APTLD Annual General Meeting Minutes
Monday February 24, 2003
1. Board Meeting Call to Order
-----------------
APTLD Board Meeting called to order at 09:00 Taipei Time. The Chair, Ramesh, welcomed member delegates to Taipei and congratulated the Secretariat for excellent jobs in organising the meeting and providing the facilities and guest registration for the APRICOT.
Self-introduction Started with Ramesh Kumar
Nadarajah/.my
The
agenda as Annex 1
Participant
list as Annex 2
2. Approving the APTLD Secretariat Election Result
-----------------
The meeting started with approving the APTLD Secretariat Election Result conducted.
2.1 The Chair moved to approve the appointment of TWNIC as Secretariat. Sue seconded.
2.2 Yumi congratulated the TWNIC’s continuing performing secretarial tasks for the next two years. She volunteered to help the Secretariat to build the new APTLD website.
3. Secretariat Reports
-----------------
3.1 Ian summarised the Review on 2002, 2003 Objectives, 2002 Financial Report and 2003 Budget Plan.
3.2 Chair moved to accept the Secretariat’s report of Review on 2002, seconded by Dr. Lee.
3.3 Sue asked about the increase of meeting expenses. Ian clarified that 2003 meetings include the ICANN meetings and the additional pre-meeting in the AP region before ICANN meetings.
3.4 Sue asked about the APTLD Sponsorship Program. Is it also an opportunity for the member to go to Pacific Region rather than get individuals to come to our meetings? Ramesh clarified that it is under our reach.
3.5 Sue moved to adoption of 2002 Financial Report and Budget Plan 2003. Ramesh seconded.
3.6 Ian briefly made a report on 2003 Objective, and welcome members to provide any suggestions
3.7 Sue requested clarification for “outreach”. Ian answered that it means website linkage, share documents and invitation to APTLD meeting, and participation in other AP meetings,
3.8 Dr. Lee suggested, in order to outreach and increase participations, there is one thing that we could do, which is to participate in other related meetings and introduce APTLD, for example ITU meeting, as an alternative method.
3.9 Kanchana asked, are we going to have more events, such as workshops, and technical related events? Ramesh replied that is to participate in related meetings and to hold parallel sessions there. It is also important to include this in our newsletter and inform members any specific items going on around the world.
3.10 Ian introduced new APTLD website.
3.11 The Secretariat sought members’ assistance to provide any old documents to add in the new website.
3.12 Sue suggested APTLD Communiqué should move higher at the top of the list. Dr. Lee noted that APTLD updating of documents should be archived.
3.13 Yumi asked about the target of the website. Ian answered APTLD members, other organisations and interested individual as well as potential members. She suggested moving APTLD Sponsorship Program at a noticeable level. Sue added that it is to provide a guideline about APTLD on the outreach section of new web site to give the potential members some information such as “who we are “, “what we do”, “why would you join”, and “if financially difficult, what support can be provided by APTLD” to encourage them to join APTLD.
3.14 Ramesh suggested future documents to be archived in html format. He asked the Secretariat to make the website available for members to review and give substantial comments in detail before the website go live.
3.15 Ramesh moved to accept financial report and 2003 objective. Dr. Lee seconded.
4. Incorporation Status Report
-----------------
4.1 Ramesh briefed that informal submission have been sent. Some issues needs to be discussed before preceding a formal submission.
4.2 Regarding the entrance fee and annual subscription fee, Ramesh thought it would be easy to settle since we do not have entrance fee.
4.3 Ramesh brought an issue: Whether in a view of the amendment that half of the Board shall retire every year, is it acceptable for the number of the Board Members to be increased from seven to eight?
4.4 Sue suggested to increase the board seats to eight based on couples of reasons; and that the Board Chair has the casting vote when a tie occurs.
4.5 Vincent agreed that half of the Board shall retire every year but he asked is there any specific reason to increase the board seats to an even number of eight? He thought it might be difficult to vote and resolute ties. Ramesh replied that it was lawyer’s recommendation when drafting the constitution regarding “half” of the board’s retirement.
4.6 Dr. Lee also questioned about the board seats to be eight instead of seven, but in principle she agreed that Sue’s viewpoint of more participation from region, and she also agreed with the principle of half of the Board to retire every year. Ramesh replied that the suggestion of increasing board seats to eight was to adopt the half of board retirement every year. He agreed that Sue’s point that if they are willing to work, why not increase the numbers of Board seats.
4.7 Ramesh added that the Board Chair would have the casting vote in case of tie block.
4.8 Ian explained the pattern of proposed board term. Sue questioned about if there is a election tie occurred, how to decide which elect for the first/two years term. After checking the result of Board election for 2003, Ramesh thought it might not a problem to decide the board terms this year.
4.9 Sue tried to clarify there’s no financial budget difference between different numbers of Board seats. She formally moved to change the board seats to eight, Yumi seconded. However, Vincent thought the constitution should be passed at AGM before implementing this. Board could make a suggestion on this issue and bring this issue to the AGM. Ramesh agreed.
4.10 Ramesh brought another issue: whether an office bearer can retain his/her designation in the second year of service on the Board? What if the half board that step down are office bearers? Dr. Lee suggested the office holding term is only for one year although the board term is two years.
4.11 Ramesh moved to recommend office bearer to be elected every year. Sue and Dr. Lee seconded.
4.12 Ramesh noted that there’s a need for a inaugural member meeting in Malaysia with at least seven members, and should decide whether if we can have a NetMeeting hosted by Malaysia instead by the end of this week. And if NetMeeting is acceptable, the incorporation can be completed in a month.
4.13 Sue moved to thank Ramesh for the endeavour of the incorporation issue, seconded by Dr. Lee
5. End of Board Meeting
-----------------
The Board Meeting was called to end by the Chair Ramesh at 10:10am.
Coffee Break
6. APTLD AGM was called to order at 10:40am
-----------------
7. APTLD Board Election and Election of new Chair and Vice Chairs
-----------------
The Meeting started with announcing 2003 Board Election Result by Secretariat/Ian.
7.1. The Election of Board for 2003 was closed on 20th February 2003. A total of 17 Voting Representatives were to vote. The voting result is: four votes in favour of Chris Disspain/.au; five for Hualin Qian/.cn; eight for Yumi Ohashi/.jp; five for Chan-ki Park/.kr; seven for Ramesh Kumar Nadarajah/.my; two for Richard St. Clair/.nu; six for Peter Dengate Thrush nominated/.nz; and six for Vincent WS Chen/.tw. Therefore, the APTLD Board for 2003 are Chris Disspain, Hualin Qian, Yumi Ohashi, Chan-ki Park, Ramesh Kumar Nadarajah, Peter Dengate Thrush, and Vincent WS Chen.
7.2 The Secretariat called for nomination for the Chair. Sue nominated Ramesh as candidate for Chair, seconded by Dr. Lee. Ramesh was elected as Board Chair for 2003.
7.3 The Secretariat called for nomination for the Senior Vice Chair. Ramesh nominated Peter as candidate for Senior Vice Chair, seconded by Sue. Yumi nominated Chris, and Vincent seconded. Four votes were in favour of Peter and two votes for Chris. Peter was elected as Senior Vice Chair.
7.4 The Secretariat called for nomination for the Vice Chair for Membership. Ramesh nominated Yumi as candidate for Vice Chair for Membership, seconded by Dr. Lee. Yumi was elected as Vice Chair for Membership.
7.5 The Secretariat called for nomination for the Vice Chair for Treasure. Yumi nominated Chan-Ki Park as candidate for Vice Chair for Treasure, and seconded by Dr. Lee. Ramesh nominated Vincent, and seconded by Sue. However, as a Secretary General, Vincent did not think that he should be nominated as candidate for Vice Chair for Treasure. Chan-Ki Park was elected as Vice Chair for Treasure.
8. APTLD Issues
-----------------
8.1 Secretariat Report by Ian. Hotta moved adaptation of the Secretariat Report, seconded by Sue, Prof. Qian, Vincent and Yumi.
8.2 Ramesh further summarised the Secretariat Report and asked for comments, especially the Meeting Plan in 2003 and NetMeeting instruction.
8.3 Vincent promised the stability of NetMeeting mechanism. Ramesh asked the Secretariat the time limit required before calling for a NetMeeting. Joanna replied that the NetMeeting would be set-up easily, but the key issue was that could the Secretariat get the message to the Board and members. Ramesh thought to set a time which most of members could attend. The negotiation process always took time. Joanna suggested setting certain day of the month as regular meeting day that is convenient for everyone to participate.
8.4 Sue questioned that whether if we got enough issues to discuss as we pre-schedule the NetMeeting every month, to deal with issues or to share experiences? Joanna replied that sharing experiences is important, which would allow APTLD members to be more active. More dialogues will increase greater participation. Ramesh expressed his wonders whether if ATPLD might not have that many issues to discuss monthly.
8.5 Ramesh suggested one-week notice period before the NetMeeting, which should be sufficient. However, Dr. Lee felt that one-week would be not enough for NetMeeting notice and Hotta agreed with Dr. Lee. Ramesh finalised it as two-weeks advance notice for any NetMeeting called. Any urgent business might be called with forty-eight hours notice as Vincent suggested.
8.6 Regarding the APTLD web site, Ramesh summarised the previous conclusion that the Secretariat should make the web site available for member’s view and comment in order to improve the website.
8.7 Ian briefed the structure of APTLD e-Newsletter. Ramesh invited everyone to participation in the contribution of the Newsletter.
8.8 Ian briefed the Outreach section. Sue suggested that members should be careful to choose the meetings we are going to participation, for example ITU meetings. She also suggested having other activities within our meeting to exchanges ideas. That would be benefit for each other, and Hotta agreed with Sue. She would like to formalise this into the APTLD Process. Vincent suggested having country report in the future meeting. Dr. Lee suggested inviting member to do presentation on certain/specific issue. The Secretariat raised another issue about the change of meeting scale to one day and half in order to accommodate presentations into the meeting agenda. Ramesh asked the Secretariat to figure out the time limit and how to invite people and how to organise the meeting, as information sharing was required
8.9 Stafford questioned about Sponsorship Program, since this program offered, how many Asia Pacific country has applied for this sponsorship? The Secretariat replied that in the past, we have started the process but we have never finalised any. So, we haven’t given sponsorship yet. It is hoped that after approval of 2003 budget, there would be able to call people to apply for sponsorship for next meeting that would be held in AP region. Yumi said, as the Vice Chair for Membership, she will work on the membership and sponsorship procedure with the Secretariat and make it more concrete in the soon future.
8.10 Ramesh suggested having a flexible sponsorship amount, which allow the Board to the financial support to potential members in Pacific region to attend APTLD Meetings. Ramsh confirmed that total of amount for Sponsorship Program is US$10,000 to support five or four or three potential members depending on how much we have to pay to get them there. Ramesh asked Yumi to work on some suggestions on Sponsorship. Vincent suggested focusing some specific potential members to attend APTLD meetings. He also suggested the Secretariat to work with Yumi, the Vice Chair for Membership, to make the Sponsorship Program work more efficiently. Ramesh thought the list of potential members would be a good place to start with APTLD Sponsorship Program.
8.11 Sue moved to adoption of Secretariat Report, seconded by Ramesh.
9. Incorporation Status
-----------------
9.1 Ramesh briefed the APTLD Incorporation Status. Once the raised issues were clear, we can go to formal submission. Then, once the formal submission is made, it should be done in one-month time.
9.2 Ramesh brought some Board’s recommendations to the AGM: increasing Board seats to be eight; office bearers including Chair, Senior Vice Chair and two Vice Chairs will be re-elected every year at AGM.
9.3 Bart suggested Senior Vice Chair should be appointed in the second year as Chair to continue his/her leadership. Hotta and Dr. Lee thought the all office bearers should be re-elected every year.
9.4 Lim/.sg questioned about the entrance fee: is there any guideline for the contribution to APTLD? Ramesh replied it is based on self-select fee band, as decided in the past depending on the numbers of domain name registered. Sue provided additional information on the historical background of self-selecting contribution.
9.5 Sue questioned about the process of membership fee issue. Ramesh suggested that the Secretariat has to negotiate with each member about the membership fee before making annual budget for the next fiscal year. It is suggested sending invoice for 2003 three weeks after Taipei AGM. Before the invoice issued, there would be private mail to consult and confirm the membership payment. Prof. Qian suggested not to mention the “self-selecting” on the invoices.
9.6 Ramesh moved to adoption of Board’s recommendations regarding office bearers’ term to be one year. Sue seconded.
9.7 Sue moved to adoption of the board seat to be eight. But Kanchana and Hotta preferred the odd number of Board Seat. Ramesh replied that if there is a tight occurred, Board Chair would have additional vote to decide. He added that having additional Board member means having more people doing the work. It will also become easier to draft the constitution if the Board seats increase to be eight. A vote was called to decide this issue:
It is proposed that the
Board be comprised of eight members and that the draft constitution is amended
accordingly:
8 votes in favour of the
proposal;
1 vote against the proposal.
9.8 Ramesh asked the Secretariat to formally amend the 2003 Board Election result as it states in the proposal that APTLD is to have eight Board members. The Eighth Board Member is Richard St. Clair/.nu. Sue seconded. The top four Board members with most votes are for two-years term and the other four are for one-year term.
9.9 Stafford moved to amend quorum for board meeting be 5, it’s seconded by Remesh and will instruct the lawyer to revise the constitution.
Lunch Break
10. ICANN Issues
-----------------
The Meeting continued and begin on 14:10.
10.1 Sue summarised the ccNSO preliminary recommendations.
10.2 Remesh stated that APTLD has to be absolutely clear about what we cannot accept. The final document will be out before ICANN Rio Meeting, given us two weeks time to review the document, and we need to schedule a NetMeeting to discuss our stand.
10.3 Ramesh suggested reviewing the Shanghai communiqué.
10.4 Bart suggested communiqué be amended and signed as full members are present. Ramesh agreed. Sue and Dr. Lee were voluntarily to undertake preparing the first draft of Communiqué to the ccNSO documents as Annex 4. Ramesh invited members to provide any suggestion or comment to Sue and Dr. Lee in order to be included in the communiqué.
11. ICANN 2004 in Fuji
-----------------
11.1 Due to late submission of application for hosting ICANN meetings, it was decided not to discuss about this issue at this meeting.
12. Meeting schedule for 2003
-----------------
12.1 .nu volunteered to host one meeting in Fiji at time convenient, whether it is this year or next year.
12.2 .nz volunteered to host one meeting.
12.3 2003 APTLD meetings were scheduled to hold at KL, Malaysia / Singapore in May; Busan, Korea in September; New Zealand in November.
13. Added item of business
-----------------
13.1 Move to appoint Dr. Lee as the ccTLD representative to DNSO, seconded by Ramesh, and so moved.
13.2 Sue suggested review on GAC relationship/interaction when board is looking at work plan. Secretariat is to make arrangement with GAC secretariat for a formal get together and inform members.
13.3 Chon proposed to have root server mirroring workshop/tutorial/training session for a half-day program, which would be beneficial to APTLD (maybe KL or Singapore in May).
14. Drafting Communiqué
-----------------
As Annex 4
15. End of Meeting
-----------------
The AGM was adjured at 17:25
=====
Annex 1
APTLD Board Meeting
and AGM Agenda
24 February 2003 /
Taipei, Taiwan
|
Venue: |
|
Meeting Room
401, Taipei International Convention Center |
|
Chair: |
|
Ramesh Kumar Nadarajah |
|
|
|
|
|
08:30-10:00 |
|
APTLD Board Meeting by Old Chair 1.
Approve APTLD Secretariat election
result 2.
Approve Secretariat Report 2.1
Annual
Report in 2002 2.2
Financial
Report in 2002 2.3
Action
Plan 2003 2.4
Budget
Plan 2003 3.
Report on Incorporation Status 4.
Update on APTLD Constitution |
|
10:00-10:30 |
|
Coffee Break |
|
10:30-12:30 |
|
APTLD AGM chaired by Old Chair 1.
Approve Board Election 1.1
Announcement of Board Election Result 1.2
Election of
New Board Chair and Vice Chairs 2.
APTLD Issues 2.1
APTLD
Secretariat election result 2.2
Secretariat
Report 2.3
Report on
Incorporation Status 2.4
Update on
APTLD Constitution |
|
12:30-14:00 |
|
Lunch at Banquet Hall, Level 3, TICC |
|
14:00-17:00 |
|
APTLD AGM chaired by New Chair 1.
ICANN
issues 1.1
New Bylaw including Transition Articles 1.2
Update on ccNSO Assistant Group 1.3
ICANN 2004 in Fiji 2.
Pacific
Outreach Coffee Break 3.
IDN
issues 4.
APTLD
Meeting Plan in 2003 & Call for Meeting Location 5.
Drafting
of APTLD Communiqué |
|
19:30-00:00 |
|
Dinner: Standing Buffet at
Regency Ballroom, 1F, Hyatt Grand Hotel |
=====
Annex 2
List of Participants
Ramesh Kumar Nadarajah/.my Chair of Meeting
Vincent/.tw Secretariat
Joanna Tso/.tw Secretariat
Ian Chiang/.tw Secretariat
Ching Chiao/.tw Secretariat
Bart Mackey/.cc & .tv
Jeong Jun Seo/.cc & .tv
Patrick Kane/.cc & .tv
Trent Peterson/.cc & .tv
Huanlin Quan/.cn
Luo Yan/.cn
Hiro Hotta/.jp
Kazunori Fujiwara/.jp
Yasuhiro Morishita/.jp
Yumi Ohashi/.jp
Chan-Ki Park/.kr
Hyun Joon Kwon/.kr
Kilnam Chon/.kr
Young-Eum Lee/.kr
Gihan Dias/.lk
Nalaka Nanayakkara/.lk
Enhbold Gombo/.mn
Stafford Guest/.nu
Keith Davidson/.nz
Sue Leader substituted for Peter Dengate Thrush/.nz
Lim Choon Sai/.sg
Kanchana/.th
Pensri A./.th
Albert Wang/.tw
Hoang Minh Cuong/.vn
Vu Xuan Bach/.vn
=====
Annex 3
APTLD AGM’s Response
To the ccNSO
Assistance Group’s Recommendations
1.1.
At
its Annual General Meeting on 24th February 2003 in Taipei, APTLD considered
the recommendations of the ccNSO Advisory Group. We commend the
ccNSO AG for the work done in producing the recommendations towards establishing
the ccNSO and are committed to working with the AG in good faith. However, we are disappointed that we do not
have a final version of the AG’s report which was due on Feb 14th as
this limits our opportunity to discuss it before the ICANN Meeting at Rio de
Janeiro.
1.2.
Any
support herein for
the recommendations is based upon the narrowly defined global policy-making
role of ICANN as was described by the matrix proposed by the assistance group,
which clearly states that the ccTLD’s local policy responsibilities lie with
the local Internet community.
2.
Preliminary
Recommendations on ccNSO Policy Development Process
(a)
We
support the ccNSO’s Assistance Group’s (“AG”) recommendation for a person,
defined as the Issue Manager, to manage the PDP. However, we note that there is
no additional information as to who appoints the Issue Manager. We strongly propose
that the Issue Manager be accountable to the ccTLD community and is appointed
by the ccNSO Council. The Issue Manager plays a pivotal role in policy
formulation. Hence it is critical for the Council to appoint a person that they
know and trust to be knowledgeable on ccTLD issues.
(b)
We
will be liaising with other ccTLD colleagues on the possibility of the Issue
Manager being part of the ccTLD Secretariat and will update the AG on any
feedback received. On the issue of funding, we recommend that any contributions
to ICANN by the ccTLD community pertaining to the Issue Manager functions be
re-channeled to the agreed party (for example, the ccTLD Secretariat).
(a)
The
AG proposes that ICANN’s General Counsel’s opinion must be sought on whether
the Issue Manager’s Recommendations are properly within the scope of ICANN
policy. While we regard this as relevant and useful, we strongly feel that two
(of the five) components should not be part of his/her opinion. They are:-
“3. is likely to
have lasting value or applicability, albeit with the need for occasional
updates;
4. will establish
a guide or framework for future decision-making; or”
(b)
Sub-items
1,2 and 5 are legal issues and are directly relevant in determining whether the
issues being considered are properly within the scope of ICANN policy process
as it pertains to ccTLDs. However, we do not see how sub-items 3 and 4 have any
bearing on the issue.
(c)
We
would recommend that the General Counsel examine sub-items 1, 2 and 5 in
determining whether the issues come with ICANN’s scope. In the event the
conclusion is in the positive, only then may the General Counsel add his/her
comments on sub-items 3 and 4.
(d)
Although
we agree that the issue manager may consult the General Counsel of ICANN, failure
to do so will not invalidate the PDP. Thus, we propose that all references to
“shall” in 2(e) be changed to “may.”
(a)
Clause
3 of Annex A sets out the Council’s voting mechanism of the Issue Report. We
are concerned that sub-item (b) has provided that a vote of 100% of Council
members of at least 2 Regions will amount to approval of the initiation of the
PDP. Bearing in mind that there are 5 Regions, this is equivalent to a minority
vote that should not be deemed as sufficient agreement by the Council. The
option should be deleted. Hence initiation of PDP is limited to a vote of more
than 66% of Council.
(a)
It
is noted in item 13(a) that if the Council reaches a supermajority vote, the
Board is to adopt the policy recommendation unless it is rejected by more than
66% of the Board. “Supermajority vote” is not defined. If a 66% vote is a
supermajority, the term “supermajority” should be applied consistently.
However, we recommend that “supermajority” be defined as 75% or more votes.
(b)
In
light of the assumption and recommendation above, we would also like to propose
that the rejection vote by Board be on par with the Council’s. The Board must
accept Council’s recommendations unless more than 75% of the Board rejects it,
in which case the recommendation is not adopted.
(c)
We
also do not agree with the principle provided for in item 13(c) that a
recommendation supported by more than 50% but less than 75% of Council is
adopted as ccTLD policy unless more than 50% of the Board rejects the same. As
these policies have the potential of binding all ccTLDs, it is not acceptable
that a policy proceeds to the Board (let alone be ratified by the equivalent
voting requirement of the Board) where 49% of the Council does not support it.
Accordingly, we propose that item 13(c) be deleted.
(a)
APTLD
remains firm that once adopted, the PDP process is the only way a policy
affecting ccTLDs can be formulated.
(b)
In
relation to implementation, ccTLDs will implement the agreed policy as
appropriate at the local level in consultation with the local Internet
community.
3.
Preliminary
Recommendations on ccNSO Council
3.1.
APTLD
confirms that the council comprise fifteen voting members being three from each
geographical region[1]. The ccTLDs
have established regular liaisons with the other ICANN constituencies and SOs
and because of our responsibilities to the local Internet communities have
taken into account the interests and viewpoints of the wider Internet
stakeholders.
3.2.
Should
the Board ignore the strong feeling and appoint council members via the Nominating
Committee, then natural justice requires that ccTLDs be represented on that
committee.
4.
Preliminary
Recommendations on ccNSO Structure
4.1.
APTLD
has worked four years to evolve membership structures and therefore the first
sentence in paragraph 3 requiring a letter is unnecessary and should be
deleted.
4.2.
We
unanimously disagree that the AG should comprise the transition committee. We
believe our AdCom, which has worked successfully for the past four years in
building the ccTLD constituency, is the appropriate group to manage the
transition.
5.
Conclusion
5.1.
The
APTLD look forward to the final report from the ccNSO AG and intend to discuss
and make comments. We look forward to good faith consideration of our response.
Asia Pacific Top Level Domain
24th February 2003
Taipei
=====
Annex 4
COMMUNIQUE OF
APTLD MEETING IN TAIPEI
FEBRUARY 24 2003
The APTLD held it’s AGM at the APRICOT meeting held in Taipei, Taiwan,
February 24 2003 with twelve of seventeen members and two observers in
attendance.
The members of APTLD thanked the Secretariat for their excellent organisation of the Board and Members meetings, and congratulated TWNIC for their organisation of the APRICOT Conference.
ccTLD in attendance:
.my,
.kr, .jp, .cn, .sg. .nz, .cc, .tv, .th,.nu, .vn, .tw (.lk, .mn – observers)
[1] Reaffirms the APTLD position as articulated via our communiqué dated 15th September pursuant to the APTLD Board Meeting in Kuala Lumpur on 14th and 15th September 2003.