February 2013 - ALAC-Announce

FW: ICANN News Alert -- Internet Groups Discuss New Priorities In Latin America and Caribbean
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 7, 2013

Feb. 7, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/press/releases/release-07feb13-en.pdf [PDF, 164 KB] ________________________________ Internet Groups Discuss New Priorities In Latin America and Caribbean 7 February 2013 http://www.icann.org/en/news/press/releases/release-07feb13-en.pdf [PDF, 164 KB] This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…>

1 0

FW: ICANN News Alert -- Interim Report IDN ccNSO Policy Development Process
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 5, 2013

Feb. 5, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-05feb13-en.htm ________________________________ Interim Report IDN ccNSO Policy Development Process 5 February 2013 Forum Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 5 February 2013 Categories/Tags: * Top-Level Domains * Policy Processes Purpose (Brief): In the framework of the ccNSO Policy Development Process on IDN ccTLD's the purpose of the Interim Report<http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idn-ccpdp-interim-04feb13-en.pdf> [PDF, 556 KB] is to report on and seek feed-back on feasible recommendations for overall policy for the selection of IDN country code Top Level Domains strings (IDN ccTLD's) and the inclusion of IDN ccTLD managers in the ccNSO. The Interim Report builds on the Final Paper's of IDN ccPDP Working Groups 1 and 2, which have been open for public comment. Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/idn-ccpdp-05feb13-en.htm This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…>

1 0

Policy vs. Implementation: Public Comment period open
by At-Large Staff Feb. 5, 2013

Feb. 5, 2013

Policy vs. Implementation Comment/Reply Periods (*)Important Information Links Comment Open:31 January 2013 Comment Close:21 February 2013 Close Time (UTC):23:59Public Comment Announcement <http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-31jan13-en.htm> Reply Open:22 February 2013To Submit Your Comments (Forum) <mailto:comments-policy-implementation-31jan13@icann.org> Reply Close:14 March 2013View Comments Submitted <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-policy-implementation-31jan13/> Close Time (UTC):23:59Report of Public Comments Brief Overview Originating Organization:ICANN Staff Categories/Tags:Policy Processes Purpose (Brief):In order to encourage feedback on the ICANN Staff Paper Policy vs. Implementation Draft Framework for Discussion <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08j an13-en.pdf> [PDF, 195 KB], a public comment forum has now been opened. Current Status:ICANN Staff has developed a paper outlining a draft framework for community discussion that identifies a number of steps and criteria that might facilitate dealing with questions relating to policy vs. implementation in the future. Next Steps:The received comments are expected to feed into the session that is being planned on this topic at the ICANN meeting in Beijing. Staff Contact:Marika KoningsEmail:Policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:Policy-staff@icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Polic y%20vs.%20Implementation%20public%20comment%20period> Detailed Information Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose Mainly as a result of discussions stemming from implementation related issues of the new gTLD program, there is increased focus on which topics call for policy and which call for implementation work, including which processes should be used, at what time and how diverging opinions should be acted upon. In order to facilitate these discussions, ICANN Staff has developed a draft framework for community discussion that identifies a number of steps and criteria that might facilitate dealing with similar questions in the future. The paper <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08j an13-en.pdf> [PDF, 195 KB] identifies a number of questions that the community may want to consider further in this context, as well as a couple of suggested improvements that could be considered in the short term. While developing a bright-line rule as to what is policy or implementation may not be possible, the hope is that by developing clear processes and identifying clear roles and responsibilities for the different stakeholders, it will become easier to deal with these issues going forward and allow for broad participation and involvement. In order to facilitate discussions on this topic, a session is being scheduled at the ICANN meeting in Beijing. Input received as a result of this public comment forum is intended to feed into those discussions, which are also intended to identify next steps. Section II: Background There are multiple kinds of "policy" within the ICANN world. There are formal policies developed through the policy development processes as set forth in the Bylaws. There are operational policies generally not subject to a PDP or considered implementation, such as the Conflicts of Interest Policy, but for which public comment is sought and considered. Finally, there are general practices that are sometimes referred to as "little p" policies or more accurately "procedures", such as the 30-day public comment requirement for Bylaw changes. Within this category again there are a variety of considerations. There could be established practices, for example, on topics that although within scope of a policy development process (PDP) have not resulted in a formal recommendation to the Board that could serve as authoritative "Policy." In some of those instances, for example vertical integration or registrar accreditation procedures, ICANN identified a path forward and if a policy recommendation on these topics were to later arise through a PDP, ICANN would then consider how that policy might impact or require change to established practice(s) (resulting in "Policy").One area that is ripe for further discussion within the ICANN community is identifying the proper process to follow when there are changes to policy recommendations that have already been adopted by the Board, or to the proposals related to the implementation of approved policy recommendations. Questions have been raised about when those issues need to be vetted using a new PDP and when it would suffice to use public comment to vet a proposed change for public comment and for the Board and/or staff to act on that based on the comment received. Such questions arose, for example, during the evolution of the applicant guidebook for the New gTLD Program, and also during the negotiation of key contracts such as the .com and .net registry agreements regarding the impact of potential incorporation of a "thick" Whois registry model.Another, associated issue is when resolution of a new issue should be supported by a consensus of the ICANN community, and when an issue arising from the implementation of a policy may be effectuated by the ICANN Board or ICANN Staff upon taking a range of advice even if there is no consensus within the ICANN community.In order to better deal with the issues outlined in this paper, ICANN Staff has outlined a number of proposed principles to serve as a basis for this discussion as well as developed a proposed framework which can be found in the annex to the paper. Section III: Document and Resource Links Policy versus Implementation Draft Framework for Discussion <http://gnso.icann.org/en/correspondence/policy-implementation-framework-08j an13-en.pdf> [PDF, 195 KB] Section IV: Additional Information N/A (*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses.

1 0

FW: ICANN News Alert -- Webinar: Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant: Examining the User Experience Implication of the Active Variant TLDs
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 3, 2013

Feb. 3, 2013

From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org<mailto:communications@icann.org>> Date: Friday, February 1, 2013 5:18 PM To: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Subject: ICANN News Alert -- Webinar: Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant: Examining the User Experience Implication of the Active Variant TLDs [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-01feb13-en.htm ________________________________ Webinar: Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant: Examining the User Experience Implication of the Active Variant TLDs 1 February 2013 Date: 13 February 2013 Time: 13:00 – 14:50 UTC (5:00am – 6:30am PST) Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/idnvarianttld/ Dial In: 1-800-550-6865 or 1-213-233-3193 International numbers available here<http://adigo.com/icann/> Meeting ID: 46389 Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) serve as powerful tools for broadening the Internet's capacity and accessibility; however, they also raise novel issues. One important issue concerns "variants" which occur when a single character can be identified with two or more different Unicode Code Points with graphic representations that may or may not be visually similar. IDN variants contain one or more such characters and therefore, if not handled correctly, might result in user confusion or a poor user experience. In an effort to develop potential solutions for the delegation of IDN variant Top-Level Domains (TLDs), IDN Variant Project Teams, consisting of volunteers, subject matter expert consultants and ICANN staff, have conducted case studies in six scripts, produced an integrated report, and are currently underway to completing three projects investigating potential solutions for IDN Variant TLDs delegation. One of these projects is called the Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs Project (P6). The purpose of the project is to gain an understanding of issues that could arise from activating IDN Variant TLDs and offer recommendations to users to avoid such issues. Examples of user roles that have been identified include registrants, registrars, registry operators, system administrators, network operators, application developers, and end users. Project team has published for public comment the Draft Final Report for Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/variant-ux-18jan13-en.htm> and is seeking to establish a dialog with the community to refine proposed principles, impacts and recommendations of the study. This webinar is offered to complement that process both by presenting the key concepts and gathering user input. The IDN Variant TLDs Program team is looking forward to your participation. This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…>

1 0