- AFRI-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Fwd: AP-RALO completed MoU and OP Today
by Nick Ashton-Hart 01 Mar '07

01 Mar '07

I thought the wider At-Large world would be keen to hear the good news from Asia today. Congratulations to the AP At-Large Community :) It was great to meet you all and I look forward to helping to facilitate your making a difference for a long time to come :) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Izumi AIZU <iza(a)anr.org> Date: 28-Feb-2007 22:57 Subject: [APAC-Discuss] AP-RALO completed MoU and OP To: Interim ALAC <alac(a)icann.org>, Asia-Pacific Discuss < apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Dear all, I would like to take this opportunity to report that AP RALO formation meeting here in Bali during APRICOt took place today, and I am pleased to share that we have completed most of the tasks for the formation, we reached the consensus on Draft MoU with ICANN, and also on Operating Principles. 12 ALS representative out of 13 gathered here and we put our initiating signatures to the documents, to be submitted to the ICANN Board. We could not complete the selection of new ALAC members and officers, but agreed with the selection schedule, including the nomination starting shortly, for a week, etc. The official announcment should come any time soon together with the minutes of our meeting. As one of "interim" members of ALAC together with Ms. Hong Xue from AP region, I personally feel greatful to all the support and active involvement of all ALS members here in our region, as well as staff support, and also all the friendly advices and suport from larger ALAC friends in other regions and othe ICANN community memebrs. Nom-com designated Siavash did the great job of charing the session of the entire day. Special thanks to Siavash! Well, the real tasks will be still there, and not easy, but I hope we will eventually make rational and meaningful steps to bring the voices of individual users in this region to the ICANN policy process. izumi _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss_atlarge-lists.… -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

Preparing for Lisbon: Resolutions from At-Large to the larger community?
by Nick Ashton-Hart 01 Mar '07

01 Mar '07

Dear All: May I suggest to you that the At-Large community has a unique opportunity at the upcoming Lisbon meeting to agree a few resolutions on key issues which are in the public and icann policy 'Eye' at the moment. With at least two RALO MoUs being concluded, and likely the European one too, the conference will have a big spotlight on the community. I submit for you all to consider that this spotlight could be used by the community to focus attention on the issues which you care about. There could for example be resolutions on: 1) Domain Tasting - the negative consequences to end-users which many in the community have highlighted and a call for the GNSO and ICANN Board to begin a PDP as an urgent matter; 2) Registry and Registrar performance - the issue of Registerfly has brought to the fore issues of enforcement and the role of ICANN in enforcing these contracts. A resolution could highlight these and call for action; a number of proposed actions have been mooted on community lists. There's also the issue of switching registrars and the difficulty that poses for people which has been brought up in the African discussion lists By resolution, I mean something brief - one page per issue - in the style of a UN resolution with adjectives leading each paragraph of a preamble section, and then a section with specific recommendations for action (not in great detail necessarily but the high-level principles or actions which should be made). At the ALAC monthly teleconference on 6th March, could the committee perhaps propose to discuss this? If one member of the committee could draft a one-page document on the above structure to be completed within a week, then there would be time to send it out to all the regions for their review and comment, and then at Lisbon the two regions present and the ALAC could agree a final text and release it to the rest of ICANN. If nobody on the ALAC is able to do the drafting, I'm happy to do a draft as a "backup drafter" and then forward it to be reviewed. I hope this will not be thought presumptuous. I don't wish to 'take over' the policy work of the community, but I do see a real opportunity for the community to make a big splash of substance at the next meeting and wouldn't like to see that opportunity lost or wasted. At the same time I do understand that people are all volunteers and I'm happy to help in any way I can. There are those - even in the community - who do not believe the At- Large community has the ability to influence ICANN's work. I do not believe they're right, but it seems to me one of the best ways to find out is to take a strong stand and suggest proactive steps to improve things. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

African Region finishes its MoU
by Nick Ashton-Hart 28 Feb '07

28 Feb '07

For those who don't already know this, the African ALS Community finished their MoU with ICANN and it went off to the Office of the General Counsel late last week. The European ALS community will also be meeting in Lisbon and are committed to finishing work on their MoU and Bylaws there - making three (!) new RALOs at one ICANN Meeting. Congratulations on all the hard work :) February has turned out to be a good month for the At-Large community :) -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [AFRI-Discuss] [At-Large] Question
by Aziz Hilali 28 Feb '07

28 Feb '07

Dear all, We received a forwarded message written by Vittorio Bertola and forwarded by Nick Ashton Hart on 09- 02 2007, in which we learn that the author of this mail would like to see us give our support to a recently formulated application to attribute the .eh ccTLD to Western Sahara . Being one of the parties concerned by the problem of the Western Sahara, the Moroccan Chapter would like to invite you all to adopt a less politically biased view of the matter and to consider the application for what it is worth in fairly neutral terms and in line with ICANNs set norms and regulations (ISO 3166-1). In fact, because of its complex political overtones, the Western Sahara dispute is being scrutinised by the relevant political bodies, including the Security Council, whose latest resolution calls on the parties concerned to overcome the current impasse and to find a lasting and final political solution to the dispute. Our move has been prompted by the misrepresentative account of both the historical dimension of the problem as well as some of the factual information reported in this message. Thus, we think that, out of sheer objectivity, it is our duty to present you with the other sides view of the problem. First of all, let us note that if indeed the problem was as simple as it was represented in the message; i.e., that Morocco simply decided to militarily occupy a formerly colonised territory that had not been part of the Moroccan Kingdom, then one might ask what it is that could have prevented Algeria or Mauritania, for that matter, from doing the same? On the other hand, does it make sense that the international community should have spent all these years (over 30 years) and so much international money on UN missions to try to find a solution to the problem that would not upset Morocco . Surely, the problem is much more complex than the message is trying to make us believe. Instead of giving a lengthy account of what the problem has been and is about, we will simply react to some of the misrepresentations that have been conveyed in this message. The author of the message wrote : < [To recap: Western Sahara is (apart from a few island territories such as the Cayman Islands etc.) the only remaining colony in the world.> To claim that the Western Sahara is one of the last colonies in the world, just like the Cayman islands, is an utter fallacy; for the Western Sahara issue represents a case of a regional dispute opposing the Kingdom of Morocco to Algeria through a proxy entity called the Polisario, and in which dispute Morocco is attempting to recover its territorial integrity through peaceful means and on the basis of international legality. Indeed, the entity pretending to represent the Sahrawi population is not recognised by the United Nations, the guardian of international legality. <It used to be a Spanish colony until 1975, when the ongoing rebellion of the Polisario Front - the fighting organization of the local Sahrawi people - prompted Spain to abandon it.> This is completely untrue: On 14 of November 1975, Spain signed a retrocession treaty with Morocco and Mauritania in virtue of which it transferred its administrative powers of the Sahara to an administration made up of the above-cited countries. The treaty itself came as the result of the peaceful Green March that 350 000 Moroccans undertook to reunite with their fellow countrymen in the Western Sahara, one of Morocco s southern provinces. Prior to the March, the Moroccan government had resorted to the International Court of Justice in The Hague for arbitration to give its consultative opinion on the status of the Western Sahara BEFORE it became a Spanish colony. The answer was clear: a) This territory was not terra nullius, b) the tribes living on it were bound to the Kingdom of Morocco by the bond of allegiance to the Alaouite throne (the current ruling dynasty). Indeed, the ceremony of the swearing of allegiance to the Sovereign was and still is held every year to renew this bond. In it, representatives of all the components of the Moroccan people do take part. < Of course, all of the above is subject to different interpretation depending to whom you talk to.]> We think that this statement of caution is certainly most appropriate given the rather complex nature of the problem and that the author of the message is aware of the fact that some facts may have been misrepresented. Indeed, the historical dimension of the problem has been totally misrepresented in the text of this message, which does no more than faithfully reproduce the political propaganda on the basis of which Algeria and its proxy representative the Polisario Front have based their alleged claims. To appreciate the historical dimension of the problem, it may be worth our while to have an idea on the process of decolonisation as it happened over time in Morocco . First, it is worth reiterating the fact that Morocco 's status with respect to the Sahara is not that of a foreign State or an occupying power. Those who promote such allegations ignore the reality of the Sahara issue and the meaning of the term "occupying power" as established in international law. At the outset, it should be pointed out that the allegation that the Western Sahara is a colony is erroneous, far-fetched and part of a propaganda scheme that the Polisario Front and Algeria have been trying to promote so actively to mislead the international community. Second, it is worth mentioning that it was Morocco which introduced the Question of the Sahara and Sidi Ifni as a decolonization issue to the Fourth Committee (Decolonization and Political Questions) of the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1965, thereby requesting the international organization to take measures to ask Spain to decolonize the territory it had been occupying since 1884. Moreover, and for the record, it is worth bringing to the fore that Morocco started to recover its territorial integrity gradually and through negotiated international agreements. In 1956, France and Spain retroceded the central and northern zones to Morocco ; the zone of Tangier also became under Moroccan sovereignty. Moroccos resolute policy of peacefully settling disputes gave birth to: the 1958 Agreement by virtue of which the city of Tarfaya was retroceded to Morocco , the 1969 Agreement that marked the return of Sidi Ifni to the motherland, the 1975 Madrid Agreement which put an end to Spanish presence in the Sahara , the final reintegration of all the Saharan provinces into Morocco as of 1979. <Specifically, I would be concerned if ICANN, in front of a technically valid application, refused to approve it for fear of an upset reaction by some governments (starting from Morocco). I think that governments - especially the ones of the neighbouring countries - are not the only or even the main stakeholder in the matter.> To this we have to say that a ccTLD represents a territorial cyberspace that is in virtual terms, the equivalent of a territorial physical space. Both spaces represent the locus of the collective interests of groups of people united by their belonging to the same Nation State (because the issue is one of sovereignty after all). Otherwise, we should expect countries such as Belgium to have 2 ccTLDs ( one for the Flemish and one for the Wallons), Switzerland 3, Algeria 4 or 5, Morocco 4 or 5, etc. <I also assume that we, as the At Large, are the constituency that has the duty to represent the interests of the local users of the Internet in Western Sahara, or, "the people" if you like, and this is why I'm not too keen on letting this request be let down too easily (even if, of course, I still have to see whether the request is appropriate and meets the requirements)>. Clearly, if we were to accept Vittorio Bertolas argument above, then we should be encouraging regional entities all over the world to apply for a ccTLD of their own. Clearly, to maintain its credibility as the corporation responsible for the global coordination of the Internet, ICANN would want to have a neutral stand on similar cases until the international community gives its final verdict on the issue at hand. <Of course, any direct contact with groups and Internet users in Western Sahara would be useful. Also, I would of course take any collective views on the matter, if different from the above.> This is an honest and fair invitation, in terms of which we invite the interested reader to find out more about the dispute from the Moroccan side in the attached document as well as in the following websites: A historical perspective on the problem: the main facts: http://www.saharamarocain.net/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=8 The legal basis for the Moroccan claim over the Sahara : http://www.saharamarocain.net/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=3 The Sahara : Risk of grey zones: http://www.saharamarocain.net/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=40 Abdelaziz Hilali President of Isoc Morocco www.inpt.ac.ma --------------------------------- Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses.

1 0

Re: [AFRI-Discuss] [At-Large] Question
by Aziz Hilali 28 Feb '07

28 Feb '07

Dear all, We received a forwarded message written by Vittorio Bertola and forwarded by Nick Ashton Hart on 09- 02 2007, in which we learn that the author of this mail would like to see us give our support to a recently formulated application to attribute the .eh ccTLD to Western Sahara . Being one of the parties concerned by the problem of the Western Sahara, the Moroccan Chapter would like to invite you all to adopt a less politically biased view of the matter and to consider the application for what it is worth in fairly neutral terms and in line with ICANNs set norms and regulations (ISO 3166-1). In fact, because of its complex political overtones, the Western Sahara dispute is being scrutinised by the relevant political bodies, including the Security Council, whose latest resolution calls on the parties concerned to overcome the current impasse and to find a lasting and final political solution to the dispute. Our move has been prompted by the misrepresentative account of both the historical dimension of the problem as well as some of the factual information reported in this message. Thus, we think that, out of sheer objectivity, it is our duty to present you with the other sides view of the problem. First of all, let us note that if indeed the problem was as simple as it was represented in the message; i.e., that Morocco simply decided to militarily occupy a formerly colonised territory that had not been part of the Moroccan Kingdom, then one might ask what it is that could have prevented Algeria or Mauritania, for that matter, from doing the same? On the other hand, does it make sense that the international community should have spent all these years (over 30 years) and so much international money on UN missions to try to find a solution to the problem that would not upset Morocco . Surely, the problem is much more complex than the message is trying to make us believe. Instead of giving a lengthy account of what the problem has been and is about, we will simply react to some of the misrepresentations that have been conveyed in this message. The author of the message wrote : < [To recap: Western Sahara is (apart from a few island territories such as the Cayman Islands etc.) the only remaining colony in the world.> To claim that the Western Sahara is one of the last colonies in the world, just like the Cayman islands, is an utter fallacy; for the Western Sahara issue represents a case of a regional dispute opposing the Kingdom of Morocco to Algeria through a proxy entity called the Polisario, and in which dispute Morocco is attempting to recover its territorial integrity through peaceful means and on the basis of international legality. Indeed, the entity pretending to represent the Sahrawi population is not recognised by the United Nations, the guardian of international legality. <It used to be a Spanish colony until 1975, when the ongoing rebellion of the Polisario Front - the fighting organization of the local Sahrawi people - prompted Spain to abandon it.> This is completely untrue: On 14 of November 1975, Spain signed a retrocession treaty with Morocco and Mauritania in virtue of which it transferred its administrative powers of the Sahara to an administration made up of the above-cited countries. The treaty itself came as the result of the peaceful Green March that 350 000 Moroccans undertook to reunite with their fellow countrymen in the Western Sahara, one of Morocco s southern provinces. Prior to the March, the Moroccan government had resorted to the International Court of Justice in The Hague for arbitration to give its consultative opinion on the status of the Western Sahara BEFORE it became a Spanish colony. The answer was clear: a) This territory was not terra nullius, b) the tribes living on it were bound to the Kingdom of Morocco by the bond of allegiance to the Alaouite throne (the current ruling dynasty). Indeed, the ceremony of the swearing of allegiance to the Sovereign was and still is held every year to renew this bond. In it, representatives of all the components of the Moroccan people do take part. < Of course, all of the above is subject to different interpretation depending to whom you talk to.]> We think that this statement of caution is certainly most appropriate given the rather complex nature of the problem and that the author of the message is aware of the fact that some facts may have been misrepresented. Indeed, the historical dimension of the problem has been totally misrepresented in the text of this message, which does no more than faithfully reproduce the political propaganda on the basis of which Algeria and its proxy representative the Polisario Front have based their alleged claims. To appreciate the historical dimension of the problem, it may be worth our while to have an idea on the process of decolonisation as it happened over time in Morocco . First, it is worth reiterating the fact that Morocco 's status with respect to the Sahara is not that of a foreign State or an occupying power. Those who promote such allegations ignore the reality of the Sahara issue and the meaning of the term "occupying power" as established in international law. At the outset, it should be pointed out that the allegation that the Western Sahara is a colony is erroneous, far-fetched and part of a propaganda scheme that the Polisario Front and Algeria have been trying to promote so actively to mislead the international community. Second, it is worth mentioning that it was Morocco which introduced the Question of the Sahara and Sidi Ifni as a decolonization issue to the Fourth Committee (Decolonization and Political Questions) of the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1965, thereby requesting the international organization to take measures to ask Spain to decolonize the territory it had been occupying since 1884. Moreover, and for the record, it is worth bringing to the fore that Morocco started to recover its territorial integrity gradually and through negotiated international agreements. In 1956, France and Spain retroceded the central and northern zones to Morocco ; the zone of Tangier also became under Moroccan sovereignty. Moroccos resolute policy of peacefully settling disputes gave birth to: the 1958 Agreement by virtue of which the city of Tarfaya was retroceded to Morocco , the 1969 Agreement that marked the return of Sidi Ifni to the motherland, the 1975 Madrid Agreement which put an end to Spanish presence in the Sahara , the final reintegration of all the Saharan provinces into Morocco as of 1979. <Specifically, I would be concerned if ICANN, in front of a technically valid application, refused to approve it for fear of an upset reaction by some governments (starting from Morocco). I think that governments - especially the ones of the neighbouring countries - are not the only or even the main stakeholder in the matter.> To this we have to say that a ccTLD represents a territorial cyberspace that is in virtual terms, the equivalent of a territorial physical space. Both spaces represent the locus of the collective interests of groups of people united by their belonging to the same Nation State (because the issue is one of sovereignty after all). Otherwise, we should expect countries such as Belgium to have 2 ccTLDs ( one for the Flemish and one for the Wallons), Switzerland 3, Algeria 4 or 5, Morocco 4 or 5, etc. <I also assume that we, as the At Large, are the constituency that has the duty to represent the interests of the local users of the Internet in Western Sahara, or, "the people" if you like, and this is why I'm not too keen on letting this request be let down too easily (even if, of course, I still have to see whether the request is appropriate and meets the requirements)>. Clearly, if we were to accept Vittorio Bertolas argument above, then we should be encouraging regional entities all over the world to apply for a ccTLD of their own. Clearly, to maintain its credibility as the corporation responsible for the global coordination of the Internet, ICANN would want to have a neutral stand on similar cases until the international community gives its final verdict on the issue at hand. <Of course, any direct contact with groups and Internet users in Western Sahara would be useful. Also, I would of course take any collective views on the matter, if different from the above.> This is an honest and fair invitation, in terms of which we invite the interested reader to find out more about the dispute from the Moroccan side in the attached document as well as in the following websites: A historical perspective on the problem: the main facts: http://www.saharamarocain.net/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=8 The legal basis for the Moroccan claim over the Sahara : http://www.saharamarocain.net/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=3 The Sahara : Risk of grey zones: http://www.saharamarocain.net/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=40 Abdelaziz Hilali President of Isoc Morocco www.inpt.ac.ma --------------------------------- Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses.

1 0

Completed African RALO MoU
by Nick Ashton-Hart 25 Feb '07

25 Feb '07

Dear Dan: I'm very pleased to inform you that the African ALS community has concluded their discussions on the contents of their MoU with ICANN and to provide you with the document for your final review. This version is largely the same as the one you looked at last December. I have also attached the public consultation notice. It is my hope that you will be able to complete your review directly, as this will allow the public comment period to be completed prior to the Lisbon ICANN meeting in March, so that the MoU may be signed, and approved by the Board at the public meeting on the 30th. I shall look forward to your reply in due course and forward it to the community. You may also hit reply all, and your email should go through to the mailing lists without any problem. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Asia Pacific At-Large community meeting Feb 28th
by Nick Ashton-Hart 25 Feb '07

25 Feb '07

Dear All: The Asia Pacific At-Large community is engaging in their final-stage negotiations on the contents of their MoU with ICANN on February 28th, in a meeting that is part of the APRICOT 2007 Conference in Bali, Indonesia. The meeting documents are all available online via the www.apralo.org website. I look forward to meeting the regional representatives in a couple of days! Baher Esmat and Save Vocea from the Global Partnerships team will be at the meeting too, alongside other events they are a part of at APRICOT. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Fwd: [At-Large] Independent Review of At-Large
by Nick Ashton-Hart 20 Feb '07

20 Feb '07

All members of the community are advised to read the announcement below. Begin forwarded message: > From: Denise Michel <denise.michel(a)icann.org> > Date: 20 February 2007 14:57:10 GMT > To: "At-Large Advisory Committee (publicly archived)" <alac(a)icann.org> > Subject: [At-Large] Independent Review of At-Large > > At the Sao Paulo ICANN meeting, the Board approved a comprehensive > schedule for independent review of ICANN’s structures (as required > under > Article IV, Section 4 of the Bylaws), as well as the Board: > > • Nominating Committee – estimated launch December 2006 > • At-Large Advisory Committee – estimated launch February 2007 > • DNS Root Server System Advisory Committee – estimated launch July > 2007 > • Board – estimated launch October 2007 > • Security and Stability Advisory Committee – estimated launch > January 2008 > • ccNSO Supporting Organisation – estimated launch July 2008 > • Address Supporting Organisation – estimated launch December 2008 > > These reviews are intended to ensure an independent examination of the > role and operation of key elements of ICANN, and are part of ICANN’s > ongoing commitment to its evolution and improvement. As with the > first > two independent reviews, which were completed for the GNSO Council and > the GNSO, these reviews will be conducted in an objective way by > independent evaluators, under guidance from the Board on the review’s > terms of reference, and with opportunity for public review and comment > on the results of the reviews. > > **Accordingly, input from the At-Large Advisory Committee, Regional > At-Large Large Organizations, and the At-Large community is invited on > the draft Terms of Reference for the ALAC review. Please provide Nick > Ashton-Hart <staff(a)alac.icann.org> with your comments and > suggestions. > Nick will be following-up with more information.** > > Draft Terms of Reference (TOR), which detail questions that will guide > the independent reviewer, will be developed by staff and presented to > the Board Governance Committee. This Committee, which has oversight > responsibilities for independent reviews, will have draft TOR > posted for > public comment and then finalized. You may find the draft TOR for the > Nominating Committee Review to be illustrative > <http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-12dec06.htm>. > > Thank you for your interest and involvement in At-Large. > > Regards, > Denise > > Denise Michel > Vice President, Policy Development > ICANN www.icann.org > denise.michel(a)icann.org > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- > lists.icann.org > > www.alac.icann.org > www.icannalac.org -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Map of the GNSO Policy Development Process
by Nick Ashton-Hart 17 Feb '07

17 Feb '07

Dear all: I've attached a scan of a handout I recently received which neatly maps the process at a high level of how the PDP process works in the GNSO. I hope this is handy. We are working on producing more of this kind of information, with accompanying descriptions, to make processes like this easier to understand. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

RE : AFRI-Discuss Digest, Vol 4, Issue 10
by CAFEC 16 Feb '07

16 Feb '07

The domain name is very important debate because in some african countries it's a seriuos problem between public and private sector. SCHOMBE Baudouin afri-discuss-request(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org a écrit : Send AFRI-Discuss mailing list submissions to afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/afri-discuss_atlarge-lists.… or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to afri-discuss-request(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org You can reach the person managing the list at afri-discuss-owner(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of AFRI-Discuss digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: [At-Large] Domain Name Tasting (Nick Ashton-Hart) 2. {Disarmed} Re: [At-Large] Domain Name Tasting (Izumi AIZU) 3. Re: [EURO-Discuss] Domain Name Tasting (Wolfgang Kleinw?chter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:51:26 +0000 From: "Nick Ashton-Hart" Subject: Re: [AFRI-Discuss] [At-Large] Domain Name Tasting To: "Pierre Dandjinou" Cc: Africa Discuss , Europe Discuss , At-Large Worldwide Message-ID: <240ba2f70702160151v44d934c1tc3141cab37f23c57(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On 16/02/07, Pierre Dandjinou wrote: > > Nick, > > > > I think the idea of having some substantive work in Lisbon around the > domain name tasting issue is a good one. > Great! Could we also make sure the new ALSes formally meet with ALAC as a Group and > be briefed on the way we operate? > > Pierre > I will add that to the draft agenda of both regional meetings -----Original Message----- > > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0