- To: psc@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Question #8
- From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 08:44:31 -0700 (PDT)
Dear Committee members,
The Committee has asked: "Are there activities or
steps that would build on existing processes to
continue to enhance global accessibility to the
transparency of ICANN's processes and input into the
Please begin by noting the following correspondence
from ICANN to the ITU (that appears on the ITU website
but does not to my knowledge appear anywhere on the
4 May 2006
Dear Mr. Zhao,
Thank you for your letter of 16 January 2006 regarding
the approval of the ITU-T?s Study Group 2 with the
annex of the ?Draft ITU-T Recommendation E.910
We appreciate ITU-T?s Study Group 2?s work on
preparing these recommendations and later
clarifications that they are in final form. With their
receipt and clarification, ICANN will review the
recommendations of E.910 in consultation with the
appropriate parties and through the appropriate
In response to your questions posed in your letter:
1. ICANN?s process for considering to implement the
provisions of the recommendations will follow ICANN
procedures consistent with transparency and public
consultation and consultation with appropriate
2. ICANN cannot pre-determine which provisions can or
cannot be implemented until it completes the process
noted in point one. Doing otherwise would be
inconsistent with its processes and procedures.
3. The timeline for implementation will be consistent
with ICANN?s process, and will depend on the review
process outlined in point one.
We appreciate SG-2?s understanding that ?some of the
proposed provisions may differ from the present
registration policies and that some proposals may
require further consultation, or be difficult to
implement at the present time.
We apologize for the confusion engendered by the term
?Temporary Document? found on the cover page of the
E.910 document. We anticipate that ICANN?s process in
reviewing these will help highlight what these
provisions are and address possible solutions.
Dr. Paul Twomey
Members of the ICANN community shouldn't have to
"discover" this communication on the ITU's website.
An exchange of documents between the ITU and ICANN
should properly be found on ICANN's own Correspondence
page (especially when ICANN is touting "the
transparency of ICANN processes").
As the ITU appears to have a well-defined process for
the receipt and transparent posting of official
correspondence, ICANN may wish to seek counsel from
the ITU on how to improve upon its own transparency
P.S. I do look forward to the promised public
consultation on this topic as I regard the .int
namespace as akin to a sponsored TLD that deserves the
right to set its own namespace policies.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around