Summary/analysis of comments

["Kieren McCarthy" <kieren.mccarthy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Posted by Kieren McCarthy, General manager of public participation, ICANN

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------

 

 

Summary of public comments for ICANN geographical regions report

 

August 2007

 

 

 

Background

 

 

This comment period originally ran in June and July 2007 to cover the final
report presented to the ccNSO. It was reopened on 8 August 2007 with a
version of the report to be submitted to the ICANN Board, following the
initial public comment period.

 

The first comment period sought comments on a ccNSO paper that suggested
ICANN's regions be redrawn. It also included a self-selection mechanism for
ccNSO members that are most strongly affected by the current definition. The
definition of which countries and territories listed on the ISO 316-1 list
are contained within which regions is important because it decides the
make-up of both the At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) and the country code
Names Supporting Organisation (ccNSO). The regions approach is also used to
provide geographic diversity in both the ICANN Board and the GNSO Council. 

 

The second comment period looked for comments on the suggestion that much
wider review be undertaken by the community on the implications to changing
the ICANN regions. In total, one relevant comment was received.

 

This analysis attempts to summarize the relevant comments from the online
forum

Where possible and practical, individual comments have been attributed to
individuals or organizations by attaching initials to the comments.  A key
to the initials used can be found at the end.

 

 

General comments

 

There was a query during the first comment period over whether the
redefining of regions was also intended to increase participation from
smaller country code top-level domain managers and, if so, that there were
better methods to doing so. It was also noted that regional organizations
that play an active role within ICANN do not necessarily follow ICANN's
regional model [OG].

 

ICANN should pay more attention to the definition as used by the United
Nations for geographic regions [OG]; and it is important that ICANN seek
wider review of the changes, in particular by the Governmental Advisory
Committee (GAC), before any action is taken [OG].

 

 

Contributors

 

OG      Olivier Guillard, AFNIC