ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

RE: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] FW: GNSO Council resolutions 13 January

  • To: "Glen_de_Saint_Géry" <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] FW: GNSO Council resolutions 13 January
  • From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 08:53:05 -0700

Thank you, Glen.

While I was initially shocked to receive a message from the FF Mailing
List, I think we all welcome the update from Council on this WG and the
formal closure of this project.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] FW: GNSO Council resolutions 13 January
From: Glen_de_Saint_Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, January 14, 2011 9:45 am
To: "mail=gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx>


Dear All,


For your information, the following motion was passed by the GNSO
Council at its meeting on Thursday, 13 January 2011.


Thank you very much.


Kind regards,





Motion on the implementation of the Fast Flux recommendations that were
adopted by the GNSO Council on 3 September 2009


Whereas the Fast Flux PDP Working Group submitted its Final Report to
the GNSO Council on 13 August 2009;


Whereas the Fast Flux PDP Working Group did not make recommendations for
new consensus policy, or changes to existing policy, but did develop
several other recommendations that were adopted by the Council on 3
September 2009 (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-03sep09.htm);


Whereas the GNSO Council intended to create a drafting team to develop a
plan with a set of priorities and schedule to address the adopted
recommendations for review and consideration by the GNSO Council;


Whereas due to workload and other priorities such a drafting team was
never created;


Whereas the Council tasked the Council leadership at the wrap up meeting
at the ICANN meeting in Cartagena to put forward proposals to suggest
which projects should be continued and discontinued;


Whereas the Council leadership has reviewed the Fast Flux
Recommendations that were adopted by the GNSO Council, also in light of
the recent recommendations made by the Registration Abuse Policies
Working Group;


Whereas the Council leadership has recommended the approach outlined
below to the GNSO Council for consideration as an acceptable way of
implementing the adopted recommendations and therewith closing the




The Council accepts the approach identified below for the adopted
recommendations (see http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-03sep09.htm)
and instructs the ICANN Staff to implement these recommendations as set
forth below:


a) Adopted recommendation Fast-Flux Working Group (FFWG) #1: 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

• Proposed implementation: This recommendation is encompassed by the
Registration Abuse Policies WG (RAPWG) Malicious Use of Domain Names
Recommendation #1 which  recommends the creation of non-binding best
practices to help registrars and registries address the illicit use of
domain names.


b) Adopted FFWG recommendation #2: 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;

• Implementation completed as it was addressed by the RAP WG in its
final report (see


c) Adopted FFWG recommendation #3: 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;


·         The RAPWG Final Report and the Fast-Flux Working Group Final
Report indicated that fast-flux is generally a domain use issue and not
a domain registration issue, and as such falls outside the purview of
the GNSO and ICANN. Therefore no further action is recommended*.


d) Adopted recommendation #4: To encourage staff to examine the role
that ICANN can play as a “best practices facilitator" within the

• Proposed Implementation: Integrate this recommendation into the RAP
WG Recommendation on “Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best
Practices” which recommends that the “GNSO, and the larger ICANN
community in general, create and support structured, funded mechanisms
for the collection and maintenance of best practices.”


e) Adopted FFWG recommendation  5: To consider the inclusion of other
stakeholders from both within and outside the ICANN community for any
future Fast Flux policy development efforts;

• Proposed Implementation:


It is assumed that if the Registration Abuse Policies WG’s (RAPWG)
Malicious Use of Domain Names Recommendation #1 is adopted by the
Council, that the subsequent effort will be open to participation by
stakeholders from both within and outside the ICANN community.



f) Adopted FFWG recommendation #6: To ensure that successor PDPs on this
subject, if any, address the charter definition issues identified in the
Fast Flux Final Report.

• Proposed Implementation: No action needed at this point, but should
be included if any future PDPs are initiated on this subject.


g) Adopted FFWG recommendation #6: 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.

• Proposed Implementation: The Council deems this work to be completed
in conjunction with the above-proposed implementation proposals.




The Council now considers the work of the Fast Flux WG complete. As
such, the "Fast Flux Council Follow-up" action item is deemed closed and
will be deleted from the Pending Project List.


Motion to Acknowledge the Receipt of the GNSO Working Group Guidelines
and Initiate a Public Comment Period


WHEREAS, in October 2008, the GNSO Council established a framework (see
GNSO Council Improvement Implementation Plan;


for implementing the various GNSO Improvements identified and approved
by the ICANN Board of Directors on 26 June 2008




WHEREAS, that framework included the formation, in January 2009, of two
Steering Committees, the Operations Steering Committee (OSC) and the
Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC), to charter and coordinate the
efforts of five community work teams in developing specific
recommendations to implement the improvements;


WHEREAS, the PPSC established two work teams, including the Working
Group Work Team (WG WT), which was chartered to develop a new GNSO
Working Group Model that improves inclusiveness, improves effectiveness,
and improves efficiency;


WHEREAS, the WG WT completed its deliberations and forwarded the GNSO
Working Group Guidelines to the PPSC on 1 November 2010;


WHEREAS, the PPSC reviewed and approved the GNSO Working Group
Guidelines on 20 December 2010


and forwarded the report to the GNSO Council on 1 January 2011 ;




RESOLVED that the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of the GNSO Working
Group Guidelines as delivered by the PPSC and directs ICANN Staff to
commence a twenty-one (21) day public comment period on the GNSO Working
Group Guidelines.


RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council shall take action on the GNSO
Working Group Guidelines as soon as possible after the end of the public
comment period.


RESOLVED FURTHER that the GNSO Council recommends that a concise summary
of the WG Guidelines be drafted by ICANN Staff, following approval of
the GNSO Working Guidelines by the GNSO Council, in order to serve as a
primer to the full document for potential WG members. The summary should
be approved by the PPSC before being submitted to the GNSO Council.





Glen de Saint Géry

GNSO Secretariat



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy