- ALAC-Announce - lists.icann.org

DOODLE for WHOIS Meeting this week
by At-Large Staff Jan. 20, 2009

Jan. 20, 2009

Dear all, Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor for the GNSO, offered to participate in a teleconference on WHOIS this Thursday or Friday. Participants are asked to engage in a discussion to rank the WHOIS issues that were presented at the last ALAC meeting by priorities. Please find further information on the WHOIS priority issues under: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?alac_whois_discussion_13_january_2009 In order to help us plan this meeting, please use the below link to an online meeting planer and flag all your available times: http://www.doodle.com/wvmyu8y2nt93e4fv Liz would be available on either Thursday, 22 January or Friday, 23 January at 2030 UTC or 2100 UTC. The call will be scheduled for 60 minutes. Time zone support has been activated for this poll. Please make sure you are using the correct time zone. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Marie-Helene Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Finalised Results of At-Large Summit Survey - Topics for Five Workshops Chosen by Community
by At-Large Staff Jan. 19, 2009

Jan. 19, 2009

Dear All: We are pleased to provide below the listing of subjects which the five working groups of the At-Large Summit will address. As you may know, the At-Large Summit has as a core element five working groups that will deliberate upon and agree final statements on areas of policy of importance to the At-Large community and the ICANN community as a whole. In order to determine what the five subjects should be, At-Large Structures were surveyed in late December 2008 to early January 2009 and provided with 13 topics to choose from; they were also able to write-in additional subjects, which could then be ranked by those respondents who filled in the survey subsequently. The results as reproduced below may be independently verified at the following URL: https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=NbehmmLKWssBgvENq6SN Selection of Working Group Topics 1 At-Large engagement in ICANN (Including goals, organization (ALS, RALO, ALAC), reviews, strategic planning, Individual Internet users participation, etc.) 2 The Future Structure and Governance of ICANN (the Improving Institutional Confidence process) 3 New Generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs) including IDN gTLDs 4 ICANN Transparency and Accountability 5 DNS Security Issues within ICANN¹s Remit As requested at the last Summit Working Group meeting, the Staff have combined two categories the original topic ³The Future Structure and Governance of ICANN² with the topic added-in by a respondent: ³ICANN¹s Relationship with Governments, the UN and the ITU². Those Summit attendees who have yet to respond will be invited to choose from amongst the above topics so that they may be assigned to the working group most of interest to them whilst retaining a balance of participants across working groups and regions. The working groups will then be convened telephonically by their interim co-chairs in the very near future to begin their work. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Heidi Ullrich, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

MP3 recording of the Council discussion on new gTLDS
by At-Large Staff Jan. 16, 2009

Jan. 16, 2009

Message forwarded from the GNSO Secretariat *************************************** Please find the MP3 recording of the Council discussion on new gTLDS at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-council-newgtlds-20090115.mp3 posted on page http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#jan Participants present on the call Council ======== Avri Doria - GNSO Council chair Chuck Gomes - Registries GNSO Council vice chair Edmon Chung - Registries Jordi Iparraguirre - Registries Kristina Rosette - IPC Ute Decker - IPC Stéphane van Gelder - Registrar Olga Cavalli - NCA Zahid Jamil - CBUC Tony Holmes - ISP Tony Harris - ISP Greg Ruth - ISP Mary Wong - NCUC William Drake - NCUC Carlos Souza - NCUC Terry Davis - NCA Olga Cavalli - NCA Alan Greenberg - ALAC liaison Pierre Bonis - ccNSO observer Absent apologies Adrian Kinderis Tim Ruiz Observers ========== Ken Stubbs - Ry Vanda Scartizini - ALAC Nick Wood - IPC Danny Younger Heike Jensen - ALS Terre des Femmes Michael Palage Ronald N. Andruff - RNA Partners, Inc. CBUC Steve Delbianco - CBUC Cheryl Langdon Orr - ALAC Chair Mike O'Connor - CBUC Jeff Neuman - Ryc Neustar Dirk Krischenowski - dotBerlin Caroline Greer - dotMobi J. Scott Evans - IPC Sébastien Bachollet - ALAC Paul Diaz - Registrar Jose Arce Carlos Aguirre Staff ====== Denise Michel Kurt Pritz John Jeffrey Dan Halloran Olof Nordling Patrick Jones Marika Konings Craig Schwartz Liz Gasster Karen Lentz Karla Valente Glen de Saint Gery Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FW: Public comments called for on Initial Report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (Part A)
by At-Large Staff Jan. 13, 2009

Jan. 13, 2009

Message forwarded from the GNSO Secretariat ******************************************* [To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org] Dear All, You are encouraged to submit comments on the Initial Report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (Part A) from 9 to 30 January 2009. http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-09jan09-en.htm Public Comment: Initial Report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (Part A) A public comment period opened on Friday 9 January 2009 for 21 days on an Initial Report into the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP). The IRTP Part A Policy Development Process is the first in a series of five planned PDPs to address areas for improvements in the existing Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy. http://www.icann.org/en/transfers/policy-12jul04.htm The IRTP Part A PDP concerns three 'new' issues: (1) the potential need for exchange of registrant email information between registrars, (2) the potential need for including new forms of electronic authentication to verify transfer requests and avoid 'spoofing', and (3) to consider whether the IRTP should include provisions for 'partial bulk transfers' between registrars. A Working Group, launched by the GNSO Council for this PDP, started its deliberations on 5 August 2008 and has now published an Initial Report. PLEASE NOTE: The Working Group will not make a final decision on which solution(s), if any, to propose to the GNSO Council before a thorough review of the comments received during the public comment period and in the final constituency statements has taken place. Following its deliberations, the Working Group has made some preliminary conclusions for each issue, which it hopes will inspire further comments from the public as well as the constituencies. These preliminary conclusions are as follows: Issue I - Is there a way for registrars to make Registrant E-mail Address data available to one another? The WG noted that WHOIS was not designed to support many of the ways in which it is currently used to facilitate transfers. Some members suggested that finding a way to make the Registrant e-mail address more readily available could be addressed as part of an overall technical modernization of the WHOIS protocol. This could be through updates to the existing protocol, modification of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) or adoption of the Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) protocol. However, after review and discussion none of these options received broad agreement. The WG did note that, in the absence of a simple and secure solution for providing the gaining registrar access to the registrant email address, future IRTP working groups should consider the appropriateness of a policy change that would prevent a registrant from reversing a transfer after it has been completed and authorized by the admin contact. This option would not change the current situation whereby a losing registrar can choose to notify the registrant and provide an opportunity to cancel a transfer before the process is completed. Issue II - Whether there is need for other options for electronic authentication? Based on the discussion in the Working Group, there appears to be broad agreement that there is a need for other options for electronic authentication. However, opinions in the Working Group differ as to whether these options should be developed by means of GNSO policymaking or should be left to market solutions. Issue III - Whether the policy should incorporate provisions for handling partial bulk transfers between registrars? Based on the discussion in the Working Group, there appears to be broad agreement that there is no need to incorporate provisions for handling partial bulk transfers between registrars at this stage. The Working Group believes that these scenarios can be addressed either through the existing Bulk Transfer provisions, or through existing market solutions. As stated in the ICANN Bylaws, the Initial Report is posted for public comment for 20 days. The comments received will be analyzed and used for redrafting of the Initial Report into a Final Report to be considered by the GNSO Council for further action. The Working Group would like to encourage everyone to review the complete Initial Report http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-a-initial-report-08jan09.pdf [PDF, 383K] before submitting comments. Comments on the Initial Report should be sent to irtp-initial-report(a)icann.org. Public comments received can be accessed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/irtp-initial-report/. The deadline for submission of comments is 30 January 2009. Related links: Part A Initial Report: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-a-initial-report-08jan09.pdf [PDF, 383K] Existing Transfer Policy: http://www.icann.org/en/transfers/policy-12jul04.htm Thank you for your cooperation. kind regards, Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Result of the extended vote on the Updated ALAC response
by At-Large Staff Jan. 13, 2009

Jan. 13, 2009

Dear all, With 12 out of 15 ALAC Members having voted in the recent vote on the updated ALAC Response to the BGC WG midpoint consultation report on the ALAC Review, we can confirm that the result was quorate. The vote has been extended until January 10th because some ALAC members experienced technical issues when trying to access the vote over the Holidays. Number of voters: 12 · Group size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00% ³Would you like to endorse the updated ALAC Response to the BGC WG midpoint consultation report on the ALAC Review as an official ALAC Statement?² * 1) Yes 11 votes, 91.67% Alan Greenberg, Adam Peake, Patrick Vande Walle, Sébastien Bachollet, Beau Brendler, Robert Guerra, Fatimata Seye Sylla, Thu Hue Nguyen, Vanda Scartezini, Cheryl Landon-Orr, Hawa Diakite * 2) No 1 vote, 8.33% Carlos Aguirre * 3) Abstain 0 votes, 0.00% You may verify the results independently under: https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=TeiMY7XSkkHbnLGmjy6K (please note that Hawa Diakite¹s vote is not listed on this summary as she has submitted her vote by email due to a technical problem) When announcing the results of voting, we have been requested by the Chair to provide a listing of those who have not voted. The following ALAC member did not participate in the balloting: Jose Ovidio Salgueiro Mohamed El Bashir Vivek Vivekandan Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms, Heidi Ullrich ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Draft Agenda for New gTLD meeting 15 Jan
by At-Large Staff Jan. 12, 2009

Jan. 12, 2009

Message forwarded from the GNSO Secretariat ****************************************** Hi Based on what I have heard spoken of so far, the following is a draft agenda for the New gTLD meeting on 15 January. 1 - Discuss areas at variance with GNSO policy principles, recommendations and guidelines. Possible areas include, i.a.: - Principle G: Do the review criteria infringe on freedom of expression - Recommendation 1: Are the price levels discriminatory? - Recommendation 2: Extent of confusing similarity - Recommendation 5: Reserved names issues - geographic - 2 char IDN - Recommendation 17: what is the clear compliance and sanctions process? - IG B: Recommended cost based fees with different applicants paying different fees. Are these fees really cost based? Are some applicants subsidizing other applicants? - IG F: Board resolution process was recommended instead of Auction - IG O: Are there any plans for a fee reduction schedule for gTLS applicants from economies classified as least developed? - Others? 2 - Discuss the motions we passed vis a vis new gTLDs - introducion of idn tlds - Implementation guideline (IG) E 3 - Discuss the comments received 4 - Discuss follow-up process to this meeting

1 0

New gTLD GNSO Council Thursday 15 January 2009 at 16:00UTC
by At-Large Staff Jan. 12, 2009

Jan. 12, 2009

Message forwarded from the GNSO Secretariat **************************************** Dear All, As agreed upon during the Council meeting, a new gTLD Council discussion is scheduled for Thursday, 15 January 2009 at 16:00 UTC. The call will be open to observers and alternates if Council members cannot attend. Please RSVP to gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org so that we can make sure there will be enough lines. The call will be recorded and transcribed and posted on page http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/index.html Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PST) UTC-8+0DST 08:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EST) UTC-5+0DST 11:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina UTC-2+1DST 14:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil UTC-2+1DST 14:00 London, United Kingdom (BST) UTC+0DST 16:00 Brussels, Belgium (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 Paris, France (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 Barcelona, Spain (CET) UTC+1+0DST 17:00 Karachi, Pakistan UTC+5+1DST 21:00 Hong Kong, China UTC+8+0DST 00:00 Singapore, Singapore UTC+8+0DST 00:00 Melbourne, Australia (EDT) UTC+10+1DST 03:00 (Friday 16 January.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The DST starts/ends on last Sunday of March 2009, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com Dial-in details: PARTICIPANT PASSCODE: GTLD For security reasons, the passcode will be required to join the call. Country Toll Numbers Freephone/Toll Free Number ARGENTINA 0800-777-0494 AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-4862 1-800-880-485 AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-0964 1-800-880-485 AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-1964 1-800-880-485 AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-7733 1-800-880-485 AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5243 1-800-880-485 AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8211-1386 1-800-880-485 AUSTRIA 43-1-92-89-654 0800-999-636 BELGIUM 32-2-402-2432 0800-4-8360 BRAZIL 0800-8912038 CHILE 1230-020-0281 CHINA* 86-400-810-4760 10800-712-1193 10800-120-1193 COLOMBIA 01800-9-156463 CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-15 800-700-167 DENMARK 45-7014-0238 8088-6075 FINLAND Land Line: 106-33-164 0-800-1-12056 FINLAND Mobile: 09-106-33-164 0-800-1-12056 FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-75 080-511-1431 FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-75 080-511-1431 FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-70-75-00-04 080-511-1431 GERMANY 49-69-2222-52104 0800-216-1601 GREECE 30-80-1-100-0639 00800-12-5999 HONG KONG 852-2286-5632 800-964-136 HUNGARY 06-800-15227 INDIA 000-800-852-1216 INDONESIA 001-803-011-3500 IRELAND 353-1-246-0036 1800-931-782 ISRAEL 1-80-9303048 ITALY 39-02-3600-0326 800-906-585 JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7739-4763 00531-12-1149 JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-5539-5154 00531-12-1149 LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1314 MALAYSIA 1-800-80-8121 MEXICO 001-866-627-0541 NETHERLANDS 31-20-710-9321 0800-023-4655 NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4641 0800-443-793 NORWAY 47-21-59-00-14 800-11982 PANAMA 011-001-800-5072119 POLAND 00-800-1210067 PORTUGAL 8008-12179 RUSSIA 8-10-8002-9613011 SINGAPORE 65-6883-9197 800-120-4057 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-15 SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-93390 SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1052 00798-14800-6323 SPAIN 34-91-414-15-44 800-099-279 SWEDEN 46-8-566-10-782 0200-887-612 SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-7718 0800-000-038 TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7346 00801-137-565 THAILAND 001-800-1206-65091 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9015 0800-018-0795 UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3215 0800-018-0795 UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-2115 0800-018-0795 UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7019-0812 0800-018-0795 UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1415 0800-018-0795 URUGUAY 000-413-598-3439 USA 1-210-795-0472 877-818-6787 VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3205 *Access to your conference call will be either of the numbers listed, dependent on the participants' local telecom provider. Restrictions may exist when accessing freephone/toll free numbers using a mobile telephone. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FW: Help build the new GNSO
by At-Large Staff Jan. 12, 2009

Jan. 12, 2009

Message forwarded from the GNSO Secretariat ******************************************* http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09jan09-en.htm Help Build The New GNSO Volunteers Are Now Being Accepted To Join Work Teams That Will Develop GNSO Improvement Implementation Plans 9 January 2009 The GNSO is creating five new Work Teams to be the incubators through which implementation plans for ICANN Board approved GNSO improvement recommendations can be developed and proposed by members of the ICANN community. Each Work Team will be made up of community volunteers who have interest in and expertise in one of five main focus areas: Constituency/Stakeholder Group Operations GNSO Operations New Working Group Model. New GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) Community Communications and Coordination We encourage you to participate in one of the Work Teams. If you do have an interest in participating, please send a message to gnso.secretariat(a)icann.org indicating which Work Team you want to join. Please include in the message your name, affiliation (constituency or individual), company/organization, position/title, email address, time zone, telephone numbers, and describe your specific interest (professional and/or personal) in joining the team. All personal information will be kept confidential. The Work Teams are open to all interested volunteers. Work Team meeting times will probably overlap, so please consider joining only one Work Team. Background information and the scope of each newly chartered team are summarized below. Background Information The ICANN Board announced sweeping recommendations for improving the GNSO last June at their meeting in Paris. The implementation work of the GNSO Improvements effort is underway and there are many exciting opportunities available for ICANN community input and support to help achieve the goals and objectives adopted by the Board. The effort is progressing on four parallel tracks: The GNSO Council is working to develop the transition to a newly structured GNSO Council by June 2009. Existing GNSO constituencies are preparing to submit their re-confirmations to the ICANN Board. New Stakeholder Groups are developing petitions and charters for ICANN Board recognition, and The GNSO is creating five special Work Teams to develop specific proposals, processes and mechanisms for implementing the ICANN Board's Recommendations. All four areas require significant investments of time and brainpower from members of the ICANN community, but the Work Team efforts, in particular, need an infusion of enthusiasm, passion, expertise and fresh ideas from the entire community to move the implementation forward. Scope of the Work Teams Constituency Operations Team (COT) This team will develop guidelines and mechanisms to help GNSO constituencies and stakeholder groups operate in ways that ensure transparency, accountability and accessibility, including outreach efforts to encourage broader participation within the GNSO by explaining the added value of membership in these groups. In its Paris recommendations, the Board directed GNSO constituencies to develop participation rules and operating procedures that set certain minimum standards regarding transparency and accountability. The Board emphasized that criteria for participation in any ICANN constituency should be objective, clearly stated, and standardized. In addition, the Board directed constituencies to develop global, targeted outreach programs aimed at increasing participation and interest in the GNSO policy process, including information on the option to self-form new constituencies. Some of the specific recommendations approved by the Board include: Develop a global outreach program to broaden participation in current constituencies. Enhance existing constituencies by developing recommendations on the following: Develop a set of top-level participation guidelines based on the principles as defined in the GNSO recommendations, while recognizing differences between constituencies and that one size may not fit all constituencies; and Develop a "tool kit" of basic administrative, operational and technical services available to all constituencies Please refer to the draft COT Charter for more information: https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team. Communication and Coordination Team (CCT) This team will develop tools for increased communication effectiveness and efficiency within the GNSO and improve GNSO communication and coordination with other ICANN structures, including members of the ICANN Board, other Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs). The Board stated that the Council as well as the GNSO constituencies should consider additional ways in which the GNSO can further improve communication, cooperation and coordination with other ICANN structures. The Board added that there should be more frequent contact and communication between the GNSO Council, GNSO constituencies and the members the Council elects to the Board, and among the Chairs of the GNSO, other Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees especially in advance of each ICANN Meeting. Some of the specific recommendations approved by the Board include: Improve the GNSO's: Web site Document management capacity Ability to solicit meaningful public comments on its work Coordination with other ICANN structures. Please refer to the draft CCT Charter for more information: https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_communications_team. GNSO Council Operations Team (GCOT) This work team will develop any changes needed to the Council's operational procedures and role in response to the Board approved GNSO structure including determining what steps are needed to establish the role of the Council as a "strategic manager of the policy process" and preparing clear rules for the establishment of new constituencies within stakeholder groups, while recognizing that differences exist between stakeholder groups and constituencies. The Board recommended that the Council move away from being a legislative body concerned primarily with voting towards becoming a strategic entity focused on overseeing and managing Working Groups, which will be primarily engaged in developing policy for the GNSO. The Council should adopt term limits and implement a training and development curriculum for its members. The Board endorsed a new bicameral voting structure for the newly reorganized Council comprised of four broad stakeholder groups. It authorized the establishment of a "contracted party house" (made up of registry and registrar stakeholder group representatives) and a second "non-contracted party house" (made up of commercial and non-commercial stakeholder group representatives) and set parameters for their respective compositions. The Board also approved the presence of a voting Nominating Committee Appointee (NCA) in each house and subsequently authorized a third Council-level non-voting appointee. The Board also approved a methodology for the GNSO Council to select a Chair and approved various voting thresholds recommended by the community. Some of the specific recommendations approved by the Board include: Determine what steps are needed to establish the role of the Council as a "strategic manager of the policy process." Define and develop scope and responsibilities of any other standing "committees" as recommended by the BGC WG (those suggested to date: committee to analyze trends; committee to benchmark policy implementation) Develop "Statement of Interest" and "Declaration of Interest" forms. Develop curriculum for training Council members, constituents, facilitators and others. Prepare clear rules for the establishment of new constituencies within stakeholder groups, while recognizing that differences exist between stakeholder groups and constituencies. Review and recommend amendments as appropriate regarding methods for encouraging, promoting and introducing new constituencies, while recognizing that differences exist between stakeholder groups and constituencies. Please refer to the draft GCOT Charter for more information: https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?gnso_operations_team. Working Group Model Team (WGMT) This team will collaborate to develop a new Working Group model for GNSO policy development and decision making. The ICANN Board recommended that Working Groups become the focal point for GNSO policy development to enhance the process by making it more inclusive and representative, and, ultimately, more effective and efficient. The Board noted that this approach can be a more constructive way of establishing areas of agreement than task forces, where membership is limited and discussion can become polarized along constituency lines. Working Groups also enable key parties to become involved in the beginning and work together to address complex and/or controversial issues. Appointing skilled chairs and drafters, as well as proper scoping of the Working Group's objectives, will be integral parts of a successful model. The Board urged that steps be taken immediately to move to a Working Group model for future policy development work, developing appropriate operating principles, rules and procedures that can draw upon expertise gained from other organization's successful policy development efforts, as appropriate. Please refer to the draft WGMT Charter for more information: https://st.icann.org/gnso_transition/index.cgi?pdp_team. Policy Development Process (PDP) Team (PDPT) This team will work to develop a more efficient and effective policy development process for the GNSO community. The Board emphasized that the GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) needs to be revised to make it more effective and responsive to ICANN's policy development needs. It should be brought in-line with the time and effort actually required to develop policy and made consistent with ICANN's existing contracts (including, but not limited to, clarifying the appropriate scope of GNSO "consensus policy" development). The Board stated that, while the procedure for developing "consensus policies" will need to continue to be established by the Bylaws as long as required by ICANN's contracts, the GNSO Council and Staff should develop and propose new PDP rules for the Board's consideration and approval that contain more flexibility. The new rules should emphasize the importance of the preparation that must be done before launch of a Working Group or other activity, such as public discussion, fact-finding, and expert research in order to properly define the scope, objective and schedule for a specific policy development goal, and the development of metrics for measuring success. Please refer to the draft PDPT Charter for more information: https://st.icann.org/gnso_transition/index.cgi?pdp_team For additional information about the GNSO Improvements Implementation process please consult the GNSO Improvements Information Page at http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/ Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Vote on the updated ALAC response extended
by Matthias Langenegger Jan. 9, 2009

Jan. 9, 2009

Dear all, Following a series of complaints from ALAC members whose vote on the updated ALAC Response to the BGC WG midpoint consultation report on the ALAC Review was not recorded, the ALAC Chair decided to extend the vote. The following ALAC members experienced technical difficulties in this vote and have contacted us: Vanda Scartezini Fatimata Seye Sylla Mohamed El Bashir Hawa Diakite Alan Greenberg Thu Hue Nguyen They received a separate email with their voting credentials a couple of minutes ago and will have time until Saturday, 10 January at 1200 UTC to submit their vote. The final result will be announced in the coming week. The question to be put is: Would you like to endorse the updated ALAC Response to the BGC WG midpoint consultation report on the ALAC Review as an official ALAC Statement? With possible answers: Yes No Abstain We have been in contact with our online voting provider BigPulse with regards to the reason of this problem and have been informed that there are two reasons for the problem that occurred: * The only way a voter can be certain the vote was recorded is to receive a vote receipt. However, vote receipt was not enabled for this poll. It is therefore possible that the voter did not get notification about a misrecorded vote. We will make sure that vote receipt will be enabled for all future votes and apologize to those who have been affected by this problem. Please contact staff(a)atlarge.icann.org if you do not receive a receipt after having voted. * There was a sever issue on the BigPuse server on December 24th, which could have affected the votes submitted on that day. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms, Heidi Ullrich ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

2 1

Results of the vote on the new vote on the RAA package
by At-Large Staff Jan. 8, 2009

Jan. 8, 2009

Dear all, With 14 out of 15 ALAC Members having voted in the recent vote on the ³New vote on the ALAC Recommendation to the GNSO on the RAA Package², we can confirm that the result was quorate. Number of voters: 14 · Group size: 15 · Percentage voted: 93.33 ³ICANN staff has told the GNSO that the only way that the current RAA package of amendments can be approved is if they pass a super-majority (66%) vote accepting the package. If it is not approved, any future policy development must be done over using current PDP processes. Please choose one of the following options:² * 1) Recommend the GNSO to accept the current RAA package, with the possibility of further policy development in the future 12 votes (85.71%): ( Alan Greenberg, Adam Peake, Hawa Diakite, Patrick Vande Walle, Sébastien Bachollet, Beau Brendler, Robert Guerra, Fatimata Seye Sylla, Thu Hue Nguyen, Vanda Scartezini, Cheryl Landon-Orr, VC Vivekanadan) * 2) Recommend that the GNSO do not approve the current RAA package 0 votes (0.00%) * 3) Abstain 2 votes ( 14.29%) : ( Carlos Aguirre, Mohamed El Bashir) You may verify the results independently under: https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=ahTyZywYNmDnmCrvMp9T When announcing the results of voting, we have been requested by the Chair to provide a listing of those who have not voted. Accordingly, we can confirm that the following ALAC member did not participate in the balloting: Jose Ovidio Salgueiro Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms, Heidi Ullrich ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0