ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[alac] FW: [council] GAC communique

  • To: <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [alac] FW: [council] GAC communique
  • From: "Bret Fausett" <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:59:16 -0700


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 4:06 PM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] GAC communique

Hello All,

Attached is a copy of the GAC communique.

I have also attached a plain text version below.

Bruce Tonkin

Governmental Advisory Committee 

Marrakech, 28 June 2006

GAC Communiqué - Marrakech 

June 2006 


The Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) of the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) met in Marrakech, during June 24-28,

The participating GAC Members comprised representatives from 41 members and
4 Observers. 

The Governmental Advisory Committee expressed warm thanks to the Government
of Morocco and the organisers for hosting the meeting in Marrakech. 

II. WHOIS and New gTLDs 

The GAC Working Group on GNSO issues continued its focus on the development 
of GAC Principles applicable to the WHOIS database and to the introduction
new gTLDs, with the intention of sharing a stabilized draft with the
community in 
Sao Paulo and to enable the GAC to provide guidance to the ICANN Board. 

Consistent with the GAC's commitment to providing information and advice on 
the range of public policy aspects of WHOIS data, representatives from
Protection Agencies in three GAC members, OPTA in the Netherlands, MIC in 
Japan, and the FTC in the U.S. who made presentations during an open session

with the GNSO outlining their respective perspectives and concerns regarding
accuracy and timely access to WHOIS data. 

Some of them and some GAC members also expressed concerns regarding the 
implications for enforcement of laws of the recent GNSO Council decision on
definition on the purpose of WHOIS data. Some GAC members expressed 
concerns that formulation 2 would also not provide an appropriate definition
the purposes of WHOIS. 

The GAC appreciates the interpretation of the GNSO Council Chair that 
formulation 1 does not imply that a decision has been taken to remove any
from public access. 

The GAC believes therefore that the final definition of the purpose of WHOIS
needs to reflect the public policy concerns expressed by GAC members. The
is intending to produce policy advice on the purpose and use of WHOIS in the

form of principles for the Sao Paulo meeting. 


A joint ICANN and GAC Workshop outlined the challenges and issues in the
of IDN. The various presentations emphasized the implementation and the
policy issues concerning the IDN deployment. 

The GAC appreciates the intention of ICANN's Presidential Advisory Committee

on IDN to perform a technical test of two approaches to the insertion of 
Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) labels into the root zone of the DNS
with a timeline. The GAC awaits the outcome of the technical tests which
provide information to address policy issues. 

The GAC also proposes that policy issues as outlined in the GNSO preliminary

issues report relating to IDN at the top level dated 28th May 2006 should be

identified, prioritized and addressed in cooperation with GNSO, ccNSO as
well as 
the broader ICANN community. 

IV. IPv6 

The GAC's Working Group on IPv6 held a joint session with the NRO Executive 
Council and the ASO Chair, where they had a very fruitful exchange on the 
proposed IPv6 allocation policy, followed by internal discussion within the 
working group. 

The GAC notes that the RIRs have completed their policy development process
relation to the allocation of IPv6 addresses and welcomed the proposal under

consideration by the ASO. The GAC will endeavour to provide advice within
proposed time frame. 

Noting the ongoing development of IPv6 the GAC encourages ICANN to keep the 
policy under review in the light of technical developments and evolution of 

Noting the possibility that the request for advice from the GAC would be
inter-sessionally between Marrakech and Sao Paulo, the GAC would like to 
remind the Board that such timelines to respond continue to be a challenge. 

V. Notice of Inquiry from the Department of Commerce and request for
by the President's Strategy Committee 

The GAC welcomed a presentation from the US government representative on the

Department of Commerce's Notice of Inquiry regarding the continued
transition of 
the technical coordination and management of the Internet domain name and 
addressing system. The GAC expressed confidence that the decision on the MoU

between ICANN and the United States Department of Commerce will be taken in 
the light of the WSIS principles. The GAC welcomed the report from the
Strategy Committee on the improvements to the inherent multi-stakeholder
model of 
ICANN. The GAC welcomes both initiatives to seek feedback on the evolution
the ICANN multi-stakeholder model. 

The GAC considers it important to engage in a further structured discussion
on this 
matter at the Sao Paulo meeting. The GAC recognizes that many of the issues
forward in the above initiatives are part of the ongoing efforts of enhanced

cooperation within the ICANN context already being undertaken by ICANN Board

and GAC Joint Working Group. 


GAC internal organization and work plan 

Following its previous decisions, the GAC endorsed the document, which was 
developed by GAC's Working Group on the future of the GAC, describing
improvements in its working methods. The document will be posted on the GAC 

The GAC took a decision to synchronize its work program with ICANN's
plan and activities of other constituencies. To implement this by Sao Paulo
the GAC will introduce a bi-annual planning and will elaborate an annual
program. The work program will reflect GAC priorities, outline objectives
and define 
delivery timeline. 

ICANN Board and GAC cooperation 

The GAC welcomes the work of the ICANN Board and GAC Joint Working Group, 
which since the meeting in Wellington held two conference calls, and
appreciates the 
positive outcome of the meeting in Marrakech. 

The GAC endorses the Communications Timeline document (attached), which 
should improve the GAC's participation in ICANN's policy development
by earlier engagement with relevant ICANN constituencies, as well as secure
and precise routine communication. 

The GAC welcomes ICANN's outreach program and commits itself to participate
its implementation. 
The ICANN Board and GAC Joint Working Group in the run-up to Sao Paulo 
meeting will work on synchronization of GAC priorities with ICANN's
plan, will address issues related to evolution of GAC and the ICANN
will engage in discussion on a permanent solution for the GAC secretariat
and will 
support internal GAC discussion on contingency planning. 


Handover of the GAC Secretariat 

The GAC took note of the handover of the GAC Secretariat from the European 
Commission to the Government of India with effect from 1st July 2006. 

GAC Election 2006 

The GAC nomination and election process for the position of the Chair and
Chairs is now open with the intention that a new Chair shall be installed by
the first 
meeting of the GAC in 2007. 


The GAC warmly thanks all those among the ICANN community who have 
contributed to the dialogue with GAC in Marrakech. 

The next GAC meeting will be during the period of the ICANN meeting in Sao 
Paulo, Brazil, December 2006. 

Marrakech, 28 June 2006 
Communications Timeline document between the ICANN Board and the GAC 


Communication timelines between the ICANN Board and the GAC 

Communication on Strategic and Policy Issues 

It is in the interest of the global Internet community that all ICANN
especially the supporting organizations and advisory committees provide
their input 
into policy development and decision making processes continuously,
constructively and in a timely manner. 

The environment of ICANN demands that the principle stated above in the
paragraph be considered in the communication processes of all parties

To maximize the results of cooperation and in order to harmonize the timing
of the 
release of the advisory opinion of the GAC with decision making by the ICANN

Board, it is necessary to implement an "early warning mechanism". This
will provide an early indication of future challenges. The goal is to make
GAC aware, 
very early in any policy development process (PDP) or proposal process, that
work is underway and that it could yield a proposal to the Board that would
public policy advice. 

GAC should identify issues where there may be public policy concerns as
early as 
possible and bring them to the attention of other ICANN constituencies. 

Early in the policy development process, the Board of ICANN as well as
Organizations, Advisory Committees and ICANN Staff may ask the GAC for
on related public-policy issues. ICANN and other constituencies may provide
input (by distributing background information prepared by the staff or by
organizations and President's advisory committees) to the GAC in terms of
public-policy questions and impact areas as they perceive them. The GAC, in
deliberations, may take these considerations into account. In order to
support the 
policy development process it may be useful to consider a creation of an ad
hoc cross-
constituency working group, which would explore options around specific

A recent example of a timely indication of a future challenge was the
statement of the 
President and CEO of ICANN, Dr. Paul Twomey, during the Wellington ICANN 
Board and GAC meeting. Dr. Twomey reminded the GAC of the possible public 
policy issues related to the introduction of IDNs. It is expected that
during the 
Marrakesh meeting (June 2006) the GAC will discuss possible areas of public
issues related to IDNs and aim to identify a work program with clearly
deadlines in relation to IDNs for its work in 2007. In earlier years, an
"early warning" 
was issued concerning IPv6 addressing allocation policy. 

The policy development process usually takes time. The GAC should be able to

follow the evolution of ideas related to these policies and provide its
input when 
necessary during the policy development process. That requires the capacity
for GAC 
to monitor issues on a long-term basis. Government(s) particularly
interested in a 
given PDP and following closely its development, is/are encouraged to
provide input 
in the work of the GAC on the given issue. 

In a more advanced stage of a PDP, when a 21 day1 public notice is issued by
to its various constituencies for comments on policy being considered for
adoption by 
the Board, it has been noted that for a number of governments and for a
variety of 
reasons, including inter-agency coordination within national governments,
resources devoted to the GAC, limited secretarial support in synthesizing
input from the governments, etc., this 21 day public notice has not been
found to be 
sufficient. Therefore, earlier indications from the Board about public
considerations of those issues that will soon be considered for adoption
could be 
considered helpful in securing timely responses from the GAC. 

Timely and Precise Routine Communication 

Taking into account GAC's limited resources as well as the specificities of 
governments' consultation and decision-making processes, communication
the ICANN Board and the GAC should be timely. It should become a rule that
to the 
extent possible all communications should be made at least 30 days before
ICANN meeting. GAC will make any effort to respond to timely communications
will alert ICANN Board if it is not in a position to give a response at the
meeting and 
will give an indicative timescale. 

It is also important to ensure precision in communication to ensure it is 
understandable to a multilingual and multicultural audience. Clarity in
will help both the GAC and the Board and should be considered not only as a
saver, but also as a confidence building measure on sometimes sensitive

GAC is entitled to receive communications on a timely basis, as is the ICANN
or respective Supporting Organizations (depending on the respective
Streamlining the decision-making procedures, with full respect to due
process, should 
be aimed at preventing delays in the development of advisory opinions. 


1 ICANN Bylaws Article III, Section 6. 1. a 


Attachment: Marrakech-Communique-1.9 Final.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy