World Wide Alliance of Top Level Domain-names

Administration Committee teleconference minutes

 Home | Meetings | AdCom | ccTLD | Participants 

10 August 2001 Time: 13:00 - 15:00 UTC

Chaired by: Peter de Blanc
Written by: Abhisak Chulya & ByungKyu Kim

Peter de Blanc (.vi, North American AdCom and Names Council)
Peter Dengate Thrush (.nz, Asia Pacific AdCom)
Patricio Poblete (.cl, Latin American and Caribbean AdCom)
Elisabeth Porteneuve (.fr, European Names Council)
Nigel Roberts (.gg, European AdCom)

Byung-Kyu Kim (Executive Director)
Abhisak Chulya (Deputy Executive Director)

Sue Leader (ccTLD Manager of .nz)

Yann Kwok (.mu, African AdCom)
Antony Van Couvering (IATLD, AdCom)


1. ccSO Formation

AdCom members agreed that we would focus almost exclusively on ccSO Formation issue in ccTLD Montevideo meeting. Peter Dengate Thrush was preparing and would shortly release draft Bylaws for the new International Organisation, called "ccTLD INC." as well as a draft MOU with ICANN for it to function as the ccSO. He would also make some comments about the Amendments required to the ICANN Bylaws by the formation of the ccSO. These were based on the ccTLD's original (BERLIN) Bylaws, as modified by later Working Groups, and having forward to the discussion on the cctld-discuss list.

These documents would be discussed online before Montevideo, by individual cc's and regional associations, e.g. by APTLD at its adhoc board meeting on 26th Aug. However, even if much can be agreed online, much of the time in Montevideo will be required on this item.

Some AdCom members expressed concern that we could not really get anything done positively with the current ccTLD-discuss list. The meeting agreed to create a "ccSO-discuss list" strictly for ccSO Formation issue.

The Charter for the List would be:

  1. each registry would be allowed one manager plus three to five observers from that registry depending on registry size,
  2. template will be set up to subscribe to the list,
  3. the list would be monitored by Secretariat who reserves the right to unsubscribe any members who do not follow the rules.
  4. AdComs would rule on any borderline or difficult cases on receive requests from Secretariat.

2. Contribution to DNSO for the year 2001.

The meeting agreed that major concern would be the withdrawal process from DNSO. ccTLD Constituency should not be out of DNSO until we have something established.

We do not want to have a vacuum period. The principle behind the working group's report back to the meeting in Stockholm, and the meeting's discussion and the communique all focused on working with the Board, staff and other constituencies on an orderly withdrawal process, to a new SO.

The date of departure was not agreed to as being unclear, and it was not widely appreciated that there was a different DNSO year from the ICANN year. Elisabeth Porteneuve explained the fiscal year of DNSO which is the same as calendar year but the fiscal year of ICANN started on July 1 and ended on June 30. Not to pay past dues to the DNSO was not a good beginning to the orderly departure, and may test the goodwill of the other stakeholders, with whom there was a continuing need to maintain frank and open relations. Therefore, we should contribute to DNSO for the year 2001.

We still owed DNSO for the amount of 15,371 USD based on invoice dated 18 April 2001.

However, we have already decided in Stockholm that DNSO invoice goes to ccTLD Secretariat and then Secretariat asks from ccTLDs for donation to Secretariat with option to donate to DNSO. Secretariat did send out invoices to ccTLDs with option to donate to DNSO and so far only one ccTLD (.nc) confirmed to pay $500 for the DNSO contribution. Patricio Poblete mentioned that .cl has planned to donate 5000 USD to ICANN and 10 % of that amount would got to ccTLD Sec. and 1 % to DNSO. Peter Dengate Thrush also pledged to donate 500 USD to DNSO from .nz.

We need to encourage ccTLDs to contribute more to DNSO. Nigel Roberts suggested we emphasized that this was "ONLY" the DNSO levies, not the funding to ICANN. Peter Dengate Thrush then suggested the issue related only to the ccTLD constituency levies, for the running of the DNSO, and did not affect any contributions individual cc's may wish to donate to the ICANN board"

Another issue in withdrawing from DNSO is the voting from our Names Council members for ICANN Board Director which is currently in progress. If we withdraw, then we would have no voice in this selection. AdCom members believe that DNSO Names Council and the new Director would have influence in restructuring the current ICANN structure. So our Names Council should participate in this selection to maintain communication line instead of being only observers.

AdComs suggested to invite all the candidates for ICANN Board Director to our meeting called "Candidates Hosting" during the afternoon session on 7 September of ccTLD meeting. Nigel Roberts agreed to draft questionnaires to ask all 5 candidates, which are Amadeu Abril i Abril, Eric Jonvel, Paul Kane, Joanna Lane, Jefsey Morfin. Sue Leader would also be available to provide assistance if needed since she would arrive in Montevideo on 2 September.

AdComs also discussed on ICANN At Large Study Committee (ALSC) since this committee were looking at total restructuring of ICANN as well. We should pay more attention to this committee and take part in or join the mailing list of this group. Oscar Robles is also a ALSC member. We need to work closely with him. Peter de Blanc and Elisabeth Porteneuve have been contributing to the ALSC, by email and over teleconference, updating with the current ccTLD ideas as developed over discussions. Peter Dengate Thrush informed the Santa Clara meeting on 13 August and the outcome should be monitored.

3. AOB

Peter Dengate Thrush brought up the issue of Management of Secretariat.

We should have some kind of written statements on supervision, appointing and controlling secretariat. What were in Bylaws may not be adequate. Peter Dengate Thrush suggested to have a committee to oversee secretariat to provide clear authority to the staff. Peter de Blanc suggested to solve the legal issue of secretariat as well as one overseeing committee or board from each region.

AdComs suggested Secretariat to send invitation letters to other DNSO constituencies to meet with ccTLDs in the afternoon session of 7 September. Some AdCom mentioned that we should expect to see the draft agreement from ICANN. Therefore, we should invite Theresa Swinehart (newly hired ICANN staff as a Counsel for International Affairs) and Herbert Vitzthum (ccTLD Liaison) to meet with ccTLDs in the afternoon session of 7 September as well. Secretariat will send the invitation letters to other DNSO constituencies, ICANN staff, and GAC members.

Regarding GAC meeting, BK Kim reported that GAC had scheduled to meet with ccTLDs in the afternoon of 7 September. Therefore, ccTLD meeting will have to break out so that some will go to GAC meeting and some will stay on for other programs. Peter Dengate Thrush will draft a briefing material regarding ccSO to GAC with input from each regional group. And each regional group and/or each ccTLD may ask and explain their GAC delegate about the ccSO formation.

4. Montevideo meeting agenda

AdCom members have finalized the following ccTLD meeting Agenda:

Day One, Thursday, 6 Sep. ccTLD Constituency Meeting, Florida Room

08:00 - 09:00 Registration and Welcome

09:00 - 12:30 Plenary Session 1

12:30 - 14:00 Lunch

14:00 - 18:00 Plenary Session 2

Day two, Friday, 7 Sep. ccTLD Constituency Meeting, Florida Room

09:00 - 12:30 Plenary Session 3

12:30 - 14:00 Lunch

14:00 - 18:00 Plenary Session 4

Meeting Adjourn at 15:00 (UTC)

© ccTLD Managers
Page updated : 2003-05-27 19:50:02