1) Reduce IANA, IAB and ISOC to one seat each
2) Reduce CORE to one seat which would also be non-voting
3) Add a constituency group for trademark interests
4) Change the 3 at large reps by reducing the number to two
and changing the current geographic selection criteria so that
there is one at large representative with no geographic restrictions
and one at large representative from a non-OECD country.
5) Change the constituency based voting to a system in which each=20
signatory may cast 4 votes*. Those votes may go to any of the
constituencies. * based on the proposed 9 positions.
Have I missed any suggestions/comments?
Please let us know what your thoughts are on this issue. By changing
the composition of POC and giving PAB the power to elect 1/2 of POC,
this proposal is likely to be one of the more important issues
we discuss for quite a while.
To start things off, my feeling is that 1) is a little extreme.
If I felt compelled to change the numbers there I would leave IANA
and IAB as is and change ISOC to one non-voting member. My reasoning=20
is that we need to insure that there are enough technical votes
to prevent (or at least hinder) politicians from doing something foolish.
I disagree with 2, CORE has a big stake in this process and deserves
represention and a voice (votes).
Much as I'd like the DNS to be separated from TM issues I believe
the reality is that it cannot. Therefore 3 should be accepted and=20
proposed.
I didn't have a problem with the original geographic split but I
really like the idea of having one representative from a non-OECD
country. I'd like to see 4 included also. It has the side benefit
of freeing up a slot for the additional rep proposed in 3.
The self selection of a particular constituency and voting that=20
way is the one issue that really bothered me about the original
proposal. I think that allowing members to spread their votes
over roughly half of the available positions is a big plus. It
provides an incentive to vote responsibly without being divisive.
Definitely include 5 in the formal proposal.
Dan
--=20
Dan Busarow 714 443 4172
DPC Systems / Beach.Net dan@dpcsys.com
Dana Point, California 83 09 EF 59 E0 11 89 B4 8D 09 DB FD E1 DD 0C 82
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 22:19:10 +0100
From: Javier SOLA <jsola@aui.es>
To: pab@gtld-mou.org
Subject: PAB Composition of POC
PAB:
The most important issue that we have on the table is the composition of
POC. The actual proposal is to add nine members to POC, all of them elected
by PAB, maintain the ones that are already there, except for ITU and WIPO
who become non-voting.
- POC will therefore have:
9 members elected by PAB
2 members elected by CORE
7 ex-officio voting members
2 ex-officio non-voting members
I will try to ask very specific questions. If you think other questions
should be added, please say so.
Please answer, even if it is only to agree with the proposal.
The proposal says about the new seats:
Include in POC representatives of the following groups:
=091. Operators and service providers - (3 representatives)
=092. Business organizations other than operators and service providers (2
representatives)
=093. Consumers (1 representative)
=094. At large members distributed geographically:
=09=09a. Americas - one
=09=09b. Europe, Africa and the Middle East - one
=09=09c. Asia-Pacific - one
1) Do you think that this distribution includes all the major players ?
2) Is it fair to the parties involved (constituencies) ? (excluding CORE
and ex-officio, in this question)
2b) Do you think that geographical distribution could be attained in some
other way ?
3) Would you propose any changes ?
4) Do you think that constituency representatives should only be voted by
PAB members that are part of that constituency or by all members of PAB ?
The proposal says that the following shall continue to be members of POC:
=091. Two persons appointed by ISOC
=092. Two persons appointed by IANA
=093. Two persons appointed by IAB
=094. Two persons appointed by CORE
=095. One person appointed by INTA=09
=096. One person appointed by WIPO (with non-voting status)
=097. One person appointed by ITU (with non-voting status)
5) Do you agree with this ? Do you want to add a counter proposal ?
6) Do you think that the overall composition of POC as a whole represents
all the interests in the Internet in a fair way (if such a thing exists) ?
Javier
---------------------------------------------------
The proposal:
_____________________________
At the meeting of POC held in Brussels on 24 and 25 November, we
addressed the single most serious issue remaining to be decided by POC,
namely how to fulfill our publicly stated commitment to propose a plan
for expansion of the POC. =09
=09Two days of meetings produced what I believe is a rough consensus. I
recognize that the emphasis is on "rough". There were strongly held
views on some subjects that may be outside the consensus set forth
below. This draft is being posted to both POC and PAB for discussion and
comment before it is released to the public for further discussion and
comment. THIS DOCUMENT SHOULD NOT BE MADE PUBLIC UNTIL POC AND PAB HAVE
HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW IT.=20
********************************************************************
=09=09=09DRAFT
=09The rough consensus of the Policy Oversight Commitee (=93POC=94) regardi=
ng
expansion of the POC to represent more clearly the entire spectrum of
interests of the stakeholders of the Internet community is described in
this document. As a part of the consensus, the POC has decided to
solicit public comment on the expansion proposal.
=09
=09I. Introduction
=09
=09From the inception of the International Ad Hoc Committee (=93IAHC=94) in
September, 1997, the IAHC and its successors, the interim POC, and now
the POC have explicitly and publicly recognized the need for
evolutionary growth and development of the entire program for expansion
of the generic top level domain name system, including the composition
of the POC. The IAHC was formed and chartered by the Internet Assigned
Numbers Authority (=93IANA=94) and the Internet Society (=93ISOC=94) to dev=
elop
this expansion program. The original eleven members of the IAHC were
chosen to represent as broad as possible a range of interests in the
Internet community, as to be geographically distributed. The selection
of members succeeded in bringing together a diversity of views and a
geographically well distributed group, but the limitation to eleven
members, and the selection process, directed initially by IANA and ISOC,
has been criticized as not giving explicit recognition to some interest
groups.
=09The gTLD-MoU now provides that the POC consists of twelve members
appointed as follows:
=09IANA - two appointments
=09ISOC - two appointments
=09Internet Architecture Board (=93IAB=94) - two appointments
=09Council of Registrars (=93CORE=94) - two appointments
=09International Trademark Association (=93INTA=94) - one appointment
=09World Intellectual Property Organization (=93WIPO=94) - one appointment
=09International Telecommunications Union (=93ITU=94) - one appointment
=09Representative of the Depository of the Memorandum of Understanding on
the =09=09=09Generic Top Level Domain Name Space of the Internet Domain
Name =09=09=09System (=93gTLD-MoU=94) (the ITU) - one appointment
=09The POC has agreed to an amendment to the gTLD-MoU to provide for the
appointment of two additional members to be appointed by the Policy
Advisory Body (=93PAB=94). Pending the formal amendment, which requires
action by IANA and ISOC, PAB has appointed two observers to POC.
=20
=09Terms of the above appointments are for three years, except that the
organizations appointing two members initially appoint one for a one
year term, and the other for a three year term. The gTLD-MoU directs
each appointing group to endeavour to achieve equitable geographic
distribution.
=09 (Further explanation of the identity and composition of the appointing
bodies referred to above may be found at the POC web site:
http://www.gtld-mou.org.)=20
=09II. The Consensus
=09In fulfillment of the promise of an evolutionary process, the POC has
reached consensus on an expansion of POC to be achieved over a period of
eighteen months, with an appropriate transitional structure to ensure
stability in the administration of the gTLD-MoU program.
=09Effective upon formal adoption by POC of this expansion program, and
for a period of eighteen months thereafter, the gTLD-MoU will be amended
to provide that POC shall have twenty members as follows:
=09The PAB will have the power to elect nine members of POC. Nominations
may be made by any member of PAB; each PAB member may nominate not more
than one nominee; nominees need not necessarily be connected or
affiliated with the nominating organization. Each nomination shall
include a designation of the nominee as falling within one of the
following classifications:
=091. Operators and service providers - three
=092. Business organizations other than operators and service providers -
two
=093. Consumers - one
=094. At large members distributed geographically:
=09=09a. Americas - one
=09=09b. Europe, Africa and the Middle East - one
=09=09c. Asia-Pacific - one
Nominations by PAB shall be completed within one month following
adoption of this expansion program by POC, and elections of members
shall be conducted not later than three months following adoption. Each
PAB member must select one and only one of the first three
classifications in which it will cast one vote, and must select one and
only one of the three geographic areas in which it may cast one
additional vote. The nominees receiving the highest number of votes in
each category will be elected.
=09The following shall continue to be members of POC:
=091. Two persons appointed by ISOC
=092. Two persons appointed by IANA
=093. Two persons appointed by IAB
=094. Two persons appointed by CORE
=095. One person appointed by INTA=09
=096. One person appointed by WIPO (with non-voting status)
=097. One person appointed by ITU (with non-voting status)
=09Prior to the expiration of the eighteen month transition period, the
POC shall determine, by vote of not less than two-thirds of the voting
members of POC, the composition of the POC thereafter in whatever form
the POC may determine.=20
=09The gTLD-MoU shall further be amended to provide that, effective at the
expiration of the eighteen month transition period, the gTLD-MoU may
thereafter be amended by vote of at least two-thirds of the voting
members of POC.