Re: [gnso-rap-dt] FW: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Council FF Hosting PDP Resolution

[Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

This change has been made and the updated version has been posted on the wiki 
(https://st.icann.org/reg-abuse-wg/index.cgi?registration_abuse_policies_working_group).

With best regards,

Marika

On 9/10/09 5:16 PM, "Greg Aaron" <gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear WG:

Please note that the GNSO Council passed a resolution this week that commends 
an issue to the RAPWG:   "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."

So, we will add fast-flux to our list of issues for examination.  Marika, 
fast-flux is already listed on our "Categories and Types" document.  Please 
move fast-flux up so that it falls after phishing/malware/spam,  Please also 
add the above Council resolution to the "definition" cell so we do not lose 
track of it.

All best,

--Greg

________________________________
From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 4:42 AM
To: Glen de Saint Géry; gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Council FF Hosting PDP Resolution

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,

Marika

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

Proposed by: Mike Rodenbaugh
Seconded by: Tim Ruiz

Whereas:

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 
2009;

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;

The GNSO Council RESOLVES:

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:



FYI
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:
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-20090903.mp3

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

Whereas

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"

Resolved

The GNSO accepts the  charter defined in
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/raa-drafting-team-charter-03sep09-en.pdf
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

Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO  Secretariat
gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://gnso.icann.org