Public participation site

28 August 2009

25 August 2009

25 August 2009

It’s not every day that ICANN comes to town. As an employee of Tucows, the third largest ICANN accredited registrar, I’m a little more tuned in to what’s going on with ICANN than the average person. But in my nearly three years at the company, I’ve never attended an ICANN meeting in the flesh. Instead, it’s been a case of tuning into the odd stream from the International Meeting, or hearing about the goings on from Adam Eisner, our Director of Domain Services at Tucows.

Not having been to an ICANN event, I didn’t know what to expect from the “Regional Gathering of ICANN-Accredited Registrars and gTLD Registries” when it came to Toronto last week. A check of the agenda had me wondering if some of the material would be over my head. The subject matter included security, compliance, data escrow and the Registrar Accreditation Agreement among other things. As I said, I try to stay up on what’s happening with ICANN, so at least I was familiar with most of topics being discussed.

The first session I attended was probably not the best introduction to the inner workings of ICANN. I had heard that there was a tendency to use acronyms to excess, so I came armed with a BlackBerry and the link to the ICANN website glossary. Despite my efforts, I still found myself leaning over on a number of occasions to ask my more experienced neighbours what the ALAC was and why the New gTLD AG3 was all about.

Once I got past the acronyms and got some background on some of the issues, I began to see in the room a group of people, each representing different interests, struggling to come to a consensus on how best to proceed. There was most definitely differing viewpoints presented, and a clear belief of being right about the best way to proceed. However, there was also a clear passion shared around the room (and around the world via phone) for ensuring that the eventual solution, or direction taken was the best for the Internet community as a whole.

Outside of the discussions around issues like the new Registrar Accreditation Agreement and the New gTLD Program which get a lot of press around the Internet industry, the gathering provided a good introduction to the work of some other areas of ICANN.

A presentation by Yurie Ito, Director, Global Security Programs for ICANN provided an excellent introduction to the kinds of challenges that the industry faces in terms of criminal activity and other abuse on the Internet. Presentations from representatives from .MOBI and .ASIA were valuable in understanding how different registries are working to market their domain extensions to the public.

The discussions about how the de-accreditation process was and wasn’t working revealed some of the differing challenges faced by ICANN, registries and registrars when a de-accreditation was undertaken. While the process is clearly not yet perfect, it was also clear that each of the stakeholders was committed to doing right by the registrants and was willing to give and take to ensure the best possible outcome was achieved.

That said, what I found most valuable was simply being a part of it. Lunch meant a chance to meet and converse with counterparts at other registrars, partners at registries, and even some long-time customers of Tucows. The evening activities, including a fantastic night at the baseball game (thanks to Afilias) allowed everyone to unwind and walk away from the issues that have the potential to overwhelm and burn out those who are front and center in the process.

Adam Eisner mentioned to me after day one that the most rewarding part of being involved in ICANN was that you were a part of the process that leads to changes that have a real impact on the Internet and how it works. It was a chance to be one of the people making it better.

The perception some have, and I confess that included myself, is that ICANN is a mess of bureaucracy and that nothing ever gets done. Sure, ICANN can be a frustrating experience at times – that was made clear in some of the discussions that took place. But I think that those involved have an unequivocal understanding of the task they have taken on and the challenge it represents.

There is little room for error when you start changing the very structure of the Internet. Second chances are hard to come by with a global network of such immense value to society. What’s amazing to me is that those involved are willing to work to make it better as opposed to being frozen in the fear of messing it all up.

The net result of attending the gathering is both a fuller understanding of just what is involved in nurturing and stewarding of this amazing thing called the Internet. I’ll definitely pay more attention to what’s happening, both through the remote access that ICANN provides and hopefully also in person in the future.

Variant top-level domains (TLDs) and how they are managed is one of the most hotly discussed topics we are facing at the moment. What are variant TLDs, you ask? Well, that’s where the discussion begins…

ICANN’s staff is currently producing implementation plans for both the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process and the New gTLD Process. What guides that process for the topic of variants, is three things:

1. Following the direction of policy advice already provided
2. Taking broader community needs into consideration, and
3. Ensuring the continued stability of the DNS and the namespace in general

In the course of doing this for the issue of variant TLDs there were two different proposals.

1. Reserve desired variants & block all other variants; and
2. Delegate desired variants & block all other variants

Following public comment periods on both proposed implementation methods (none were agreeable across the community), it was decided during the Sydney meeting this June that ICANN staff would seek implementation assistance from the community. This is usually the case on policies that have technical implications and hence are difficult to implement.

As a result a small team has been asked to volunteer their time (you can read more about that team and another issue the team is looking at in the post Solving the remaining IDN issues).

Community discussion on this topic is very important as we strive to reach a conclusion that works for all involved. Variant TLD management is especially important to make the introduction of IDNs work well for the end-users. The IDN Tables that hold and define the character variants are the most important piece of the management of variants, as these tables are developed to reduce the potential for confusion to end users by the introduction of IDNs.

In the most recent paper [pdf] published on this topic, a variant is defined as follows:

“Variant characters are two or more characters that are similar in appearance and result in two domain names to be visually confusing.

As such the resulting “variant strings” that are obtained by replacing the original characters with the variant characters, are visually indistinctible and, if used for separate purposes, could create user confusion. In some cases this could result in visually similar strings having the same meaning.

As such, the term “variant” designates orthographic equivalence on the character level, such as that between “æ” and “ae” in “encyclopædia” and “encyclopaedia”, but not in the broader sense that pertains to the variant spelling of words, as “encyclopaedia” vs. “encyclopedia” or “color” vs. “colour”. The IDN Tables that define variant characters are useful because they enable TLD registries to develop registration policies that will reduce the potential for confusion that could result from typographic similarities in domain names.

Recent discussions have suggested that the definition might be better if more technical stringent (for example by following the definition in the JET Guidelines: “One conceptual character can be identified with several different Code Points in character sets for computer use”) and then add various examples of variants, where some are confusingly similar visually and others are not.

The same paper proposed the following way of managing IDN TLD variants:

“ICANN understands the need expressed in the community for enabling allocation of variant strings, in particular for locations where some users will key in one string and other users will key in the variant string when accessing for example a website. ICANN urges the community to continue to discuss and develop a technical solution that will enable the allocation of variant strings in the root zone in a stable manner. Until then IDN ccTLD Fast Track requesters will need to select one string per script or language only or alternatively wait until a technical solution has been found.

“In order to reserve the possibility of allocating variant strings to the appropriate entities, ICANN will ensure that all variant strings are reserved or blocked for allocation for now. Blocked strings will be considered as “existing strings” when incoming requests are checked for conflicts with existing TLDs. Therefore, any later request for the same string will be denied.”

The reservation of desired variants was thought to be the safest way of securing adequate variant management until a solution has been found on how to manage them at the top level. The community response to the temporary solution was mixed. There is a concern in certain regions that a blocking of variants will disfranchise certain user communities. However, at the same time the response received stated that solving this problem should not in any way slow down the Fast Track introduction.

While we continue work on the subject with the industry experts, one thing seem to be clear: variant TLDs will be identified using of the IDN Tables that are required in either a Fast Track request or an IDN gTLD application.

This means that for the sake of the end-users, the usability of IDNs globally, and therefore the adoption of IDNs across applications on the Internet, we better get these tables right!

I have previously blogged about what could be the worst case scenario. We really want to avoid this. We are in the last step of making IDN TLDs a reality for users globally which will be an amazing step for all involved.

One particularly important aspect of ICANN’s launch of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) will be the availability of Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) at the top level. That eagerly anticipated enhancement to Internet participation has also raised some issues.

For example, current practice dictates that gTLDs contain at least three characters – two-character Latin TLDs are reserved for country-code top-level domains (ccTLDs). However, in certain languages (you probably can think of more than one) one or two characters commonly express a complete word – and they would not be confused with present-day ccTLDs.

Prohibiting the registration of names of less than three characters in certain languages may hobble IDN use in certain languages but it is difficult to fashion a uniform set of rules to govern a potential relaxation of this requirement that works universally.

ICANN’s approach to this issue is similar to its approach on many issues regarding implementation of the policy for the introduction of new gTLDs.

1. Get expert advice on the matter. The use of experts allows ICANN to obtain experience and skill economically outside its core competencies and develop material for public discussion in a timely manner.
2. Use that advice to formulate some sort of model.
3. Then conduct public discussion on the issue (the discussion is clarified by existence of a model).
4. Iterate the model and hold another round of public discussion.
5. Iterate the model, and so on.

This process has been used effectively thus far in the new gTLD implementation. ICANN has consulted with: technical, DNS, risk management and linguistic experts, dispute resolution providers, and others.

In this case of character limits and IDNs, ICANN is engaging a small team to evaluate this problem and provide expert advice from both sides of the problem: that IDNs must be effectively engender regional participation and that the rules must provide stability, i.e., that the domain name system (DNS) work in a way predictable to users.

Given the importance of the issue, we saw a large number of volunteers – all of them competent to take part – but from which only a few of which were chosen for the team so initial advice could be developed relatively quickly.

That not to say that those not in the team can’t participate effectively now and in the future. Right now, there are a number of comments on the issue but no jointly developed advice or model. The small working group is intended to move the discussion forward — but not conclude it. Rather, it will provide additional material for all those who are interested in ensuing discussion in ICANN meetings and public comment fora.

Again, that process for reaching implementation: identify issues, get expert advice, create a model for public discussion, discuss, iterate the model, and so on.

The idea is that the experts crystalise the discussion in a timely way and therefore encourage meaningful participation.

We are at step number two of this process that will include all interested parties. The process for developing a preliminary set of assumption will be publicly reported so the ensuing public discussion can be informed and timely.

Everyone at ICANN appreciates the comments made on this particular issue and other IDN issues – all going toward an effective way to increase effective regional participation in the Internet.

20 August 2009

18 August 2009

18 August 2009

17 August 2009

17 August 2009

17 August 2009

One of the consistent pieces of feedback I receive as ICANN’s Chief Financial Officer is that people want to know what it is that the organization is spending its money on. We have been been working hard to come up with ways of showing this clearly, especially so over the past year.

ICANN is a public benefit not-for-profit company and we recognize that you, as a community, need to be kept informed about our finances so that we remain accountable.

So here is a rundown of what we have produced with respect to finances. The hope is that you can follow the budget process all the way through from the strategic planning to the draft budget stage and through to seeing where the money comes from and where it goes to.

You should also, by the time you reach the end of this post, know how and when you can provide input into that process and so directly influence the budgeting process.

The dashboard

First up, because it has simple graphics and because it is constantly updated is the dashboard. The dashboard is a compilation of a wide range of data across the organization designed to be easy to review by the community. There is a big button on the front page on the left-hand column that links directly to it, otherwise you can find it at: http://www.icann.org/idashboard/public/

As you enter the dashboard, the opening page is our unaudited financial information. Here you can see the year-to-date expenditure of the organization, alongside what we have budgeted. You can also see where the money comes from plus what we have budgeted for. This year we will be showing more detailed functional budgets as the expenditures to date for each organizational activity.

General info

Next up is the part of the website in which we keep financial information for ICANN. You can find by clicking Documents and then Financial Information, or just click here: http://www.icann.org/en/general/financial.html

There are three sections of financial information. One section is for general financial information, one for the current fiscal year, including the budget, and the last section is for historical financial information on ICANN, that goes back each year to ICANN’s inception.

Under “general financial information” you can find general financial policies such as ICANN’s disbursement policy, the ICANN Investment Policy, Travel Support Guidelines, tax exempt status documents, and so on.

The next section is for current year financial information. It includes the current year’s adopted operating plan and budget, the IRS tax form 990, payments made to directors, travel support reports, and audited financial statements.

The last section is for historical information. It contains the same types of information as the current year.

Operating Plan and Budget

It is worth noting here that every year, the operating plan and budget that we produce is put out to public comment. We also always run public sessions at ICANN meetings where members of the community are allowed to ask questions and raise queries about any aspect of either the plan or the budget.

For example, the most recent public comment period for the FY2010 budget – which has since been approved – can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200906.html#draft-opplan-budget.

Comment periods

A number of people commented – as you can see by clicking on “comments”. And a summary of those public comments is posted to the same list and is available here: http://forum.icann.org/lists/op-budget-fy2010/msg00021.html. That summary is then used to make changes to the budget.

So the budget for the financial year we have just stepped into has been finalized, but what about next year FY11 for the financial year from 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011?

Strategic Plan

Well, we are just about to start on our strategic planning sessions – where the community itself gets to decide what the priorities are for the organization and so where it should spend it money.

This process will kick off soon – it will be announced on the front page when it is. In the meantime, you can view the 2008-2011 Strategic Plan here: http://www.icann.org/en/strategic-plan/

And an explanation of how that process works is given here: http://www.icann.org/en/planning/

I hope this is helpful in understanding both the financial information that we make available to you as well as the the entry points for community feedback. We take ICANN’s commitment to accountability and transparency to heart.

If you have any questions, if you feel we are still not providing enough information, or the right information, or if you want to know more about how you can respond to the budgeting process, please just post a comment below and we’ll review it and get back.

Thanks

Kevin Wilson
Chief Financial Officer, ICANN

12 August 2009

10 August 2009

10 August 2009

10 August 2009

7 August 2009

5 August 2009

5 August 2009