April 2009 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

ICANN, the JPA and Draft Cybersecurity Act 2009
by Carlton Samuels April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

I have always had a difficulty seeing how my Uncle Sam would let go of something so clearly strategic, especially when most Americans hold it was bought and paid for by American money. So when I opined to some of you that the JPA - or some form thereof - shall forever be with us, some said this was an "over the top" assessment. Follow the link and see the rattles of the the ordinary American political mind. Note well that the politicians named here are not your usual klavern of rightwing firebreathing nativists. These - Snow and Rockefeller - tend to sterling centrist perspectives, if not actively liberal. The *draft* *Cybersecurity Act 2009* [http://cdt.org/security/CYBERSEC4.pdf] establishes some facts on the ground. Read *Sec 2: Findings* carefully. The *recitals* in this part justify what is proposed: the maintenance of the DNS infrastructure currently jobbed out to ICANN is a strategic and critical infrastructure resource which is fundamental to the security and continued well-being of the United States. Plainly put, it is ineligible for "foreign" control. Focus on *Sec 3: Cybersecurity Advisory Panel* and note who are the persons elegible for appointment to help USG/DOC make the decisions on JPA. Be sure to read carefully *Sec 8: Review of NTIA Domain Name Contracts*. The provision for extending USG oversight of ICANN is documented here and the mechanism by which that will be assured. Here is further grist for the mill, compliments of Milton Mueller's blog: http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2009/4/2/4141451.html http://www.cdt.org/ Kind regards, Carlton Samuels The University of the West Indies.

3 4

FW: Brand Owners Divided on New gTLDs
by Carlton Samuels April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

Follow the link to see what others are saying about it..... http://www.domainpulse.com/2009/04/01/melbourne-it-survey-finds-brand-owner… Carlton Samuels The University of the West Indies

1 0

ALAC/At-Large budgets
by Alan Greenberg April 2, 2009

April 2, 2009

Nick, with the rest of the community, the ALAC has been asked to comment on the FY10 Operating Plan and Budget Framework. Although perhaps not unreasonable, there is virtually nothing there for us to directly comment on with respect to ALAC and At-Large. It would be very helpful, and perhaps allow us to better focus, if we could see what the projected components are of the budget framework which directly impact us - both from an absolute sense, and understanding how it compares to previous years. As I understand it, this would be in line with the ALAC independant review comments of fiscal transparency. Alan

5 4

Board Request for Community Views on Constituency Day
by At-Large Staff April 1, 2009

April 1, 2009

Dear All: In case this has slipped below the radar screen, we forward the below message from Diane Schroeder for you to consider. To the Supporting Organisations and Advisory Committees: > > The Board is interested in your views on the best ways for the Board and > Supporting Organizations & Advisory Committees to interact at the ICANN > international meetings. As the community grows and the issues become more > complex, it has become a greater challenge to find a way to effectively and > efficiently organise this interaction. > > In particular, the Board would like to come to a shared understanding of what > Constituency Day should be, with a view to trying out different ways of > interaction during the Constituency Day at next ICANN international meeting in > Sydney.. > > At present the Constituency Day is organised as follows: the Board is divided > up and a number of members are assigned to various constituencies for > different amounts of time depending on the constituency. The idea behind this > approach was to give the Board members an opportunity to listen to some of the > constituency business, not just rely on the question and answer time with the > Board. To prepare for the visit by the Board members, each constituency is > asked to provide a list of topics that they would like to discuss with the > Board. Some constituencies are better at providing this than others. Board > Members are assigned to constituencies other than the one with which they are > most familiar. In addition, the CEO and the Chair visit all constituencies. > At the end of the day, after all the visits, the Board comes together and > exchanges the views they have heard from the various groups. > > To assist in the discussion about the future of Constituency Day, the Board > would like your thoughts on the following specific questions, by the end of > April. > 1. What is the goal of having the Board meet with a Supporting Organization, > Constituency, or Advisory Committee during the ICANN meeting? > 2. What is the best communication method between the Board and a Supporting > Organization, Constituency or Advisory Committee during the ICANN meeting? > 3. How much time is needed for effective communication with the Board? > 4. Who of the Board should come to such meetings the CEO & the Chair? A > representative group of board members? All Board members? > > Thank you for your help in this process. > Diane Schroeder -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Heidi Ullrich, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0