ICANN - Brussels 25 June 2010 Board Meeting >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. We will be beginning in just under a minute. Ladies and gentlemen of the board, good morning. Thank you for attendance. We begin the board meeting scheduled for Brussels. We have an agenda set out in its usual way, which is that a large number of items are on what we call the consent agenda, which are relatively noncontentious, where the work has come through through a recognized project which has been checked and the board has indicated it doesn't require any discussion on those particular items. It's a feature of every item on a consent agenda that any board member can, without explanation why, ask for an item to be taken out of the consent agenda and be put on the main agenda so there can follow discussion. What I propose to do is not read the entire consent agenda because it runs to many, many pages and it lists a number of things, but just to indicate for the purposes of the public the kinds of things that go onto the consent agenda. We beginning with the approval of the minutes of 22nd of April. We then go on to extend the time for GNSO constituencies to review their charters as part of the long running restructuring and strengthening of the GNSO. We then have some amendments to the ICANN bylaws in relation to SSAC. And then implementation of some -- some implementation resolutions around the reports of various working groups, one relate to go the NomCom, one relating to SSAC, and one relating to the board. We then have some resolutions detailing the technical liaison group review. As you know, all of the organs of ICANN are subject to regular review. The TLG is now being included in that process, and there's some resolutions about how to do that and it's a slightly different process than we have been building up. It's not a bylaw matter but we are just making it clear how that review is going to be done. We then have some very routine housekeeping. There are a number of president's committees that have been set up over the years that have been formally closed down and their members thanked but as a member of good housekeeping they need to be formally disbanded so these resolutions simply do that. Then there are some bylaw amendments related to the selection of a board director from the at-large community. So those will go out. Then there's an at-large improvement implementation plan, so we will be dealing with that. We then come to some things that we have often done at the end of the meeting but we are going to incorporate a new process so thanks to departing directors. We have one on this occasion, that's Raimundo Beca. They will be thanked, there will be a formal vote of thanks to Janis Karklins, but I will ask Raimundo at the end of the consent agenda to come forward and just receive our thanks and a small token. We did the same thing yesterday in the public forum for Janis Karklins who had to depart yesterday. We then will approve some SSAC appointments which is a matter for the board, and thanks to the departing members. We do a thanks to all those departing volunteers, including from the at-large. We thank our sponsors, we thank our scribes, we thank our local hosts, and we thank the meeting participants. So that's the consent agenda, but perhaps before I go further on that, it's appropriate to formally welcome the interim chair of the GAC to her first meeting. Heather, he welcomed you earlier to the stage but this is the formal welcome to the mysterious and arcane workings of the board itself. Ladies and gentlemen of the board, please join me in formally welcoming Heather. Right. So that's the consent agenda. I am just going to wait for a moment to check that no object to the form having had that description of the items and having the text of those resolutions in front of you, just to be sure no member of the board wishes to take any one of those items and make them the subject of discussion in the main agenda. I see no such interest, so I'll ask then, is somebody prepared to move the adoption of the consent agenda? >>STEVE CROCKER: Mr. Chairman, I so move. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Is someone prepared to second that? Thank you, Ray. So it's moved Steve, seconded Ray that we accept the consent agenda. I will put that motion. All those in favor, please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Carried. Thank you. We come then to three very important resolutions related to delegation, and members who are looking at their agenda will note that there is another matter, but I will do that after we have done these redelegations. There's been a considerable amount of work, as people will know in relation to IDN ccTLD delegations, and we come today to three more of those, and I'll take -- I will come to the first one which deals with China and ask Harald Alvestrand, who has a long history in developing the IDN work. Harald. >>HARALD ALVESTRAND: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is the -- The resolution is delegation of the (in Chinese) top- level domains to China Internet network information center. I am sorry for all pronunciation errors or if I remember the word incorrectly. Whereas, ICANN has received a request for delegation of (in Chinese) encoded as xn--fiqz9s and (in Chinese) encoded as xn--fiqs8s to China Internet network information center as country code top-level domains. Whereas (in Chinese) are two strings that were deemed to have successfully completed the string evaluation portion of the IDN ccTLD fast track process by the ICANN Board of Directors in resolution 2010.04.22.11. Whereas ICANN has determined that the proposal is on behalf of a country or territory that is currently listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard, and therefore eligible to be delegated country code top- level domains under current policy. Whereas the strings applied for delegation are proposed to be used by the applicant in a manner consistent with the country or territory for which they were approved in the string evaluation process. Whereas the applicant has undertaken to operate the two top-level domains in a manner which does not cause confusion to the Internet user community, as documented in their implementation plan published online at, URL. Whereas ICANN has reviewed the delegation request, and has determined that the proposal would be in the interests of the local and global Internet communities. Resolved that the proposed delegation of the (in Chinese) top-level domains to China Internet Network Information Center is approved. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Harald. Kuo-Wei. >>KUO-WEI WU: I have two comments for that. First of all, I'd like to declare, because I am still the board member of the TWNIC and also a member of the CDNC, so I am not going to comment on this or also voting on this resolution, but I would like Harald to correct the Chinese pronunciation, though, and I think this might be the reason for me, as Chinese, to sit on the board. It's (in Chinese), and so I think that is -- if any of you need to pronounce correct Chinese, I'm here, please. [ Laughter ] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you very much for that. [ Applause ] What I'm actually looking for first as a matter of formality is for someone to second that resolution. So I see George was up fast to be associated with what is a very, very positive resolution, indeed. So we have the motion moved and seconded. Thank you, Kuo-Wei, for both those things, your expression and the reason for your abstention later on in the voting because of the possible conflict. And much more, thank you for helping with us the Chinese pronunciation. There are going to be many occasions when I'm sure your services will be called upon. Are there any other discussion about this resolution? Jean-Jacques. >>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT: Thank you, Peter. I would like to seize this opportunity to chair a comment on the three requests that are laid before our eyes, not only for (in Chinese). This is also relevant for Taiwan, dot Taiwan and dot Hong Kong. This is extremely important not only for ICANN and for the Internet but it has a universal importance, and I would like to mention the UNESCO convention of 2005 on the diversity of cultural expression. And I would like to recall two of the main provisions of this convention. Firstly, affirming that cultural diversity is an inherent characteristic of humanity. I think this is a very strong principle and a very encouraging one. And second whereas, recalling that cultural diversity that thrives in a framework of democracy, tolerance, social justice, and mutual respect between peoples and cultures is a prerequisite for security, peace at national and international level. I would also like to say that these are principles, but it is also a fact that languages do not exclusively belong to states. They are the ownership of populations and individuals, and it is a specificity of their culture. And this is -- these are the reasons why these three requests are so paramount. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: You wanted to speak in relation to this resolution also? >>RAM MOHAN: Yes, thank you. I am also very pleased to see this resolution as well as this set of resolutions come forward. As someone who has been working with IDNs and in the area of IDNs for quite a while, and specifically in the last little while been involved in understanding some more of the nuances that go into the -- both the delegation as well as the technology behind it, I'm absolutely pleased that we are here. You know, the fact is that of the nearly 1.8 billion Internet users, those that speak the Chinese language represent the single largest group besides English speakers. China itself has almost 400 million Internet users. And this development and the vote and the addition of the TLDs that use the Chinese language is, in my opinion, truly an historic moment and a landmark in where the TLD system is going. And I, for one, am really proud to be in a very small way to be part of a community that has helped make it happen. That community, what I'm talking about is the IETF, the Internet Engineering Task Force, and the engineering community. The engineers at the IETF have been at the forefront of the effort to get IDNs, to get the technology behind it to work in a way that is compatible with the Domain Name System that was built many years ago and build a way so that there is a continuing bridge to the future. And hats off to all of the engineers and to the linguists and that set of communities that got together to help make this a reality. Certainly from the Chinese language perspective, there have been a great number of very talented folks who have contributed, including submitting RFCs and things like that into the engineering community. And I think that's a fantastic model for how to go forward. So with that, I just want to say something. Kuo-Wei was saying, you know, he is here to help teach pronunciation. And I spent just a little bit of time earlier with him to learn how to say this, and Kuo- Wei, if you could just correct me. I'm going to say this in Chinese. I will tell you what it actually means in English afterwards. (In Chinese) [ Applause ] >>RAM MOHAN: What that means is we welcome Chinese into the root server. Thank you. [ Applause ] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. Thank you. I think there was applause for you making the effort. Let's turn over to Kuo to get a mark for that pronunciation. [ Laughter ] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you for that. Let's move on. I am going to put that resolution. I'm sure everybody on the board wants to associate themselves with all of the things that have been said. Rod? >>ROD BECKSTROM: Just one brief remark and that is to say this is a truly historic moment. More than one out of five people who walk on this planet speak Chinese as a first language. In addition to all the incredible engineering work that's gone on for many years, the policy work, the work by linguists and the work in the last six months by the operators in China of this proposed IDN ccTLD and the intense work of the board of ICANN and staff and the community have been remarkable. And it's exciting for all of us, I think, to be here and to see the root truly embrace the world. Thank you. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Rod. I am going to put that resolution now, so all those in favor, please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Kuo-Wei you indicated your abstention for the reason that you gave. I declare that resolution carried. [ Applause ] (Standing Ovation) >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: What an historic day. Let's move to another historic very similar resolution, and I will call on Jean- Jacques to take us through the resolution in relation to another ccTLD delegation. >>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT: I'd like to consider that the applause and the consideration manifested for one of the three gTLDs that IDNs asked for applies to all three, and that the enthusiasm applies to all three, because what is at stake is really a community, a linguistic, a cultural community that is not restricted to one country, no matter how large and important it is. I think it's a worldwide recognition that diversity is here and that's how we must operate. So delegation of the (in Chinese) top-level domain to Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation Limited. Whereas ICANN has received a request for delegation of (in Chinese) encoded as xn--j6w193g to Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation Limited as a Country Code Top Level Domain. Whereas (in Chinese) is a string that has successfully completed the string evaluation portion of the IDN ccTLD fast track process. Whereas ICANN has determined that the proposal is on behalf of a country or territory that is currently listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard, and therefore eligible to be delegated Country Code Top Level Domains under current policy. Whereas the string applied for delegation is proposed to be used by the applicant in a manner consistent with the country or territory for which they were approved in the string evaluation process. Whereas ICANN has reviewed the delegation request and has determined that the proposal would be in the interests of the local and global Internet communities. Resolved, reference, that the proposed delegation of the dot (in Chinese) to Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation Limited is approved. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Jean-Jacques. Is there a seconder for that resolution? I see Ray Plzak is seconding that. Jean-Jacques, I am going to proceed on the assumption that we agree that all of the things that were said in relation to the first and the acclamation also apply in relation to these. So I am going to move to putting that resolution. All those in favor of this resolution, please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? And we note Kuo-Wei is abstaining. Thank you. I will declare that resolution carried. Thank you very much. [ Applause ] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: The next delegation is in relation to Taiwan, and I will ask Ram Mohan to read that resolution for us. Ram. >>RAM MOHAN: Thank you. Before I start, Kuo-Wei, could you help me with exactly how to pronounce. >>KUO-WEI WU: I think I can open the Chinese language school in here. [ Laughter ] >>KUO-WEI WU: "Taiwan." >>RAM MOHAN: "Taiwan." Thank you. This resolution is the delegation of "Taiwan" and "Taiwan" top-level domains to Taiwan Network Information Center. Whereas, ICANN has received a request for delegation of "Taiwan" encoded as xn--kpry57d and "Taiwan" encoded as xn--kprw13d to Taiwan Network Information Center as Country Code Top Level Domains. Whereas, "Taiwan" and "Taiwan" are two strings that were deemed to have successfully completed the string evaluation portion of the IDN ccTLD fast track process by the ICANN Board of Directors in resolution 2010.04.22.11. Whereas, ICANN has determined that the proposal is on behalf of a country or territory that is currently listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard and therefore eligible to be delegated Country Code Top Level Domains under current policy. Whereas the strings applied for delegation are proposed to be used by the applicant in a manner consistent with the country or territory for which they were approved in the string evaluation process. Whereas, the applicant has undertaken to operate the two top-level domains in a manner which does not cause confusion to the Internet user community as documented in their implementation plan published online at, URL. Whereas, ICANN has reviewed the delegation request and has determined that the proposal would be in the interests of the local and global Internet communities. Resolved that the proposed delegation of the "Taiwan" and "Taiwan" top-level domains to Taiwan Network Information Center is approved. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Ram. Is there a seconder for that resolution? I see Ramaraj seconds. Is there any further discussion on this delegation or these delegations? If not, just recording again the same enthusiasm and acclamation treated as applying to all of these and the comments that Jean- Jacques made in both languages in discussing this. I'll put that resolution, then. All those in favor, please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? We note Kuo-Wei's abstention. I declare this resolution carried also. [ Applause ] >>ROD BECKSTROM: This is for Hong Kong as well. [ Applause ] (Standing Ovation) >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Just to echo Rod's comments and other comments, extraordinary work. Congratulations to everybody involved. Historic day. Can we go now to item 2 on the agenda which is consideration by the board of the Independent Review Panel's declarations on ICANN's decision regarding ICM's registry's application for an sTLD. I have a resolution that I am prepared to move in relation to how we should treat this. A little bit of explanation. This is an application that was made some years ago in the sTLD round. The board, after a number of discussions and contract negotiations with the applicant, resolved in a split vote to decline this application. And the applicant then pursued one of the mechanisms provided under the ICANN bylaws and sought an independent review of that decision by the board to decline that application. There was a hearing in front of those panelists at which the panelists made their case, and at which ICANN responded through its counsel, and eventually there was another split decision by the panelists finding the board had not acted consistently with its bylaws and made a number of recommendations. Now, the board is obliged to consider that under the bylaws, is obliged to consider any such finding by an Independent Review Panel, and at the earliest opportunity which was available to us, we began considering the course of conduct that we should follow. We took the reasonably unprecedented step of publishing the options that we thought were available to us, the kind of decision tree process that we thought we had to go through, putting up all the different options as to what we might do in considering how to respond to the panel decision. We then received an unprecedented amount of public comment on that, an extraordinary amount of work done by staff then to digest that public comment and report their results to us and to the community. We have had a number of discussions during the week here in Brussels and have arrived at the following resolution as a means of resolving this issue and taking it forward. So I move the following resolution. Whereas, on the 19th of February, 2010, an Independent Review Panel, quote, the panel, issued an advisory declaration in the independent review proceedings filed by ICM registry challenging ICANN's denial of ICM's application for the XXX domain -- sorry, XXX sTLD. Whereas, the board understands and appreciates the inaugural utilization of the independent review process and the value of such an accountability mechanism. Whereas, although the board has not made a determination as to whether or not it agrees with the findings of the panel majority, brackets, a two-one decision, close brackets, the board has determined to accept and act in accordance with some of the panel's findings. Whereas, in accordance with article IV, section 3.15 of ICANN's bylaws, the board considered the panel's declaration throughout the week in Nairobi from the 7th through 12th March 2010 and reviewed various paths towards conclusion. Whereas, in the absence of a process for approving an sTLD six years following the receipt of ICM's original application, the board chose to create a transparent set of process options and resolved to pose those options for public comment. Whereas the process options were posted for public comment, and over 13,700 comments received have been reviewed and analyzed. And whereas, the board has reviewed public comments received and further discussed and debated the process options for further consideration of the panel declaration. Resolved, and there's a number, the board accepts and shall act in accordance with the following findings of the independent process majority. Quote, one, the board of cane in adopting its resolutions of June 1, 2005, found that the application of ICM registry for the XXX sTLD met the required sponsorship criteria, semicolon, and, brackets, two, the board's reconsideration of that finding was not consistent with the application of neutral, objective, and fair documented policy, end quote. Resolved, the board directs staff to conduct expedited due diligence to ensure that, brackets (1,) the ICM application is still current, semicolon, and then (2,) that there have been no changes in ICM's qualifications. Resolved, another number. If the expedited due diligence results are successful, then the board directs ICANN staff to proceed into draft contract negotiations with ICM, taking into account the GAC advice received to date. Resolved, another number, upon staff's finalizing of a draft contract with ICM, the board will determine whether the proposed contract is consistent with GAC advice and, if not, will enter into GAC consultation in accordance with the bylaws. Resolved, further number, after the GAC consultation is completed, the board will decide whether to approve the contract and will declare whether its action is in accordance with GAC advice or not. So that ends the resolution. I am moving this relatively pro forma as chair and I have asked the vice-chairman, again pro forma, to second it. Dennis, will you second that resolution? >>DENNIS JENNINGS: Yes, I do second that resolution. Thank you, Peter. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. The resolution is moved as read into the record and seconded. Is there any further discussion by the board on this resolution? Harald. >>HARALD ALVESTRAND: To same that I am uncomfortable with this situation is an understatement. I believe that our process has been followed, our reconsideration process has been followed. We have received competent legal advice on what is the reasonable path forward for what the organization should do, and that effectively this forces me to say that it is in the best interest of the organization and the interest of the furtherance of the organization's goals to act as if something is true that I believe is not, in fact, so. This is a very uncomfortable situation, but I can see no better way to move forward. Thank you. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Harald, for a very concise explanation of the position that I think many board members find themselves in. Is there any further comment on the resolution? Rita and then Bruce. Rita. >>RITA RODIN JOHNSTON: I guess I agree with Harald. I was in the unfortunate position to be on the board in 2007 and being told to reevaluate what happened in 2005. And after hearing many comments about the propriety tee of this application, I still question whether, in fact, there is a real sponsored community here, but it really doesn't matter what I think. I think what's important is that ICANN has a process that it set up and the process came back and said that sponsorship criteria was met and that this board has the courage to follow that criteria. And I think that is really important for everyone in the community to understand and appreciate. Thanks. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Rita. Bruce. >>BRUCE TONKIN: Thanks, Peter. I just wanted to, I guess, draw attention to some of the timing implications of the resolution just so it's clear to the community as well as to the applicant here. The first couple of steps of the timing probably more in the control of the ICANN staff and the applicant in that there will be, first, a due diligence stage; secondly, if that due diligence is successful, then there is a stage where the draft contract is reviewed. But, ultimately, the key step then is for the board to decide whether the board feels that contract is in compliance with GAC advice. If the board doesn't feel it is in compliance with GAC advice, then it needs to consult with the GAC. And our best advice so far is that that would probably be in Colombia because the GAC as a whole doesn't meet intersessionally. So I just wanted to make clear that there is a potential that this is a prolonged process in timing. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Bruce. Any further comments? Katim. >>KATIM TOURAY: Yeah. Thanks, Peter. Good morning, everyone. I, too, I think have to say that I'm like a lot of people here on this dais. You know, I'm in a very uncomfortable position in the face of this resolution. I think at the end of the day, we all have to face the facts that sometimes we have to make the tough decisions. And I think this is a very difficult decision that has to be made in the interest of ICANN, in the interest of due process, and in the interest of the involvement of the community in the stipulation of the policies of the organization. And as Bruce said, this game has still not played out yet. We still have quite a number of steps to proceed. I think at this point, you know, we have to, you know, do our best to follow due process. Thank you. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Katim. Any other comments? Seeing none, I will put this resolution. All those in favor of the resolution, please raise your hands. Thank you. Any opposed? [No verbal response.] I see none. Any abstentions? I see Rod Beckstrom and Jean-Jacques Subrenat. Would either of you like to make a statement in relation to your abstentions, starting with Jean-Jacques. >>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT: Thank you, chair. I would like to provide two sentences regarding my abstention. First, my position is established on an informed basis with all due care, in good faith, in the honest belief that it is in the interests of the corporation of which I am a member of the board. Second statement: I believe that my abstention in this vote is consistent with the dispositions of Article 6, Section 23 of the ICANN bylaws. I request that my statement be deposited by the secretary of the board. Thank you. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Jean-Jacques. Duly noted. And, Rod? >>ROD BECKSTROM: While I accept the contribution to ICANN's accountability and transparency provided by the existence and the use of the independent panel review process, I am nonetheless concerned about the determination by two of the three panelists that the ICANN board should not use business judgment in the conduct of its affairs. In my view as CEO, the board must be able to use business judgment in order to protect the global public interest in the coordination of the root of the Internet and the domain name system. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Rod. Duly noted. Any other comment about that resolution? If not, I've declared it carried and we move on. What I would now like to do is call Raimundo Beca to the stage to formally thank Raimundo in person for his years of service. Raimundo. There was in a consent agenda, Raimundo, a formal resolution regarding our thanks. And you have been here with us this week and we have had many opportunities in private to say some of these things but now is an opportunity no public. First of all, let me hand these to you. This is the traditional certificate thanking you that you can frame and also a token of our thanks. But you have been an extraordinary board member and have served as chair of the finance committee and on many other committees, and I think one of the longer serving board members. Thank you very, very much for the extraordinary service you have rendered ICANN. [Applause] (Standing ovation). And, Raimundo, there are a couple of people who have insisted they want to say a couple of things in the public forum and we will ask you to make some of those comments. And, Ray, you have particularly asked if you can say something in this forum and I'm delighted to give you the opportunity. Ray? >>RAY PLZAK: Thank you, Peter. First of all, Raimundo and I go back many, many years back to days before LACNIC when Raimundo was active in ARIN. Along the way we came to an agreement that depending upon which side of the equator we were on, we decided who would be called "Ray." And we have been associated over the years working together in a large variety of roles. I have always valued your opinions and your contributions, Raimundo. And I, for one, will miss your presence on this board. So from the deepest of my heart, I wish to thank you very much for everything you've done to help promote the development of the Internet in Latin America and your contributions to the development of the Internet as a whole. Thank you very much. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Ray. Is there anyone else who wants to make a comment in this forum? Vanda? Thank you. >>VANDA SCARTEZINI: Raimundo, thank you so much for all the job for your kindness, for all your devotion. We have the chance to live together during almost ten years. We've been in this voluntary task in ICANN. I hope you won't disappear. I hope you will remain with us, and I wish to see you soon in order to take profit of your excellent memory which is really needed in the board like this one. Thank you so much. [Applause] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Jean-Jacques? >>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT: I would like to address you, Raimundo, in one of the languages you so like because you spent so long in France, for example, at a time when your country was not thriving in state functions. So what I would like to say here, most of all, is how much quality, how much care you've put into every single issue you tackle. You have a very high professional sense. Many times you brought us back to the right path with our discussions, and I would like to thank you about this. I think an African saying says "an old man who dies, it's like the burning of a library," of course, I don't wish you anything like this. But I would like to say that the fact that Raimundo leaves the directory is like losing a huge hardware. So I would like to make sure that you keep all this memory and all this wiseness -- wisdom to ICANN. [Applause] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Jean-Jacques. And, Gonzalo? No? All right. >>GONZALO NAVARRO: Thank you, Peter. I will speak in Spanish. As a person from Chile, I'm so proud to mention these words. I think Raimundo has been a very important person, probably one of the most important persons in ICANN representing the Latin American community in an excellent way. Personally speaking, I will miss him a lot because even if I am a young member of the board, it is so difficult to get the -- analyze all the map. Raimundo was the most generous people with me. I'm so grateful and I really hope to go on with the job he started and, of course, we will miss him, but I'm sure he will be close to us all the time. It is not a good-bye, it is just see you later, Raimundo. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you very much, Gonzalo. That's the end, Raimundo, of the additional tributes that people wanted to say in public. So we hand it over to you for anything you would like to say in reply. >>RAIMUNDO BECA: Thank you very much, everybody. I will speak first in Spanish, then in French and finally in English. In Spanish first. I'm so touched that it's difficult for me to express my feelings. Of course, I need my mother tongue to do that. Thank you, thank you so much to all of you. It's been six years, very interesting for me. It has been a huge experience. I really learned a lot. I have a bunch of friends extraordinary, and it's one of the best treasures I can keep. Now I speak in French. As Jean-Jacques said, France is a second home country to me. I spent 19 years of my life in France, 16 years were compulsory and three because I wanted to. So when I have to express feelings, French comes naturally. And now I will switch to English. In my life I have always had a very big difficult to get away from the police. When I came out of the secondary school to the university, I didn't like that moment. I wanted to rest in the school. When I left the university to go to study in France, I didn't like to go. I didn't want -- I wanted to rest in the university. And the sole moment in my life where I have which I didn't have the same emotion was the moment when I was not accepted to come back to my country for 16 years. So in this moment, the emotion which I feel is that I am not leaving ICANN because nobody has asked me to go out. [Applause] And I always would have liked to be in the moment like the one we just had now with the IDNs which is a big emotion, a big history. So I live now this history moment of the IDNs. And, of course, this is my memory. I would have liked also to be there for another moment which will be -- we are going to live in one year more, which is the moment when the last five blocks of IANA will be evenly distributed to the five regions. I worked a lot for that to happen, and I would have liked to have been in the board when that happened. It would not be that, but for sure I will be present when that will happen. I'm also -- because I worked a lot of that, I will have been there when the first new gTLDs of the round would happen. As a memory of that or in participation of that, I will wear this. [Applause] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Raimundo, thank you very much. >>RAIMUNDO BECA: It was an excuse to Ray because I didn't -- >>RAY PLZAK: That's all right, I've got one, too, and I will wear it south of the equator the next time I'm there. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: It sounds like collision in the T-shirt namespace, doesn't it? [Applause] Thanks very much. Can I now ask the representatives of the local hosts to come forward so that we can thank you for the extraordinary efforts that you have gone into making this meeting such a success. Marc, are you able to come forward? Marc van Wesemael. I don't know who else you have with us today. Bring them up. We really would like to say a few words. [Applause] (Standing ovation). Marc, I was going to say a few words, but I think that testimony from the crowd is actually far more important and far more effective than anything I can say. What I would have said is having served on an organizing committee when ICANN was in Wellington, I know a little bit about what's involved. And it is an absolutely extraordinary effort. One of the things is that we appreciate that you three that are here today are just a tip of an enormous team that have done an enormous amount of work. Please carry that emotion, that thanks back to all of the team. And thank you for the work that's gone into this. It has been an excellent meeting as far as we're concerned, particularly the catering of all the things to pick out about a meeting. Everybody has commented about that. Everyone has gone very, very smoothly. Thank you very, very much to you and your team. [Applause] >> MARC van WESEMAEL: It has been a great experience. Thanks to Daniela and Giovanni. It all went well. They did a great job. As I said in the opening speech, it was really squaring the circle at some times. And I did that by, as I said, circling this square. And thank you, Giovanni. Thank you, Daniela, but also thank you to all the people that have been working at this -- on this event. And thank you all people here for coming to Brussels. I hope you enjoyed it. I hope you will stay in Brussels for a few days and enjoy the weather and the nice town. Thank you very much. [Applause] >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Marc. I'm looking for Tanzie to come forward or whoever has the tokens for you. Thank you very much. If the cameras can get ready. So to the Brussels meeting team, thank you very much, very much. [Applause] Katim? >>KATIM TOURAY: Peter, I really would be remiss if I don't bring to the attention of this body the incredible efforts to which Giovanni went to get me a visa to get to Brussels. I had to go to the CAR. We didn't have a Belgian embassy in my country, Gambia. I had to go to the CAR list twice. Giovanni called, e-mailed, faxed and did everything. In the end, I got it just about a few days before I got there. So I want to say thank you very much on behalf of not only myself but I'm sure the list of the people that you really went to bat for to help ensure they got here on time. Thanks again. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Just another example of the extraordinary staff that goes into much of the background. Let's move back to the regular agenda. We are up to Item 6, and we have an issue relating to board committee assignments. Ray, I might ask you to have a look at that for us, please. >>RAY PLZAK: Thank you, Peter. Before I begin, just a note -- taking note of the conversation during the report of the finance committee this morning, I'm taking the liberty of correcting the individual that's named in the second resolution regarding his name. And, therefore, whereas, Kuo-Wei Wu has joined the ICANN board and Raimundo Beca's term as an ICANN director has concluded. Whereas, in light of the changes to board membership, the Board Governance Committee has made recommendations for revisions to the membership of certain board committees. Whereas, the board agrees with the BGC's recommendations. Resolved, Kuo-Wei Wu shall become a member of the public participation and IANA board committees. Resolved, Ramaraj shall become a member of the board executive committee. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Ray. Is there a seconder for that committee -- for that resolution? I see Dennis, the chair of the BGC, seconding that. Is there any discussion about that? If not, I'll put that resolution. All those in favor please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? I see three. Jean-Jacques? >>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT: Yes, I don't think I need to reassure my colleagues Ramaraj and Kuo that I have deep esteem to them and that they are nominated to the committees. My point is about process. Whereas, I would like to commend Dennis and other members of the Board Governance Committee for all the work that has been done over the past year, all the tasks they have accepted to take on and they have dealt with so well. I just want to make a point that I have brought this up in several international meetings of ICANN, that I think this particular process of the appointment of board members, two board committees can and should be improved. I come out with this just now because I have a strong believe that especially now where we are engaged in the process of the review teams and where we have an ever greater duty in terms of governance, I think that internal governance is equally important. And so in line with this, I have sent around to my colleagues of the board some suggestions for an improvement. But I repeat, I'm overjoyed by the appointments which were made. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Jean-Jacques. The other abstentions were from Ramaraj and Kuo-Wei who are the subjects of the resolution. I assume it is simply for that reason, unless you wish to say something. I see none. Let's declare the resolution carried and move to the next resolution which deals with the remuneration of the chair. And consistent with my practice whenever this has been discussed, I will hand the chair to Dennis. In fact, when this has been discussed at the board, I have actually left the room. I don't think that's -- I'm not sure that counsel is recommending that I do that on this occasion. So, Dennis, you have the chair for Item 7 and Rita has indicated that she will move this resolution. >>DENNIS JENNINGS: Thank you very much, Peter. Let me go straight to the resolution. Whereas, the board has determined that it is appropriate to consider reasonable compensation for the chair of the board of ICANN. Whereas, as a non-profit California public benefit corporation that is exempt from United States federal income taxes because it is an organization described in 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, ICANN may not pay more than "reasonable compensation" for services rendered to ICANN. Whereas, the compensation committee was tasked with obtaining, reviewing and considering comparable compensation data before making recommendations relating to board chair remuneration, taking into account organization size, geographic considerations, international presence and other relevant factors. Whereas, the compensation committee is authorized to engage and to seek advice from independent professionals with appropriate expertise in compensation arrangements for board members of U.S.-based, non- profit, tax-exempt organizations possessing a global employee base. Whereas, in connection with consideration of compensation for the ICANN board chair, the Board Governance Committee, in furtherance of the compensation committee's remit, requested staff to engage the services of Towers Watson, an international consulting firm, to assist the compensation committee in compiling and analyzing appropriate compensation data as to compare built with respect to the chair of ICANN's board. Whereas, in making recommendations to the full board regarding the level of compensation to consider for ICANN's chair of the board, the Compensation Committee followed the process set forth in United States treasury regulation 53.4958-6 which is intended to enable the board to establish the presumption that the compensation to be paid to the board chair is reasonable for federal income tax purposes. Whereas, upon due inquiry of its members, the Compensation Committee concluded that no member participating in the deliberations and voting on the level of compensation recommended to the board for the board chair compensation was conflicted. Whereas, because the board chair, who is also the chair of the Compensation Committee is conflicted, the board chair did not participate in the deliberations or voting on the recommendations as to whether the board should consider compensating the board chair, or the level of compensation considered. Whereas, after consideration of the information the Compensation Committee received, including the comparability data provided by Towers Watson and the advice and counsel of Towers Watson, the non- conflicted voting members of the Compensation Committee agreed that it is in the best interests of ICANN to recommend that the board consider compensating the ICANN chair of the board. Whereas, after consideration of the information the compensation received, including the comparability data provided by Towers Watson and the advice and counsel of Towers Watson, the non-conflicted voting members of the Compensation Committee agreed that -- pardon me while I turn the page -- agreed that while taking into account organization size, geographic considerations, international presence, the role and responsibilities of the board chair and other relevant factors, determined that reasonable compensation for the board chair would be U.S. dollars 75,000 per year. Whereas, upon due inquiry of its members, the board has concluded that no member of the board participating in the deliberations and voting on the issue of compensating the board chair was conflicted. Whereas, because the board chair is conflicted, the board chair did not participate in the deliberations or voting on the issue of compensating the board chair. Whereas, the board considered the information that was gathered pursuant to the Compensation Committee remit, including the comparable compensation data compiled and reported by Towers Watson. Whereas, there has been a full discussion non-conflicted board members regarding the reasonableness of compensating the board chair and the reasonable of compensating the board chair in the amount of $75,000 per year for services to ICANN, taking into account organization size, geographic considerations, international presence, the role and responsibilities of the board chair and other relevant factors. Whereas, in reviewing the recommendations of the Compensation Committee regarding the level of compensation best suited for ICANN's chair of the board, the board followed the process set forth in treasury regulation 53.4958-6 which is intended to enable the board to establish the presumption that the compensation recommended to be paid to the board chairman is reasonable for federal income tax purposes. Whereas, if the board decides to compensate the board chair, doing so will require a bylaws change. Resolved, with a reference number, the board has determined that it is appropriate to consider reasonable compensation for the ICANN chair. Resolved, the board directs staff to post for public comment for a period of at least 30 days revised bylaws that would allow for compensation of the ICANN chair of the board, and after taking public comments into account, the board will reconsider the matter. Now I'm chairing the meeting, of course, naturally. Pardon me while I fix this. Do I have a seconder for this motion? Rita, you are proposing. And Ray is the seconder. Does any member of the board wish to make any comment on this resolution at this time? Seeing that nobody wants to make a comment, can I ask all board members who are in favor of this resolution, voting in favor of this resolution, to raise their hands. (Raising hands). Thank you. Any board member wishing to vote against this resolution. Any abstentions? I see one -- three abstainers. Thank you very much. Resolution passed. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Can I -- Peter Dengate Thrush. Can I just comment I'm abstaining for the obvious reasons of conflict of interest. >>DENNIS JENNINGS: And, Rod, do you wish to comment? >>ROD BECKSTROM: I'm abstaining due to potential perceived conflict of interest that the chairman of the committee that determines my compensation. >>DENNIS JENNINGS: Steve, do you wish to comment? >>STEVE CROCKER: Not at length. It is very delicate. It is a question of judgment. It is a matter of a potential conflict of interest so I decided to abstain. >>DENNIS JENNINGS: Thank you, Steve. Concluding that matter, I hand you back to our chair. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Dennis. Let's move then to the fiscal budget for the coming year. I would ask, Ramaraj, the chair of the board's finance committee to take us through this resolution. Ramaraj? >>RAMARAJ: Thank you, Peter. After I read the resolution into the record, I would like to make a comment, and I would like to request Bruce also to support me in another comment, with your permission. Adoption of fiscal year 2011 budget. Whereas, on 19 February 2010, ICANN's board approved an update to the strategic plan. Whereas, the framework for the FY11 operating plan and budget was posted in February 2010 for community consultation and was presented at the Nairobi ICANN international public meeting. Whereas, community consultations were held to discuss and obtain feedback on the initial framework. Whereas, the draft FY11 operating plan and budget was posted for public comment in accordance with the bylaws on 17 May 2010 based upon the framework for the FY11 operating plan and budget, community consultation and consultations with the Board Finance Committee. Whereas, ICANN has actively solicited further community feedback and consultation with the ICANN community through online fora, conference calls, meetings in Brussels, and in the open forum in Brussels. Whereas, the ICANN Board Finance Committee has discussed and guided staff on the development of the FY11 operating plan and budget at each of its regularly scheduled monthly meetings. Whereas, the ICANN Board Finance Committee met in Brussels on 20 June 2010 to discuss the FY11 operating plan and budget and recommended that the board adopt the FY11 operating plan and budget. Whereas, the board has heard comments from the community during the meetings in Brussels, and with the comment period ending today, the board will make adjustments to the budget where appropriate in order to address the community's concerns. Resolved, the board adopts the FY11 operating plan and budget. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Ramaraj. Is there a seconder for that resolution? I see Bruce. Now, any comment on the resolution? Ram, you wanted to make a comment? >>RAMARAJ: Yeah. So we received a fair amount of community feedback online and at these meetings. And I thought I would take up on one aspect of that in terms of what we do now and in terms of process improvement going forward. So one area that there was a fair bit of feedback was in constituency support. So we thought that one area that we would try and do is request Kevin and his team to give greater detail than is available in the 83-page report, greater granularity and go down and share that with the community that's interested in that. That was one step. And work with members of the community based on that input and see if there are any changes, any additions, some modifications that we could still incorporate at this time. So those were actions arising out of the feedback that we received from community. We also felt that we need to work with the supporting and advisory organizations much earlier in the project process to get that feedback. It has been expressed many times as almost like operational divisions, and we are going to initiate that in maybe August, September this year to help get more clarity and inputs so that the budget process continues to improve. Thank you, Peter. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Ram. That's very important, I think, to acknowledge the community input that's been had and the various responses, some immediate and some longer term and hopefully some of them quite structural. Bruce, were you going to comment? >>BRUCE TONKIN: Thank you, Peter. I just want to talk a little bit about compliance because that's been a common theme across the GNSO in nearly every certainly constituency group I attended. The registry constituency wants to see stronger compliance of conditions around vertical integration and we heard yesterday from the working group that that's a major issue in any proposal coming forward, that any proposed structure needs to be able to ensure that ICANN manage compliance to whatever that proposal is. In the registrars, the registrar constituency believes that the members that attend these meetings are, of course, all the good guys and that there are others that don't attend that need compliance. So they are keen on compliance, too. The intellectual property constituency believes we need more compliance particularly around WHOIS. Law enforcement believes we need compliance around WHOIS and generally improving due diligence around selection of registrars, et cetera. So I can certainly go on but we're hearing that from lots of different areas. And then when people look at the bucket, they look at what percentage is ICANN spending on compliance and is it spending more or less. So the answer to that is it is spending more. It's spending about 7.7% in addition to last year. And then if you compare the compliance against our total budget, it's probably about 6% of ICANN's total budget goes into compliance. So I think the next step is we need to go away from just comments that hey, we should spend more, we should double, treble, quadruple the budget to having some more concrete proposals about what specific actions do we want the staff to take. The staff can then provide some budget elements against what those actions would be, and then the board or the Finance Committee can review that and say we've got three options, different levels of expenditure. We can put those out for community comment and do that as part of the budgeting process. Also, I want to add there are sort of three maybe methods of compliance and three costs associated with that. So regardless of whether you are talking about the compliance of registrants with WHOIS or whether you are talking about the compliance of registries in terms of ownership provisions, you can do three things. One is you can check up front when a registrant registers a domain name or when a registrar is accredited. You can do an annual recheck of those qualifications, if you like, so at the time of renewal. So obviously that would be very expensive to do that for 80 million registrants that we have in the system. Secondly, you can use an audit approach which a lot of tax departments do. They so basically say, well, we don't have time to check everybody's tax return in detail. We will use some typically an algorithm that checks a few things, and if you say your income is a large number but the amount of tax you need to pay is nearly nothing, then that usually triggers an audit, you can understand why that is the case. So you can do some audits, just picking a few elements that seem bad. We can do that with WHOIS. We can do some scans of WHOIS and audit of some of it. Or thirdly use complaints and you follow-up on complaints. Our current compliance system at the moment is basically a complaints-based system. And what we haven't included in the budget is some improvements to the reporting systems for WHOIS data reporting, and ICANN has been spending quite a bit on that in the last few years to improve that complaint reporting system. I want to identify there are three main systems. They have three very different levels of cost. And I think we, as a community, need to analyze that in more detail. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Bruce. I think it's appropriate to respond to the amount of public comment that we have had about that particular item association thank you for that clear exposition. Mike Silber, did you want to comment on the budget? >>MIKE SILBER: Thanks, Peter. Just to indicate that a clause has been put in the recordals as Ramaraj has indicated to take into account that there has been a slight confusion or lack of foresight in terms of the planning that we are passing the resolution when the public comment only closes today. And also further that some of the comment received has asked for further detail to allow people to comment on items that are not clear to them. I just think that's a process improvement that we really need to focus on in future, that we allow significant or sufficient time for comments to be made and we don't have to rely on ad hoc alterations after the fact when we have already adopted something. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Mike. Anyone else want to comment on the budget? Seeing none, let's put that resolution which will have the effect of adopting the budget. All those in favor, please raise their hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Goodness, a clean slate. Well done. Let's move to the next one which is an item that we had an item on our published agenda called the new gTLD budget and there has been some discussion about that. I actually asked Mike to move the resolution but there isn't one. Mike, if you are interested in saying a few comments about the discussions we had about the new gTLD budget, now is the time. >>MIKE SILBER: Thanks again, Peter. I think the critical issue is recognizing that we're in a process of continual improvement, and having regards to the discussion around firstly the budget and secondly the new gTLD budget at the public forum yesterday as well as during the course of the week, it's our view as the board that the matter has been appropriately dealt with. We greatly appreciate the public input. Obviously, it's an ongoing public input. And it certainly will be taken into consideration in terms of the processes leading up to the final launch of the new gTLD application process. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Mike. So let's move on to the next item which is in relation to the internal audit function. And I have asked George to move this resolution. George. >>GEORGE SADOWSKY: Thank you, Peter. I'm quite pleased to do this, having listened to Rita Rodin's report in the Audit Committee of the need and usefulness for this function. So, whereas the Board Audit Committee, BAC, has been carefully considering the institution of an internal audit function within ICANN as a best practice for financial controls and accountability within the organization. Whereas, the BAC, through staff, identified an initial scope and firm to perform the internal audit function and report the results of such function directly to the BAC. Whereas the BAC had an initial discussion with the internal audit firm while in Brussels and provided a brief presentation to the board on the initiation of the internal audit function. Resolved, reference number, the board appreciates the Board Audit Committee's institution of this important step in continued best practices for audit committees and increased accountability for the organization. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, George. Is there a seconder for that resolution? I see Ramaraj is seconding. Any discussion about that? If not, let's put that resolution. All those in favor, please raise your hands. Thank you. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Rita, who is the chair of the Audit Committee, abstains. I don't think you are strictly required to, Rita, but if you feel you want to. Do you want to make any comment? >>RITA RODIN JOHNSTON: It just feels weird to thank myself, I guess. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Let's move on -- declare the resolution carried and we can move on to the next one which is the discussion of the resolution about the use of the board retreat for considering new gTLDs. Bruce, can you take this one, please. >>BRUCE TONKIN: Thank you, Peter. I have pleased you have chosen a short resolution for me, which is much appreciated. The resolution reads, whereas the public comment period for the Draft Applicant Guidebook version 4, which is for both ASCII and IDN gTLDs, will close on the 21st of July of this year. Whereas the board intends to work expeditiously to resolve any outstanding issues prior to issuing of the applicant guidebook, noting, however, that some issues might be outside of the control of the board. Whereas, the board noted a number of issues raised during the public comment forum in Brussels on which further consideration will be required. It's therefore resolved that the board will use its retreat currently scheduled for the 24th and 25th of September of this year for the consideration of all the outstanding issues related to the implementation of the new gTLD program. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Bruce. Is there a seconder for this resolution? I see George. Thank you. Any discussion about this use of the retreat to try and clean up the -- any remaining issues? Jean-Jacques. >>JEAN-JACQUES SUBRENAT: Thank you, Peter. As someone who has been on the board for less than three years, I'm very struck by the fact that this has been a constant element on the agenda at each of our meetings, and also in our sessions which are not in public. And I have listened carefully to everything which was said in the public forum on this subject. And I would like to commend you for proposing that we set aside a special retreat of the board for this. I think we owe all our stakeholders a result, and the result has to be tied to a timeline. Thanks. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Jean-Jacques. Yes, I share that. Thank you for the kind comments personally, but coming to the timeline, we appreciate first of all the costs of delay and then the costs of the uncertainty around this, and that's one of the intentions, if we can, is to start putting some stakes in the ground. Any other discussion about the use of the board retreat? Of course what this means is we will probably have to schedule another retreat where we get on the business that a retreat requires, and that includes succession and voting and various other matters. But we have a reasonable time gap between now and the next meeting in Cartagena. I will put that resolution. All those in favor, please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Katim, you are abstaining or opposing? >>KATIM TOURAY: I am voting affirmatively for it. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. Declare the resolution carried. We come then to a resolution concerning the publication of materials coming to the board as part of our briefings. And I will ask Katim to take this resolution. Katim. >>KATIM TOURAY: Certainly, Peter. Thank you. The issue of transparency and accountability is two issues that are very important to the ICANN board, and in that spirit and in that regard, the board is attempting to trial balloon the idea of providing to the public materials that it is provided, that it is provided in readiness for the board meetings. Of course, this material would not include material that is confidential. And I think, by the way, this would be a very important practice because I think it will begin to expose a lot of people to the kind of torture the board gets exposed to when you get hit with like a 200 or almost 300 page board book that we sometimes get. And the resolution reads: Whereas, the board has for some time wanted to share the briefing papers it receives with the community in the interests of transparency and accountability, and the community has also requested the publication of these materials. Whereas, as a proof of concept, staff has prepared a version of the board briefing materials for the board meeting of 22nd April 2010 for publication, with confidential material redacted. Whereas, the Board Governance Committee will assess results of the proof of concept publication and recommend further guidance to the board on the practice of sharing board briefing materials. Resolved, the board directs staff to publish the nonconfidential portions of the board briefing materials for the board meeting of 22nd April 2010. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Katim. Is there a seconder for this resolution? Jean-Jacques. I think as chair of the Public Participation Committee, that is a very appropriate seconding. Thank you. Any other comment on this resolution? Katim. >>KATIM TOURAY: I just notice, Peter, there is no resolution number on this resolution and it is not in bold, and I suppose that has no implication as to the -- how resolved the board is about the resolution. I just thought I would point it out. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. The practice, as you probably know, is all these resolutions go through and get carefully numbered by the legal team afterwards, and sometimes they come out of order. I have shifted the order around, as you know, a couple of times already, so they end up being numbered sequentially. Thank you. I'll declare that resolution carried. And if we can move to the next item which is the Nominating Committee has been -- there's a position on the Nominating Committee that is intended to be filled by an academic and technical research community, but there hasn't ever been selected by the board such a community or one encouraged to be found. And so the board has been, for some time, making an appointment to fill that position. But after discussions, we have decided to change that practice. I would ask Kuo-Wei to read this resolution. Thank you, Kuo. >>KUO-WEI WU: Whereas in the accordance with the Article VII of section 2.8.c of the bylaws, one voting delegate of the Nominating Committee, NomCom, shall be selected by an entity designed by the board to represent academic and similar organization, NomCom academic member. Whereas, in prior years, the board did not develop a process for identifying the appropriate entity to select the NomCom academic member. Whereas, in lieu of the identifying selecting entity, the board previously recommendation from the BGC selected an individual to serve as the NomCom academic member. Whereas, it has been determined that the board should no longer select the NomCom academic member and that an entity should do so. Resolution, 2010, June 25, 25th, the board directs staff to develop an entity selection process and evaluation procedure to comply with the bylaw for the BGC and the board consideration, with a view toward identifying an entity in sufficient time to select the NomCom academia member for the 2011 to 2012 NomCom. Resolved, 2010, June 25th, the board will not appoint a NomCom academia member of the 2010 to 2011 NomCom. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Kuo. Is there a seconder for that resolution? I see Ray is seconding that. Any other discussion about that? This is a step to regularize the practice of previous years. All those in favor, then please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Carried. And then we come to item 14, approval of the bylaws in relation to -- which resulted from a reconsideration request and I will ask Rita to take us through resolution 14. >>RITA RODIN JOHNSTON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Whereas the Board Governance Committee fully considered reconsideration request 10-1 and adopted a recommendation in response, calling for revisions to the bylaws with respect to the timing for posting of the adopted resolutions and the preliminary report after a board meeting. Whereas the board adopted the BGC's recommendation on reconsideration request 10-1. Whereas the BGC has reviewed and consider the public comments received and recommended the board approve the bylaws revisions as posted at, and there's a site. Resolved, the board approves the bylaws revisions as posted for public comment in furtherance of the BGC's recommendation on reconsideration request 10-1. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you. Is there a seconder for this resolution? I see Katim. Any discussion about this? Reasonably self-explanatory. All those in favor, please raise your hands. Any opposed? Any abstainers among us? I see none. I'll declare the resolution carried. That completes the resolutions for which notice was given, and we come to other business. I see Mr. Secretary is attracting my attention. Mr. Secretary tells me it's not clear we have a record of voting on the resolution that Katim put for the publishing of the board material. So if you wouldn't mind we will just do that again, go back to Katim's resolution. We won't read it into the record again. It's the one about publishing the board materials for the 22nd of April and asking the Board Governance Committee to look into this practice of making the materials in the board briefings available. Everyone clear which one we are voting on? Let's put that vote again, please. All those in favor of the resolution as read by Katim, please raise your hands. Are there any opposed? Are there any abstentions? Mr. Secretary, you can record that as carried unanimously. Just in general business, I want to make a couple of comments that I have been giving notice to all of the people that the board has been interacting with at this meeting that we are looking at the way we do those interactions at the meeting to improve the use of efficiency and the use of time for the board to meet the community. We do have a kind of institutionalized set of meetings, so if it's Tuesday morning it's one group, if it's Thursday morning it's another group, and if it's Sunday night, another group, and I thought it was just time to have a look at that. So we have talked to those groups and asked them to consider how we are meeting with them and how best to use the time that's available. Because of the fact that some of those groups got on back in 1998 and 1999 and set up these meetings that we have got new constituencies, new groups formed, it's high time we had a look at that. The other thing that I think you might be interested in is that we have changed the timing of the board workshop and as a result of that we were able to present the board's current thinking on some issues at the forum yesterday, and I think the board feels that that was a certainly very much better way of engaging with the community and we appreciate the community feedback on that. So more along those lines and thank you to everyone for helping us maximize the efficiency of the board at these meetings. There's one other item that I was going to ask Rod to do a comment on, on some H.R. matters just to give the board an update on those. Are there any other items of general business, just to get an indication? I see none. So Rod, an update on H.R. >>ROD BECKSTROM: The update on HR is unfortunately Doug Brent is leaving us, so we were opening up a COO search. We are doing that with Aguns International, the same firm that recruited Doug in the first place, recruited myself and other officers of ICANN. We have posted the applications online. You can apply online. We are receiving applications. We are working through the applicants and have just started interviewing. I would hope we bring that process to a successful conclusion within three to six months. But we will take however much time we need to find the right candidate. We've also recently posted the vice president of global partnerships online. We're taking applications, and encourage you to think about the best candidates that you would know for that position. That's the update. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thanks, Rod. I particularly encourage people to use their networks to help us find the best people for this fantastic organization. Bruce? >>BRUCE TONKIN: Thanks, Peter. Just a really quick comment. Looking at the ICANN home page, and you go down to the very bottom of the page in very fine print, there is a section called "careers." That's where all the job listings are there. I think there are 11 or 12 job listings currently. But it is accessible from the home page. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Bruce. We will appoint you as navigator from here on. Any other comments about those HR items? If not, I will hand back to you, Rod. >>ROD BECKSTROM: So, Doug, I would like to invite you to please join me on stage for a historic moment for ICANN. We normally recognize the comings and the departure of board members and CEOs. And this is the first time in ICANN history, at least that I know of, that another board member has been recognized for their exceptional contribution. And this is a very special moment for a very special man. I think that the ICANN board and the previous CEO made an excellent move in creating the chief operating officer position in ICANN to coordinate our operations, which are extremely complex. This is a very, very dynamic and complex organization. So that was a good move. Actually, an excellent move. But there was an even better move they made, Doug, and that was hiring you. You are one of the most exceptional managers and leaders that I've seen in an organization. And what you have done here in the last 3 1/2 years is to build not only a foundation for this house but walls and structure in the retrofit and remodel that has really boosted the capacity of the organization, the professionalism and the strengthening of processes. And you have done that with the utmost attention to the quality of your relationship with staff members and also the community. And you provide an outstanding model in that sense. So we're all going to miss you hugely. And our loss is, indeed, Silicon Valley's gain. But we are just very, very sorry to see you go. We have a tradition at ICANN which is giving board members an ICANN jacket when they join the board. And in this moment, it is my honor to give to you an ICANN board jacket as you complete your role as COO. Please stand and join me in congratulating Doug. (Standing ovation.) >> Encore, encore. >>DOUG BRENT: I promise to keep this extraordinarily brief knowing I stand between you and airplanes and lunch and everything else. I will say it really has been an honor to work with everybody here and here and the staff, and I'll miss you all. Thank you very much. >>ROD BECKSTROM: Thank you, Doug. You are the best. Thank you. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: That brings to a close the board meeting in Brussels, unless there's any further business. I see none. I will declare the meeting closed. Thank you all, ladies and gentlemen. See you in Cartagena. [Applause]