January 2011 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Internet Society article on Egypt Internet shutdown
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Jan. 31, 2011

Jan. 31, 2011

An interesting FAQ from ISOC re: the recent Egypt Internet shutdown. http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=3100 Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0

Fwd: [ccnso-council] Call for volunteers Study Group on Use of Names for Countries and Territories
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Jan. 31, 2011

Jan. 31, 2011

Please be advised of the following current call for volunteers for a ccNSO Study Group which means that shortly this group will be activated and begin its important work and ALAC will be asked to provide the WT with a Liaison, and some (usually limited in number) members as outlined... We need to start thinking on who we might out forward as members along with how they will be called for and selected/endorsed and most importantly if these members will need to be supported (to facilitate discussion in our regions on issues raised and addressed by the WT and to provide these members with such input for their use) i.e. a wiki page (under ccNSO Liaison space I assume) and/or an internal list etc., As the ALAC's ccNSO Liaison I will be happy to participate as the ALAC Liaison to this WT, and as soon as I know how many members for ALAC / At-Large will be called for I will forward that information on... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org> Date: 1 February 2011 05:04 Subject: [ccnso-council] Call for volunteers Study Group on Use of Names for Countries and Territories To: "ccnso-members(a)icann.org" <ccnso-members(a)icann.org>, " cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org" <cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org> Cc: "ccnso-council(a)icann.org" <ccnso-council(a)icann.org> Dear all, The ccNSO is now seeking volunteers to our Study Group on the Use of Names for Countries and Territories. The study group is expected to: 1) provide an overview of current and proposed policies, guidelines and procedures for allocation and delegation of strings currently used or proposed to be used as TLDs that are either associated with Countries and Territories (i.e., by inclusion on the ISO 3166-1 list) and/or are otherwise considered representations of the names of Countries and Territories. 2. A comprehensive overview of the types and categories of strings currently used or proposed to be used as TLDs that are either associated with Countries and Territories (i.e., by inclusion on the ISO 3166-1 list) and/or are otherwise considered representations of Country and Territory names. 3. A comprehensive overview of issues arising (or likely to arise) in connection with applying the current and proposed policies, guidelines and procedures for allocation to types and categories of strings currently used or proposed to be used as TLDs that are either associated with Countries and Territories (i.e., by inclusion on the ISO 3166-1 list) and/or are otherwise considered representations of Country and Territory names. If considered appropriate by the study group, the study group will advise on a course of further actions, if any, to resolve issues identified under 3. For more detailed information, see http://www.ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/use-of-names-statement-of-purpose-… The study group will also contain members and liaisons from other stakeholder groups, such as the GAC, ALAC and GNSO. If you are interested in joining this Study Group, please, let me know by Monday, 14 February 2011 at the latest. You do not need to be a member of the ccNSO to become a member of the Study Group! Kind regards, Gabi

1 0

The US Commerce Dept position paper ...
by Wolf Ludwig Jan. 31, 2011

Jan. 31, 2011

Dear all, as indicated before, I perceive the planned ICANN Board – GAC meeting end of February in Brussels with some unease (reminding me to some unpleasant situations during the WSIS process ;-) Milton’s blog post on IGP supports my bad feelings – see: The US Commerce Dept position paper for the ICANN Board negotiations http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/1/29/4737705.html And some more: US wants veto power over new TLDs http://domainincite.com/us-wants-veto-power-over-new-tlds/ There is an old African proverb saying: “Where elephants fight, it’s the grass that suffers” (let’s see who will be in the grass ;-) Best, Wolf comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig www.comunica-ch.net Digitale Allmend http://blog.allmend.ch - EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org

1 0

The AGAT initiative
by Evan Leibovitch Jan. 27, 2011

Jan. 27, 2011

Hello everyone, At its last meeting in Cartagena, the ICANN Board acknowledged that a number of sticking points remain in the new gTLD approval/application process, though most of the it is essentially settled. What remains are issues that ICANN stakeholders have been trying to resolve with varying levels of success. There have been some remarkable areas of consensus, notably on the "Rec6" Cross-community Working Group. However, much remains that has either been unable to obtain full consensus by these groups or (in the eyes of many) subject to significant misinterpretation by ICANN staff that has so far been charged with the wording of the Applicant Guidebook. At its meeting yesterday, the ALAC endorsed an initiative to create a small working team focused on providing specific wording for the Guidebook on specific areas that remain at an impasse, from an end-user centric point of view. The intent is to deliver a direct and reasonably complete alternative text that addresses the concerns that have been expressed through ALAC and other stakeholders (including the GAC). We are looking for help with this, but we need a group that is committed to helping to both assess our intended direction and to help create specific AG-ready working based on that. The general framework of the Applicant Guidebook Alternate Text (AGAT) effort can be found at https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Applicant+Guidebook+Altern… We have a significant amount of work and not much time in which to do it, so any offers of assistance are greatly appreciated. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

3 3

A few suggestions for At-Large to work on (was: Re: ALAC : quelques réflexions.)
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Jan. 27, 2011

Jan. 27, 2011

Dear Jean-Jacques, thank you for your kind message which you sent me, agreeing that my responses could be public. First and foremost, I wanted to welcome you and other newly selected representatives to the ALAC. Two days ago was the first ALAC call which I Chaired and I realise that this was a first for you and several other people. In fact, we were meant to have an ALAC call for new members prior to this call, but timetable issues, including the end of year holiday break, precluded that. If you do feel that we need such a call, or if others here, feel that this is needed, we could arrange one. You just have to ask for it. I am pleased to have received a set of questions from you because I realise that for many of us having been around At-Large for a while, we take many things for granted, whether they are acronyms, current work, working groups, processes etc. For this reason, I'll try to be as complete as possible, in responding. However, seasoned members of the ALAC might know more than me about some history/subject/process, so they're very welcome to add to my answers. Many of my comments below reflect only my feelings about where At-Large should go. But as the Chair - the driver - of this Advisory Committee, I am not the Navigator. Ultimately, it will be for At-Large members, that is the At-Large Structures and the Internet Users out there, to decide where we're going. Your input is very valuable, and that's why I wanted to respond in public. I hope that others will chime in too. On 26/01/2011 14:12, Jean-Jacques Subrenat wrote : > > /As a new year begins, it is useful for ALAC, as for other components > of ICANN, to reflect on the challenges facing the organization. This > can help determine the areas in which ALAC can add value to the > overall credibility and performance of ICANN, while pursuing the > objectives of the At-Large community worldwide. / > / > / > /_Some challenges facing ICANN_/ > / > / > /1) Evolving from a pioneer group to a world-wide operation with > global responsibilities/ > /- Pioneering is in its DNA, hence there is still some ambiguity in > the respective roles of Board and Staff/ > /- Board overload must make way for a more selective, value-added > approach of Board performance and oversight/ > /- rules of internal governance (e.g. designation of committee members > and chairs) must now be brought to the same level of high expectations > as apply to external governance (accountability, transparency)/ > /2) Striking a better balance between sources of revenue and the > public interest/ > /- a large part of the growing budget (2010-11, ca. 100m US$) still > comes from fees paid by the domain name industry, whereas.../ > /- ... at the same time, there is a greater awareness of the needs of > the common Internet user/ > /- the notion of "the public interest" (put forward by the "Enhancing > institutional confidence" recommendations and now enshrined in the > AoC) is gaining general acceptance/ > /- therefore, there is a need for a more diverse financing of the > ICANN budget (revenue from new gTLDs ?)/ > /3) Building on the AoC/ > /- the AoC remains an undertaking between ICANN and one sovereign > state. How can this be enlarged to a more representative and truly > international system?/ > /- the AoC recognizes the need for a clearer role for public authority > in matters of public policy: will the GAC rise to the challenge?/ > /4) Some daunting tasks/ > /- transitioning from IPv4 to IPv6/ > /- new gTLDs, knowing that there is widespread demand, but at the same > time some large businesses and trademarks are lobbying to at least > retard their launch/ > /- positioning ICANN in the most appropriate manner in the > constellation of entities dealing with the Internet (IGF, ITU, G20...)/ > / > / I am in complete agreement with you. I have said publicly that At-Large has cranked itself one notch up since the At-Large Summit in Mexico City and is currently cranking itself another notch up tanks to the At-Large improvements process, a direct result of the At-Large Review which you were part of. For me in At-Large, there is only one way forward, and that's to be motivated to make our ALAC-RALO-ALS structure as useful as possible for ICANN to successfully meet those challenges. We are here to help. This means not being scared of pointing out when things are not right. This also means using mildly strong language when we are being ignored. I am very happy to read your list, because ALAC has been pointing all of the above for a long time. Was it listened to in the past? Nope. Yet, this is the sort of language I hear from individuals, ALSes, our local communities and Internet users worldwide. Do you understand how frustrating an experience this has been for many of our members? We are now seeing a hint of a change in attitude from the Board and Staff. All we can hope is that, whilst we'll continue our work to the best of our ability, in acting in the best interests of the Internet user, this paradigm shift will continue. > /_In the context of these challenges, how can ALAC add value?_/ > /1) Preliminary remark: ALAC has come a long way in a short time, > especially over the last 2 or 3 years/ > /- its first-ever Summit was held successfully in Mexico City/ > /- ALAC has progressed enormously in formulating and presenting advice > on policy issues, and this progress has been recognized by the Board/ > /- the ALAC Review report recommended, and the Board approved, the > nomination by the At-Large structures of a candidate to be seated on > the Board as a voting member/ Yes, this was an improvement - but I *need* to emphasize that the independent report in the At-Large Review made recommendations for TWO candidates to be seated on the Board as a voting member. The context in which the Board accepted for only ONE candidate to be seated was, in my opinion, deplorable, and I therefore would re-iterate that our goal is to ultimately have TWO candidates seated on the Board. For this, I admit that At-Large needs to prove itself to be able of excellent output, and I think that it is already achieving this today. Since it takes two to tango, for this to happen, the Board and other constituencies will need to shift their view of At-Large and shed their old prejudices - which, might I add, have *no place* in tomorrow's ICANN. > /2) Focus on a few areas where ALAC's contribution adds real value/ > /- currently, ALAC addresses a wide range of subjects. But in some > instances, its advice is just one among many, without any special value/ > /- Would ALAC's contribution be more meaningful if focused on a few > items, meaningful to ICANN and commensurate with the purpose of ALAC > (e.g. a thorough analysis of the the transition from IPv4 to IPv6)?/ ALAC advice does focus on a few items. The process is bottom-up, with all forthcoming policy issues under consideration by At-Large being recorded on an extremely useful Google Spreadsheet document accessible by everyone: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tKrlhCospxnfewY_9R39SuQ&gid=4 This is then reviewed at ALAC meetings, with Carlton, the ALAC ExCom Rapporteur, finding out from the RALOs and ALAC members which policy issues should ALAC comment on. As you will notice, this is shown under the Tab "Public-Comment". The next tab, "PAD", shown the progress on each of the policy advice which ALAC has decided to pursue. Dev Anand Teelucksingh does much of the maintaining of this fantastic tool, along with ICANN At-Large staff. I suggest that you and other newly appointed ALAC members take some time to study the various tables in this document. I certainly did when I wanted to find out: "Where are we now?" As far as concentrating on specific subjects which may fall outside the ICANN consultation process, these may be developed under the At-Large WG table. For example, issues of IPv4-IPv6 transition/cohabitation used to be part of a standalone group but this has not been concentrated into a TECH Technical Issues working group. It is my wish to see those working groups thrive because it is only through having this ready-to-act multiple communities of experts that At-Large could be very responsive. Developing the working groups to their full potential is therefore work in progress and you are very welcome to (1) take part, and indeed (2) propose yourself as the lead on some subjects. > /- The "international dimension" of ICANN is one where ALAC has, more > than others, something to say. What does ALAC think should be the > components of a true internationalization of ICANN?/ It is indeed a long term goal of At-Large to help ICANN continue its internationalization. You will have noticed that the recent ALAC statement about ICANN's Strategic plan emphasizes this, as have every previous document that was released by the ALAC. I refer you to the At-Large Summit statement in 2009, part of it originating from Working Group 2 which made recommendations on page 10 of this document: http://www.atlarge.icann.org/files/atlarge/correspondence-05mar09-en.pdf I believe that ALAC's stance has not changed, but I also believe that ICANN as a whole has not made enough use of the document which emerged from the At Large Summit. With the new CEO, management teams and Board, I wonder whether anyone in ICANN even knows that this valuable work was done? Perhaps now is it time to expand on this, in one of the standing working groups. In fact, one of the recommendations of the Summit was that this work shall continue. > /3) Aggregate and communicate/ > /- on issues which are of prime importance to its world-wide > community, ALAC should strive for shared positions with SOs and other > ACs (e.g. on IDNs), preferably in the form of joint statements/ I am 100% for cross-constituency work. It is my utmost convictions that one of the primary failures of the new gTLD process leading to delays was to address the issues in a silo-like fashion. Board members, I have been told, spent their time in ICANN meetings going from conference room to conference room, being subject to a "groundhog day"-like repeat of the same information, the same questions, the same subjects being discussed, and each constituency and/or advisory committee telling them a different point of view. Why not get the communities to speak to each other and once and for all, come up with some solutions rather than creating headaches for Board members? That's what we want! Unfortunately, reality being what it is, this is not an opinion shared by everybody outside of At-Large. It is my belief that we should not change our stance because our proposals are ready for the future of ICANN NG. (ICANN Next Generation) > /- if and when a response from the Board or Staff is tardy or > incomplete, ALAC should be more assertive in demanding a response, and > making it known/ As far as a lack of response from the Board or staff - we have noticed a marked improvement in this area. Yes, the response in the past has sometimes been dreadful. Personnel changes at Board and Staff level appear to be erasing obstructions. We should monitor future responses carefully and hope that this improvement continues. But at the same time, Jean-Jacques, I think everybody agrees that we do not want to appear as a constantly nagging child. I know ALAC is not, but this ill-minded perception remains. In my personal opinion, it is ICANN as a whole which should now mature culturally. Why does it always have to be the US Dept. of Commerce which should remind ICANN that? > /- if the evolving requirements of the ALAC community come up against > obstacles (e.g. ICANN By-laws), these should be addressed, including > if necessary by proposing a change to the By-laws/ Yes - this is actually going on too! The At Large improvements working teams are working very hard on that, as a follow-up to the At Large Review. https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/At-Large+Improvements+Workspace Work Team A ( https://community.icann.org/display/Improve/At-Large+Improvements+Work+Team… ) has been working on this and you are encouraged to join it. in fact, you are encouraged to join any of the work teams. They are all reaching the last straight, with the finishing line in sight, but a final push is required to conclude most of the work by the San Francisco meeting. > /- the potential of ALAC to analyze and formulate the requirements of > the world community of Internet users, can be enhanced (outreach, > communication)/ > / > / > // > / > / Other Work Teams are also addressing this already. In addition, there has been a great deal of progress with ICANN's relevant department in establishing a communications plan for outreach and inreach. Scott Pinzon (Director of Marketing and Outreach at ICANN) has worked with members of the ALAC on developing material for outreach and inreach and there appears to be very positive sustained support from ICANN to do this. We'll have PodCasts, a Web site, and much content will be created in the next few months. One of the ideas is to have a couple of At Large Structures being able to showcase themselves on the Web sites every month. Another one is to have non-technical commentaries published. The possibilities are endless. Perhaps someone else (Heidi? Scott himself?) could fill-in as to what opportunities are open to us now. This is a very exciting time because we are being given wings to fly. Jean-Jacques, this is meant as a starting point for you and other At-Large members. I welcome comments and input from everyone into this thread. More can be done, but this can only be done through your input and participation. Warmest regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 1

Kieren Blog: A damaged process and a damaged community
by Wolf Ludwig Jan. 27, 2011

Jan. 27, 2011

FYI – an interesting blog post by Kieren McCarthy A damaged process and a damaged community http://kierenmccarthy.com/2011/01/25/a-damaged-process-and-a-damaged-commun… Best, Wolf comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig www.comunica-ch.net Digitale Allmend http://blog.allmend.ch - EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org

1 0

DSSA WG At-Large Representatives and endorsement of additional applicant requested
by ICANN At-Large Staff Jan. 27, 2011

Jan. 27, 2011

Dear All, During the ALAC monthly meeting of 25 January, the ALAC endorsed the following applicants to serve as At-Large representatives on the DSSA WG (in alphabetical order by surname): Eric Brunner-Williams (NARALO) Edmon Chung (APRALO) Mohamed El Bashir (AFRALO) Cheryl Langdon-Orr (APRALO) ALAC Liaison to the DSSA WG Patrick Vande Walle (EURALO) An additional applicant is John R. Levine (NARALO). Olivier Crépin-Leblond, ALAC Chair and co-Chair of the DSSA WG, has requested the ALAC to indicate any opposition to the endorsement of John R. Levine by Monday, 31 January. The SOI of John, as well as those of the At-Large representatives to the DSSA WG, are available at: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/DSSA+WG+-+At-Large+Members. An At-Large representative from the LACRALO region is still being sought. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, ICANN At-Large Staff

2 1

Comments requested on draft ALAC Statement on the Interim Report of the Geographic Review WG
by ICANN At-Large Staff Jan. 27, 2011

Jan. 27, 2011

Dear All, The draft ALAC statement on the Interim Report of the Geographic Review WG is available for your review at: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+-+January+2011+-+Statement+ on+Interim+Report+of+Geographic+Regions+WG. This page is linked to the At-Large Workspace on the Interim Report of the Geo-Regions Review that includes the RALO contributions and the Interim Report: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Interim+Report+of+Geographic+Reg ions+Review+Working+Group+-+Community+Workspace. The RALO contributions will be added to the end of the ALAC Statement. Please add your comments directly to the wiki page using the edit mode or the comments function or through replying to this e-mail. Comments will be accepted through Friday, 28 January at 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene, Gisella Gruber-White, Marilyn Vernon, ICANN At-Large Staff

1 0

IDN Liaison updates
by Edmon Jan. 25, 2011

Jan. 25, 2011

Hi Everyone, As I figure out how to upload the info to the wiki, I thought I would send this quick update to everyone first as the IDN Liaison: 1. Tina Dam, the IDN Project Manager has left ICANN. Through information from staff provided at the JIG working group, we understand that Naela Sarras, who has been with the IANA team, will be overseeing the IDN ccTLD Fast Track. For other parts of the IDN Project, it seems there hasn't been a clear direction yet. 2. Somewhat related to 1. we have asked staff, through our chair to include an ALAC representative on the ongoing ICANN IDN guidelines review process. We have not yet heard back yet (perhaps due to 1. above). 3. Update JIG working group - public comment period for draft final report on single character IDN TLDs complete - currently working on a summary of the comments received and will work on a final report to be submitted to the respective councils (ccNSO and GNSO) - continuing discussion on and working to publish an initial report for IDN Variant management 4. Update on IRD working group - public comment period for interim report to end March 14, 2011 - currently working to do more outreach to relevant constituencies - outreach also to the ALAC and GAC planned 5. Update on IDN ccPDP: no further update since Cartagena. Edmon

1 0

New ICANN Organisational Diagram
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Jan. 20, 2011

Jan. 20, 2011

A new ICANN organisational diagram, following the input from Sébastien Bachollet, the ALAC Selected ICANN Board Director, has now been published on: http://www.icann.org/en/about/ Sébastien kindly liaised with me to check on its accuracy prior to publication. I trust that it reflects the new ICANN Board structure well and thank Sébastien for his work. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0