World Wide Alliance of Top Level Domain-names

Administration Committee teleconference minutes

 Home | Meetings | AdCom | ccTLD | Participants 

22 May 2002, Time: 12:00-13:30 UTC

Chaired by: Elisabeth Porteneuve
Written by: Abhisak Chulya, Seung-Yeon Yoo

Yann Kwok (African Region) (noted as YK)
Patricio Poblete (Latin America - Caribbean Region) (noted as PP)
Elisabeth Porteneuve (Names Council) (noted as EP)
Peter Dengate Trush (Asia-Pacific Region) (noted as PDT)

Byung-Kyu Kim (Executive Director, ccTLD Secretariat) (noted as BK)
Abhisak Chulya (Deputy Executive Director, ccTLD Secretariat)

Peter de Blanc (N. American Region)
Nigel Roberts (European Region)
Oscar Robles (Names Council)

0. Last AdCom teleconference minutes:


I. Action Points arising from the Adcom Teleconference, 22 May 2002

  1. 20020522-A
    Secretariat: Gather information regarding the root server operators. Invite them for the Bucharest meeting.

  2. 20020522-B
    PDT: Prepare an invitation to be given to the root server operators.

  3. 20020522-C
    Secretariat: Check and confirm the co-chairs and the speakers for the Bucharest meeting

  4. 20020522-D
    Secretariat and EP: Contact and invite IDN committee members for discussions (25 June)

  5. 20020522-E
    Secretariat: Contact the GAC Secretariat for a joint session of ccTLD-GAC for Bucharest meeting (24 June)

  6. 20020522-F
    Secretariat: Contact Sabine Dolderer, Hartmut Glaser, and Bernard Turcotte for a presentation on the ICANN Budget Committee

  7. 20020522-G
    Secretariat: Contact Philip Shepard and the GA

  8. 20020522-H
    Secretariat: Contact the ccTLD Liaison officers to the other constituencies.

II. Discussions

  1. Regional Proposals on ICANN Reform:

    At the previous meeting it was agreed that the Adcom should attempt to encourage the preparation of regional position papers on ICANN reform. A paper from CENTR had been published.

    PDT is preparing a draft APTLD position on ICANN Reform based on comments and discussions from APTLD members and should finish it tonight for submitting to the APTLD Board tomorrow. Draft CENTR position has been circulated on the lists already. PDT commented that APTLD position is similar to CENTR position in several ways that:

    1. a coordinating body is required,
    2. the ccTLDs are still prepared to contribute to ICANN,
    3. the ccTLDs still think that ICANN's role in relation to ccTLDs is going to be narrow because each ccTLD is responsible for it's own policies and
    4. that IANA functions should be done properly.

    Some Asia Pacific ccTLDs are in favor of more involvement of government in the Internet management, in the area of At large representation.

    Another issue is that there is no indication what the legal nature or country of residence will apply to the re-structured ICANN. Some legal systems do not have any concept of "trusteeship". Although there are probless associated with ICANN being a US-registered corporation, at least its laws are reasonably known.

    As for LACTLD, PP mentioned that there were some discussions within LACTLD and they were working on a draft position as well.

    The difference are on how groups envision the future. LACTLD members may value more the existence of ICANN than the other regions appear to, and are concerned to not favor a solution which could fragment the current ICANN. He mentioned that the LACTLD would favor an organization similar to ICANN. He also said that the APTLD, CENTR, and the LACTLD have some common grounds in each position.

    PDT pointed out that in the undergoing ICANN Reform debates the gTLD are playing a strategic lobbying game. It consists on one hand to describe ccTLD as difficult partners, and on the other to split DNSO into various groups in such a way, as there is no common forum for policy development regarding gTLD, where all partners meet.

    Today, many ccTLDs in their countries work closely with local users, industry, individuals, organizations and governments on their ccTLD policies development.

    The same should be true for the development of policies in the gTLD space. The DNSO should be the "local internet community" of the g-space.

    The gTLD game is to fragment the DNSO, and move policy decisions to the Board level, increase their influence, and limit or prevent users and public representation.

    One of the complaints about the ccTLDs is in relation to those few ccTLDs that operate as competitive commercial registries. In fact, there are only a few of these, but they are often discussed as if the few hundred thousand names in them are commercially significant in relation to the tens of millions of names in the g-registries. PDT told the group that the gTLDs want to ensure that whatever structure emerges, it ties up the ccTLDs in the same terms of regulatory control that the gTLDs are subject to.

    The important point is that it is a "sovereign" decision of the ccTLD as to how it operates, and that principle cannot be allowed to be changed.

    There can be no conditions imposed from ICANN on ccTLDs. If there are any conditions, we will select them ourselves.

    He said that the ccSO should provide a forum for which the problems regarding the commercial ccTLDs could be discussed and solved. Once again, he strongly pointed out that ICANN does not create any policies for ccTLDs.

    As a key principle for ccSO, PP reaffirmed that it should be a coordinating body, not generating binding policies on its members. He felt ccTLDs would be happier joining this than if it were making binding policy.

    He also mentioned that the regional position papers were just a start of the efforts of the ccTLDs to solve the problems. PP said that it is important to merge different views at the beginning so that the ccTLD, as a group, would keep working in the same direction.

    EP reported that the GAC had not yet published its position on reform.

    PDT pointed out that it is in each ccTLD Manager's interest to communicate with its GAC representatives, or make national authorities aware of this institution. Although there are issues yet to reslove with the GAC, in many ways our Governments are the ccTLD natural allies, although the current structure tends to make us adversaries.

  2. ccTLD meeting with Root Server Operators:

    YK expressed his concerns that the IANA takes much time even for a small technical change in the DB. He said that it was a good idea to have a contract with the root servers directly but pointed out that the root server operators do not have access to the actual content.

    PDT said that in order to have progress with the root server operators, a meeting with the root server consortium was suggested at the last AdCom teleconference. What we agreed at that last call we needed was a short outline from the Secretariat on the purpose of the meeting, and who would be speaking at it, so that we could formalise the agenda and endorse the item, which was agreed to be a good idea.

    EP said that there are 2 aspects in having a section at the Bucharest meeting regarding the root server. First, the root server operators can provide general information on the root servers because many people do not know well how the root servers work. Second, they can also provide information on the service they are able to provide for the ccTLDs.

    EP pointed out that there were a lot of people who would learn more about root servers functioning and it would be a very useful information if we can get some root operators to give presentations to ccTLDs.

    The call considered to contact root server operators from Europe (Lars-Johan Liman from Sweden and Joao Luis Silva Damas from RIPE), Jun Murai from Japan, Bob Manning and David Conrad from the US, and convene them for the technical workshop in Bucharest. Lars-Johan is well known as excellent presenter.

    PP restated the purpose of that workshop is to learn on root server operations. The root server operators operate root servers, but do not generate the content.

    PDT stressed that the ccTLDs should develop a good relationship with the root server operators. PDT and the Secretariat will prepare a brief invitation to the root server operators.

  3. Adcom and Names Council representatives:

    The secretariat had circulated the dates of election of the ccTLD Names Council representatives, and of the regional representatives to the Adcom. The term of the current Names Council reps. is due to expire in September. Given the announcement of our withdrawal from the DNSO, and the current re-structuring it was thought that further elections were unlikely to be necessary. As to Adcom representation, it was the responsibility of each region to appoint its reps in good time.

  4. Agenda for the ccTLD Bucharest Meeting:

    The need of details regarding the ccTLD Bucharest Meeting agenda was expressed by the participants. The speakers and Co-ordinators of the meeting topics will have to be decided in advance.

    • 4.1 ccTLD Meeting with the GAC in Bucharest:

      It was felt that meetings with the GAC were becoming unproductive in their current format. It was agreed that the GAC would be invited to participate in a private workshop with the ccTLDs on the isues of ICANN reform. Because of the GAC need to work in private, the session would be closed to ccTLD managers (and nominees) and GAC membes (and their nominees) only. 2 hours would be scheduled.

    • 4.2 A ccTLD position on ICANN Reform:

      A session at Bucharest would be to try to bring together the various regional positions on reform into a combined ccTLD position. Each regional group will be asked to give presentations and the ccTLDs, as a group, can come up with a conclusion based on the presentations. At least,it would make clear what agreement there was, and we could focus on those areas where consensus was yet to be reached.

    • 4.3 Root Server operators:

      As discussed before, the root server operators will provide the ccTLDs with general information on how the root server works.

    • 4.4 ICANN Reform:

      Philip Sheppard, the chair of the Names Council, and representatives of GA will be invited to share their views regarding the ICANN reform.

    • 4.5 Funding:

      The ICANN Budget Committee will be asked to give a presentation on the work done by the Budget group.

    • 4.6 IDN:

      EP suggested to have a survey on which ccTLDs are planning to implement IDN in a short run. The IDN Committee will be asked to make a presentation on the progress.

    • 4.7 Annual Report from Secretariat:

      BK will present a report on the activity of the Secretariat.

  5. (Amended) Draft Agenda for the ccTLD Bucharest Meeting:

    Venue: Contsanta Room, Bucharest Marriott Grand Hotel

    DAY 1, 24 June 2002 (Chair: Nigel Roberts)

    09:00 - 12:00 Plenary 1: ccSO & ccTLD Incorporation

    1.1 ccSO Formation (Co-ordinator: PDT)

    • Key Principles discussion and voting
    • Reports from liaison officers

    10:30 - 10:45 Coffee Break

    1.2 ccTLD Incorporation (Co-chair: PDT)

    • report from ccTLD Legal Working Group

    12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break

    14:00 - 18:00 Plenary 2: ICANN Reform

    2.1 ICANN Reform (coordinator required)

    • Report on ccTLD regional position on ICANN Reform
    • Joint workshop with GAC (coordinator required)
    • Open session with Philip Sheppard, the Names Council Chair (coordinator required)
    • Open session with the GA and/or other DNSO groups (coordinator required)

    16:30 - 16:45 Coffee Break

    2.2 Drafting session for a ccTLD Position on ICANN Reform

    DAY 2, 25 June 2002 (Chair: Nigel Roberts)

    9:00 - 12:30 Plenary 3: Workshop on Root Server

    3.1 Workshop with Root Server Operators (Co-ordinator: Yann Kwok)

    • RSSC presentation by Jun Murai
    • Learning from Root Server Operators (invited root server operators)

    10:45 - 11:00 Coffee Break

    3.2 How to improve ccTLD services (coordinator required)

    • Secondary ccTLD name servers (TBD)
    • Sharing Experience on (TBD: whois ?)

    12:30 - 14:00 Lunch Break

    14:00 - 18:00 Plenary 4: Reporting from the Secretariat, Budget committee, & IDN

    4.1 Secretariat Report & Budget (Co-ordinator: BK Kim)

    • Secretariat Report by BK Kim
    • Secretariat Management Accounts
    • Report from Sabine Dolderer, Hartmut Glaser and Bernard Turcotte's, members to the ICANN Budget Committee
    • Funding to ICANN, ccSO, DNSO and ccTLD Secretariat (coordinator required)

    16:00 - 16:15 Coffee Break

    4.2 IDN Issues (Co-ordinator chair: EP)

    • Invitation to IDN Committee members for discussion
    • Survey of ccTLD registries that would implement IDN

    4.3 Drafting of the ccTLD Communique

The next teleconference would be held on 6 June 2002, UTC 12:00

Meeting Adjourned at UTC 13:30

© ccTLD Managers
Page updated : 2003-05-27 19:52:23