December 2014 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Draft Statement on IANA Stewardship CWG Proposal
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 12, 2014

Dec. 12, 2014

The draft statement is now up - https://community.icann.org/x/YoEHAw. It is a significant revision of the version presented at the Webinar on Wednesday. There are 5 versions posted. - 10 December 2014 Webinar version (PDF) - Redline compared to Webinar version (PDF) - Clean copy (PDF) - Clean copy (DOCX) - Wiki format As discussed on the Webinar and the last Ad Hoc IANA Issues call, we really need to get this posted on the Public Comment in time to allow other groups to see it and hopefully support it. Accordingly, I am opening this for comments and suggestions until 22:00 UTC on Monday. It will then be revised and posted to the PC AS A DRAFT as soon as practical. PLEASE TRY TO GET IN ANY SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS BEFORE THE DEADLINE. Once posted, we can still refine it and the formally approve in the following week before the comment period closes on 22 December.

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Next round in the battle of letters regarding PICs
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 11, 2014

Dec. 11, 2014

Well, there is no way to know if Thomas would have sent his letter reminding the Board of unanswered GAC advice without our action, but in the absence of knowledge, we can take credit. ;-) On the Board, I think that you are being a bit unfair. They deserve all the knocks for not doing things properly when the issues first arose, and for allowing critical contracts to be signed creating the potentially uneven playing field. However, now that we are where we are, it is not just an issue of who do you love more. They have placed themselves in a VERY difficult position (and as I said I have little sympathy), but if I was in a position to "fix" things, I am not at all sure exactly how I would go about doing that. I too hope to be pleasantly surprised, but if I am, it will be because they have worked there way through a complex maze. Alan At 10/12/2014 11:35 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >I would like to think that the ALAC motion taken in LA has been the >catalyst for this flurry of activity on an issue so many in ICANN >thought (hoped?) was dead. > >The letters we have seen lately on the Public Interest Commitments >issue simply re-enforce what we saw in the Public Comment Process on >it -- it's the domain industry versus the rest of the world. > >We now have what is actually a moment of unusual clarity at ICANN. >The lines have rarely been drawn this sharply, on a matter that at >its core directly concerns public trust in the domain name system. > >At a time when it is under more global scrutiny than ever, the ICANN >Board is now forced to reveal its true loyalties between the public >interest (in this case, a coalition of governments, registrants and >end users) and the industry it is supposed to be regulating. > >In its decision, ICANN will tell the world -- which is already >watching its every move with scepticism -- to whom it is ultimately >accountable, and whether the term "multistakeholder" actually means something. > >I await the Board's response. I hope to be surprised but do not expect to be. > >- Evan > > >On 10 December 2014 at 21:51, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: ><https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gtld-rysg-to-crocker-i…>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gtld-rysg-to-crocker-i… > >Alan > >

1 0

Next round in the battle of letters regarding PICs
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 11, 2014

Dec. 11, 2014

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gtld-rysg-to-crocker-i… Alan

2 1

Re: [ALAC] Nominating Committee ALAC Requirements Document
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 11, 2014

Dec. 11, 2014

Please find attached a clean version as well as a redline version of the document I have submitted to the NomCom. following the comments from several ALAC members, I have changed the time estimate from 25 to 25-30 and made it clear that some ALAC members spend more time than that. I have also made it clear in the first section that the three ICANN meetings are over and above that (it was already clear in the 2nd section). Alan At 08/12/2014 12:56 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >The Nominating Committee has a document describing what the ALAC >does and the requirements and expectations for people applying for >LAC positions. This year the NomCom will be selecting ALAC Members >for Africa, Latin America / Caribbean Islands and Asia/Australia/Pacific). > >The document has not been revised since 2010, and I think it >important that we update it. I should have attended to this earlier, >but unfortunately the other issues we are working on seem to have >taken precedence. > >So we are now VERY late. Attached is the current version that has >been used 2010-2014 and one I have edited for use this coming year. > >I would appreciate all ALAC members (or past ALAC members) quickly >looking at this and letting me know what I have omitted or got wrong. > >In particular I would appreciate your experience regarding how many >hours per month we should realistically say is expected. We used to >have 20-26 and I changes that to the simpler 25. My rationale is: >- Monthly ALAC call: 2 >- e-mail: 30 minutes per day = 15 >- participation in various WG, drafting, webinars: 2 hours per week = 8 > >Even if you don't make any other changes, please comment on what >YOUR experience is regarding the number of weeks for a normal >(non-ALT, non-Liaison) ALAC Member. > >Sorry for the rush, but I need to get this sent in by mid-week, so >please don't put this off. > >Alan

1 0

LAC NOMCOMM
by Vanda Scartezini Dec. 10, 2014

Dec. 10, 2014

I understand time consumer is not really small. I am now dedicating 1 to 2 hours at least by day to read ICANN materials, groups materials and ALAC specific issues and still did not assumed any group coordination! and when I do I believe this will add at least 2 more hours a week minimum. Traveling time normally is long and for the majority at ""employee age"² it is not easy get authorisation to travel. Minimum 30-50 hours /month Time, from NOMCOMM point of view, is a good contributor to reduced number of candidates for ACs and SOs. Anyway the number/ quality of candidates in our region is growing and we have had good opportunities to choose good candidates. Another relevant problem from this region still languages, of course interpretation solves reasonable part of this problem but still people need to communicate in English to really follow what is going on on conversations, other constituencies, corridor talk etc. Young people has much better languages skills but has job time constrains, and vice-e-versa. My two cents During the NOMCOM period ( I have been there for 4 years) NEW good candidate is not easy to outreach. I really talked with several groups, went to LACNIC/ LACNOG regional meetings, IPv6, general NGOs meetings, lawyers and engineers association meetings , talked during several meetings I organised for e-commerce around Mercosur area, and we got good candidates, not so many, but good ones. So Outreach works nbut really demand a lot of work from NOMCOM members. But they are there to do such task. What we need is a person with interest in this community,that understand the region behaviour, has experience working with communities by themselves in the region, with focus on Internet issues, with or without focus on ICANNN, but working for the users: promoting connection, access, content all kinds dedicated to the Internet users, ICT consumers¹ rights etc.etc. Knowledge of Internet environmental is essential in my opinion or you can not convince people if you do not know very well what are you talking about to respond tricky questions. All the best Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos.

4 3

ICANN IANA Transition Outreach meeting in Berlin
by sandra hoferichter Dec. 10, 2014

Dec. 10, 2014

Dear all, I would just like to inform you that Jimmy Schulz and I did attend an outreach meeting yesterday (9.12.) discussing the IANA transition with the German community. (see here the agenda in German: https://numbers.eco.de/2014/allgemein/eco-zukunftsdialog-ii-neuausrichtung-d er-internetverwaltung.html ) The event was very well attended and the discussion lively. If not already the case I would encourage to organise such events in other regions as well and also recommend At-Large members to participate. From ICANN Jean Jacques (VP Europe) participated. Unfortunately the announcement was not spread on any At-Large lists in advance, I could imagine there would have been a greater interest from the At-Large Community. I found out about this event on a short notice only. We should better cooperate here. Best Sandra

2 1

RESEND: Category 1 gTLDs - two interesting letters
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 10, 2014

Dec. 10, 2014

{with attachments!] Attached please find a letter from the Business Constituency to the Board relating to Category 1 TLDs and the Advice to the Board that we issued in Los Angeles, and a letter from Thomas Schneider, Chair of the GAC to the Board on a number of issues including Category 1 TLDs. It will be harder for the NGPC to take no action. I am told that the next meeting of the NGPC is on Thursday. Alan

1 0

Internauta Colombia ALS application
by staff＠atlarge.icann.org Dec. 10, 2014

Dec. 10, 2014

> Dear Francisco, > > We apologize for taking so long to respond to your Internauta > Colombia application. > > The ICANN At-Large Staff has been asked to inform you that the > ICANN's At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) has carefully considered > your application for At-Large Structure (ALS) status and has decided > by formal vote that your organization does not meet the requirements > for certification. For your reference, the process as a whole may be > found at http://tinyurl.com/ALAC-RoP-AdjDoc4-2013-07. > > This decision is based upon several factors, including the > communication from the members of the Latin American and Caribbean > Islands Regional At-Large Organization (LACRALO) who have themselves > reviewed your application and associated information. Regional advice > is a crucial part of the certification process. Unfortunately LACRALO > could not come to an agreement regarding whether to recommend > certification of your organization or not. A summary of the issues > considered by LACRALO is attached. > > A vote of the ALAC was taken to decide on whether to certify your > organization with the following result: > Votes to certify: 4 > Votes to not certify: 6 > Abstentions: 3 > > With 13 out of 15 ALAC Members casting ballots, the vote was quorum > was met. Certification requires a majority of the votes cast, and > with 4 out of 13 votes supporting certification, Internauta Colombia > was not certified as an ALS. > > If you believe that your application should be reconsidered, the > following options are available to you: > > 1. Resubmit a Modified Application. > Based on the summary of issues considered by LACRALO, you can attempt > to address the reasons why some LACRALO members did not recommend > that your organization be certified. It is suggested that you do this > in consultation with the LACRALO Leadership who are copied on this > e-mail. Once these issues are addressed, you can re-submit your application. > > 2. Request that the ALAC Reconsider its Decision > If you believe that the ALAC erred in its decision, you may ask the > ALAC to reconsider the decision. When requesting ALAC > reconsideration, please provide details of why you believe the > decision is not correct in as much detail as you believe will be > useful, and transmit this by email, along with any supplementary > documentation you believe relevant, to staff(a)atlarge.icann.org . The > staff will acknowledge receipt and transmit the information to the ALAC. > > 3. Contact the ICANN Ombudsman > ICANN has established the Office of the Ombudsman to evaluate and > where possible resolve complaints about unfair or inappropriate > treatment by ICANN. For more information about ICANN's Ombudsman, > please https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ombudsman-2012-02-25-es. > You may contact the Ombudsman at ombudsman(a)icann.org or > chris.lahatte(a)icann.org or on the Complaint Page by completing the > form at https://omb.icann.org/portal/complaint.php. > > 4. Requests for Reconsideration. > Under ICANN Bylaws ARTICLE XI, Section 2.4-i(7) a decision not to > accredit an ALS is subject to review according to procedures > established by the ICANN Board. As described in the ALAC's > Certification Process for At-Large Structures (paragraph 6), ALAC > decisions to certify or de-certify an ALS are subject to review > according to the procedures as provided by the Bylaws of ICANN, > Article IV, Section 2 regarding Reconsideration Requests. A > suggested form for submitting a Reconsideration Request is available > at: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/request-form-11apr13-en.doc. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7-B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi%20Ullr ich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20Gisella%20Gru ber,%20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy%20Sta ff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge <https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge <https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge>

2 1

Category 1 gTLDs - two interesting letters
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 10, 2014

Dec. 10, 2014

Attached please find a letter from the Business Constituency to the Board relating to Category 1 TLDs and the Advice to the Board that we issued in Los Angeles, and a letter from Thomas Schneider, Chair of the GAC to the Board on a number of issues including Category 1 TLDs. It will be harder for the NGPC to take no action. I am told that the next meeting of the NGPC is on Thursday. Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Drafting Team to fix ALAC ALS certification process
by Vanda Scartezini Dec. 8, 2014

Dec. 8, 2014

Excellent name Tijani. We have worked together at NonComm and she is really good and hard worker. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. On 12/6/14, 19:42, "Tijani BEN JEMAA" <tijani.benjemaa(a)planet.tn> wrote: >Dear Alan, > > > >I nominate Fatimata Seye Sylla to be part of this drafting team. > > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >------ > >Tijani BEN JEMAA > >Executive Director > >Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) > >Phone: + 216 41 649 605 > >Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 > >Fax: + 216 70 853 376 > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >------ > > > > > > > >-----Message d'origine----- >De : alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg >Envoyé : dimanche 30 novembre 2014 23:23 >À : ALAC >Objet : [ALAC] Drafting Team to fix ALAC ALS certification process > > > >As discussed on the ALAC call last week, I am calling for a few > >volunteers to form the ALS Certification Process Drafting team to > >revise the ALS certification process as documented in > >http://tinyurl.com/ALAC-RoP-AdjDoc4-2013-07, under the section > >"Certification process for At-Large Structures (ALS)", steps 3-6. > > > >Note that this is NOT the larger review of ALS criteria and > >expectations, but simply a process to ensure that our rules are > >practical, make sense, and are actually followed. > > > >Members need not be current ALAC Members or RALO leadership, but > >should be very familiar with the processes currently being followed. > > > >Please reply to this list, or directly to me copying Staff. > > > >Alan > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ALAC mailing list > >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >ALAC Working Wiki: >https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A >LAC) > > > > > _____ > > > <http://www.avast.com/> Image supprimée par l'expéditeur. > >Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant >parce que la protection Antivirus avast! <http://www.avast.com/> est >active. > > > > > >--- >Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant >parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. >http://www.avast.com >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: >https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A >LAC)

1 0