCH AS DOT IQ, THE IANA SEEKS INPUT FROM PERSONS SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECTED BY THE TRANSFER, PARTICULARLY THOSE WITHIN THE NATION OR TERRITORY WHICH THE TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO BENEFIT.

IN THIS REGARD, THE IANA TAKES VERY SERIOUSLY THE DESIRES OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE AFFECTED COUNTRY.

FOR A MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION OF THIS PROCESS, SEE ICP-1, CCTLD NEWS, MEMO NUMBER 1.

AND THE IANA REPORT ON REQUEST FOR REDELEGATION OF THE .PN TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN.

AND EACH OF THOSE HAS A LINK.
IN VIEW OF THESE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS, THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES IN IRAQ COMPLICATE ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OF ANY PARTICULAR ENTITY TO ASSUME THE DELEGATION OF THE DOT IQ TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN.

THERE IS CURRENTLY NO SHOWING OF THE NATURE OF THE INTERNET COMMUNITY IN IRAQ, MUCH LESS A SHOWING OF BROAD SUPPORT WITHIN THAT COMMUNITY FOR ANY PARTICULAR CHANGE IN THE PRESENT DELEGATION.

IN PARTICULAR, THE EVOLVING SITUATION IN IRAQ CREATES GREAT CHALLENGES IN ASSESSING THE VIEWS OF THE GOVERNMENT AS CONTEMPLATED BY THE RELEVANT REDELEGATION POLICIES.

UNTIL THE SITUATION IN IRAQ STABILIZES, IT DOES NOT APPEAR FEASIBLE TO SELECT A NEW DELEGEE FOR THE IQ DOMAIN.

PLEASE LET US KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

BEST REGARDS, THE IANA FUNCTION.

THAT IS A STATEMENT THAT STANDS ON ITS OWN.
I WON'T INTERPRET IT FOR YOU.

BUT THAT'S THE RESPONSE WE'RE GIVING AT THE MOMENT TO PEOPLE WHO MAKE REQUESTS AROUND DOT IQ.
WE DO RECEIVE MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF REQUESTS AROUND IT, AND INQUIRIES.

WITH YOUR LEAVE, CHAIR, IF I MAY MOVE TO THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT.

GOOD.

FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES, IT'S JUST ON 11 MONTHS SINCE I TRANSFORMED MY LIFE BY AGREEING TO BE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF ICANN.

AND SEEING THAT THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING, THIS IS PROBABLY THE CLOSEST I'LL GET TO SHARE WITH THE COMMUNITY, IF YOU LIKE, AN ANNUAL REPORT OR THE YEAR IN THE LIFE OF PAUL TWOMEY.

SO I THOUGHT, UNLIKE OTHER MEETINGS WE'VE HAD, THAT I WOULD FOCUS THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT IN GIVING A REVIEW OF -- ALMOST AN ANNUAL REVIEW, IF YOU LIKE, A REVIEW OF THE LAST 11 MONTHS, AND WHAT I THINK ARE THE IMPLICATIONS GOING FORWARD.

I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO FIVE THINGS.

I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO WHAT I THINK ARE THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY, THE BOARD, AND THE STAFF.

I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THE LARGE-SCALE PROCESSES WE HAVE TRIED TO UNDERTAKE IN TERMS OF CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMUNITY OVER THE LAST 11 MONTHS.

I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU SOME SENSE OF THE FEEDBACK WE HAVE RECEIVED.

I'D LIKE TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE AS PART OF ONE OF THOSE ISSUES IS REQUIREMENTS THAT WE PERSONALLY STILL HAVE TO IMPLEMENT IN REGARDS TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.
AND PERHAPS THROUGH ALL THIS DRAW TO A CONCLUSION BY TALKING ABOUT WHAT I THINK THIS MEANS IN TERMS OF CONSEQUENT FOCUS OF OPERATIONS.

LET ME TALK TO ACHIEVEMENTS. AND THESE ARE NOT IN ANY PARTICULAR ORDER.

I THINK ONE OF THE ACHIEVEMENTS WAS HAVING THE EXTENSION OF THE MOU, ALTHOUGH I THINK THAT'S A REFLECTION OF OTHER ACHIEVEMENTS, TO BE TRUTHFUL.

WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ORGANIZATIONAL RESTRUCTURING AND RECRUITMENT, A NEW CEO, AND I THINK PROBABLY IMPORTANTLY, PUTTING IN A LAYER OF MANAGEMENT AND MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE ORGANIZATION.

THERE HAS BEEN THE FORMATION OF THE AT-LARGE STRUCTURES, WITH TEN ESTABLISHED SO FAR AND SIX PENDING.

TO GIVE YOU AN -- AND IMPORTANTLY, THOSE WITH THE AT-LARGE STRUCTURES, THREE ARE PRESENTLY FROM AFRICA, ONE FROM ASIA, ASIA-PACIFIC, FIVE IN EUROPE, AND ONE IN LATIN AMERICA.
AND WE HAVE FOUR PENDING, OR THE ALAC DOES, FOUR FROM ASIA-PACIFIC, ONE FROM EUROPE, AND ONE FROM LATIN AMERICA.

SO I THINK THAT'S BEEN A GOOD SIGNAL.

AND I THINK THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AT-LARGE IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT FOR ICANN'S CONTINUED PROGRESS.
IN TERMS OF GTLD POLICIES, THE WHOIS HAS BEEN A MAJOR PART OF EFFORTS IN THE LAST 11 MONTHS.
IT'S NOT YET CONCLUDED, BUT, HOPEFULLY, WE'RE MOVING TOWARDS GREATER SENSE IN THE WAY FORWARD.

THE TRANSFERS POLICY IS VERY CLOSE TO CONCLUSION OF IMPLEMENTATION.
WE'RE RECEIVING REPORT ON THAT, THE (INAUDIBLE) POLICY HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.

I THINK VERY IMPORTANTLY OVER THE LAST 11 MONTHS, ONE OF THE MAIN PIECES OF WORK BY THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN THE DISCUSSIONS AND FORMATION OF THE COUNTRY CODE NAMES SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION.
AND WE NOW HAVE 39 COUNTRY CODES WHO HAVE JOINED THAT ORGANIZATION.
IT WAS FOUNDED ON MONDAY.

WORK ON IDN IMPLEMENTATIONS IS AN ONGOING WORK.
IT'S A WORK BEING DONE, OBVIOUSLY, BY OTHERS AS WELL AS BY ICANN.
I DON'T WANT TO OVERSTATE THE ROLE OF THE ORGANIZATION IN IDN IMPLEMENTATION.
BUT THAT'S AN ONGOING AREA.
AND I THINK AS THE CHAIR AND OTHERS HAVE INDICATED, IT'S A VERY COMPLEX AREA, WILL CONTINUE TO BE A VERY COMPLEX AREA.

SO WHILE I NOTE THAT DOWN AS AN ACHIEVEMENT IN TERMS OF THE ICANN IDN GUIDELINES THAT WERE SORT OF WORKED THROUGH IN RIO AND AFTERWARDS, THIS IS AN AREA OF CONTINUING -- I THINK IT'S BEEN AN AREA OF CONTINUING FOCUS AND IT'S AN AREA OF CONTINUING COMPLEXITY.

WE'VE ALSO GOT THE PDP PROCESS FOR NEW REGISTRY SERVICES THAT HAS BEEN -- OR NEW REGISTRY CHANGES, WHICH HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS AND IS STILL IN DISCUSSION.

YOU'VE HEARD ALREADY THERE'S BEEN AN OPENING OF AN OFFICE IN BELGIUM.

WE HAVE THE NEW STLD APPLICATION PROCESS UNDERWAY AT THE MOMENT.

THE BROAD STRATEGIC INITIATIVE FOR THE NEW GTLDS, THE EXPERT ADVISORY WORK IS PRESENTLY BEING INITIATED.

AND AN IMPORTANT PART OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IN TERMS OF SUPPORT FOR THE REGISTRIES AND REGISTRARS IS ACCREDITATION.
WE HAVE NOW ACCREDITED 191 REGISTRARS.

SO THERE'S BEEN QUITE A GROWTH IN THE LAST 11 MONTHS, NOT 191, BUT THERE HAS BEEN GROWTH IN THE LAST 11 MONTHS.
THAT'S SOME INDICATION OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED.

I'VE PROBABLY LEFT OFF THINGS, TO BE TRUTHFUL.

I WANTED TO GO MUCH MORE TO THE CONSULTATION, AND I WANTED TO SHARE WITH THE COMMUNITY THE COMMUNICATIONS WE'VE HAD, PARTICULARLY MYSELF, BUT CERTAINLY BOARD MEMBERS AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE STAFF, AND ALSO SHARE BACK WHAT WE HAVE HEARD.

AND I SUPPOSE THIS IS PARTLY TESTING OUR HEARING IN TERMS OF PRESENTING IT TO YOU, TO SEE IF WE HAVE IT RIGHT.
BUT IT HAS BEEN VERY EXTENSIVE.

THE LAST 11 MONTHS, FOR MYSELF, HAS BEEN SOMETHING OF A BLUR.

IT HAS BEEN A BLUR BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN IN -- TRAVELING ALMOST CONTINUOUSLY FOR THOSE 11 MONTHS, IN CONSULTATION AND DISCUSSION WITH CONSTITUENCY ORGANIZATIONS AS WELL AS, OBVIOUSLY, WORK IN THE OFFICES IN MARINA DEL REY AND ALSO MY POOR DAUGHTER IN SYDNEY GETS TO SEE MY OCCASIONALLY.

SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION, A LOT OF MEETINGS WITH REGIONAL INTERNET REGISTRIES, WITH COUNTRY CODES, WITH GOVERNMENTS, WITH CONSTITUENCY MEETINGS IN PLACES LIKE WASHINGTON, IN PARIS.

THERE'S BEEN QUITE A WIDE RANGE OF SORT OF CONSULTATION AND REQUESTS, STOCKHOLM WAS ANOTHER ONE IN TERMS OF BROADER AREAS OF CONSTITUENCY MEETINGS.

SO I WANTED TO SHARE BACK, YOU KNOW, THE CONSULTATIONS WE HAVE HAD HAVE BEEN WITH A WIDE RANGE OF PEOPLE: GOVERNMENTS, INTERNET ADDRESS COMMUNITIES AND THE REGISTRIES IN PARTICULAR, CCTLD MANAGERS, BOTH THROUGH PLACES LIKE APTLD AND CENTR, BUT ALSO MEETING WITH MANY MANAGERS IN THEIR OWN OFFICES, AND TRYING TO DO THAT NOT JUST IN SORT OF THE LARGE ONES, BUT ALSO IN SOME OF THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, CC MANAGERS.

MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL COMMUNITY.

I'D LIKE TO PUT ON RECORD MY THANKS BOTH TO JOHN FOR HIS ROLE IN LIAISON WITH THE IAB, BUT ALSO THE WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH LESLIE DAIGLE AND HAROLD OVER STROM AND THEIR TWO POSITIONS IN TRYING TO WORK ON THAT.

MEMBERS OF THE AT-LARGE USER COMMUNITIES, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS HAS BEEN A PART OF OUR CONSULTATION, ESPECIALLY AROUND WHOIS, BUT OTHERWISE.

THE WIDER BUSINESS COMMUNITIES, GTLD REGISTRY OPERATORS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY HOLDERS, INTERNET CONNECTIVITY SERVICE PRIORITIES, DOMAIN NAME HOLDERS, AND I'M CERTAIN I HAVE LEFT OFF OTHER GROUPS.

AS FAR AS DOING THE WORK, IT HAS BEEN AN EXHAUSTIVE PROCESS OF GOING TO PEOPLE AND ASKING QUESTIONS, WHAT SHOULD WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM ICANN, WHAT SHOULD WE BE DOING MORE OF, LESS OF, WHO IS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REFORM GOING, YOU KNOW, HELP US.

AND I WANT TO FEEDBACK A SORT OF SUMMARY OF WHAT WE HAVE HEARD.

AND, IMPORTANTLY, A SUMMARY OF WHAT WE HAVE HEARD, WHICH IS WITHIN MISSION, BECAUSE WE HAVE HEARD LOTS OF THINGS THAT ARE OUTSIDE MISSION.

IF YOU -- HOW MANY REQUESTS I HAVE TO STOP SPAM AND THINGS WE SHOULD DO AROUND SPAM.

I MEAN, TO GIVE YOU SOME SENSE, THE OFFICE -- WE RUN A SERIES, QUITE A NUMBER OF COMPLAINT E-MAILS, ADDRESSES FOR INBOXES, AND WE HAVE OUR OWN INBOXES.

WE RECEIVE COMPLAINTS FROM REGISTRANTS OR USERS OF THE INTERNET AT RATES OF HUNDREDS TO SEVERAL THOUSANDS A WEEK, WHICH TAKE UP QUITE A NUMBER OF STAFF AREAS, WHICH RELATE TO SOME OF THESE AREAS, INCLUDING SPAM OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

SO THERE ARE AREAS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE ON THIS LIST WHICH ARE AREAS THAT WE HAVE DECIDED WHILE THEY'RE IMPORTANT, THEY'RE NOT WITHIN MISSION.
AND I ASK YOU TO KEEP AN EYE ON THIS LIST, BECAUSE IT HAS, FROM 1 TO 13, BECAUSE I LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU A LITTLE TABLE, IT'S A SUMMARY TABLE, AND IN SHOWING YOU THAT TABLE I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE TO SAY, HERE'S 1 TO 13 CONSTITUENCIES.
I COULDN'T WRITE THEM DOWN OTHERWISE.

LET ME GIVE YOU A SENSE OF THE SORTS OF PRIORITIES THAT THE CONSTITUENCIES HAVE SHARED BACK WITH MYSELF AND THE STAFF AND THE BOARD.

PROBABLY THE ONE WHICH IS MOST -- AND YOU'LL SEE MANY OF THESE HAVE BEEN REPORTED BACK BY NEARLY ALL THE CONSTITUENCIES.

THE FIRST ONE HAS BEEN A STRONG PUSH TO COMPLETE THE MOU PROCESS WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND TO COMPLETE IT SWIFTLY.
I WILL COME BACK TO THAT, BECAUSE I WANT TO GO THROUGH WITH YOU WHAT THAT ACTUALLY MEANS IN TERMS OF THE MOU.
PROACTIVELY ENSURE THE FUTURE STABILITY AND SECURITY OF THE ROOT SERVER SYSTEM.

THAT'S BEEN A FAIRLY COMMON VOICED, WHEN ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S HAPPENING, WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS CORE BUSINESS.
THERE IS NOT ONLY A REQUEST TO ENSURE THAT THE IANA RUNS WELL, BUT AS MANY OF YOU ARE AWARE, A REQUEST TO SUBSTANTIALLY AUGMENT ITS CORE SERVICES AND ENSURE THEY FUNCTION EFFICIENTLY.

AND I HAVE TALKED TO MANY OF THE CONSTITUENCIES HERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, I CALL FOR WORK FLOW SOFTWARE, ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS, THINGS TO HAPPEN QUICKLY, TRACKING, ET CETERA, AND, IMPORTANTLY, THE WHOLE RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS WITHIN THE IANA PROCESS.
CERTAIN CONSTITUENCIES HAVE ARGUED QUITE STRONGLY TO INTRODUCE NEW GTLDS TO INCREASE COMPETITION IN THE DOMAIN NAME SPACE.

OTHER CONSTITUENCIES WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE EXPANDED RESOURCES TO ASSIST DEVELOPING NATION INTERNET COMMUNITIES WITH ISSUES AROUND EDUCATION AND TECHNICAL COORDINATION.

I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE -- ONE OF MY GREAT LESSONS IN THE LAST 11 MONTHS IS THAT WHILE WE DO HAVE A GLOBAL INTERNET COMMUNITY, AND I THINK VINT YESTERDAY SAID THERE'S ABOUT A BILLION USERS OF THE INTERNET NOW, WE DON'T HAVE A SET OF GLOBAL PROBLEMS.
WE HAVE A -- WE DO HAVE SOME GLOBAL PROBLEMS.
BUT MANY PROBLEMS ARE ACTUALLY REGIONAL.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S AT ALL SURPRISING, BECAUSE WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF THE INTERNET IS A WAVE OF ADOPTION.
AND SO MANY OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE IMPORTANT, SAY, IN NORTH AMERICA IN THE EARLY 1990S AND MID-1990S ARE NOW BECOMING IMPORTANT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD, WHILE NORTH AMERICA IS WORRIED ABOUT OTHER DIFFERENT SETS OF ISSUES.

I CAN CLEARLY REPORT TO YOU THAT THE ISSUES IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC ARE VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE ISSUES IN NORTH AMERICA, NORTHEAST ASIA, SOUTHEAST ASIA, LET ALONE THE ISSUES IN AFRICA, ET CETERA.
SO WHILE WE SERVE A GLOBAL COMMUNITY, THE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE FEEL ARE ACTUALLY DIFFERENT ACCORDING TO WHERE THEY ARE IN THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY.

LET ME GIVE YOU JUST A SMALL EXAMPLE.

A VERY BIG ISSUE IN NORTH AMERICA AND OTHER PARTS OF THE DEVELOPED WORLD IS THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.
TRADEMARKS, ET CETERA.

WHEN I TRAVEL AND VISIT, TALK TO PEOPLE IN EAST ASIA, FOR INSTANCE, I WAS TALKING RECENTLY TO THE MINISTER AND THE PERMANENT SECRETARY AND THE MANAGER IN THAILAND.
THEY JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE QUEEN'S NAME.

SENSITIVE TERMS IN EAST ASIA ARE NOT SO MUCH DISCUSSIONS ABOUT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND TRADEMARKS AND MUCH MORE ABOUT SENSITIVE TERMS IN THE CONTRA, ROYAL FAMILY NAMES, OFTEN PLACE NAMES.

IF I MOVE FURTHER WEST TO THE MIDDLE EAST, A LOT OF THE TERMS PEOPLE ARE VERY SENSITIVE ABOUT ARE RELIGIOUS TERMS.

WHEN I DISCUSS -- WE HAVE DISCUSSIONS IN AFRICA, THE TERMS PEOPLE ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT ARE OFTEN GEOPOLITICAL TERMS, OFTEN PUT IN TERMS OF ONLINE NEO COLONIALISM.

I KNOW WE HAVE A WIPO WORKSHOP, SO I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO JONATHAN'S TASK FORCE ON THIS.

I JUST WANT TO SHARE IT WITH YOU IN TERMS OF THE WAY PEOPLE EVEN IN ONE NARROW ISSUE, WHICH IS PROTECTION OF TERMS, EACH REGION HAS A DIFFERENT WAY OF LOOKING AT THAT ISSUE AND EXPECTS -- THE PEOPLE ARE VERY INTERESTED, THEY MAKE IT VERY CLEAR TO ME, I HAVE SOME GOOD FRIENDS HERE FROM VIETNAM, WE HAD A GOOD MEETING IN VIETNAM IN DECEMBER AMONGST A WHOLE GROUP OF PEOPLE IN ASIA, AND IT WAS MADE VERY CLEAR TO ME IN THAT MEETING FROM VARIOUS PEOPLE IN EAST ASIA THE SORT OF TERMS.
AND THEY EXPECT IT TO BE MET.
THERE'S NO SORT OF QUESTION.

SO THIS ISSUE OF HOW YOU ACTUALLY INTERACT WITH DEVELOPING NATIONS AND REGIONS AROUND EDUCATION, TECHNICAL COORDINATION, AND LISTENING TO THE ISSUES THEY THINK ARE IMPORTANT IS CERTAINLY ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE HEARD VERY STRONGLY IN THE LAST 11 MONTHS.

RELATED TO THAT, THEN, IS INCREASED PREPARATION OF ICANN MATERIALS IN MULTI-LINGUAL FORMATS.

THAT'S BEEN A VERY IMPORTANT PART PUT FORWARD.
IT'S BEEN PUT FORWARD IN TERMS OF PARTICIPATION.
AND I THINK THAT'S QUITE IMPORTANT.

ALSO, WE HEARD STRONG FEEDBACK ABOUT PROTECTING CONSUMER INTERESTS.
THERE WILL BE SEVERAL ISSUES I WILL WALK THROUGH HERE NOW IN TERMS OF CONSUMERS.
ONE IS INFORMATION AND SERVICE.
ONE WAS IMPORTANTLY HOW TO EDUCATE CONSUMERS ON HOW TO OBTAIN RESOURCES FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION, CONSUMER PROTECTION, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

NOT NECESSARILY WITHIN ICANN, BUT CERTAINLY THE ABILITY TO LIAISE AND INTERACT WITH GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES WHO HAVE RESPONSIBILITIES HERE.
A VERY STRONG SIGNAL, PARTICULARLY FROM THE REGISTRAR COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO THE REGISTRY COMMUNITY, IS AROUND WHAT THEY REFER TO AS COMPLIANCE, WHICH IS TO BE SURE THAT THE WAY THE MARKET OPERATES IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCREDITATION AGREEMENTS AND, AS A CONSEQUENCE, THE SUPPORT OF LOOKING AFTER THE RIGHTS OF USERS AND REGISTRANTS, AND TO ENSURE THAT THE BEHAVIOR THAT IS BEING DONE TO PROTECT THOSE PEOPLE IS ACCORDING TO WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE IN OUR PRESENTLY -- IN OUR AGREEMENTS.

SO VERY STRONG SIGNAL, VERY CONSISTENT SIGNAL BACK FROM THAT COMMUNITY ABOUT COMPLIANCE, COMPLIANCE.
ALSO A SENSE OF STRENGTHENING SERVICES TO GTLD REGISTRIES TO ADDRESS THEIR GROWING NEEDS AS THEY'RE INTRODUCED. AND THIS PARTICULARLY, I THINK, IS DIRECTED TOWARDS THE PROCESS OF INTRODUCTION OF NEW GTLDS AND HOW WE THINK THROUGH AND ASSIST AND HOW THE COMMUNITY THINKS ABOUT THAT PROCESS OF ESTABLISHMENT OF GTLDS.
I HAVE MENTIONED BEFORE ABOUT COMPLIANCE WITH THE SERVICES TO HELP REGISTRARS.
THIS IS PUT A BIT MORE IN THE POSITIVE WAY.
BUT STRENGTHEN SERVICES TO REGISTRARS TO ENSURE A HEALTHY, COMPETITIVE MARKETPLACE.

ONE OF THE ASPECTS WAS COMPLIANCE.
THERE ARE OTHER ASPECTS AS WELL.

AND, FINALLY, TO MATERIALLY AID GTLD REGISTRARS WITH MANAGING CONSUMER COMPLAINTS.
I'D LIKE TO PUT INTO THAT MATTER AIDING ICANN TO HELP DEAL WITH REGISTRARS' CONSUMERS COMPLAINTS THAT WE GET.
BUT YOU CAN GET THE SENSE OF THAT SET OF THE SORTS OF FEEDBACKS WE HAVE RECEIVED, TALKING TO THE CONSTITUENCIES.
AND I TRIED TO GIVE YOU SOME INDICATION OF WHICH CONSTITUENCIES SEEMED TO GIVE THAT MESSAGE.

NOW, IT'S NOT A SURVEY, SO IT'S AN IMPRESSION, IF YOU LIKE, FROM MANY CONVERSATIONS.

BUT THAT'S BEEN, YOU KNOW -- WE'VE TRIED AS WELL AS DOING THE JOB AND DOING THE TASKS THE BOARD HAVE ASKED, AND THE STAFF, WE ALSO TRY TO GET A SENSE OF WHAT ADDITIONAL THINGS DO PEOPLE WANT. AND THAT'S BEEN A STRONG PART THERE.

LET ME THEN GO TO ONE OF THE FIRST REQUIREMENTS, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT CONSISTENTLY, EVERY CONSTITUENCY HAS SAID THEY WANT TO SEE, WHICH IS THE COMPLETION OF THE MOU.
I WANTED TO TAKE YOU THROUGH THE MOU REQUIREMENTS AND GIVE YOU A SENSE OF WHAT'S SITTING IN THERE AND THE FUNCTIONS AND TASKS THAT ICANN HAS TO PERFORM.

BEFORE I DO THAT, GO THROUGH THE PROVISIONS, LET ME SHARE WITH YOU THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I HAVE AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, A VERY CONSISTENT MESSAGE.
IT'S ACTUALLY A MESSAGE THAT IN VARIOUS HATS I HAVE HEARD FROM TWO DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATIONS, WHICH IS, IT IS THEIR POLICY THAT THESE FUNCTIONS ARE BEST RUN THROUGH AN INTERNATIONAL, MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PRIVATE-SECTOR LED OPERATION, AND NOT RUN THROUGH THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.
AND IT'S A VERY STRONG COMMITMENT.

AND I STILL HEAR THIS VERY STRONGLY FROM PEOPLE LIKE FORMER DEPUTY SECRETARY BOARDMAN WHO IS NOW DEPUTY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, BUT, HOWEVER, STILL KEEPS AN INTEREST IN THIS ARENA, VERY STRONG MESSAGE ABOUT THEIR POLICY TO ENSURE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MOU CONCLUDED AND THE TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITIES TO TAKE PLACE.

NOW, THE REQUIREMENTS -- I'M NOT TRYING TO SPEAK FOR THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, I'M JUST REPORTING TO YOU WHAT THEY TOLD ME.
THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE MOU FALL IN SOME ASPECTS INTO FOUR AREAS.
THERE ARE A SERIES OF ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISIONS, OPERATIONAL PROVISIONS, ONE I WOULD CALL DUE DILIGENCE ACTIONS, AND OUTREACH PROVISIONS.

THE OVERALL TURN OF THE DOCUMENT, THOUGH, IS VERY MUCH AROUND DUE DILIGENCE.
IT IS A MASS-DOWN SHAKE LIST, A BIT LIKE IF YOU WERE GOING TO A VENTURE CAPITALIST TO RAISE THE MONEY, HERE'S THE CHECKLIST TO GET THE NEXT ROUND OF CAPITAL.

IT'S A BIT THE SAME, HERE ARE THE THINGS THEY WANT TO SEE IN TERMS OF DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE THE TRANSFER.
ON ACCOUNTABILITY -- I'M SORRY THIS IS SO SMALL.
I COULDN'T -- I'LL READ THROUGH IT.

FIRST OF ALL ON ACCOUNTABILITY, TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE EXPERTISE AND ADVICE ON PRIVATE SECTOR FUNCTIONS RELATED TO TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF THE DNS.
TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP AND TO TEST AND IMPLEMENT PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES TO IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY, EFFICIENCY, AND TIMELINESS IN THE CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF POLICIES RELATED TO TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF DNS, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE NEED TO ACCOMMODATE INNOVATION IN THE PROVISION OF DNS SERVICES.

AND ONE EXPRESSION OF THAT IS THE GNSO WORK PRESENTLY BEING DONE ON NEW REGISTRY CHANGES IN THE PDP.
CONTINUE TO DEVELOP, TEST, AND IMPLEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS TO ADDRESS CLAIMS BY MEMBERS OF THE INTERNET COMMUNITY THAT THEY HAVE BEEN ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY DECISIONS IN CONFLICT WITH ICANN'S BYLAWS, CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS, OR OTHERWISE TREATED UNFAIRLY IN THE CONTEXT OF ICANN PROCESSES.
THIS IS THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL WHICH WE RECEIVED A REPORT ON AT THIS MEETING, THE OMBUDSMAN AND ALSO THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD, ISSUES ALONG THOSE LINES.
LET'S MOVE TO THE OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS.

TO CONTINUE TO CONSULT WITH -- THE FIRST ONE BASICALLY FOCUSES ON SECURITY, TO CONSULT WITH THE MANAGERS OF ROOT NAME SERVERS AND OTHER APPROPRIATE EXPERTS WITH RESPECT TO OPERATIONAL AND SECURITY MATTERS RELATING TO THE SECURE AND STABLE OPERATION OF THE DOMAIN NAME AND NUMBERING SYSTEM IN ORDER TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THOSE MATTERS, INCLUDING ICANN'S OPERATION OF THE AUTHORITATIVE ROOT, UNDER APPROPRIATE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

VERY IMPORTANT PROVISION THERE ABOUT WORKING THROUGH ON THE SECURITY ISSUES AND ON THE OPERATION OF THE AUTHORITATIVE ROOT.
TO CONTINUE THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTING NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS.
TO CONTINUE TO ASSESS THE OPERATION OF WHOIS DATABASES AND TO IMPLEMENT MEASURES TO SECURE IMPROVED ACCURACY OF WHOIS DATA.
AND TO CONDUCT A REVIEW OF SYSTEMWIDE EFFORTS TO AUTOMATE OPERATIONAL PROCESSES.

THERE'S A SERIES OF DUE DILIGENCE REQUIREMENTS.
DEVELOP A CONTINGENCY PLAN TO ENSURE CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS IN THE EVENT THE CORPORATION INCURS A SEVERE DISRUPTION OF OPERATIONS, OR THE THREAT THEREOF, BY REASON OF ITS BANKRUPTCY, CORPORATE DISSOLUTION, A NATURAL DISASTER, OR OTHER FINANCIAL, PHYSICAL, OR OPERATIONAL EVENT.

STRAIGHT DUE DILIGENCE, WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT IF YOU WERE ONE TO TRANSFER FUNCTIONS, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THE ORGANIZATION HAS THOUGHT OF WHAT TO DO IN THE CASE OF A DISASTER.

CONDUCT A REVIEW OF CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND MANAGEMENT SUCCESSION PLAN.

CONDUCT A REVIEW OF INTERNAL MECHANISMS THAT PROMOTE AND ENSURE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE STAFF, AND CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITIES.
MANY OF THESE HAVE BEEN UNDERWAY OR ARE AFFECTED IN THE 2.0 BYLAWS.
BUT THERE'S A REVIEW OF THAT PROCESS UNDER THE MOU.
IMPORTANTLY, TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A FINANCIAL STRATEGY THAT EXPLORES OPTIONS FOR SECURING MORE PREDICTABLE AND SUSTAINABLE SOURCES OF REVENUE.
AND THE VERY STRONG MESSAGE IN THIS IS A MOVE -- AS WE BEGIN TO THINK ABOUT THE FINANCIAL HEALTH OF THE ORGANIZATION, THAT WE MOVE AWAY FROM SORT OF YEAR-BY-YEAR SORT OF WINDOWS INTO THE OPERATIONAL -- OR INTO THE FINANCING OF THE ORGANIZATION, TO A LONGER-TERM VIEW OF WHAT'S INVOLVED IN THE FINANCING OF THE ORGANIZATION.

AND REVIEW AND AUGMENT ITS CORPORATE COMPLIANCE PROGRAM, INCLUDING SYSTEM FOR AUDITING COMPLIANCE OF ALL AGREEMENTS.
YOU CAN SEE THE ISSUE HERE ABOUT COMPLIANCE.

REQUIREMENTS IN THE MOU CONCERNING OUTREACH, TO DEVELOP A COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM WITH PRIVATE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARTIES TO CONDUCT OUTREACH TO GOVERNMENTS AND LOCAL INTERNET COMMUNITIES IN TARGETED REGIONS, INCLUDING KEY CONSTITUENCIES.

DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT AN APPROPRIATE AND EFFECTIVE STRATEGY FOR MULTI-LINGUAL COMMUNICATIONS.

TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP, TO TEST, AND TO IMPLEMENT APPROPRIATE MECHANISMS THAT FOSTER INFORMED PARTICIPATION IN ICANN BY THE GLOBAL INTERNET COMMUNITY, SUCH AS PROVIDING EDUCATIONAL SERVICES AND FOSTERING INFORMATION, SHARING WITH CONSTITUENTS, AND PROMOTING BEST PRACTICES AMONG INDUSTRY SEGMENTS.

NOW, I SHOULD EXPLAIN, THIS IS NOT ALL THE PROVISIONS OF THE MOU.

BUT I TRIED TO GET THE KEY PROVISIONS THAT WERE AFFECTED ABOUT THE OPERATIONAL ASPECTS AND TASKS IN FRONT OF THE OPERATIONS.
AND IN SOME RESPECTS, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S AN OVERLAP BETWEEN THE MOU REQUIREMENTS AND SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING THROUGH THE CONSTITUENCIES.

THAT'S PROBABLY NOT SURPRISING, BECAUSE FOR THOSE CONSTITUENCIES BASED AT LEAST IN THE UNITED STATES, THEY'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE THAT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AS WELL.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THE SORT OF COMMUNITY FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED, THE MOU REQUIREMENTS WE HAVE RECEIVED.
AND I WOULD REMIND YOU THAT EVERY CONSTITUENCY HAS TOLD US, "COMPLETE THE MOU."

SO IF WE ARE TO COMPLETE THE MOU, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO THIS LIST OF TASKS.
SO PART OF WHAT I WANTED TO DO AT THE END OF 11 MONTHS TO THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY WAS TO FEEDBACK THIS INFORMATION.

I WANTED TO FEED BACK TO YOU WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY, WHAT THE CONSTITUENCIES HAVE SAID TO US THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
AND WE'VE HAD TO SUMMARIZE IT IN PHRASEOLOGY FROM MANY DIVERSE TYPES OF PRACTICAL THINGS PEOPLE HAVE ASKED FOR.

THERE HAVE BEEN QUITE A RANGE OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO DO WHICH DO NOT FIT WITHIN MISSION.
AND WE HAVE CLEARLY SAID TO PEOPLE, "THAT'S REALLY INTERESTING AND IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE DO."

THOSE DISCUSSIONS HAVE NOT BEEN DISSIMILAR TO THE THINGS THAT THE CHAIR AND OTHERS SHARED ABOUT THE WSIS PROCESS.

THERE'S A WHOLE RANGE OF THINGS OUT THERE IN THE INFORMATION SOCIETY.

BUT WE DO A VERY NARROW FUNCTION IN THE TECHNICAL COORDINATION ARENA.
AND IT IS ONLY PART OF THE TECHNICAL COORDINATION ENVIRONMENT.

NEVERTHELESS, THE THINGS I SHARED WITH YOU DO FIT WITHIN MISSION, GENERALLY, AND OTHER THINGS PEOPLE HAVE ASKED FOR.
PLUS THE OBLIGATIONS WE HAVE UNDER AN MOU TO PERFORM TASKS.

NOW, AS WE THINK ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT INPUT, IF WE NOW SIT HERE THINKING ABOUT, OKAY, WHAT DO WE DO NOW TO MEET THESE DEMANDS THAT THE COMMUNITY IS ASKING OF US, AND IT'S A DIALOGUE THAT THE STAFF HAS STARTED WITH THE BOARD AND THERE ARE ONGOING DISCUSSIONS.
AND I'M CERTAIN AS WE TALK THAT THROUGH, THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITIES TO TALK THAT THROUGH MORE WITH THE COMMUNITY.

BUT AS WE THINK ABOUT IT, WHAT HAS BECOME QUITE CLEAR TO ME AS A REVIEW IS THAT THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO DO ACTUALLY FALL UNDER FOUR MAIN HEADINGS.
AND THOSE FOUR MAIN HEADINGS GO BACK TO THE WHITE PAPER.

I WAS READING THROUGH THE WHITE PAPER AGAIN A COUPLE WEEKS AGO AND LOOKING AT WHAT WERE THE CORE PRINCIPLES PUT FORWARD IN THE WHITE PAPER FOR THIS NEW ENTITY.
AND REVIEWING THOSE PRINCIPLES AGAIN AND THINKING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE WERE ASKING US TO DO, THEY, BASICALLY, AGAIN, THOSE WHICH FELL WITHIN MISSION, FALL WITHIN THOSE BASIC FOUR PRINCIPLES.
AND LET ME SHARE THOSE WITH YOU.

THE FIRST ONE IS TO CONTRIBUTE TO STABILITY AND SECURITY OF THE UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS SYSTEM AND FOR ROOT MANAGEMENT.
I THINK THE WHITE PAPER ACTUALLY SAYS DNS.

BUT IN THE WHITE PAPER, "DNS" IS A TERM WHICH IS SEEN TO SOMEHOW SORT OF APPLY TO THE WHOLE UNIQUE IDENTIFIER SYSTEM, NOT TO WHAT THE TECHNICAL COMMUNITY REFERRED TO AS DNS.
SO I HAVE USED THAT TERM.
TO PROMOTE COMPETITION AND CHOICE FOR REGISTRANTS AND OTHER USERS.
TO ESTABLISH A FORUM FOR MULTI-STAKEHOLDER BOTTOM-UP DEVELOPMENT OF RELATED POLICY.
AND TO ENSURE ON A GLOBAL BASIS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PARTICIPATION BY ALL INTERESTED PARTIES.

SO IT WAS VERY INTERESTING TO READ THROUGH THE WHITE PAPER AND READ THROUGH THOSE FOUR PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT FORWARD FOR THE OPERATION OF ICANN BACK IN 1998 AND THEN LOOK AT WHAT PEOPLE WERE ASKING US TO DO WAS SITTING IN THE MOU.
BECAUSE THEY, ESSENTIALLY, FALL UNDER THOSE FOUR PRINCIPLES, AT LEAST THE ONES THAT PASSED THROUGH THE TEST.

SO IT'S AROUND THESE PRINCIPLES THAT WE ARE THINKING ABOUT IN THIS DIALOGUE WHAT'S NEXT AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO, THOSE FOUR PRINCIPLES REALLY DO GOVERN OUR SORT OF THINKING ABOUT THE EFFORT AND THE EMPHASIS ON EFFORT.

SO CHAIRMAN AND BOARD, THAT IS THE REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT.
I HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH MANY OF THE USUAL THINGS IN A PRESIDENT'S REPORT, BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS MORE USEFUL TO SHARE WITH YOU WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FOR THE LAST 11 MONTHS AND THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING TO US, NOT JUST FOR THIS YEAR, BUT WHEN WE SAID TO THEM, WHAT DOES LONG-TERM STABILITY LOOK LIKE?

WHAT DO YOU WANT ACHIEVED IN SOME SORT OF MEDIUM TERM?
THESE ARE THE SORTS OF FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED.

>>VINT CERF: WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PAUL.
LET ME -- I WILL INVITE QUESTIONS FOR PAUL.
BUT I WANT TO JUST ALERT YOU TO THE REMAINING SCHEDULE FOR THIS EVENING.
I HAVE ONE REPORT WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THAT WE PRESENT BEFORE WE GET TO THE OPEN MICROPHONE.

SO THAT NEEDS TO BE SQUEEZED IN.
LET ME FIRST FIND OUT IF THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS FOR PAUL, EITHER FROM THE FLOOR OR FROM THE BOARD.
I SEE ONE OR TWO HERE.

ELLIOT, LOOKS LIKE YOU WON THE RACE.

>>ELLIOT NOSS: THANK YOU.
AND, PAUL, THERE WAS A LOT OF ENCOURAGING INFORMATION IN THAT REPORT.

I CONGRATULATE YOU ON THE EARLY WORK.

YOU MENTIONED EXPLICITLY THAT IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS OR IN THE LAST NUMBER OF MONTHS THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF REGISTRAR ACCREDITATIONS.
WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR MARKET DATA, WE'RE NOT SEEING MUCH OF A CONTRIBUTION, IF ANY, FROM NEW REGISTRARS. I'M WONDERING IF ICANN STAFF HAS AT ALL GIVEN ANY THOUGHT OR LOOK INTO WHETHER THE REASONS FOR ACCREDITATION MAY HAVE CHANGED OVER TIME.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: PERHAPS YOU COULD SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH THE BOARD.

>>ELLIOTT NOSS: MAYBE AT ANOTHER TIME, BUT I'D LOVE TO HEAR YOURS.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: WE HAVEN'T -- FOR PARTICULAR REGISTRATIONS, WE DON'T HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY NOR ARE WE IN THE POSITION TO LOOK THROUGH FOR THE RATIONALE FOR ONE PARTICULAR REGISTRATION, OR ACCREDITATION.

IT IS FAIRLY CLEAR TO US THAT THERE ARE INCENTIVES SITTING INSIDE THE OPERATION OF THAT MARKETPLACE WHICH DO SEEM TO REWARD HAVING MORE ACCREDITATIONS, AND THAT OBVIOUSLY RELATES TO THE (INAUDIBLE) AROUND DOT COM, ET CETERA.

AND WE ARE SEEING PATTERNS FOR REQUESTS FOR ACCREDITATION NOW WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT PEOPLE HAVE REALIZED THAT THERE IS THAT INCENTIVE AND THAT AN ACCREDITED REGISTRAR MAY GIVE THEM BENEFITS FOR PARTS OF THE MARKET WHICH ARE NOT NECESSARILY PURELY SELLING DOMAIN NAMES.

NOW, I DO NOT WANT TO MAKE ANY STATEMENT ABOUT A PARTICULAR REQUEST, BECAUSE I CAN'T SAY ON A PARTICULAR REQUEST WHAT THEY'RE USING IT FOR. BUT ON A PATTERN, ONE WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT THE GRANTING OF 40 THREADS TO A REGISTRAR CERTAINLY SEEMS TO BE GIVING PEOPLE THE SENSE THAT THEY GET AN ADVANTAGE WHEN IT COMES TO THE WAY IN WHICH THEY ACCESS THE BATCH POOL, AND WE'RE CERTAINLY SEEING PATTERNS ABOUT THAT.

>>ELLIOTT NOSS: THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THE CHAIR WILL COMMENT BRIEFLY ON THIS. THE SUMMARY OF WHAT THE CEO JUST SAID IS IN EVERY SYSTEM I CAN THINK OF, THERE'S ALWAYS SOME OPPORTUNITY TO GAIN THE SYSTEM AND WE'RE PROBABLY SEEING SOME OF THAT BUT WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER THERE'S ANYTHING TO BE DONE.

>>ELLIOTT NOSS:EXCELLENT. THANK YOU.

>>WOLFGANG KLEIUWACHTE: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MY NAME IS WOLFGANG KLEIUWACHTE.
ONE OF THE INNOVATIONS OF ICANN 2.0 WAS THE OFFICE OF AN OMBUDSMAN. YOU MENTIONED THAT ONLY BRIEFLY. IS THERE ANY NEWS OR FORECASTS?

>>PAUL TWOMEY: GOOD QUESTION, THANK YOU. WE DID AN INITIAL REVIEW ON OMBUDSMAN. WE HAVE RECENTLY WANTED TO ENSURE THAT TIGHTENS UP ALL THE SORT OF PROCESSES, PARTICULARLY THE COMPLAINT PROCESSES. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE INTERNALLY IS TO REVIEW ALL THE WAYS IN WHICH WE PRESENTLY RECEIVE COMPLAINTS, BECAUSE IT WILL FACTOR INTO THE TASK OF ALL OF THE OMBUDSMAN. AND WE HAVE APPLICATIONS IN THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING, BUT WE'RE ALSO HAVEN'T CLOSED THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS. AND WE EXPECT TO DO SO SHORTLY, AND THEN MOVE TO AN APPOINTMENT.

THE DELAY HAS NOT COME FROM THE NATURE OF THE CANDIDATES. THE DELAY WE'VE DONE, AS WE LOOK THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN OMBUDSMAN PROCESS, AND TO BE TRUTHFUL, TO GIVE YOU -- IT'S A PHRASE THAT JUST MEANS TO GIVE YOU MORE DETAIL. I'VE BEEN INFORMED BY SOMEBODY ELSE IF I SAUCE THE PHRASE "TO BE TRUTHFUL," IT SOUNDS LIKE I'M LYING THE REST OF THE TIME.

TO GIVE YOU MORE DETAIL, ONE THING WE WANTED TO BE SURE OF IS THAT THE OMBUDSMAN POSITION IS GENERALLY ALLIANCE WITH THE HANDLING OF COMPLAINTS GENERALLY, BECAUSE WE GET SO MANY. AND AS I SAID, SOME WEEKS WE CAN GET 3,000 COMPLAINTS. SO WE'VE GOT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, WHICH ONES ARE APPROPRIATE TO GO TO THE OMBUDSMAN VERSUS WHICH ONES NEED TO GO THROUGH A DIFFERENT PHASE.

I EXPECT CERTAINLY BY KUALA LUMPUR WE'LL HAVE A REPORT ON THE PROGRESS.

>>VINT CERF: QUESTIONS FOR PAUL? I'M SORRY; IS THIS QUESTION FOR PAUL? MARILYN.

>>MARILYN CADE: MARILYN CADE. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. I'M A MEMBER OF BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY.

I'M GLAD TO HEAR THE COMPLETION OF AN MOU IS AND MUST BE A CORE PRIORITY; THAT IS, I INDEED AGREE WITH YOU. WHAT I HEAR AS I TALK TO OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY, FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. BUT AS WE HEARD ABOUT THE WORK PRIORITIES, WE'VE NOT -- AND THIS OBVIOUSLY IMPLIES A SIGNIFICANT STRESS ON THE BUDGET. WE HAVEN'T YET HEARD THE REPORT ON THE BUDGET. WILL THAT BE COMING LATER TODAY OR TOMORROW?

>>PAUL TWOMEY: SHALL I TAKE THE QUESTION OR WOULD YOU?

>>IVAN MOURA CAMPOS: I GAVE A REPORT ON -- FOR THE FINANCIAL COMMITTEE WORK, AND -- WHILE YOU WERE NOT HERE, AND I SAID IT'S STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS THE TRUTH, I MEAN. WE'RE WORKING ON IT.

AND IT WILL BE IN A FEW WEEKS ACCORDING TO THE BUDGET DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE THAT I SHOWED IN THE LAST TWO SLIDES. THAT'S THE SCHEDULE. THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. YOU'LL SEE IT SOON ENOUGH.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>VINT CERF: THE DEFINITION OF SOON ENOUGH IS OPEN TO SOME DEBATE, I SUSPECT.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: MR. CHAIRMAN --

>>MARILYN CADE: THEN PERHAPS I'LL ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR INTERPRETATION OF WHEN I MIGHT FIND SOON ENOUGH, HOWEVER.

AS THE BOARD EXAMINES ALTERNATE SOURCES OF FUNDING AND AS THE BOARD EXAMINES PRIORITIES, I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO KEEP IN MIND THAT WE, TOO, IN THE COMMUNITY NEED TO HAVE TIME. AND I KNOW YOU KNOW THIS, BUT LET ME RESTATE IT. WE, TOO, NEED TO HAVE TIME TO THINK THROUGH WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE AND TO LOOK HARD AT WHAT CAN BE BROADLY SUPPORTED.

SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU KEEP THAT IN MIND, AND I KNOW THAT YOU WILL.

MY SECOND QUESTION REALLY HAS TO DO WITH THE WORK PRIORITY IN THE MOU, WHICH IS THE INTRODUCTION OF NEW GTLDS.

WE DID MEET WITH THE BOARD AND THE SENIOR STAFF AND YOURSELF AS THE CROSS-CONSTITUENCY, AND WE ALSO HAD A MEETING BETWEEN COUNCIL AND THE BOARD, AND WE DID TALK ABOUT OUR PRIORITIES. AND I NOTE THAT WE DID NOT -- AND I'M SPEAKING AS A COUNCILOR AT THIS POINT, WE DID NOT INCLUDE PERHAPS ENOUGH RECOGNITION OF THE DEMANDS ON OUR TIME THAT WILL BE TAKEN IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT WE DO OUR JOB AS THE POLICY ENTITY FOR GTLDS.

SO I MIGHT SUGGEST THAT AS A FOLLOW-UP, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE AN EXCHANGE, PERHAPS ELECTRONICALLY WITH COUNCIL TOE BE SURE WE DEVISE OUR WORK PLAN IN A WAY WE CAN BE VERY INVOLVED IN THIS. FOR MY CONSTITUENCY, THIS QUESTION AND HOW IT IS ADDRESSED IS A VERY HIGH PRIORITY.

>>VINT CERF: GOT T THANK YOU, MARILYN. MIKE, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: YES, MARILYN, AS A REPRESENTATIVE ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, I'M PROBABLY SOMEWHAT ATTRIBUTED FOR THE DELAY. AS A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE GNSO, I HAVE, SHALL WE SAY, IMPARTED UPON MY FELLOW COMMITTEE MEMBERS THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BOTTOM-UP PROCESS, SOME OF THE DIFFERENT MECHANISMS.

SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS PROPERLY VETTE IT OUT AND RELYING UPON SOME OF MY FIVE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE GNSO.

SO THE GNSO'S COLLECTIVE INSIGHT AND FEEDBACK IS IMPORTANT TO THE COMMITTEE, AND IT -- AS I SAID, I'M LETTING IT BE KNOWN IN THE, SHALL WE SAY, PRELIMINARY STAGE.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, MIKE.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS? I SEE ONE FOR PAUL AND THEN AMADEU AFTER THAT.

>>PIERRE OUEDRAOGO: THANK YOU, I WANT TO CONGRATULATE PAUL AND THE BOARD FOR THE OPTING OF THE BRUSSELS GROUP. THIS IS GREAT FOR US BECAUSE NOW WE SOLVE THE TIME ZONE PROBLEM AND NOW WE CAN SPEAK IN OTHER LANGUAGE WITH THEM; MAINLY IN FRENCH. AND I WANT TO ASK YOU, WHEN DO YOU PLAN TO HAVE PEOPLE SPEAKING OTHER LANGUAGES IN IANA, BECAUSE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE STABILITY OF THE SYSTEM IN AFRICA. MOST OF THE CCTLDS HAVE CONTACTS DURING THEIR CONTACTS WITH IANA, AND IT IS BASED ON LANGUAGE, AND THIS SOMETIME DELAY THE MAINTENANCE AND MAKES THE CCTLD DIFFICULT TO RUN IN AFRICA.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANKS, PIERRE. CAN I JUST STRESS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT STATEMENT OR QUESTION, BECAUSE IT COMES TO SOME OF THE CULTURAL THINGS. YOU WERE TALKING BEFORE, VINT, ABOUT THE NARROW TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS, AND THE WAY YOU CAN TREAT THINGS FOR ICANN TO DO. AND SUPPOSEDLY THE MOST NARROW THING WE DO TECHNICALLY IS THE IANA FUNCTION, AND EVEN IN THAT, AS PIERRE HAS INDICATED, SOME OF THE ISSUES WE DEAL WITH IN TERMS OF SIMPLE COMMUNICATIONS.

THE TESTS WE DO OF WHETHER WE HAVE OUTSTANDING WORK IS TO CHECK WHAT E-MAILS WE HAVE RECEIVED, WHAT SITS IN THE FILE. WHAT I HAVE LEARNT TO MY PAIN IN THE LAST 11 MONTHS, AND I CAN GIVE YOU A LIST OF COUNTRIES OR REGIONS QUITE LONG WHERE PEOPLE FEEL THAT THEY HAD CONTACT WITH IANA AND DID NOT GET SERVICE AND IT'S ALL FALLEN INTO A BLACK HOLE, YOU GO BACK AND CHECK THE FILE AND THE PAPERWORK IS IN THE FILE. IT'S JUST PETERED OUT. AND I THINK PIERRE HAS PUT HIS FINGER ON AN IMPORTANT POINT. I THINK THE REASON WHY IT PETERS OUT IS NOT TECHNICAL COORDINATION BUT SIMPLE THINGS. PEOPLE LIKE TO DEAL IN THEIR OWN LANGUAGE, THEY UNDERSTAND BETTER IN THEIR OWN LANGUAGE, THEY WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.

AND MY FRIENDS IN EUROPE KNOW, I'VE SAID THIS OFTEN TO THEM, I DON'T THINK EUROPE IS THE WORLD. I'M SORRY. BUT THE POINT I WANTED TO MAKE ABOUT IT IS WE HAVE INTERACTIONS EVEN ON THE ROOT ZONE MANAGEMENT ISSUES WHICH LOOK VERY DIFFERENT IN VERY WELL-ESTABLISHED PLACES AND LOOK EXCEPTIONALLY DIFFERENT WHEN YOU'RE NOT ONLY TALKING ABOUT BEING ABLE TO DO THINGS IN MY OWN LANGUAGE BUT I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND. I'VE BEEN OUT OF THE LOOP, I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE ACCESS TO THE SKILLS. EVEN TO PETER'S STATEMENT OR QUESTION BEFORE THE BREAK, TWO CC MANAGERS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA RECENTLY HAVE RAISED WITH ME ISSUES FACING OTHER CC MANAGERS WHICH HAVE JUST BEEN VERY BASIC ISSUES ABOUT SKILLED ACCESS INFORMATION AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

SO I THINK PIERRE HAS REALLY PUT A VERY IMPORTANT PART TO SOMETHING THE TYPICAL COMMUNITY TAKES HIGHLY. THE TYPICAL COMMUNITY TAKES THE IANA FUNCTION SIGNIFICANTLY, AND I UNDERSTAND WHY.

A MANAGERIAL PIECE OF FEEDBACK I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU IS EVEN WHEN MYSELF AND DOUG AND WE GO BACK AND WE REALLY HAMMER THE POINT AND GO CHECK THE FILES AND SEE WHERE ARE WE UP TO AND HOW THINGS ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED, IT'S BECOME CLEAR TO ME EVEN IF I COULD SAY TO YOU, OPENING THE FILES, WE HAVE DONE THE RIGHT THING, WE REALLY HAVE NOT DONE THE RIGHT THING BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A COMMUNICATION FAILURE.

SO THAT'S A LONG ANSWER TO PIERRE'S POINT BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY. THE LAST QUESTION FOR PAUL I THINK COMES FROM AMADEU.

>>AMADEU ABRIL I ABRIL: OKAY; THANKS. DOES IT WORK? OH, NOW. THANKS.

FOR THE BENEFIT OF TIME, I WILL JUST LEAVE MY SKEPTICISM REGARDING THIS ASSERTION THAT THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT IS, YOU KNOW, REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO RESOLVE THIS. I LEAVE THAT ON THE FLOOR AND IN FIVE YEARS' TIME WE DISCUSS AGAIN, OKAY, ABOUT THE NEW REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW MOU.

THE QUESTION I WANTED TO ADDRESS HERE IS A VERY DETAILED ONE REGARDING THE OMBUDSMAN. YOU SAY THAT YOU ARE STILL LOOKING AT THAT. GOOD.

YOU'RE STILL LOOKING AT THE SORT OF COMPLAINTS THAT IT SHOULD HANDLE. IT'S VERY SIMPLE. IF YOU RECEIVE A COMPLAINT SAYING, LOOK, INTERNET IS GOING TOO SLOW FOR ME. NOTHING TO DO. IF YOU RECEIVE A COMPLAINT ABOUT (INAUDIBLE, NOTHING TO DO WITH ICANN. IF YOU HAVE A COMPLAINT THIS REGISTRAR REFUSES TO REGISTER MY NAME, THE REGISTRY IS DOING SOMETHING WITH MY DOMAINS, THIS IS SOMETHING FOR ICANN, FOR ALAN, FOR TINA, FOR DAN, FOR ALL OF YOU.

THE ONLY THING THAT SHOULD GO TO THE OMBUDSMAN IS THE THING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE NOW, BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE FUNCTION. YOU DON'T HAVE THE OFFICE, IS THE COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE STAFF NOT DEALING WITH THE COMPLAINTS OR THE STAFF, FOR INSTANCE, NOT ANSWERING TO COMPLAINTS OR NOT, YOU KNOW, ENFORCING THE CONTRACTS OR WHATEVER.

AND YOU WILL NOT HAVE THAT UNTIL YOU HAVE THE OMBUDSMAN BECAUSE NOW YOU HAVE THE FIRST DEGREE OF THAT.

PLEASE DO THAT, PLEASE CHECK THAT, I HAVE THIS PROBLEM, TWO, THREE, FOUR TIMES.

THE SECOND THING IS THAT IT'S A BASIC PRINCIPLE OF ANY OMBUDSMAN FUNCTION THAT IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE BEING A PART OF THE STAFF. SO I REDIRECT MY ADVICE FROM ONE YEAR AGO. DON'T HIRE HIM AND BRING HIM TO THE MARINA DEL REY OFFICE. BETTER TO HAVE A PART-TIME OMBUDSMAN DEALING WITH A UNIVERSITY OR ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD AND WORK WITH THE STAFF AND BE PHYSICALLY SEPARATED. BECAUSE IF HE BEHAVES -- IF HE'S WITH THE STAFF, HE WILL BEHAVE AND THINK AS THE STAFF AND THEN THE FUNCTION WILL LOSE ITS USEFULNESS.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: AMADEU, I AGREE WITH YOU ON BOTH POINTS. LET ME SHARE WITH YOU, AS AN AUSTRALIAN, THE DEFINITION OF OMBUDSMAN IS CLOSE TO THE EUROPEAN DEFINITION, NOT AMERICAN, WHICH MEANS CLOSER TO A CUSTOMER RELATIONS MANAGER, AS I WOULD CALL T IT'S REALLY ONE OF THE REASONS WE SLOWED DOWN AND REVIEWED THIS ISSUE BECAUSE I BECAME AWARE, THERE WAS A REPORT DONE BY SOMEONE WHO CAME FROM THE AMERICAN OMBUDSMAN ASSOCIATION AND DID A REPORT AND WHAT BECAME CLEAR TO ME IS THERE WAS A DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE WAY THEY SAW AN OMBUDSMAN AND THE WAY YOU DESCRIBED IT. SO ONE OF THE REASONS WE HAD TO THINK OF IT THROUGH IS WHAT DO WE MEAN BY OMBUDSMAN. I ALSO AGREE AS OPPOSED TO STAFF, THEY'RE AN INDEPENDENT PERSON. BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE INDEPENDENT AND NOT GOING TO COME FROM THE DNS SPACE, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THE PROCESSES ARE CLEAR FOR THE SORT OF COMPLAINTS THEY GET. AND WHILE IT'S FINE FOR YOU TO SAY THE OMBUDSMAN DEALS WITH STUFF THE STAFF HAS DONE WRONG, I AM PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE END OF MODERN CIVILIZATION, ACCORDING TO MOST OF THE E-MAILS I RECEIVE. I AM THE DEVIL INCARNATE FOR LARGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE. AND LET ME TELL YOU A SIMPLE REASON WHY. ONE OF THE SOURCES -- YOU CAN CHECK BACK ON SPAM TAKES YOU BACK THROUGH THE IANA SITES PEOPLE USE, AND SORT OF AS A CONSEQUENCE THEY SEE US AND COME BACK AND BLAME US. YOU ARE SPAMMING US. EVERY DAY, YOU ARE SPAMMING US, STOP SPAMMING ME, ALL THAT SORT OF STUFF.

SO WHILE HE AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAY, THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE HAVE TO THINK THROUGH THE PROCESS, IS NOT TO MAKE IT EASY FOR THE STAFF BUT TO ENSURE WHEN WE DO HAVE AN INDEPENDENT OMBUDSMAN OR SOMEONE WHO HAS THE SKILL THEY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO UNDERSTAND THE COMPLAINTS THEY'RE GETTING ARE THOSE SORTS OF COMPLAINTS NOT THE COMPLAINTS THAT ARE ILL-ADVISED OR IGNORANT.

>>VINT CERF: I AM CONCERNED NOW THAT -- IT'S ALL RIGHT. HANG ON. I'M CONCERNED WE'RE NOW EATING INTO WHAT LITTLE TIME WE HAVE FOR OPEN MICROPHONE. THIS IS NOT TO PUT YOU OFF, PETER, AT ALL. WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY IS, FIRST, I'M PREPARED TO GO A BIT BEYOND 6:00 TONIGHT, BUT I'M AWARE THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WORKING ALL DAY AND THEY'RE PROBABLY HUNGRY. WHEN WE RECONVENE TOMORROW AT 9:00, WE HAVE CONTINUING REPORTS, AND I AM ALSO PREPARED TO CONTINUE WITH OPEN MICROPHONE DISCUSSION.

SO IF YOU MISS TONIGHT, THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY TOMORROW.
PETER.

>>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: THANK YOU, PETER DENGATE THRUSH FROM INTERNET NEW ZEALAND. ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE 11 MONTHS IS THAT ICANN HAS BEEN SUED. I'M SURPRISED, I GUESS, THAT A MATTER OF THAT SORT OF SERIOUSNESS ISN'T INCLUDED IN YOUR REPORT SO FAR. I'M OBVIOUSLY AWARE OF THE STRICTURES THAT IMPOSED ON YOU UNDER THE RULES OF SUBJUDICA, BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE AN OUTLINE OF WHAT THE LAWSUITS ARE ACTUALLY ABOUT, WHAT THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES FOR ICANN MIGHT BE, AND WHAT, SO FAR, THE BOARD'S THINKING ABOUT DEFENDING THEM OR NOT IS, BECAUSE OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THEM.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: IN RESPONSE T MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO ASK THE GENERAL COUNSEL TO OUTLINE WHAT WE HAVE IS FIVE LAWSUITS, NOT TWO, AND ANSWER PROBABLY THE FIRST, MAYBE THE SECOND, AND CERTAINLY NOT THE THIRD QUESTION.

>>JOHN JEFFREY: I'LL HAVE TO REMEMBER ALL THOSE QUESTIONS TO ANSWER IT.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: YOU'RE NOT GIVING AWAY OUR SIDE. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>JOHN JEFFREY: AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LAWSUITS THAT HAVE BEEN FILED IN THE LAST YEAR. AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME REMAINING FACTORS THAT ARE STILL HERE FROM PREVIOUS YEAR'S LAWSUITS, SUCH AS AN APPEAL ON ONE IN THE PAST. I'LL SAVE THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT ONE IS PRETTY MUCH DONE.

BUT RECENTLY, RELATING TO A SUBJECT I EXPECT WE'LL HEAR SOME ABOUT LATER, THE WLS SERVICE HAS RESULTED IN, I BELIEVE, THREE CURRENT LAWSUITS. ONE THAT WAS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE EARLIER IN THE YEAR -- OR LATER IN 2003, ONE THAT WAS FILED IN 2003 IN CANADA TO WHICH WE ARE RESPOND TO GO JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES THERE. AND AS IT'S ONGOING, I WON'T COMMENT ANY MORE ABOUT THAT.

THERE IS A NEW LAWSUIT ABOUT THE WLS ISSUE ALONE THAT HAS ANTI TRUST AND RICO RACKETEERING TYPE ISSUES IN ITS COMPLAINT. WE'RE NOT AWARE THAT HAS BEEN SERVED ON US YET BUT WE'RE AWARE IT HAS BEEN FILED. I CAN'T SAY A GREAT DEAL ABOUT THAT, EITHER.

AND AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, WE RECEIVED A LAWSUIT LAST WEEK THAT WAS SERVED ON US BY VERISIGN THAT HAS ANTI TRUST IMPLICATIONS, BREACH OF CONTRACT IMPLICATIONS.

OF COURSE WE INTEND TO DEFEND THOSE LAWSUITS. I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH MORE I CAN SAY.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, JOHN.
MAYBE THE NEXT TIME WE HAVE A MEETING IN THIS COUNTRY IT WILL BE FURTHER SOUTH.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>VINT CERF: NOW, ARE THESE QUESTIONS FOR PAUL OR ARE THEY OPEN MICROPHONE QUESTIONS? WE AREN'T AT OPEN MICROPHONE YET. SO GRANT, IS THIS OPEN MICROPHONE OR PAUL?

>>GRANT FORSYTH: I COULD POSE IT AS A QUESTION FOR PAUL, AND THE REST OF YOU CAN HEAR IT. BUT MORE TRUTHFULLY --

(LAUGHTER.)

>>GRANT FORSYTH: -- IT WAS A CONTRIBUTION, YES. BUT IF YOU PREFER THAT I DEFERRED, AND IF NOT --

>>VINT CERF: I WOULD ASK YOU, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL ON FORMER BOARD MEMBER JONATHAN COHEN TO MAKE A REPORT ON THE WIPO 2 STUDY AND THEN WE WILL GET TO OPEN MICROPHONE. JONATHAN.

>>JONATHAN COHEN: WITHOUT MEANING TO DIMINISH THE HARD WORK OF THE COMMITTEE, I'M GOING TO BE VERY BRIEF BECAUSE I CAN SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE CHOMPING AT THE BIT TO GET TO OPEN MIKE.

WIPO 2, YOU'LL REMEMBER, IS A RECOMMENDATION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF WIPO COMMUNICATED TO THE BOARD, TO THE GAC, TO AMEND UDRP, TO INCLUDE THE PROTECTION OF IGOS, THEIR ACRONYMS AND COUNTRY NAMES. THE COMMITTEE HAS MET TWICE IN PERSON IN TUNIS AND ROME, AND HAD FOUR TELECONFERENCES AND HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF INITIALLY REVIEWING THE ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION AND A 25-PAGE REPORT HAS BEEN PRODUCED WHICH WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE BOARD WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.

HOWEVER, THE BOARD -- SORRY, THE COMMITTEE HAS NOT YET GOT TO THE SECOND STAGE OF ITS WORK, WHICH IS TO LOOK AT THE IMPLEMENTATION POSSIBILITIES FOR THESE RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD THE BOARD, IN ITS WISDOM, DECIDE TO DO SO.

WE'VE LOOKED, TO DATE, AT THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THESE THINGS ARE WITHIN ICANN'S MISSION, WHETHER THEY'RE BASED ON INTERNATIONAL LAW, WHETHER THEY'RE REASONABLE BASED ON THE ORIGINAL CONSENSUS, AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THE NEED TO RESPOND TO THE STRONGLY EXPRESSED NEED OF 178 COUNTRIES.

I'M ADVISED BY DR. TWOMEY AND THE GAC THAT THEY HAVE RECOMMENDED THAT THIS COMMITTEE CONTINUE ITS WORK AND LOOK AT THE QUESTION OF IMPLEMENTATION AND REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD WITH A FINAL REPORT BY THE ICANN BOARD MEETING IN JULY IN KUALA LUMPUR.
AND THAT IS MY REPORT.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JONATHAN. WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THAT REPORT.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR JONATHAN?

IN THAT CASE, I WILL OPEN THE MICROPHONES. AND THERE IS A RACE -- I THINK GRANT ACTUALLY WON THE EARLIER RACE, SO WE'LL OFFER HIM THE OPPORTUNITY.

OH, I'M SORRY, TWO -- I'M SORRY, GRANT, I SCREWED UP. JOHN JEFFREY HAS A QUESTION OR STATEMENT AND VENI MARKOVSKI DOES. SO APOLOGIES.

>>JOHN JEFFREY: JUST A CLARIFICATION, I DID SKIP ONE OF OUR MORE RECENT LAWSUITS SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE COVER THAT. THERE'S A CASE CALLED SYNCALOT THAT WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE SITE FINDER SERVICE LAST SEPTEMBER AND WE WERE RECENTLY ADDED TO THE COMPLAINT ALONG WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. SO WE'RE BEING SUED FOR THE SITE FINDER DISPUTE.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. VENI.

>>VENI MARKOVSKI: IT'S JUST A NOTE TO AMADEU. I STRONGLY PROTEST AGAINST HIS USAGE OF THE TERM OMBUDSMAN AS MALE, BECAUSE WE, AS FAR AS I KNOW, HAVEN'T DECIDED IT TO BE A HE. IT MAY BE A SHE.

SO PLEASE, YOU KNOW....

(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VENI, FOR REMINDING US THAT THIS IS A GENDER NEUTRAL ENVIRONMENT.
ALL RIGHT.
GRANT, TAKE THE MIKE.

>>GRANT FORSYTH: MR. CHAIRMAN, FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU.

I'D LIKE TO RETURN TO THE SUBJECT WHICH THE GENERAL COUNSEL HAS JUST FURTHER ELABORATED FOR US ON, AND THAT IS THE QUESTION OF LITIGATION.

AND IN PARTICULAR, THE LITIGATION WHICH WE UNDERSTAND IS BEING FILED BY VERISIGN, AND PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH A SUGGESTION BY WAY OF A STATEMENT FROM THE THREE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY.

LET ME JUST SAY IN OPENING THAT IN MY DAY JOB AS A TELECOMMUNICATIONS, IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS REGULATION, I AM ACUTELY AWARE OF THE COMMERCIAL MOTIVATION FOR INCUMBENT MONOPOLISTS OR ORGANIZATIONS WITH SIGNIFICANT MARKET POWER TO LITIGATE AGAINST THOSE WHO STAND IN THE WAY OF THEIR EXERCISING LEVERAGING AND MAXIMIZING THAT MARKET POWER FOR THEIR COMMERCIAL BENEFIT.

LET ME JUST GET THIS BACK.

>>VINT CERF: LAPTOPS ARE REALLY NOT MUCH OF A SUBSTITUTE FOR PAPER, ARE THEY.

>>GRANT FORSYTH: NO, AND I WILL READ THIS; OTHERWISE, YOU MAY HAVE ME HERE LONGER THAN YOU WISH. SO BEING FULLY AWARE OF THE COMMERCIAL DRIVERS OF SUCH AN ORGANIZATION, THIS HAS GIVEN US SOME CONCERN.

FIRSTLY, I'D NOTE OR WE WOULD NOTE THAT WE HAVE BEEN TOLD AND CAN OBSERVE, ONE, THAT LITIGATION IS SEVERELY DRAINING THE RESOURCES OF ICANN, BOTH FINANCIALLY AND IN HUMAN TERMS. WE ALSO NOTE THAT ICANN IS STRUGGLING TO ACHIEVE ITS OBJECTIVES, DESPITE ITS WILLINGNESS TO DO SO.

WE NOTE THAT THERE IS A RESISTANCE IN SEEKING ADDITIONAL FUNDING FROM THE TRADITIONAL SOURCES OF THE USER VIA THE REGISTRARS.

WE NOTE THAT THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY WHO ARE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ICANN, ICANN'S PERFORMANCE AND ROLE, AND ARE ACTIVELY CHAMPIONING FOR THE ELIMINATION OF ICANN IN FAVOR OF MOVING THE FUNCTIONS CURRENTLY UNDERTAKEN BY ICANN AND COMBINING THOSE FUNCTIONS WITH A RAFT OF OTHERS UNDER THE AUSPICES OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, SUCH AS UNITED NATIONS, ITU, OR UNDER DIRECT GOVERNMENT'S CONTROL.

ADDITIONALLY, WE NOTE THAT ICANN'S ROLE AND PERFORMANCE IS EVOLVING AND CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVING. ICANN IS A YOUNG ORGANIZATION. TODAY, ICANN IS TRANSITIONING THE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF THE CRITICAL INTERNET RESOURCES BEING NAMES AND NUMBERS FROM AN AMERICAN AND U.S. GOVERNMENT-CENTRIC MODEL TO A GLOBAL ONE.

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, THROUGH ITS AGENCY, THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, AND IN THE VERY REAL FORM OF THE MOU, TO WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE IS A SIGNATORY, IS TODAY VERY MUCH INVOLVED IN THE INTERESTS -- AND INTERESTED IN THE SUCCESS OF THIS TRANSITION AS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT ICANN'S FUNCTION HAS NOT YET BEEN FULLY TRANSITIONED TO THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY.

THUS, GIVEN THE ABOVE, ONE, THE CENTRAL ROLE OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE IN TRANSITIONING THE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF INTERNET NAMES AND NUMBERS THROUGH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SUCCESSFUL ICANN; TWO, THE FACT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, THROUGH THE MOU, HAS A CONTINUING INTEREST IN VERISIGN'S CONTRACT WITH ICANN; THREE, THE STRONG COMMERCIAL INCENTIVES I REFERENCED BEFORE DRIVING VERISIGN AS A MONOPOLIST WITH SIGNIFICANT MARKET POWER WITH THE ABILITY TO DEVOTE CONSIDERABLE RESOURCE TO THEIR LITIGATION; AND FOUR, THAT THE OUTCOME OF THIS LITIGATION WILL MATERIALLY EFFECT AND SHAPE ICANN GOING FORWARD, AND ENHANCE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE GLOBAL INTERNET COMMUNITY TO EFFECTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT OF INTERNET NAMES AND NUMBERS.

THUS, GIVEN THAT THERE IS TO BE LITIGATION, THE OUTCOME OF THIS LITIGATION MUST RESULT IN GREATER CERTAINTY AND STABILITY FOR A SUCCESSFUL ICANN.

ANY OTHER OUTCOME WILL ONLY THREATEN ICANN'S LEGITIMATE CONTINUANCE AND LEAVE OPEN THE PROBABLE ELIMINATION OF THE UNIQUE MODEL OF GLOBAL PARTICIPATION IN A PRIVATE-SECTOR LED BOTTOM-UP CONSENSUS DECISION-MAKING; THAT IS, ICANN.

THUS, WE SUGGEST THAT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT OWES IT TO ITSELF AND THE GLOBAL INTERNET COMMUNITY TO ENSURE THAT THE TRANSITION FROM A U.S. GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED INTERNET TO AN INDEPENDENT GLOBALLY OPERATED ENTITY CONTINUES AS ICANN EVOLVES FROM ITS CREATION TO MATURITY. AND FURTHER AND LASTLY, BECAUSE ICANN IS STILL IN TRANSITION, WE RESPECTFULLY CALL UPON THE U.S. TO EXPLICITLY, PUBLICLY, AND WITHOUT RESTRICTION SUPPORT ICANN'S EFFORTS TO DEFEND ITSELF IN THE FACE OF THIS CURRENT AND ANY FUTURE LITIGATION.

THAT INCLUDES ASSISTING THE FUNDING OF THE LITIGATION SO THAT ICANN'S BUDGET DOES NOT LARGELY DISAPPEAR AS A RESULT OF THESE LAWSUITS.

THANK YOU.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: GRANT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HOPE THAT YOU WILL ALSO CONVEY THAT MESSAGE OUTSIDE OF THE ROOM TO THE APPROPRIATE PARTIES.

MR. MITCHELL.

>>W.G. CHAMPION MITCHELL: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHOM I HAVE NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET, MY NAME IS CHAMPION MITCHELL, AND I AM THE CHAIRMAN AND CEO OF THE NEWLY LIBERATED NETWORK SOLUTIONS.

(LAUGHTER.)

(APPLAUSE.)

>>W.G. CHAMPION MITCHELL: BUT I COME TODAY NEITHER TO PRAISE NOR TO BURY CEASAR.

I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK WITH YOU, HOWEVER, AND TRY TO SPEAK WITH A VOICE OF A CONSTITUENCY THAT IS NOT BEING HEARD TODAY, THE MOST IMPORTANT CONSTITUENCY THAT EXISTS, THE ONE THAT I AM SURE YOU CARE ABOUT GREATLY, AND I KNOW I CARE ABOUT GREATLY, AND THAT IS THE AVERAGE USER OF THE INTERNET AND OF OUR SERVICES.

YOUR CHAIRMAN HAS SUGGESTED TO ME THAT RATHER THAN GIVING MY OPINION, I MIGHT BE MORE USEFUL TO YOU IF I SHARED A FEW FACTS.

WE HAVE DONE A GREAT DEAL OF RESEARCH. SINCE WE ARE NO LONGER MONOPOLIST, WE THINK IT IS A WISE THING TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR CUSTOMERS, AND TO TRY TO RESPOND TO THEM RATHER THAN TELLING THEM WHAT THEY NEED.

WE FOUND OUT SOME VERY INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT YOU AND I SERVE.
THEY FALL INTO, ESSENTIALLY, TWO VERY LARGE GROUPS.

WE HAVE A LITTLE OVER 8 MILLION DOMAIN NAMES UNDER MANAGEMENT.
ABOUT HALF OF THEM ARE HELD BY 250,000 REGISTRANTS WITH 300,000 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTACTS, OR ABOUT 500,000 OF OUR FOUR AND A HALF MILLION CUSTOMERS HOLD ABOUT HALF THE NAMES.

THE OTHER FOUR MILLION CUSTOMERS HOLD AN AVERAGE OF 1.02 NAMES PER CUSTOMER.
ALMOST ALL OF THEM HAVE ONE NAME.
THEY'RE VERY DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE.

OUR, AS WE CALL THEM, POWER USERS, WHO ARE LARGE CORPORATIONS SUCH AS THOSE REPRESENTED BY THE IP INTERESTS HERE, LARGE SERVICERS, SUCH AS PEOPLE WHO ARE WEB SITE DESIGNERS, ADVERTISING AGENCIES, AND, OF COURSE, AS ALWAYS, LAW FIRMS, AND, UNFORTUNATELY, I USED TO BE ONE OF THOSE, THESE PEOPLE ARE WELL REPRESENTED HERE.

THEIR PROFILE, THE PROFILE OF THE ACTUAL PEOPLE MANAGING THE DOMAINS, MANAGING THE TECHNOLOGY, IS, THEY ARE VASTLY PREDOMINANTLY MALE.
THEY ARE BETWEEN THE AGES OF 24 AND 32.
THEY MANAGE A LARGE NUMBER OF DOMAINS.
THEY ARE HIGHLY TECHNICALLY COMPETENT.
AND THEY'RE THE PEOPLE SITTING IN THIS ROOM TODAY.
AND THEY ARE HEARD FROM.

NOW, LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THE OTHER FOUR MILLION, BECAUSE I WILL SUBMIT TO YOU THAT IF THE INTERNET IS TO REACH ITS FULL POTENTIAL AS THE MOST POWERFUL TOOL OF COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMERCE THAT HAS EVER BEEN SEEN, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE YOU AND I NEED TO WORRY ABOUT.

SO LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THE OTHER FOUR MILLION.
FIRST OF ALL, THEY'RE NOT PREDOMINANTLY MALE.
THEY'RE ABOUT EVENLY DIVIDED.
SECOND, THEY'RE NOT YOUNG.
THEY RANGE FROM 20S TO THEIR 50S.
THIRD, THEY ARE NOT TECHNOLOGY-SAVVY.
IN FACT, THEY ARE APPREHENSIVE OF TECHNOLOGY.

WE PAID A MARKET RESEARCH FIRM, MODEM MEDIA, QUITE A BIT OF MONEY TO GO OUT AND FIND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THESE FOLKS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.

THE NUMBER ONE OVERWHELMING CONCERN, MORE THAN 67% OF THEM SAID THE MAJOR IMPEDIMENT TO THEIR USE OF THE INTERNET IS THEIR FEAR FOR THE PRIVACY OF THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION.
THEY ARE TERRIFIED OF IDENTITY THIEVES, THEY DON'T LIKE SPAMMERS.
THEY ARE AFRAID OF SLAMMERS.

AND WHEN YOU TAKE THEM FROM THAT TO WHAT ELSE ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT, WHAT OTHER THAN THE USE OF YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION AGAINST YOU ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT, THE PARENTS AMONG THEM, THEIR VERY FIRST RESPONSE ALMOST UNIVERSALLY, IS PREDATORS OF THEIR CHILDREN.

BECAUSE ABOUT ONE-HALF OF THOSE FOUR MILLION PEOPLE GIVE THEIR HOME ADDRESS AND THEIR HOME TELEPHONE NUMBER BECAUSE THEY'RE OPERATING AN OFFICE OUT OF THEIR HOME OR THEY HAVE A BUSINESS INTENT THAT THEY WANT TO DEVELOP ONE DAY.

THEY DON'T HAVE AN OFFICE.
THEY USE THEIR HOME INFORMATION.
THESE PEOPLE ARE ALSO VERY CONCERNED ABOUT BEING TAKEN.
THE INTERNET'S A NEW THING.
THEY CAN'T SEE EACH OTHER.

I MEAN, I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU, AND I WILL NOT GO OFF ON THIS, BUT I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THE REASON EBAY HAS BEEN SO SUCCESSFUL IS, IT IS ENTIRELY FOCUSED ON THE BUYER.

THE SELLER IS ALWAYS WRONG; THE BUYER IS ALWAYS RIGHT, NO MATTER WHAT THE DISPUTE.
THEREFORE, BUYERS HAVE CONFIDENCE.

I DON'T KNOW IF MEG WAS BRILLIANT OR LUCKY OR BOTH, BUT THAT'S THE RIGHT FORMULA.
AND I SUBMIT TO YOU, IT'S THE RIGHT FORMULA FOR US.
AND SO I AM GOING TO VERY BRIEFLY, AS BRIEFLY AS MY ACCENT AND CULTURAL HERITAGE WILL ALLOW --
(LAUGHTER.)

>>W.G. CHAMPION MITCHELL: I AM FROM THE SOUTH BRONX.

(LAUGHTER.)

>>W.G. CHAMPION MITCHELL: -- SPEAK TO YOU VERY BRIEFLY ABOUT TWO ISSUES THAT I THINK IMPACT HERE.

THE FIRST IS WAIT-LIST SERVICE.
AND LET ME START BY SAYING, I AM NOT HERE TO ARGUE THE PROS OR CONS OF WAIT-LIST SERVICE.
I DO NOT CARE ABOUT THAT.
I DO KNOW THAT THERE IS ABUSE IN THE SECONDARY MARKET.

LET ME BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT PAUL AND ELLIOT WERE BANTYING ABOUT TODAY, BECAUSE THERE IS NO CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF ANY SUBSTANCE.
YOUR VOTES ARE, I UNDERSTAND, ABOUT SIX MONTHS BEHIND ON APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTRANTS, THERE ARE SO MANY.

THE REASON IS SIMPLE.
BECOME A REGISTRANT, GET A THREAD, SELL IT FOR $20,000.

THAT'S THE MARKET PRICE, SO THE REGISTRY CAN BE BANGED BY PEOPLE IN THE SECONDARY MARKET.
THAT'S THE SCAM.
THAT'S THE GAME.

I THINK WAIT-LIST SERVICE HELPS WITH THAT.
BUT I WOULD AGREE WITH YOUR CHAIRMAN THAT IT IS NOT THE WHOLE ANSWER.
BUT HELPING IS BETTER THAN NOT HELPING.
BUT WHAT I REALLY WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT IS THIS: WE HAVE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF CUSTOMERS WHO WANT THE SERVICE.
AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE IT TO THEM.

NOW, LET ME SAY RIGHT HERE THAT I THINK THE VERISIGN REGISTRY HAS BEEN WHOLLY IRRESPONSIBLE IN THE WAY THEY HAVE HANDLED THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS SERVICE.

I HAVE SAID THAT TO RUSTY LEWIS AND I WILL SAY IT TO YOU.
BUT THE FACT IS THAT THIS SERVICE HAS BEEN OFFERED, THAT WE ALREADY HAVE OURSELVES OVER 40,000 PEOPLE WHO WANT IT, THAT THEY ARE EXPECTING THIS, AND THEY ARE THE SMALL PLAYERS, AND THEY -- IT GOES RIGHT BACK TO THIS CREDIBILITY OF US AS AN ISSUE.

YOU SET DOWN SIX CONDITIONS.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THOSE WERE MET.
WE SIMPLY WANT TO OFFER THIS TO OUR CUSTOMERS.
WE SPEAK FOR OUR CUSTOMERS.
IT IS NOT ANTICOMPETITIVE.
THAT IS RIDICULOUS.

BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO OFFER OTHER SECONDARY MARKET SERVICES, SOME OF WHOM ARE THE VERY PEOPLE UP HERE WHO ARE SAYING IT'S ANTICOMPETITIVE BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO COMPETE WITH IT.
I DON'T CARE ABOUT EITHER ONE -- A POX ON THEM, OR ON VERISIGN.

I CARE ABOUT THE CUSTOMERS.
THE CUSTOMERS WANT THIS.
THEY ALSO WANT THOSE OTHER SERVICES.
WE'RE GOING TO OFFER ALL OF THEM.
LET THEM DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT.
LET THEM DECIDE WHAT HAS VALUES.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WHEN I CAME IN, I INHERITED A GROUP OF MONOPOLISTS WHO HAD A DEGREE OF ARROGANCE BEYOND ANYTHING I HAD EVER SEEN.
FOR THAT REASON, THERE IS NOT A SINGLE VICE PRESIDENT LEFT AND THERE'S ONE DIRECTOR.

I GOT RID OF ALL OF THEM.
AND THE REASON IS VERY SIMPLY THIS: IT IS NOT MY PLACE TO TELL THE CUSTOMER WHAT THEY WANT.

IT IS MY PLACE TO TRY TO HELP THEM UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE GETTING WITH WHAT THEY SAY THEY WANT. AND THEN IF THEY WANT IT, GIVE IT TO THEM.
AND I SUBMIT THAT THAT'S WHAT WE ALL OUGHT TO BE DOING.

IT IS ABOUT CHOICE.
IT IS ABOUT FREEDOM OF CHOICE.
IT IS ABOUT THE REAL DEMOCRACY THAT THE INTERNET CAN BRING ABOUT.
AND IT IS ABOUT A WORLDWIDE DEMOCRACY BASED ON CHOICE.

I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO GO TO MY FOUR AND A HALF MILLION CUSTOMERS AND TELL THEM THAT THE COMBINATION OF IRRESPONSIBILITY ACTIONS BY REGISTRY AND BUREAUCRACY KEEP THEM FROM GETTING WHAT THEY WANT.

BUT IF I HAVE TO TELL THEM THAT, I WILL.

AND I WOULD URGE YOU THAT AS WE SIT HERE IN THE LAND OF THE CEASARS, YOU MIGHT WANT TO REMEMBER ONE LESSON THEY TAUGHT US.

IF YOU RESPOND TO THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE, YOU WILL SURVIVE AND GAIN POWER.

IF YOU DO NOT, YOU WILL BECOME EXTINCT.

AND THAT IS THE CHALLENGE I THINK THAT FACES YOU TODAY.

THE SECOND ISSUE, VERY QUICKLY, GOES TO THEIR GREATEST FEAR, PRIVACY.
AS I SAID, 67% OF THEM ARE AFRAID TO USE THE INTERNET, EVEN THOUGH THEY WANT TO.
WE EVEN HAVE A NAME FOR THESE PEOPLE.
WE CALL THEM "EAGER BUT ANXIOUS."

THEY'RE ANXIOUS ABOUT THE TECHNOLOGY, THEY'RE ANXIOUS ABOUT THEIR PRIVACY.
WE HAVE TO MAKE THEM CONFIDENT, YOU AND I.
WE HAVE TO MAKE THEM CONFIDENT IN USING THIS.
THAT IS THE ONLY WAY IT WILL EXPAND TO ITS FULL POTENTIAL.
AND I SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THE DATA-MINING OF WHOIS AND THE COLLECTION OF THIS DATA AND MAKING IT AVAILABLE TO THE WORLD AT LARGE IS A HUGE DETERRENT.

EVERY WEEK, WE GET E-MAILS FORWARDED TO US FROM OUR CUSTOMERS WHERE THEY HAVE RECEIVED OFFERS TO BUY DATA ON PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS, PRIVATE INFORMATION ON PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS.
AND IF YOU DON'T THINK IT COMES OUT OF WHOIS, LET ME TELL YOU -- AND WE'RE GIVING TO YOUR STAFF THE DISK -- ONE OF THE ONES THAT WAS FORWARDED TO US WAS FROM SOMEONE IN RUSSIA, WHO IS OFFERING 560,000 CANADIAN NAMES AND ALL THE PERSONAL INFORMATION ON THEM FOR $355.

WE -- WHEN THESE ARE FORWARDED TO US, WE TEND TO RESPOND TO THEM ANONYMOUSLY TO SEE WHAT WE CAN GET. AND WHAT WE GOT WAS A WONDERFUL DISKETTE OF 15,000 NAMES.
BUT WE ALWAYS ASK THEM, WE WANT TO KNOW IF IT'S VALID.

SO TELL US WHERE IT CAME FROM.
PROVE TO US WHERE YOU GOT IT.
WELL, MOST OF THEM WON'T.
THEY'RE TOO SMART.
THIS GUY DID.

AND WHAT WE CAN SHOW YOU IS, AND WHAT THAT DISK SHOWS, AND WE ARE TURNING THIS OVER TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, EVERY BIT OF IT WAS MINED OUT OF WHOIS, SADLY, SOME OF IT OUT OF OURS, BUT OUT OF EVERY OTHER MAJOR REGISTRAR ALSO.
SO THIS IS NOT THE FIGMENT OF SOMEBODY'S IMAGINATION.

THERE ARE THOSE IN THIS ROOM WHO WOULD SAY, OH, THIS IS SOMETHING THE REGISTRARS CREATE AS A COVER.
THAT'S NOT TRUE.
THERE'S THE EVIDENCE.
THERE ARE LEGITIMATE LAW ENFORCEMENT NEEDS, THERE ARE LEGITIMATE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEEDS.
THOSE CAN BE MET.

BUT FOR ALL OF US, IF WE DO NOT MEET THE CONCERNS, THE FEARS, THE NEEDS, AND THE DESIRES OF THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO USE THIS MEDIUM AND GAIN THE POWER IT CAN GIVE THEM, THEN WE WILL ALL FAIL AND WE WILL ALL DESERVE TO FAIL.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I CAN'T RESIST -- FIRST OF ALL, THAT KIND OF STRAIGHT TALK IS MUCH APPRECIATED.

YOUR COMMENT ABOUT A POX ON EVERYONE MAKES ME THINK THAT MY EARLIER HOME FOR PAX ROMANA HAS TURNED INTO POX ROMANA.

OTHER OPEN MICROPHONE?

YOU'LL HAVE TO FIND YOURSELVES QUEUING UP TO GET IN ORDER.
DON'T FORGET TO REPORT TO THE INTERPRETERS YOUR NAME SO THEY'LL KNOW HOW TO DO THAT.

>>MICHAEL ARRINGTON: HELLO.
MY NAME IS MICHAEL ARRINGTON.

I'M THE CEO OF POOL.COM, A SMALL CANADIAN COMPANY IN THE DELETING DOMAIN BUSINESS.

BEFORE I START WITH THE COMMENTS I PREPARED, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS ONE THING CHAMP SAID, BECAUSE HE DID ADDRESS WLS QUITE EXTENSIVELY.

AND HE TALKED A LOT ABOUT CUSTOMER CHOICE AND GIVING THE CUSTOMER WHAT THEY WANT.
AND I THINK THOSE ARE IMPORTANT WORDS.
BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO CHAMP, I AM NOT SURE HE FULLY UNDERSTANDS WHAT WLS BRINGS TO THE CUSTOMER.

IT ELIMINATES CHOICE.

CHOICE REQUIRES OPTIONS, AND WITH WLS, THERE ARE NO OPTIONS.
THERE IS A SINGLE OPTION.
AND I SUPPOSE THAT WHEN CUSTOMERS ARE FACED WITH A SINGLE OPTION, MUCH LIKE THEY WERE WITH AT&T IN THE '70S, THEY WILL CHOOSE THAT OPTION.

BUT WHEN GIVEN A CHOICE OF MULTIPLE OPTIONS, THEY WILL TEND TO CHOOSE THE ONE THAT WORKS BEST FOR THEM.
AND WHAT WORRIES ME IS THAT TODAY, WE HAVE SUCH A VIBRANT, HEALTHY, COMPETITIVE MARKET, FULL OF CHOICES FOR THE CONSUMER, BASED ON A MULTITUDE OF BUSINESS MODELS.

AND WE'RE SEEING THAT CUSTOMERS ARE CHOOSING A BUSINESS MODEL THAT ULTIMATELY IS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN THAT PROPOSED UNDER WLS.
AND I HOPE CHAMP AND I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THAT IN PERSON AS WELL.

GOING BACK A COUPLE OF YEARS TO BUCHAREST IN 2002 AND AFTER THAT, THE BOARD MADE DECISIONS ON WLS AFTER ENGAGING AND ASKING FOR THE OPINIONS OF ITS SUPPORTING COUNCILS.
AND IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT THE DNSO CAME OUT HEAVILY, IN FACT, A SUPERMAJORITY, AGAINST THE WLS PROPOSAL, THE BOARD DID APPROVE A FORM OF WLS AND REQUESTED ITS STAFF TO ENGAGE IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH VERISIGN.

I'M NOT HERE TO DEBATE WHETHER THAT WAS THE RIGHT OR THE WRONG DECISION.
IT WAS A DECISION THAT WAS MADE BY THE BOARD IN GOOD FAITH.
AND I THINK THAT THERE WERE FACTS AT THE TIME THAT COULD HAVE SUPPORTED THAT DECISION.

THE FACTS SPECIFICALLY THAT I THINK WERE RELEVANT AT THE TIME WERE THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO -- AT THE TIME, NO REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD IN PARTICULAR. AND THAT WAS A PRIMARY REASON PUT FORWARD BY VERISIGN FOR PROPOSING -- FOR SUPPORTING THE WLS, IN THAT THERE WERE QUITE A FEW ACCIDENTAL DELETIONS.
AND WITHOUT THE REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T EXIST AT THE TIME, WLS WAS SORT OF A FORM OF INSURANCE AGAINST THAT.
SINCE THEN, THE REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD HAS QUITE SUCCESSFULLY BEEN RELEASED.
AND I THINK THAT YOU NO LONGER HAVE THE PROBLEM WITH ACCIDENTAL DELETIONS THAT YOU USED TO HAVE.
AND I THINK EVERYONE WILL PROBABLY AGREE WITH THAT.

YOU ALSO AT THE TIME HAD NO REAL MECHANISM FOR PARTIES TO OBTAIN OTHER THAN THROUGH WHAT WAS KNOWN AS A REAL POOL.
AND THAT WAS CAUSING SIGNIFICANT CONGESTION AT THE REGISTRY.
AND, IN FACT, AT TIMES EVEN POTENTIALLY CLOGGING THE REGISTRY, BRINGING IT DOWN, PERHAPS.

WITH THE RELEASE OF THE, QUOTE, UNQUOTE, BATCH POOL, THERE IS A WHOLE NEW MECHANISM AND SET OF RULES FOR REGISTRARS TO OBTAIN DELETING DOMAINS THAT WEREN'T AVAILABLE TO THEM TWO YEARS AGO.
AND WITH THOSE RULES UNDER VERY CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT, WITH CONTROLLED BANDWIDTH AND NUMBER OF CONNECTIONS TO THE REGISTRY, I THINK THAT THE REGISTRY TODAY WOULD AGREE THAT THOSE TECHNICAL ISSUES ARE NO LONGER IN PLACE.

AND I THINK THERE'S A THIRD REASON, WHICH, TO ME, IS THE MOST IMPORTANT.
IT GOES TO WHAT CHAMP SAID ABOUT LOOKING AT WHAT THE CUSTOMER WANTS.

TWO YEARS AGO, THERE WAS ONLY A SINGLE BUSINESS MODEL WHEN IT CAME TO BACK-ORDERING OR PURCHASING DELETING DOMAIN NAMES.
AND THAT WAS THE PRIMARY COMPETITOR IN THE MARKET AT THE TIME HAD A MODEL WHERE A CONSUMER WOULD PAY AN UP-FRONT FEE IF THEY'D LIKE TO OBTAIN A DOMAIN NAME.

THAT UP-FRONT FEE WAS PAID REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE DOMAIN EVER DELETED.
IT SEEMED LIKE A GOOD MODEL AT THE TIME WHEN IT WAS THE ONLY OPTION AVAILABLE TO CONSUMERS.

BUT AS CHOICES SPREAD AND OPTIONS BECAME AVAILABLE, IT BECAME VERY CLEAR THAT CONSUMERS PREFERRED A SUCCESS-BASED FEE WHERE THEY PAID FOR A DELETING NAME ONLY IF THEY ACTUALLY OBTAINED IT.

IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, SINCE WLS WAS PROPOSED, YOU HAVE SEEN A PLETHORA OF BUSINESS MODELS EMERGE THAT ALLOW THE CONSUMER TO OBTAIN A DOMAIN NAME -- PAY FOR A DOMAIN NAME ONLY IF THEY SUCCESSFULLY ACHIEVE IT.
AND I THINK THAT WITH HINDSIGHT, WE REALIZE THAT THE BUSINESS MODEL THAT WLS IS BASED ON IS FATALLY FLAWED.

SO I WOULD URGE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THAT AS WELL ON SATURDAY WHEN THEY LOOK AT THE WLS PROPOSAL.
SO, IN SUMMARY, I URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THE PROPOSAL ON SATURDAY.

I THINK IT IS ANTICONSUMER AND ANTICOMPETITIVE.

IT IS DECEPTIVE TO CONSUMERS AND WILL DESTROY AN EXISTING HEALTHY AND VIBRANT MARKET.
THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
PLEASE.

>>BOB CONNELLY: TRYING TO BE GENDER-NEUTRAL, AND I ALMOST ADDRESSED YOU AS MR. CHAIRPERSON.
SO LET ME JUST LET IT BE VINT.

IT'S BOB CONNELLY, PSI, JAPAN.

YOU GAVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK DURING THE REGISTRARS' CONSTITUENCY MEETING THE OTHER DAY, UNEXPECTEDLY, ON THE QUESTION OF THE IDN DOMAINS.

I SOMEWHAT INCOHERENTLY AND PERHAPS EMOTIONALLY RESPONDED WITH THE PROBLEMS MY STAFF IS FACED WITH.

I HAVE RECORDED MY COMMENTS MORE COHERENTLY NOW AND HAVE GIVEN THE USB STICK TO THE SCRIBE.
HOPEFULLY, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT WAS SAID MORE CAREFULLY.

I THINK THE LESSON OF WHAT HAPPENED THEN, IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY OTHER THINGS WHICH ARE ON YOUR DESK, THERE MAY BE EFFECTS OF NEW REGISTRY SERVICES WHICH COULD HAVE EFFECTS WHICH ARE UNANTICIPATED AND REMOTELY DISTANT FROM THE ORIGINAL ISSUE, SO AS ANY OF THESE COME UP DOWN THE PIKE, IT TAKES A LOT OF THOUGHT.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, MR. CONNELLY.

>>TONY HOLMES: TONY HOLMES, ISPCP.

DURING THE ICANN MEETING IN TUNIS, THE ISPCP EXPRESSED CONCERNS OVER CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE RIRS' ADVICE TO ICANN OF THEIR INTENTION TO MOVE AHEAD WITH PLANS TO SET IN PLACE A NEW NUMBER RESOURCE ORGANIZATION.

THIS PROPOSAL SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGED THE ROLE OF THE ADDRESS COUNCIL AND ITS FUNCTION AS A BODY WHERE GLOBAL ADDRESS POLICY COULD BE DEVELOPED.

AGAINST THAT BACKGROUND, THE ISPCP WELCOMED A LETTER FROM ICANN TO THE CHAIR OF THE NRO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL ON THE 29TH OF JANUARY, WHICH MADE A NUMBER OF PROPOSALS THAT ICANN FELT REQUIRED ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AND CLARIFICATION.

THE RESPONSE TO THAT LETTER WAS SENT TO ICANN BY THE NRO ON THE 24TH OF FEBRUARY AND PUBLISHED ON THE ICANN WEB SITE.

THIS WAS DISCUSSED DURING THE ISPCP MEETING HERE IN ROME, WHERE IT WAS NOTED THAT SOME OF THE SPECIFIC CHANGES WHICH ICANN HAD PROPOSED HAD BEEN ACCEPTED, WHILST OTHERS HAD NOT.

DURING THE PAST FEW DAYS, MEMBERS OF THE ISPCP HAVE TAKEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS ONGOING CONCERNS WITH MEMBERS OF THE NRO AND OTHER RIR REPRESENTATIVES.

THIS DIALOGUE, CONDUCTED IN A SPIRIT OF WILLINGNESS AND COOPERATION, HAS PROVED BENEFICIAL IN HIGHLIGHTING THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES.

IT HAS BECOME APPARENT THAT SOME OF THE -- THANK YOU.

IT HAS BECOME APPARENT THAT SOME OF THE CONCERNS RAISED STEM FROM DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THE
PROPOSAL, AND IT WAS ACCEPTED THAT THIS WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE NEAR FUTURE THROUGH AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT REVIEW.
THE ONE REMAINING ISSUE THE ISPCPCP WOULD LIKE TO DRAW TO ATTENTION IS THE NEED TO ENSURE AN OFFICIAL LIAISON IS SET IN PLACE BETWEEN THE GAC AND THE NRO.

AS ICANN STATED IN THE LETTER REFERRED TO ABOVE, SUCH A LIAISON IS CONSIDERED ESSENTIALLY ESSENTIAL TO THE OPEN EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY DEFINED IN THE MOU.

HOWEVER, TO WORK WELL, SUCH RELATIONSHIPS NEED TO WORK BILATERALLY BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES IN ORDER TO GAIN FULL BENEFIT.
FOR THE ISPCP, THE NEED TO ESTABLISH SUCH A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GAC REMAINS A FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENT.
THE ISPCP REMAINS COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH THE NRO AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS TO ENSURE ICANN BECOMES FIRMLY ESTABLISHED AS THE BODY THAT TAKES ACCOUNT OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND SUCCESSFULLY ESTABLISHES ITSELF AS A CREDIBLE AND HIGHLY RESPECTED ORGANIZATION.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TONY.
THAT'S A HELPFUL INPUT TO OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE RIR AND NRO GROUPS.
PLEASE.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
MY NAME IS BRUCE TONKIN, AND I AM SPEAKING HERE AS BRUCE TONKIN FROM MELBOURNE, IT, WHICH IS A DOMAIN NAME REGISTRAR.

AND MY COMMENTS ARE RELATIVELY SELF-INTERESTED ON THE BASIS OF THE BUSINESS OF MELBOURNE IT.
BUT WE ALSO HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE SUCCESS OF ICANN AND IN THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF ICANN.

I WANT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE ICANN BUDGET AND HOW TO FUND THAT BUDGET.

THE -- IN THE PAST, WE'VE HAD QUITE A LOT OF THOUGHT GIVEN INTO WHAT THE BUDGET SHOULD BE AND, YOU KNOW, HOW THE FUNDS SHOULD BE ALLOCATED.

BUT RELATIVELY LITTLE THOUGHT HAS BEEN GIVEN IN RECENT YEARS TO THE FUNDING MODEL AND WHERE THOSE FUNDS ARE OBTAINED FROM.

IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, THE BUDGET HAS INCREASED, AND, ESSENTIALLY, THAT HAS BEEN FUNDED THROUGH DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATIONS.
AND YOU'LL NOTE THAT THE PRICE OF DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATIONS HAS NOT GONE UP AS THE BUDGET HAS GONE UP, WHICH THEN MEANS THAT REGISTRARS ARE ABSORBING THOSE FUNDING INCREASES.
SO VERY MUCH THE BURDEN HAS FALLEN ON REGISTRARS.

AND REGISTRARS REALLY, I THINK, GENERALLY DON'T MIND.

WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE DO NEED TO SUPPORT ICANN, AND WE'VE BEEN WILLING TO DO THAT IN THE PAST.

HOWEVER, AS WE COME UP FOR LOOKING AT PERHAPS A THREE-YEAR PLAN, I WOULD URGE ICANN TO ENGAGE WITH THE REGISTRARS AND THE REGISTRIES AND THINK ABOUT DIFFERENT WAYS THAT THE FUNDING MODEL MIGHT WORK THAT RELATE MORE TO THE VALUE OF THE INDUSTRY NOW COMPARED TO WHAT IT WAS SOME YEARS AGO.

AND TO GIVE SOME EXAMPLES IN PERHAPS SOME REAL-WORLD ANALOGIES, IF WE THINK ABOUT THE REAL ESTATE WORLD, WE'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF -- THE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRARS ARE IN THE BUSINESS OF SELLING ADDRESSES.

SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT US AS SELLING LETTER BOXES, AND WE STICK A LETTER BOX ON A PIECE OF LAND, AND THAT'S THE ADDRESS.

BUT THEN THE REAL COST OF ESTABLISHING A BUILDING ON THE LAND AND, IN FACT, IMPROVING, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT OF THAT LAND, IS FAR IN EXCESS OF THE VALUE OF THE DOMAIN NAME ITSELF.

THERE WAS A SURVEY DONE IN AUSTRALIA OF THE COST OF WEB SITES AND ESTABLISHING AN ONLINE BUSINESS.
AND THE DOMAIN NAME WAS LESS THAN .05% OF THE VALUE THAT IS EVENTUALLY ATTACHED TO THAT DOMAIN NAME.

IN A REAL ESTATE ANALOGY, GOVERNMENTS MOVED AWAY FROM PERHAPS THE REVENUE OF TRYING TO MOVE TO THE SALE OF THE LAND, AND VERY SOON MOST OF THE GOOD LAND WAS ALREADY SOLD, AND THEY MOVED MORE TOWARDS OTHER FUNDING MODELS, INCLUDING TAKING A PERCENTAGE, PERHAPS, OF THE AUCTION PRICE AS LAND IS TRANSFERRED FROM ONE OWNER OF THE LAND TO ANOTHER OWNER OF THE LAND.
AND THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THE FUNDING MODEL HAS CHANGED AS THE INDUSTRY AND THE VALUE OF THE LAND HAS CHANGED.

AND I JUST, WITHOUT GOING INTO SUGGESTIONS AT THIS STAGE, JUST ENCOURAGE THE ICANN PRESIDENT TO ALLOCATE ENOUGH TIME TO REALLY SIT DOWN AND WORK WITH REGISTRARS THAT ARE GENERALLY REALLY UNDERSTANDING THE BUSINESS, UNDERSTAND WHERE THE VALUE IS MOVING TO.

AND THE VALUE HAS MOVED AWAY FROM REGISTRATION AND IS VERY MUCH MOVING TOWARDS THE SECONDARY MARKET.

AND YOU MAY WELL SEE A LARGE QUEUE OF PEOPLE BEHIND ME TODAY, AND I SUSPECT THAT MANY OF THEIR COMMENTS ARE RELATED TO THE SECONDARY MARKET AND NOT AT ALL TO DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION.

THANK YOU.

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

I WOULD INVITE YOU TO DRAW TO THE ATTENTION OF THE CHAIRMAN OF OUR FINANCE COMMITTEE, IVAN CAMPOS, IDEAS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE FOR ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURES FOR FUNDING.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD INTERJECT.

BRUCE -- AND THIS GOES BACK TO THE COMMENTS I HAD MADE TO MARILYN EARLIER.

WE ARE CONSIDERING A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
AND THREE NUMBERS THAT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE THAT IS HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN ARE EIGHT, 12, AND 18.
AND THAT IS 8 CENTS, 12 CENTS, AND 17 CENTS, THE INCREMENTAL COST OF WHICH DOMAIN NAMES HAVE GONE UP AND WHICH REGISTRARS ARE CURRENTLY BURDENED WITH.

SO, AGAIN, THE REALITIES OF THE MARKETPLACE ARE BEING COMMUNICATED TO MY FELLOW COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

AND, AGAIN, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CONCERNS THAT GRANT AND MARILYN AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GNSO HAVE TAKEN IN, HAVE RAISED, ARE BEING CONSIDERED.
AND, AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO VETTE IT BEFORE WE COME OUT WITH OUR PRELIMINARY BUDGET.
SO YOU ARE BEING HEARD.

>>BRUCE TONKIN: I WANT TO SEPARATE BUDGET FROM FUNDING LEVEL.

>>MICHAEL PALAGE: NO.
BUDGET -- WE'VE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.
PLEASE GO AHEAD.

>>RAYMOND KING: HI, MY NAME IS RAYMOND KING, THE CEO OF SNAPNAMES.
AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT IN SUPPORT OF WLS.

THERE ARE THREE IMPORTANT POINTS THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE ABOUT WLS AND ABOUT THE THOROUGH AND EXTENSIVE PROCESS IT'S BEEN THROUGH TO DATE.

BUT FIRST LET ME THANK THE BOARD FOR ITS CONTINUED INTEREST IN ENSURING THAT WLS GETS A FAIR HEARING FROM ALL SIDES.
I WANT TO CONVEY JUST A FEW POINTS AS YOU GUYS WRAP UP THIS PROCESS.

FIRST, SINCE ITS INTRODUCTION IN 2001, WLS HAS BEEN CAREFULLY CONSIDERED, APPROVED BY THE BOARD, AND THAT APPROVAL WAS REAFFIRMED WITH THE BOARD'S RATIFICATION OF THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE ABOUT A YEAR AFTER THE ORIGINAL EVENT.

THE COURTS HAVE ALSO WEIGHED IN STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THE LEGITIMACY OF THE SERVICE, AND THERE'S NO NEW INFORMATION ABOUT THE MERITS OR CONDITIONS OF THE SERVICE THAT SHOULD CHANGE THE BOARD'S DECISIONS.

ICANN'S STAFF AND VERISIGN HAVE AGREED TO THE CONDITIONS, AND IT'S TIME TO MOVE FORWARD.

SECONDLY, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ICANN'S IN THE BUSINESS OF TECHNICAL COORDINATION OF THE INTERNET, NOT IN CHOOSING BUSINESS MODELS.

AS ICANN HAS PREVIOUSLY DOCUMENTED, THE ORGANIZATION IS CHARGED WITH PROTECTING COMPETITION, NOT SPECIFIC COMPETITORS.

THIRDLY, HAVING SAID THAT, WLS REALLY IS A GOOD SERVICE.
SPEAKING AS THE FIRST DOMAIN NAME BACK-ORDERING SERVICE THAT WAS IN THE BUSINESS, I CAN SAY WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY THAT WLS WOULD BE WELCOMED BY OUR USERS, BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR, SIMPLE, AND RELIABLE.

THIS IS HIGHLY PREFERRED OVER TODAY'S SYSTEM, WHICH INVOLVES PUTTING BACK ORDERS WITH MULTIPLE PROVIDERS AT MULTIPLE PRICE POINTS AND HAVING TO WATCH THEM ALL SIMULTANEOUSLY AND HOPE FOR THE BEST.
ANY USER WOULD PREFER CERTAINTY OVER LACK THEREOF.

CURRENTLY, COMPANIES WHO ARE PLAYING IN THE DOMAIN NAME RACE -- SORRY -- COMPANIES PLAYING IN THE DROP GAME RACE TO CREATE AS MANY ACCREDITATIONS AS POSSIBLE FOR ONE SIMPLE REASON.
AN ACCREDITATION COSTS ABOUT $15,000 TO SET UP, AND YIELDS ABOUT $25,000 A MONTH IN REVENUE, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, PHENOMENAL.

THAT WOULD PROBABLY EVEN IMPRESS THE WALL STREETERS.
THERE'S NO WONDER SO MANY REGISTRARS HAVE BEEN CREATED RECENTLY FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF SELLING THEIR THREADS.
AND IT'S NO WONDER THERE ARE SO MANY VOICES AGAINST WLS.

AS MORE AND MORE REGISTRARS GET INTO THE BUSINESS, SPECIFICALLY TO SELL THEIR THREADS, THE ENTIRE SYSTEM WILL DEGRADE.
THERE WILL BE -- IT WILL BE HARDER AND HARDER TO PREDICT, YOU KNOW, WHERE TO GO.
SO IT'S GOING TO BE A BAD, BAD THING FOR CONSUMERS.
THEREFORE, WE LOOK FORWARD TO WRAPPING THIS UP AND IMPLEMENTING WLS.
THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

PLEASE.

>>DANIEL RUZZINI MEJIA: MR. CHAIRMAN, MY NAME IS DANIEL MEJIA AND I REPRESENT DOMAIN SPOT AND LOCAL WHOIS. WE ARE THE FIRST COMPANY, THE LEADING COMPANY PROVIDING INFORMATION ABOUT DELETED DOMAIN NAMES AND OUR CUSTOMERS RETRIEVE ON A DAILY BASIS SUCH INFORMATION.

I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SPEND FEW WORDS TO SUPPORT WLS.

FOR TWO SIMPLE REASONS. THE FIRST REASON, IT IS, I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT WLS, SIMPLE, CLEAR AND LEANER TO END USERS. CONSIDERING OUR INNOVATIVE POSITION IN THE MARKET, WE SEE THAT THE CONCEPT OF BACK ORDERING DOMAIN NAME IS NOT VERY EASY TO UNDERSTAND THE WAY IT IS OFFERED. THERE ARE TOO MANY DIFFERENT PROVIDERS OF SUCH SERVICE THAT USE DIFFERENT METHODS, AND THESE ABSOLUTELY GENERATE CONFUSION.

WE BELIEVE THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF WLS, PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS AT ALL, AND TO MAKE BETTER USE OF THE SERVICE.

THE SECOND REASON, ACTUALLY, IS JUST A THOUGHT. IMAGINE IF, TODAY, THE PRIMARY DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION SYSTEM WORKED LIKE THE CURRENT BACK ORDER SYSTEM. CURRENTLY ITS EASY TO REGISTER DOMAIN NAMES BECAUSE THE MECHANISM BEHIND DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION IS LEANER, SIMPLER. WLS WOULD MAKE THE BACK-ORDER SYSTEM LEANER, TOO. FOR THIS REASON, WE LOOK FORWARD TO APPROVAL OF WLS.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
PLEASE.

>>BHAVIN TURAKHIA: HI, I AM BHAVIN TURAKHIA, AND I RUN A REGISTRAR. WE'RE THE SMALL GUYS. I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE WHERE CHAMP LEFT OFF, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO HIM.

AS A REGISTRAR, WE'RE ALL FOR SUPPORTING WHAT CONSUMERS WANT IN SUPPORTING EXACTLY WHAT CONSUMERS AND REGISTRANTS OUT THERE NEED.

NOW, I COULDN'T HELP BUT OBSERVE THAT IN THE NETWORK SOLUTIONS SPEECH THAT WE JUST HEARD, THE NUMBERS STARTED OFF FAIRLY LARGE WITH 8 MILLION DOMAINS AND THEN DIVIDING IT INTO 4 MILLION ON THIS SIDE AND 4 MILLION ON THIS SIDE. BUT WHEN WE STARTED TO TALK ABOUT THE POINT IN WLS, I HEARD 40,000 SUPPORTERS WHICH CONSTITUTES ABOUT 0.5% OF THE MARKET BASE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. NOW, I UNFORTUNATELY DON'T HAVE THE KIND OF MONEY TO SPEND ON MARKET RESEARCH SO I HAVE TO TALK TO MY CONSUMERS MYSELF, WHICH MIGHT BE GOOD OR BAD.

I AM OF BELIEF THAT IN ITS CURRENT FORM, MOST CONSUMERS ARE UNINFORMED ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS THAT WLS HAS ON THEM DIRECTLY. AND I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO BRING OUT A FEW POINTS IN THIS PERSPECTIVE.

THERE ARE QUITE A FEW EXAMPLES THAT CAN ACTUALLY BE DEMONSTRATED. FOR INSTANCE, CURRENTLY, WHENEVER A WLS IS (INAUDIBLE) ON A PARTICULAR NAME, A NOTIFICATION WILL BE SENT OUT TO THE CURRENT REGISTRANT OF THE DOMAIN NAME. THINK OF A SITUATION, FOR INSTANCE, OF A LARGE COMPANY LIKE SAY DISNEY THAT HAS OVER A THOUSAND NAMES AND CONSIDER THE IMPACT THAT THERE WILL BE OF DISNEY GETTING 1,000 E-MAILS STATING THAT SOMEBODY HAS BOUGHT A WLS ON EVERY ONE OF THEIR DOMAIN NAMES AND THEY CAN'T EVEN FIND OUT WHO IT IS.

ANOTHER POINT WHICH IS VERY VALID TO NOTE IS THAT ANY SUCH NOTIFICATION SENT TO A REGISTRANT WHO CURRENTLY OWNS A DOMAIN NAME WILL ONLY ENSURE IN A NAME THAT SHOULD HAVE EARLY EXPIRED IS NOW RENEWED. THE CURRENT REGISTRANT IS ACTUALLY GETTING A NOTICE THAT SOMEBODY OUT THERE IS WILLING TO PAY $30 FOR A DOMAIN NAME THAT HE IS LETTING EXPIRE. NOW, IT COSTS HIM ONLY $6 TO RENEW THAT NAME, AND IT'S A NO-BRAINER THAT HE WOULD ACTUALLY GO AND DO IT AND SET UP A FOR-SALE PAGE ON THAT NAME AND SELL IT FOR 30 OR 60 OR 200 BUCKS OR WHATEVER IT IS.

THERE'S ALSO THE ASPECT THAT CONSUMERS ARE GOING TO BE BLATANTLY ALLOWED TO PURCHASE A WLS AND DOMAIN NAME THAT MIGHT NOT EXPIRE FOR ANOTHER TEN YEARS AND MOST CONSUMERS MAY NOT BE AWARE THEY'RE REALLY BUYING AN OPTION WHICH ACTUALLY IS USELESS FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS. IT'S ALSO FUNNY IT'S CALLED THE WAIT LIST SERVICE BECAUSE THERE'S NO LIST, THERE'S ONLY ONE WLS, WHICH MEANS ONLY ONE CONSUMER CAN BUY IT AND THERE'S A NATURAL ASSUMPTION BEHIND IT THAT THE RIGHT CONSUMER IS GOING TO GET IT. AND I WOULD PUT MY BET ON THIS THAT A SPECULATOR WHO IS INFORMED ABOUT THE DELETED DOMAIN NAMES MARKET IS MORE LIKELY TO OBTAIN A WLS POSITION ON A DOMAIN NAME BEFORE AN INFORMED CONSUMER. IN TODAY'S MARKET, CONSUMERS CAN APPROACH MULTIPLE PARTIES AND ACTUALLY OPT FOR BACK ORDERING A DOMAIN NAME WITH AT LEAST A PROBABILITY OF OBTAINING THAT PARTICULAR NAME, BUT WITH THE WLS IMPLEMENTED, THERE'S REALLY NO WAIT LIST. THERE'S ONLY ONE CHANCE THAT SOMEBODY HAS TO PUT A WLS ON THE DOMAIN NAME.

NOW, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO END WITH A POINT THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE OPEN MIKE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN MENTIONING, WHICH IS WITH REGARDS TO THE MULTIPLE REGISTRAR ACCREDITATIONS THAT ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE MONETIZATION OF THREADS AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT WLS WOULD SOLVE THAT, I DON'T THINK WLS WOULD STOP PEOPLE TO GO OUT THERE AND STOP PEOPLE FROM ACCREDITING THEMSELVES AS REGISTRARS. SO I WOULD ASK THAT, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT THE FACTS ARE FAR MORE DIFFERENT THAN THEY USED TO BE TWO YEARS AGO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU. I FIND IT HELPFUL TO GET THESE DISTINCT AND VARYING VIEWS ON THE SUBJECT.

I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO CONSIDER CAPPING THE LINE RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE IT'S 17 MINUTES PAST THE HOUR. BY THE TIME WE FINISH WITH THOMAS, WE WILL HAVE GOTTEN WELL TOWARDS 7:00, DEPENDING ON THE BREVITY OF THE FOLLOWING COMMENTATORS, HINT, HINT.

SO IF YOU DON'T MIND, THOMAS WILL BE THE LAST TO SPEAK TONIGHT, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TOMORROW FOR OPEN MICROPHONE.

PLEASE.

>>SUSAN CRAWFORD: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MY NAME IS SUSAN CRAWFORD. AND I'M WORKING WITH SNAP NAMES HERE TODAY.

AND I WANT TO SPEAK AS A LAWYER ABOUT THE PROCESS THE SERVICE HAS BEEN THROUGH. AND I'LL BE VERY BRIEF. HOW ABOUT THAT? VERY, VERY BRIEF.

SINCE ITS FORMAL INTRODUCTION ON DECEMBER 31ST, 2001, THIS PROPOSAL HAS BEEN THROUGH AN OPEN, TRANSPARENT, PAINSTAKING AND PROLONGED EXAMINATION. IT'S BEEN THE SUBJECT OF NO FEWER THAN FOUR PUBLIC MEETINGS, AT LEAST TWO GENERAL COUNSEL ANALYSES, SEVERAL 30-DAY COMMENT PERIODS, A VERY DETAILED REPORT FROM THE NAMES COUNCIL, AND MANY BOARD MEETINGS. I WENT THROUGH THE CHRONOLOGY CAREFULLY TO ASCERTAIN ALL OF THIS.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ALL OF THE OBJECTIONS YOU'RE HEARING TODAY HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY AIRED AND CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD, AND THAT IT'S TIME FOR THIS BOARD TO MOVE ON, TO REAFFIRM THE DECISIONS IT MADE IN AUGUST 2002 AND JUNE 2003, AND APPROVE THE WAIT LISTING SERVICE.

THE CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET, THE BIBLICAL REDEMPTION PERIOD HAS BEEN OBSERVED. IT HAS BEEN WORKED ON MANY TIMES, LOWERED THE PRICE, MANY INPUT THAT THE BOARD HAS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED. APPROVING WLS, THE WAIT LISTING SERVICE, AT THIS POINT WOULD BE A SIGN OF THE MATURATION OF THIS BOARD AND AS A SIGN OF THE INCREASING STANDARDIZATION OF WHAT HAPPENS IN ICANN 2.0.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE ONLY THING YOU LEFT OUT IN THAT LONG LIST WAS THE PARTRIDGE IN THE PEAR TREE WHICH I THINK ALSO GOT INTO THE ACT.

>>ERIC BRUNNER-WILLIAMS: MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, HI, JOHN. A QUICK FRIENDLY NOTE TO MY GAMING AWARE FRIENDS THE TUCOWS, ELLIOTT AND OTHERS, OUTSOURCING A BATCH POOL SEEMS LESS FICTIONAL THAN THE ENTIRE REGISTRY OPERATION. SO WHEN WE HEAR THAT ARGUMENT BEING RAISED BY REGISTRAR OPERATOR BACK ENDS, WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT WHY WE CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN OUTSOURCING A BATCH POOL AND OUTSOURCING AN ENTIRE BACK END.

I OPERATE AN ABNACO OWNED REGISTRATION, WHICH SERVES NORTH NEW ENGLAND AND ATLANTIC CANADA AND I'M GOING TO TAKE A DIFFERENT TACK FROM THE PERSON SPEAKING BEFORE ME, AND INSTEAD OF SPEAKING LIKE A LAWYER I WILL SPEAK LIKE A TECHNICIAN, WHICH I AM.

AS I LOOK AT THIS, AS A BENEFICIARY, OF COURSE, WLS WILL FREEZE THE REGISTRAR MARKET SHARE AND IT WILL END THE STATISTICAL TREND TOWARD NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION REFLECTING ONLY THE PRICE AND QUALITY OF NAMED SERVICE PROVIDERS. SO IF APPROVED, WLS WILL MORE OR LESS FREEZE THE EXISTING DISTRIBUTION OF THE DOT COM NAME SPACE IN THE EXISTING REGISTRARS, MAINTAINING THE SIX MODEL WE HAVE NOW.

WLS WILL TRANSFER WILL 6 MILLION A YEAR FROM THE REGISTRAR TO ITS REGISTRY AND ITS BUSINESS PARTNERS. I AM A BENEFICIARY OF THE BATCH POOL OPERATION. I BECAME OPERATIONAL -- OR EXCUSE ME, I BECAME ACCREDITED IN 2002, SO LONG BEFORE ANY OF THIS ACTUALLY MEANT ANYTHING TO ANYBODY.

AND I CAN TELL YOU WHAT I'M DOING WITH MY REVENUE SHARE. I'M RESTARTING THE OPEN SOURCE PROVISIONING SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY THAT WAS BEGUN TWO YEARS AGO AND PARALLELED THE DEVELOPMENT OF EPP IN THE WORKING GROUP OF THE IETF WHICH WAS ABANDONED FOR LACK OF FUNDING FROM ANY SOURCE TWO YEARS AGO.

I PREFER TO SPEND IT ON IMPLEMENTATION THAN ON LITIGATION.

WHEN I LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AS A PROTOCOL DESIGNER EXAMINING A PROBLEM DOMAIN, BACK ORDER IS SIMPLY AN INSTANCE OF REGISTRAR COMMUNICATIONS WITH A NONREGISTRAR. A SPECIALIZED SERVICE BROKER IN THE INSTANCE OF POOL, IMPLEMENTED INTERNALLY BY LARGER REGISTRARS SUCH AS GO DADDY.
ABSTRACTLY THE WLS PROPOSAL IS THAT THE SOLE NONREGISTRAR THAT A REGISTRAR CAN COMMUNICATE WITH -- LET ME REPEAT THAT IN CASE I SCREWED MYSELF UP. THE SOLE NONREGISTRAR THAT A REGISTRAR CAN COMMUNICATE WITH, ASSUMING THE COMMUNICATION HAS ECONOMIC VALUE, IS A REGISTRY.

AS A COMPUTER SCIENTIST I MUST SHARE THE OBSERVATION THAT THIS IS AN OVERSPECIFICATION OF OUR PROBLEM. IF REGISTRARS COMMUNICATE WITH REGISTRARS FOR SOME YET UNIMAGINED PURPOSE THAT CAN BE MONETIZED, WILL REGISTRIES DEFINE THAT WAS A REGISTRY SERVICE AND DEFINE IT FOR THEMSELVES. YOUR ANSWER ON THE WLS SCHEME WILL ANSWER THIS QUESTION FOR THE FUTURE.

WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO SHARE REVENUE THAT ISN'T A FATAL DANCE OF IDIOTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S A MOST COLORFUL WAY TO FINISH.

PLEASE.

>>TOM BARRETT: THANK YOU, MY NAME IS THOMAS BARRETT. I'M FROM ENCIRCA WHICH IS AN ICANN ACCREDITED REGISTRAR. WE OPENED FOR BUSINESS JUST OVER TWO YEARS AGO, AND WE ARE A RETAIL REGISTRAR, IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD.

WE FIRST STARTED SELLING DOT NAMES TO CONSUMERS, WE MOVED INTO DOT US, WE WERE VERY SUCCESSFUL SELLING THAT TO FORTUNE 100 COMPANIES TO PROTECT THEIR TRADEMARKS, TO SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS, AND TO CONSUMERS AS WELL.

AND RECENTLY WE HAVE MOVED INTO THE OTHER GTLDS AND OTHER CCTLDS.

SO IN SHORT, I DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THE END USER. I SUPPORT THEM EVERY DAY, EVEN WHILE WE'RE HERE IN ROME, I'M RESPONDING TO END-USER NEEDS.

WHEN WLS WAS FIRST PROPOSED TWO YEARS AGO, I SAW IT AS SOLVING A LARGER ISSUE. AND THAT'S THE ISSUE OF PROTECTING CONSUMERS AND ENSURING THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE A DOMAIN NAME THAT WAS DELETED INADVERTENTLY. AND THAT WAS A VERY NOBLE GOAL, AND WLS WAS PART OF THAT GOAL.
AND THE INADVERTENTLY COULD HAVE BEEN BECAUSE OF HIJACKING, COULD HAVE BEEN BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T GET RENEWAL NOTICE OR IT WAS DELETED FOR SOME REASON.

AS PART OF A PRECONDITION FOR WLS, THE BOARD INSISTED ON REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD. AND WE NOW HAVE OVER 12 MONTHS OF EXPERIENCE WITH REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD.
AS A RETAIL REGISTRAR, I CAN TELL YOU THAT MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN THAT THE REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD HAS EFFECTIVELY SOLVED THE PROBLEM OF INADVERTENT DELETION OF DOMAIN NAMES.

I ISSUE RESTORE COMMANDS ON THOSE CUSTOMERS WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN TO RENEW OR WHOSE E-MAIL ADDRESS NO LONGER WAS FUNCTIONAL, BUT REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD, IN MY EXPERIENCE, HAS SOLVED THE PROBLEM. CUSTOMERS ARE NOT LOSING THEIR DOMAIN NAMES TO THE DELETION PROCESS ANYMORE.

SO TODAY, FAST FORWARD TWO YEARS. HOW WILL WLS BENEFIT MY CUSTOMERS? AND I'VE BEEN TALKING TO MY CUSTOMERS AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THEY WILL BENEFIT FROM WLS, AND HOW WILL MY BUSINESS, IN TURN, BENEFIT BY PROVIDING THAT SERVICE.

WE'VE HEARD VERY PASSIONATE AND ARTICULATE ARGUMENT FROM THE LARGEST REGISTRAR OF HOW MANY CUSTOMERS THEY HAVE THAT WANT WLS. NOW WE HAVE NOT BEEN PREREGISTRATION AND OFFERING PREREGISTRATIONS FOR WLS. I HAVE BEEN TALKING DIRECTLY WITH MY CUSTOMERS, BUT I HAVE NOT OFFERED A LAND-RUSH PREREGISTRATION QUEUE.

WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THEY DON'T NEED WLS. IT'S VERY SIMPLE, BECAUSE REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD HAS SOLVED THEIR FEAR OF LOSING THEIR DOMAIN NAME.
MY FIRST CUSTOMER, WHEN I STARTED SELLING DOT NAME, WAS JANE PAULEY. SO JANE.PAULEY.NAME WAS MY VERY FIRST SALE AS REGISTRAR OVER TWO YEARS AGO. JANE PAULEY DOESN'T NEED WLS. SHE WANTS TO MAKE SURE HER NAME DOESN'T EXPIRE AND DOESN'T DELETE. AND JANE PAULEY DOESN'T WANT SOMEBODY ELSE BUYING A WLS ON HER NAME.

SO AS A REGISTRAR PROVIDER FOR JANE PAULEY, WHAT IS MY CHOICE? AM I COMPELLED TO SELL HER WLS SO THAT NO ONE ELSE WILL BUY IT? OR DO I SAY, "LOOK, JANE, EVEN IF YOU GET A NOTICE FROM ANOTHER REGISTRAR THAT SOMEONE ELSE HAS BOUGHT WLS ON YOUR NAME, I WILL MAKE SURE THAT YOUR NAME NEVER DELETES." IT'S SIMPLY -- THAT IS SIMPLY THE ONLY CHOICE I HAVE.

SO JUST AS REDEMPTION GRACE PERIOD HAS EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATED THE ACCIDENTAL DELETION OF DOMAIN NAMES, WLS WILL EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATE THE DELIBERATE DELETION OF DOMAIN NAMES.

AS A REGISTRAR, I CANNOT ALLOW A NAME TO DELETE IF A WLS EXISTS FOR ANY REASON. SO EITHER I WILL ENCOURAGE MY CUSTOMER TO RENEW IT, BECAUSE IT'S IN THEIR BEST INTEREST TO RENEW IT, BECAUSE THEY'RE USING IT OR IT REPRESENTS SOME RIGHTS THEY HAVE, OR I WILL INCENT THEM TO SELL IT, BECAUSE IT HAS MARKET VALUE BEYOND WHAT THEY'RE WILLING TO USE IT FOR.

SO DELETION NO LONGER OCCURS. AND THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE AS A RETAIL REGISTRAR.
SO WHAT HAPPENS? WHAT HAPPENS WITH WLS IF IT GOES THROUGH? DELETIONS DON'T HAPPEN. AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN DELETIONS DON'T HAPPEN? WELL, YOU'VE HEARD ONE SUPPORTER OF WLS WHO IS THE LARGEST REGISTRAR, AND IF YOU GO THROUGH A MENTAL CHECKLIST, MAYBE YOU CAN CHECK OFF WHO ELSE MIGHT SUPPORT WLS AMONG THE REGISTRARS AND WHO DOESN'T SUPPORT WLS AMONG THE REGISTRARS. I'LL BET YOU A BEER AT THE BAR WHAT YOU'LL FIND IS THE LARGEST AND OLDEST REGISTRARS SUPPORT WLS. WHY? BECAUSE THEY GET TO RETAIN THEIR INVENTORY OF NAMES. THEY DON'T DELETE ANYMORE.

THE SMALLEST REGISTRARS, LIKE MYSELF, WHO ARE IN BUSINESS EVERY DAY, GAINING CUSTOMERS THE HARD WAY, GAIN NOTHING FROM WLS.
SO YOU HAVE THE EFFECT OF AN INDUSTRY, A REGISTRAR INDUSTRY, WHICH HAS GROWN TO SEVERAL HUNDRED-PLUS REGISTRARS. THE OLDEST AND LARGEST GET STRENGTHENED AND YOU WEAKEN THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY.

THAT IS WHY WLS IS ANTI-COMPETITIVE. IT'S NOT BECAUSE VERISIGN IS GETTING A MONOPOLY. IT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE GIVING THE MONOPOLY TO THE LARGEST REGISTRARS WHO HAVE THAT INVENTORY THAT WON'T DELETE.

THIS APPEARS TO RUN COUNTER TO ICANN'S MISSION, NOT ONLY OF HELPING THE CUSTOMER BUT OF STRENGTHENING COMPETITION IN THE REGISTRAR MARKET.
THANK YOU.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: CAN I -- PLEASE, GO AHEAD.

>>DONNA MCGHEE: MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, THANK YOU FOR THIS TIME. MY NAME IS DONNA MCGHEE AND I REPRESENT BULK REGISTRY, ICANN ACCREDITED REGISTRAR, AND I'M HERE TO STATE MY SUPPORT FOR WLS. AND I'M GOING TO KEEP MY TWO POINTS SHORT.

WHEN THE DECISION FOR WLS HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE, THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN ACCOMMODATED BY THE CONDITIONS YOU IMPOSED AND THE COMPANIES NEED TO BE ABLE TO RELY ON YOUR DECISIONS.

MY SECOND POINT IS SHORT AS WELL. WLS IS A GOOD PRODUCT. IT WILL BE SIMPLE AND EASY FOR CONSUMERS TO USE.

SO BULK REGISTRY FULLY SUPPORTS A QUICK IMPLEMENTATION OF WLS.
THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU FOR YOUR BREVITY AND CLARITY.
NEXT.

>>TIM RUIZ: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I'M TIM RUIZ WITH GO DADDY SOFTWARE. I WAS SENT UP HERE TO SAY ALL SIX CONDITIONS YOU HAD PLACED ON THE WLS NEGOTIATIONS HAD BEEN MET, AND I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT, AND IN PARTICULAR WITH CONDITION "C" WHICH I SEE AS THE MOST IMPORTANT CONDITION OF ALL SIX, BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT'S GOING TO PREVENT REGISTRARS FROM USING INSIDER KNOWLEDGE TO GAME THE WLS SYSTEM.

I KNOW YOU ALL RECALL ORIGINALLY THAT CONDITION "C" WAS -- BECAME LATER TO BE KNOWN AS THE BLACK-OUT PERIOD. IN RESPONSE TO A RECONSIDERATION REQUEST FROM VERISIGN, THE RECONSIDERATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT SOME FLEXIBILITY BE ALLOWED THERE, BUT I QUOTE ALSO THEY SAID WHILE STILL SUBSTANTIALLY ACHIEVING THE GOAL OF THAT CONDITION.

AND SO THE STATE OF THAT CONDITION TODAY, OR THE WAY IT IS WORDED TODAY, AND I'M QUOTING FROM JOHN'S LETTER, THE GENERAL COUNSEL'S LETTER OF JANUARY 26TH, AND THAT CONDITION READS, " TO AVOID AN INCUMBENT REGISTRAR ACQUIRING A PREFERENCE IN OBTAINING A WLS SUBSCRIPTION THROUGH ADVANCE KNOWLEDGE OF OR CONTROL OVER THE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION, THERE SHALL BE APPROPRIATION RESTRICTIONS ON THAT REGISTRAR'S ABILITY TO OBTAIN A WLS SUBSCRIPTION ON ANY DOMAIN NAME IT IS CURRENTLY SPONSORING IN THE REGISTRY."

WELL, WHAT IS THE PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION FROM VERISIGN? IT HAS BASICALLY THREE COMPONENTS. WE'LL LOOK AT THE FIRST TWO IN THE BEGINNING OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PARAGRAPH. ONE IS THAT THERE WOULD BE A PROVISION THAT SIMPLY STATES NO REGISTRAR SHALL USE ADVANCED KNOWLEDGE OR CONTROL OVER THE DELETION OF A DOMAIN REGISTRATION TO OBTAIN A COMMERCIAL BENEFIT RELATED TO A WLS SUBSCRIPTION.

WELL, THAT SHOULD BE A GIVEN. OF COURSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A PROVISION IN THE WLS AGREEMENT IN ORDER TO MEET THE CONDITION.
THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS THROUGH ENFORCEMENT OF THIS PROVISION, VERISIGN AND ICANN WILL COOPERATE TO WORK TO PREVENT REGISTRARS FROM USING INSIDE INFORMATION.

WELL, WHAT IS THAT MECHANISM, THAT ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM, THAT THEY'RE GOING TO COOPERATE TO USE? WHAT ROLE WILL ICANN PLAY? WHAT ROLE WILL VERISIGN PLAY? IT'S NOT DEFINED HERE IN ANY WAY.

WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS A CLEVER RESTATEMENT OF THE CONDITION ITSELF. NOT A REIMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONDITION; JUST A RESTATEMENT OF THE CONDITION.

THE THIRD COMPONENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION REFERS TO THE GTLD REGISTRAR DOMAIN NAME DELETION POLICY. AND AS IF THERE CAN BE SOME RELIANCE ON THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME. AND AS YOU ALL KNOW THAT'S A NEW CONSENSUS POLICY. IT HAS NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED. IT IS UNTESTED, ITSELF; HAS SOME COMPLIANCE ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE LOOKED AT GOING FORWARD.
AND SO TO RELY ON THIS POLICY AS PART OF THE IMPLEMENTATION FOR CONDITION "C" REALLY MAKES NO SENSE AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

SO HOPEFULLY, IF YOU'VE LOOKED CAREFULLY AT THE PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION FOR CONDITION "C," YOU'VE SEEN THIS FOR YOURSELF. IF NOT, I WOULD JUST ASK YOU OR ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO BACK, TAKE A LOOK AGAIN BEFORE SATURDAY AND BEFORE MAKING YOUR VOTE.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S A PRECISE OBSERVATION AND MUCH APPRECIATED. DO WE HAVE ALFONSE AND --

>>ELLIOTT NOSS: I'M GOING TO BE ULTIMATE IN BREVITY.

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: SO, THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO MAKE JUST A COUPLE BRIEF POINTS ABOUT TWO OTHER COMMENTS I'VE LISTENED TO BEFORE. THE FIRST ONE IS ABOUT PRIVACY IN WHOIS DATA, WHICH AS SOMEONE POINTED OUT -- I MEAN, IT'S ACTUALLY WHAT USERS WANT. PERHAPS THE TOP CONCERN THAT USERS CURRENTLY HAVE. THIS MORNING, IN THE ROOM DOWN THERE WE HAD THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE ITALIAN COMMISSION, WHICH IS THE FAIRLY TOP-LEVEL GUY IN THE ITALIAN COMMISSION. AND WE ASKED A QUESTION TO HIM, AND WE ASKED HIM HOW COME THAT A REGISTRAR THAT IS LOCATED IN EUROPE HAS A CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION TO OFFER A FREE AND AVAILABLE TO ALL SERVICE AND (INAUDIBLE) THEN WE HAVE A LAW THAT SAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO PUBLISH. HE SAID IT'S EASY, THE CONTRACT IS CLEARLY VOID, SO IF SOMEONE WANTED TO SUE THE REGISTRAR, THEY WOULD WIN THE CAUSE. SO I THINK WE HAVE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND, IF YOU'RE TALKING PRIVATELY WITH THESE PEOPLE, YOU START TO SAY OH, THIS IS A VERY INTERESTING BOTTOM-UP REGULATORY PROCESS AND WE ARE CONSULTING EVERYONE AND IT TAKES SOME MONTHS BUT WE WILL GET SOMEWHERE, AND YOU SAY WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? I HAVE A LAW HERE. SO I'M GETTING FED UP WITH THIS, AND IF I GET FED UP ABOUT THIS I SIMPLY SEND THE POLICE AND ENFORCE THE LAW.

SO, I MEAN, I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE THIS INTO SERIOUS CONSIDERATION.

YESTERDAY, WE HAD THE WHOIS WORKSHOPS HERE, AND THIS GUY CAME HERE AND NOTICED THAT ON THE PROGRAM AND SAID, WHY ARE YOU HOLDING A WHOIS POLICY WORKSHOP HERE? AND YOU DIDN'T EVEN CARE TO INVOLVE SOMEONE FROM MY AUTHORITY HERE. JUST TO GIVE ADVICE TO TELL YOU WHAT IS LAW AND WHAT IS NOT? AND I THINK THIS IS ALSO AN INTERESTING POINT, BECAUSE I'M STARTING TO FEAR THAT THIS COMMUNITY SOMETIMES GETS TOO MUCH CLOSED IN ITSELF, SO IT DOESN'T TALK WITH THE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD SO IT DOESN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE, BUT SOONER OR LATER IT'S GOING TO COME HERE AND TELL US WHAT WE HAVE TO DO, ACTUALLY.

SO MY SECOND POINT COULD SEEM CONTRADICTORY, BUT IT REALLY IS NOT.

IT'S REALLY ABOUT THE SAME MATTER.
AND IT IS ABOUT THE LAWS, SO I HOPE I DON'T GET SUED, ACTUALLY.
BUT, WELL, I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE A BRIEF PERSONAL POINT.
WELL, I GUESS THAT -- I MEAN, SUING PEOPLE IS A NORMAL WAY OF DOING BUSINESS IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE WORLD.

SO WE HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT, EVEN IF I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT I WOULD STRESS THAT THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE ARE CONTRACTS THAT LIMIT WHAT THE PRIVATE PEOPLE DO WITH THE SERVICES THEY ARE MANAGING.

AND, I MEAN, IF CONTRACTS ARE WRITTEN WELL, EVERYTHING IS FINE.
IF CONTRACTS ARE BADLY WRITTEN AND DON'T FORCE THE PEOPLE -- THESE PEOPLE TO DO THE GOOD THINGS, OR PERHAPS, EVEN LIKE I WAS SAYING BEFORE, FORCE THEM TO DO BAD THINGS, GOVERNMENTS SIMPLY STEP IN.

SO IF SOMEONE THINKS THAT I MEAN, WE CAN SIMPLY CHALLENGE THE CONTRACT, AND IF WE WIN THE LAWSUIT, WE WILL BE FREE TO DO WHAT WE WANT, THAT'S NOT TRUE.
ONE WEEK LATER, YOU WILL GET THE POLICE HERE TO ENFORCE THE LAW.
AND THEY WILL SIMPLY SAY THIS PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP IDEA IS TOTAL CRAP, SO WE HAVE TO DO IT OURSELVES.

SO PLEASE REALIZE BECAUSE ACTUALLY IT MIGHT BE THE MOST STUPID THING YOU ARE GOING TO DO IN THE NEXT YEARS.

THANK YOU.

(APPLAUSE.)

>>VINT CERF: AND THOMAS, YOU HAVE THE HONOR OF COMPLETING THIS SESSION TODAY.

SO -- NO, I'M SORRY.
I KNOW YOU WANT TO, BUT I ALREADY CALLED A CAP.

AND I AM GOING TO BE A REAL DIRTY BIRD ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT'S NOW 40 MINUTES PAST OUR CLOSING TIME.

BUT YOU GET A CHANCE TOMORROW IF YOU'RE HERE.

>>THOMAS ROESSLER: WELL, I SUSPECT YOU WILL HAVE THE VERY LAST WORD TONIGHT.
IN ANY EVENT, I SHOULD PROBABLY FIRST SAY THAT THIS IS STRICTLY THOMAS ROESSLER TALKING TOO MUCH ABOUT ICANN ISSUES.

THIS IS NOT THOMAS ROESSLER TALKING ON BEHALF OF ANYONE.
TWO POINTS.

FIRST OF ALL, CONDITION C ON WLS WAS BROUGHT UP SOME MINUTES AGO BY TIM RUIZ.
THIS CONDITION CAME FROM A TIME WHEN THERE WAS NO DELETES POLICY.
ONE OF THE ORIGINAL RATIONALES FOR THIS CONDITIONS WAS THE SCENARIO THAT REGISTRARS COULD, WITHOUT A DELETES POLICY, HOARD DELETED DOMAIN NAMES, COULD KEEP THEM, UNLESS SOMEONE PLACED A WLS SUBSCRIPTION THROUGH THEM.

THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN AN INCENTIVE FOR CONSUMERS TO GO TO REGISTRARS THAT HOARD DOMAIN NAMES AND ACQUIRE WLS SUBSCRIPTIONS FROM THESE PRECISE REGISTRARS, AND IN TURN, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN AN INCENTIVE FOR REGISTRARS TO KEEP DOMAIN NAMES AFTER DELETION.

SO, FROM MY PERSONAL POINT OF VIEW, MUCH OF WHAT IS UNDER "C" WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF BY AN IMPLEMENTED AND EFFECTIVE DELETIONS POLICY.
AND WE HAVE GONE SOME WAY DOWN THERE.

THE SECOND POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IS ABOUT AN ARGUMENT I HEARD FROM ONE OF THE WLS SUPPORTERS WHO STOOD IN THE QUEUE BEFORE ME.

THIS WLS SUPPORTER SAID THAT THE SERVICES THAT ARE IN PLACE NOW ARE ESSENTIALLY DEGRADING QUALITY OF REGISTRY SERVICE FOR EVERYBODY AND ARE DEGRADING RESOURCE AVAILABILITY FOR EVERYBODY.
AND HE NOTED THAT IT WAS EXTREMELY CHEAP TO BECOME A REGISTRAR AND THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF MONEY TO BE MADE BY JUST SHARING ACCESS TO THE REGISTRY SYSTEM.

WHAT YOU ARE SEEING THERE IS WHAT IS CALLED THE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS.
THERE IS AN UNASSIGNED RESOURCE, AND IT IS ENTIRELY RATIONAL FOR ALL OF THESE PLAYERS TO TAKE AS MUCH OF THIS RESOURCE AS THEY CAN AND TURN IT INTO MONEY.
THE KEY HERE IS, THEY ARE NOT PAYING FOR THE AMOUNT OF THE RESOURCE THAT THEY CONSUME.
THEY ARE PAYING FOR HAVING ACCESS TO THE RESOURCE.

SO ONE WAY TO ATTACK THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM COULD BE TO CHANGE THE PRICING STRUCTURE AND TO SAY WE NOT JUST PRICE ACCESS TO THE RESOURCE, BUT WE PRICE USE OF THE RESOURCE; WE NOT JUST TAKE A FEE FOR A SUCCESSFUL ADD COMMAND, BUT MAYBE ALSO FOR KEEPING A CONNECTION OPEN, FOR AN UNSUCCESSFUL ADD COMMAND.

I THINK THERE ARE SOME DEGREES OF FREEDOM IN DESIGNING THE SYSTEM IN WAYS WHICH PREVENT THE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS FROM OCCURRING HERE.
THAT SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, FOR THE RECORD, I'M NOT SPEAKING AT THIS POINT EITHER IN FAVOR OR AGAINST WLS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, THOMAS.
YOUR ANALYSES ARE ALWAYS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

WELL, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE HAVE NOW FINISHED OUR OPEN MICROPHONE SESSION FOR TODAY.
WE RECONVENE TOMORROW AT 9:00 IN THE MORNING IN THIS ROOM.
AND WE WILL CONTINUE OUR OPEN FORUM ACTIVITIES.
I WISH YOU ALL A VERY PLEASANT EVENING AND WONDERFUL MEAL HERE IN THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY FILLED WITH RESTAURANTS THAT CAN'T POSSIBLY BE BEAT ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD.

(6:42 P.M.)