ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

[gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Council FF Hosting PDP Resolution

  • To: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Council FF Hosting PDP Resolution
  • From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 01:41:35 -0700

Dear All

For your information, please find below the language of the resolution that was 
adopted on the Fast Flux Hosting PDP.

With best regards,


Motion on the Fast Flux (FF) Hosting Policy Development Process (PDP)

Proposed by: Mike Rodenbaugh
Seconded by: Tim Ruiz


On 30 May 2008, the GNSO Council initiated a PDP and chartered a Working Group, 
comprised of interested stakeholders and Constituency representatives, in 
collaboration with knowledgeable individuals and organizations, to develop 
potential policy options to curtail the criminal use fast flux hosting;

Whereas the Working Group was asked to consider ten questions, specifically:

Who benefits from fast flux, and who is harmed?
Who would benefit from the cessation of the practice, and who would be harmed?
Are registry operators involved, or could they be, in fast flux hosting 
activities? If so, how?
Are registrars involved in fast flux hosting activities? If so, how?
How are registrants affected by fast flux hosting?
How are Internet users affected by fast flux hosting?
What technical, e.g. changes to the way in which DNS updates operate, and 
policy, e.g. changes to registry / registrar agreements or rules governing 
permissible registrant behavior measures could be implemented by registries and 
registrars to mitigate the negative effects of fast flux?
What would be the impact (positive or negative) of establishing limitations, 
guidelines, or restrictions on registrants, registrars and/or registries with 
respect to practices that enable or facilitate fast flux hosting? What would be 
the impact of these limitations, guidelines, or restrictions to product and 
service innovation?
What are some of the best practices with regard to protection from fast flux?
Obtain expert opinion, as appropriate, on which areas of fast flux are in scope 
and out of scope for GNSO policy making;
Whereas the Working Group has faithfully executed the PDP, as stated in the 
By-laws, resulting in a Final Report delivered to the GNSO Council on 13 Aug 

Whereas the Working Group did not make recommendations for new consensus 
policy, or changes to existing policy;

Whereas the Working Group has developed and broadly supports several 
recommendations, and outlined possible next steps;

Whereas the GNSO Council has reviewed and discussed these recommendations and 
the Final Report;


To extend our sincere thanks to the Working Group members, to the Chair James 
Bladel, to the Council Liaison Mike Rodenbaugh, and to two members of the ICANN 
Policy Staff, Marika Konings and Glen de Saint Géry, for their efforts in 
bringing this Working Group to a successful conclusion;

To encourage ongoing discussions within the community regarding the development 
of best practices and / or Internet industry solutions to identify and mitigate 
the illicit uses of Fast Flux; and

The Registration Abuse Policy Working Group (RAPWG) should examine whether 
existing policy may empower Registries and Registrars, including consideration 
for adequate indemnification, to mitigate illicit uses of Fast Flux; and

To encourage interested stakeholders and subject matter experts to analyze the 
feasibility of a Fast Flux Data Reporting System to collect data on the 
prevalence of illicit use, as a tool to inform future discussions; and

To encourage staff to examine the role that ICANN can play as a "best practices 
facilitator" within the community; and

To consider the inclusion of other stakeholders from both within and outside 
the ICANN community for any future Fast Flux policy development efforts; and

To ensure that successor PDPs on this subject, if any, address the charter 
definition issues identified in the Fast Flux Final Report.

To form a Drafting Team to work with support staff on developing a plan with 
set of priorities and schedule that can be reviewed and considered by the new 
Council as part of its work in developing the Council Policy Plan and 
Priorities for 2010.

On 9/5/09 12:12 AM, "Glen de Saint Géry" <Glen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear All,

Ahead of the official minutes the following resolutions were passed and 
consensus was reached on the items below at the GNSO Council meeting on 
Thursday, 3 September 2009.

MP3 Recording of the GNSO Council meeting:

Motion 1
Motion on joint ALAC/GNSO Drafting team
Proposed by Avri Doria
Second: Mike Rodenbaugh


On March 4 2009 (Resolution 20090304-2)the GNSO council committed to "drafting 
a registrant rights charter" in cooperation the ALAC and

As part of the same resolution (20090304-2) the GNSO council committed to 
creating a "drafting Team to discuss further amendments to the RAA and to 
identify those on which further action may be desirable"


The GNSO accepts the charter defined in
with the deliverables and milestones as set out in that charter and invites the 
ALAC to participate as a partner in this effort.

The drafting team, at its next meeting, will pick a pair of coordinators, one 
each from the At-Large Community and the GNSO.

With charter amended as: Replace under Charter (B) item 3 - replace 
'amendments'  with 'topics'
to read "Propose next steps for considering such topics"

The motion passed by voice vote.

Councillors present at the time of the vote.
Philip Sheppard, Mike Rodenbaugh, Kristina Rosette, Tony Holmes, Maggie 
Mansourkia, William Drake, Adrian Kinderis, Tim Ruiz, Stéphane van Gelder, 
Jordi Iparraguirre, Edmon Chung, Chuck Gomes, Olga Cavalli.

One Abstention - Avri Doria, Nominating Committee Appointee (NCA)
Avri Doria stated the following reasons for abstaining

Due to Commercial Stakeholder Group (CSG) concerns about  the ethics of my 
decision to join the NCUC and about the propriety of my continuing to vote as 
an NCA, I abstain from all votes in the council until such time as the Board 
Structural Improvements Committee decides on the disposition of the CSG letter 
of concern.

Motion 2
Fast Flux Hosting motion.
Absentee voting on the Fast Flux Hosting motion closes on Saturday, 5 September 
2009 at 23:15 UTC. The motion and complete results will then be published on 
the Council list.

Other Decisions:

1)  Council confirmed Michele Neylon's appointment as the Chair of the 
Inter-Registrar Transfer Policies Part B Working Group (IRTP Part B WG)

2)  Council confirmed the following GNSO co-chair and volunteers for the Joint 
ccNSO-GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG)

Edmon Chung - gTLD Registries (co-chair)
Terry Davis - Nominating Committee Appointee
Stéphane van Gelder - Registrar

Avri Doria - GNSO Council chair (Observer ex-officio)
Chuck Gomes - GNSO Council vice-chair (Observer ex-officio)

3)  The Motion requesting an Issues Report on Vertical Integration and 
Registry/Registrar cross-ownership submitted by Mary Wong was tabled until the 
next meeting.

4)  The travel funding motion was withdrawn; any GNSO participants not covered 
by the travel policy should work through their constituency or stakeholder 
group to request funding as directed by Kevin Wilson.

Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Kind regards,


Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy