ccTLD Working Group on "Funding" teleconference outcomes
17 May 2000
A teleconference of interested parties reached general consensus that:
1. Any ccTLD representative with further suggested inputs as to funding models may send such models to the funding chair (email@example.com) and to the ccTLD list, no later than 29 May 2000.
2. There will be a teleconference available 30 or 31 May 2000. Kilnam will recommend a time that will allow for maximum possibility of international participation, and the numbers and codes will be posted to this list.
3. The chair will compile a summary of the funding models into a spreadsheet, and sort the entries in a scale of "recommended bands" of contributions. The "bands" will range from 0 (zero) to 500,000 US dollars. There may even be a "negative band", where the ccTLD may indicate that they need a grant or financial subsidy to properly maintain their ccTLD and its Quality of Service.
4. The summary and recommended "bands" will be posted to the ccTLD list no later than 15 June 2000.
5. ccTLD's would be requested, (WITHOUT making any commitment to pay or even subscribe to this process) to self-select which "band" they feel is appropriate for them. The funding WG expects that ccTLDs that are actually generating substantial revenues, regardless of the fact that they are in developing countries, will "self-select" the appropriate level of contribution. This process should give us a good handle on the situation and total level of contributions that _may_ be available on a voluntary basis.
6. There will be a pre-meeting in Yokohama the morning of 12 July. The regular ccTLD meetings will start 1300 Hrs 12 July in Yokohama.
7. We would consolidate our consensus and prepare a paper for ICANN Yokohama.
8. All agree that no one wants a mechanism where funding is directly tied to quantity of domain names, which would imply a "name tax".
9. Elizabeth will write to Louie T at ICANN asking how and why the "invoices" came to be sent out.
10. All agree that ccTLD constituency needs more formalization, web site, and documentation of process, such as By-Laws or Articles, and a full time paid person to do the administrative work of the constituency.
11. The ccTLD AdCom should draft a letter to ICANN indicating that we are proceeding as agreed in Cairo, to reach consensus on funding prior to the formal ICANN meetings in Yokohama, and that we feel the policy of sending out invoices is contra-indicated with respect to ICANN's by-laws and stated goals of "bottom-up" policy.
12. If anyone else on the conference remembers anything or wished to add to this, please do so.
Peter de Blanc
chair, ccTLD Funding