World Wide Alliance of Top Level Domain-names

ccTLD ICANN Meeting in Marina del Rey

 Home | Meetings | AdCom | ccTLD | Participants 

Executive Summary of ccTLD Meeting in Marina del Rey on 11-12 Nov 2001

Chair: Peter de Blanc, North America AdCom and .vi
Co-chair: Maureen Cubberley, CIRA, .ca

Donation at the gate: 2,950 USD

Written by: Abhisak Chulya and Seung-Yeon Yoo

There were 37 ccTLD managers and 8 proxies present at this meeting.

Day one (11 Nov.)

Plenary Session 1 (9:00 - 12:30):

1.1 ccSO Formation Discussion:

Peter Dengate Thrush presented a draft of Application for Becoming ccSO prepared by BK Kim and APTLD to the meeting, ccSO-2001mdr.html. The major issues for discussion were: nature of membership, number of geographic regions, structure of ccSO Council, and the level of consensus and its definition. A straw poll was taken to decide whether the regional structures that we will use would be based around the geographical structures. The question was "Are you in favor of changing this structure in the future for flexibility?"

In favor of changing: 12
In favor of leaving the current structure in place: 4
Abstention: 10

1.2 ALSC Final Report and Comments:

Presented by Mao Wei, Director of CNNIC, 20011111.ALSC-report-CN-VN.html .

The issue of whether each ccTLD should do this election for ICANN as proposed by CNNIC was widely discussed. Peter de Blanc strongly suggested that the ccTLD as a group should have some kind of response to ALSC Final Report other than the suggestions made by CNNIC and VNNIC. He set up an assumption that there will be an At-Large SO. He asked the ccTLD managers to think about the following issues:

1.3 DNSO Funding:

Seung-Yeon presented the status of the DNSO funding and the invoice from DNSO for the amount of US$ 15,371.00 20010418.DNSO-to-ccTLD-invoice.pdf. We are still way short of this amount. Peter de Blanc urged the ccTLD managers to contribute more to the DNSO.

Plenary Session 2 (14:00 - 18:00):

2.1 MINC Presentation

2.2 ccTLD Progress Report:

Presentation by BK Kim, Executive Director: 200111.Secretariat-report.html.

BK pointed out that the contributions received from the countries does not even equal half the amount of the budget proposed by the secretariat since the permanent secretariat was launched in May 2001. He strongly urged the ccTLD managers to contribute more to the Secretariat funding.

2.3 Internet Security and Stability

2.4 ccTLD Response to gTLD questions:

Peter Dengate Thrush had prepared the responses to gTLD questions on the Formation of the ccSO. He presented the questions to the audience one by one and asked if any changes were needed. The accepted final version is posted at: ccSO-answers-to-gTLD-2001mdr.html

Day Two (12 Nov):

Plenary Session 3 (9:00 - 13:00):

3.1 ccSO Open Forum with other ICANN communities

  1. ALSC presentations:

    Carl Bildt, the Chair of ALSC, and the members of ALSC were at the ccTLD meeting to explain and answer to the ccTLD managers who had questions on the ALSC Final Report.

  2. BC/IPC/ISP Constituencies : Marilyn Cade, Tony Holmes, Steve Metalitz expressed their sincere attitudes to work closely with the ccTLDs and suggested that we set up a small group to come up with a list of issues to discuss before the meeting in Ghana.

  3. ICANN Board/Staff : Stuart Lynn, Louis Touton, Andrew McLaughlin, Herbert Vitzthum, and Michelle Cotton were present to discuss the following three issues:
    1. IANA Services: Stuart Lynn handed out the sheet related to the time needed for IANA Name Server change. On an average, it would take a total of 30 days based on the 30 actual cases that were changed this year.
    2. ccTLD Agreements: Stuart Lynn made it clear that he was not interested in Service Agreement with ccTLDs but that he was determined to continue to negotiate with the ccTLDs at their own pace. In the same way that the staff had come to appreciate that one contract wouldn't fit each cctld, so it was suggested by Peter Dengate Thrush that perhaps they should consider whether one contract could cover all issues with cctlds, in order to meet their obligations under the Amended MoU. It might be more convenient to look at a series of contracts.
    3. Funding: ICANN funding proposed was US$ 1,496,000. ICANN received US$859,000 by June 30 this year. An additional of US$ 24,000 was received after that. There was still a short fall and he urged the ccTLD managers who had not contributed to do so.

    Morton Taragin of .il asked Stuart Lynn a question on signing a contract with the Root Server Operators. Stuart Lynn doubted that the best service contract will encourage the performance of the root server.

  4. Non-commercial Constituency : YJ Park stated that if the ccTLD was willing to outreach to the developing countries, which most of them are non-commercial, NCC would cooperate with ccSO.

  5. NAIS presentation by Alan Davidson : 20011111.NAIS-report.ppt

    Alan pointed out that the At-Large issue was a very fundamental issue in regards to what kind of ICANN we would have. It will affect most of the issues related to the ccTLDs. His comments on ALSC Report were:

    • Domain Name Holder is problematic, confusing and narrow in concept, and not fool proof at all.
    • Fee will create an equity problem.
    • No place for ISP, biz and NCC.

    He also stated that NAIS would work closely with the ccTLDs to make sure that the public was represented the right way and that ICANN was doing its proper role.

  6. gTLD Registrar/Registry by David Johnson : The gTLDs asked questions from their perspective regarding the ccSO. The questions asked by the gTLDs and the answers are at ccSO-answers-to-gTLD-2001mdr.html

Day Three (14 Nov.) - Additional Meeting

Plenary Session 4 (13:30 - 16:00)

4.1 Security Issues:

Nigel Roberts volunteered to draft a mission statement on security, which would be presented to ICANN Public Forum in the morning of 15 November. See statement at 20011111.ccTLD-security-activities.html.

The main three points of the statement were:

In addition, Sabine Dolderer of .de volunteered to head up a discussion on the "ccTLD Backup and Shared Secondary Name Server" issue.

4.2 ccSO Liaison Officers:

The meeting agreed that the AdCom should appoint liaison officers to communicate with other constituencies in order to keep good relations with them. The AdCom will write up the "job description" and the ccTLD Secretariat will put out to the ccTLD discuss list asking for volunteers, one for each constituency.

4.3 ALSC: Response to Final Report.

4.4 ccTLD contract (chaired by CIRA):

Maureen Cubberley informed the meeting that the contract negotiation with ICANN staffs was still taking place and that there were not enough areas in common between CIRA and ICANN to share any information.

The meeting suggested that ccTLD Secretariat create it's own database to record the request of changes in IANA information and update it frequently on the ccTLD web site.

4.5 Communique of the ccTLD Support Organization (in Formation)

The communiqué drafted in Marina del Rey includes the discussion on the ccSO formation:

  1. Membership by application
  2. A ccSO council of 15, 3 from each region
  3. Transparency in all conducts of the ccSO
  4. Appliance of ICANN principle of geo diversity in relation to all elected positions within the SO
  5. Adoption of a definition of the level of consensus necessary for consensus policy making

The communique also includes issues such as Internet Security, Internationalized Domain Names, Contract with ICANN, IANA Services, and the ALSC report.

The communiqué can be seen at 20011112.ccTLDmdr-communique.html

© ccTLD Managers
Page updated : 2003-05-26 19:34:54