ICANN Resolutions » Geographic Regions Review Working Group Final Report Submission
Important note: The Board Resolutions are as reported in the Board Meeting Transcripts, Minutes & Resolutions portion of ICANN's website. Only the words contained in the Resolutions themselves represent the official acts of the Board. The explanatory text provided through this database (including the summary, implementation actions, identification of related resolutions, and additional information) is an interpretation or an explanation that has no official authority and does not represent the purpose behind the Board actions, nor does any explanations or interpretations modify or override the Resolutions themselves. Resolutions can only be modified through further act of the ICANN Board.
Whereas, the cross-community Geographic Regions Review Working Group has produced its Final Report in which it proposes a series of recommendations regarding the ongoing application of the organization's geographic regions framework.
Whereas, the ICANN Board is interested in further community reaction to those recommendations.
Whereas, the Working Group has recommended that the Board direct staff to manage a public comment period of at least 120 days to give the community an opportunity to thoroughly review the proposals and provide any additional comments on its recommendations.
Resolved (2015.12.02.04), that the Board directs the President and CEO, or his designee(s), to initiate and manage a public comment period of at least 120 days on the Geographic Regions Review Working Group Final Report to give the community an opportunity to review the recommendations of the Working Group, and to provide any additional comments on those recommendations.
Why is the Board addressing this issue now?
The Board-chartered cross-community Geographic Regions Review Working Group submitted its Final Report recommendations to the Chairman of the ICANN Board on November 4, 2015. At the recommendation of the Working Group, the Board taking action to seek community review and further comment on the Working Group recommendations.
What are the proposals being considered?
The Working Group concludes that the general principle of geographic diversity is valuable and should be preserved.
Application of the geographic diversity principles must be more rigorous, clear and consistent.
Adjusting the number of ICANN geographic regions is not currently practical.
No other International Regional Structures offer useful options for ICANN.
ICANN must formally adopt and maintain its own unique Geographic Regions Framework.
The Community wants to minimize any changes to the current structure.
ICANN must acknowledge the sovereignty and right of self-determination of states to let them choose their region of allocation.
ICANN communities have flexibly applied geographic diversity principles over the years. While the Board should remain strictly subject to the current framework, flexibility should be preserved for other structures.
"Special Interest Groups" or "Cross-Regional Sub-Groups" offer new diversity opportunities.
Implementation mechanisms and processes must be developed by Staff.
The Board must preserve its oversight and future review opportunities.
After the close of the public comment period, the Board will consider the recommendations of the Working Group taking into account the input from the community.
What stakeholders or others were consulted?
All ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees were invited to provide representatives to the Working Group. At various times throughout the working group effort the ALAC, ASO, ccNSO and GNSO had representatives serving on the group. The GAC Chair also participated early in the process. Prior to submission of the Working Group's Final Report, comments were provided by the ALAC, ccNSO, GNSO and the GAC Chair. The formal ALAC, ccNSO and GNSO comments accompanied the Final Report submission.
What significant materials did the Board review?
The Board received a copy of the Working Group's Final Report including formal written statements from the ALAC, ccNSO and GNSO.
What factors did the Board find to be significant?
For purposes of directing the initiation of a public comment forum, the Board reviewed the recommendation of the Working Group to establish a public comment period of at least 120 days.
Are there Positive or Negative Community Impacts?
Opening an extensive public comment period on this matter can be viewed as a positive development for the community.
Are there fiscal impacts/ramifications on ICANN (Strategic Plan, Operating Plan, Budget); the community; and/or the public?
The initiation of a public comment period regarding this matter presents no fiscal impacts/ramifications on the organization, the community or the public.
Are there any Security, Stability or Resiliency issues relating to the DNS?
The initiation of a public comment period regarding this matter will have no anticipated impact on the security, stability and resiliency of the domain name system.
Is this either a defined policy process within ICANN's Supporting Organizations or ICANN's Organizational Administrative Function decision requiring public comment or not requiring public comment?
Public comment opportunities regarding this matter have been numerous and extensive so no further comment opportunities are required. However, the Board has decided to provide an additional opportunity for public comment as it is interested in receiving additional feedback from the community before it deliberates on the recommendations of the Working Group.