Post-Geneva IFWP Consensus Summary

  1. Objectives / Principles
    1. The processes of the new entity shall be open and transparent, utilizing the Internet to this end to the fullest extent possible.
    2. The processes of the new entity shall be global and diverse.
    3. The entity shall be limited to its enumerated powers.
    4. The entity shall strive to minimize barriers to entry.
    5. The entity shall work to assure the stability of Internet.
    6. The entity should recognize that individuals and organizations have concurrent and legitimate rights in names that are not based in trademark.
  2. The Interim Board
    1. There will be an interim Board implemented.
    2. The Interim Board will establish the new Entity.
    3. The Interim Board will validate the Membership.
    4. The Interim Board will validate the election process.
    5. The Interim Board will oversee the Election of the Initial Board.
    6. Termination of the Interim Board
      1. Six Month target
      2. Extension Possible
      3. No Later than 30 September 2000
  3. Structure of the Entity
    1. The Entity shall have councils with their supporting organizations.
    2. IETF should be the supporting organisation that appoints the Protocol Council. It is expected that the IETF would be likely to appoint the IAB as the Protocol Council.
    3. The regional address registries will be on the Address Council. There was consensus that there should be a process by which the Board can extend the Address Council to include bodies other than RIRs. New regional registries should be represented on the Address Council. The board of the IANA will have the right to exclude members of the Address Council if they don't meet IANA's openness requirements.
    4. There will be a Names Council. The Names Council’s powers will be limited consistent with Board powers. The Names Council will have the non-exclusive power to nominate Board members. The Names Council will propose best practices for registrars. The names council will exercise all of its functions with respect to specific registries, consonant with the business practices and law of the countries of the registries. (Note: names council functions in relation to TLDs described in "Powers" section below.)
    5. The Entity shall have a board.
    6. Decisions about technical policies must be approved by a relevant council prior to the board’s decision to accept or reject. (Strong support but not full consensus.)
    7. The board may propose matters to be considered by the councils.
    8. The Entity shall have a Membership (based on incomplete notes of Membership workshop).
    9. Members shall elect the Board. (Saturday’s report suggested a hybrid system in which some Board seats are elected by technical councils while others are elected by open membership user/industry groups.)
    10. Members shall have the non-exclusive right to nominate Board candidates.
    11. Members may vote to remove Board members.
  4. Powers of the Entity
    1. The board shall have the power to set policy regarding IP numbers through a bottom-up procedure where entity councils make proposals that the board may accept or veto.
    2. The board shall have the power to set policies and procedures to maintain a coherent root zone system.
    3. The board shall have the power to set policies and procedures for delegating TLDs, including ccTLDs and gTLDs.
    4. (Note: the following items were conclusions of the names council workshop; they may be inconsistent with the more general conclusions of Workshop A.)
    5. The Names council will recommend new gTLDs and gTLD policies; will make points of advice and recommendations to the Board for all TLD matters; will provide a forum for discussion among gTLD and ccTLD registries and registrars, and a forum for dispute resolution between and among them; will recommend general and specific conditions for operation and management of TLDs, existing or new.
    6. The board shall have the power to set policies and procedures to assign technical parameters.
    7. The board shall have the power to set technical policies and procedures including the coordination of the Internet domain name system and the oversight of registrars and registries.
    8. The entity shall have the power to set policies and procedures to determine its own organizational structure and finances. No consensus was reached about whether this power shall be exercised by the board or by the members.
  5. Entity Responsibilities
    1. The new entity should cooperate with TLD registries to form databases of up-to-date registration and contact information for all SLDs. (Rough consensus, with a single strong dissent.)
    2. The entity should encourage the rapid development of various trademark dispute resolution mechanisms.
    3. The entity itself does not resolve trademark / domain name disputes.
  6. Recurring Issues
    1. Top-down vs. bottom-up relationship between Board/Councils/Membership.
    2. Centralized vs. decentralized relationship between Entity and registries.
    3. Narrowly prescribed Board powers vs. Board discretion re powers.
    4. Degree of Membership involvement.
    5. Mechanics of membership/representation.
    6. Funding/ownership structure.
    7. Jurisdiction/choice of law.
    8. Non-profit vs. other corporate structure, implications for liability/accountability.
    9. Selection of Interim Board.
    10. Propriety of differential treatment for gTLDs and ccTLDs.
    11. Role of councils in Board nomination/election.