| Home | | | Meetings | | | AdCom | | | ccTLD | | | Participants |
14 November 2000, 16:00 - 18:00
Marina Beach Marriott Hotel, Pacific Room
Mike Roberts welcomed all participants and started off with the following agenda:
Details are as follow:
1. Mike Roberts introduced Michelle Schipper. She has been assigned to be the contact person related to IANA matters since September 2000. Here is her presentation:
a) Protocol parameter assignments
IP Address Coordination
b) Who we are
c) Workload - Protocols: work on all parts of protocol numbers
d) Address Allocations
e) Workload - Address
f) DNS Coordination
She also mentioned that IANA worked with delegation and redelegation. IANA also handles Registration and update information.
2. Status of ICANN-ccTLD agreements:
Louis Touton summarized that ICANN was hopeful that we were approaching agreement even though we had some difficulty with our invoices to some cctld managers. Also governments and ccTLDs wanted more time to work things out.
3. Status of ICANN letter to governments re ccTLD delegations as requested by GAC
Andrew McLaughlin introduced that ICANN had posted the draft of letter to governments (http://www.icann.org/cctlds/draft-letter-to-govts-12nov00.htm) on Nov. 12, 2000 (the day that ccTLD meeting started, perfected timing). Andrew stated that ICANN just posted it two days ago so that we could get immediate response. He cited a little bit of history that according to the old 1591 expanded by Jon Postel in IANA newsletter the governments have significant role or vote in delegation and redelegation process. Jon did not state whether a decisive role or there wasn't no role to recognize the government have particular interest and stake and particular legitimacy to seek the public interest to local community that ccTLDs tried to serve. In the ICANN process now we attempt to formalize the relationship between ccTLD and governments. The effort from ICANN staff level is to try to come to the common ground while preserving the basic core of old 1591 plus a way to have a formal relationship with the governments The GAC principle document contemplates that ICANN will have some sort of communication with government but not a formal contract. In the draft letter to government, Andrew summarized that ICANN would like to inform government that we are just about to enter agreement with local ccTLD administrator and if the government has any comment, please let us know. If we don't hear from you within 60 days, we will go forward. ICANN objective is trying to make some progress and state the common ground.
4. Status of ICANN-Root Server agreements
Louis Touton stated that ICANN was hopeful in the next month or so to have a satisfactory agreement with root server operators.
5. Posting of Staff working paper on revised revenue structure
Mike Roberts talked about the Staff Working paper: ICANN Cost Recovery Structure for Domain Name Registries (http://www.icann.org/financials/staff-paper-cost-recovery-10nov00.htm) which posted on Nov. 10, 2000 (two days before ccTLD meeting started). He said the comments would be very valuable to ICANN to gauge the consensus.
6. Q&A
Peter Dengate Thrush: ccTLDs are unprepared for this meeting as none of us has received agenda. ccTLDs expressed some serious concerns about ICANN board communication and consultation of the policy. ICANN posted the Staff Working paper while we are in transit to this meeting, leaving no time to review and discuss this document. There also is no consultation from ccTLD Constituency on ICANN budget on for the year 2000 - 2001. There is no legal basis for ICANN to issue invoice to cctld managers. Therefore, ccTLD managers had decided not to pay ICANN invoices but to donate for 1 million USD. These are the latest from ccTLD meeting from the past two days. See full statement at: http://www.wwtld.org/communique/20001113.ccTLDmdr-communique.html
Mike Roberts: Thank you for the contribution from ccTLDs.
Louis Touton: IANA Redelgatiion refer primarily to ICP1.
Peter de Blanc: presented these major points
Mike Roberts: looking forward to see these documents and provide some feedbacks.
Calvin Browne of .za: In connection with process of government - cctld admin, who ICANN will send the letter to?
Mike Roberts: It will be those where present participation in GAC that we will send letter to.
Calvin Browne of .za: What happen when community don't like what government view as ccTLD?
Andrew McLaughlin: That is a judgment that ICANN can not be in a position to make. We can't go out and try to second guess whether the government speak for the community or not. That is politics.
Abhisak Chulya of ccTLD Sec: ccTLD Sec. had conducted Names Council Election and this election based on IANA database. We had about 39 ccTLDs return ballots. This is due to IANA database is not updated. We are glad to know that Michelle Schipper will work on IANA database but in her presentation she did not mention cctld Admin contact coordination. How will IANA handle this problem which had prevented ccTLD constituency from having a democratic election?
Mike Roberts: When changing Admin Contact, it will involve redelegation issue which will need approval from DoC.
Patricio Poblete: I believe we have to create some source of process and to announce mechanism when approaching government.
Louis Touton: Concerning who the letter might send to, perhaps the cctld manager could recommend who the letter might send to.
Sue Leader of .nz: If you must send the letter to government, would you contact all of ccTLD managers? For example, in New Zealand, we have worked regularly with different officers and we can tell you who is the right person.
Mike Roberts: We are happy to do so.
Meeting adjourned at 17:50
Note: There are no discussion on agenda nos. 7 and 8.