May 2015 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

John Kerry Calls For The Internet To Be Placed Under The Authority Of The United Nations
by Ali Almeshal May 22, 2015

May 22, 2015

John Kerry Calls For The Internet To Be Placed Under The Authority Of The United Nations http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=33147 Sent from my iPhone

6 6

Fadi Chehade resigns effective March 2016
by Alan Greenberg May 21, 2015

May 21, 2015

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-05-21-en

3 3

Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] New Public Comment: Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim May 20, 2015

May 20, 2015

Dear ALAC & RALO Chairs, I know that it is a busy time, but please do provide comments on whether the proposed slower pace of At-Large Review 2 is agreeable or if further adjustments are needed to ensure sufficient time and capacity for the At-Large community to do a meaningful review towards enhancing At-Large effectiveness and relevance. Comments on other aspects of ICANN reviews as raised in the call for Public Comments would also be appreciated. Best regards, Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date: May 20, 2015 12:38 AM Subject: [ALAC-Announce] New Public Comment: Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews To: "alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" < alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: Dear All, Kindly note that the At-Large Workspace for this new public comment period has been created: Proposed Schedule and Process/Operational Improvements for AoC and Organizational Reviews <https://community.icann.org/x/-440Aw>. 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 Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge <https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge> _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org

2 1

URGENT: Revised CWG IANA Comment
by Alan Greenberg May 20, 2015

May 20, 2015

The revised version has been posted incorporating changes suggested. Both a redline and clean version are available at https://community.icann.org/x/XConAw. The final version must be submitted by 23:59 UTC on Wednesday, so please submit any comments as soon as possible. The submission will undergo ALAC ratification following submission. Alan

1 0

CWG IANA Transition Proposal Comment
by Alan Greenberg May 20, 2015

May 20, 2015

The first draft of the proposed comment on the CWG report has been posted. The full set of community comments and the draft can be found at https://community.icann.org/x/XConAw. The PDF version of the draft comment is also attached to this e-mail. The deadline for submission is tomorrow, Wednesday, 20 May, and the ALAC will be ratifying the submission after-the-fact. If you have not yet looked at the draft comment, please do, as there is little time left to provide feedback. Alan

2 3

URGENT: Topics for discussion with the Board in Buenos Aires
by Alan Greenberg May 13, 2015

May 13, 2015

Please see https://community.icann.org/x/jAsnAw and provide comments on: - what you think of these topics? - whether there is anything else we could add? - how many should we set (set two topics, or one main one and a fall-back if we have extra time?) - who should be representing the ALAC/At-Large? We will have about 6 seats at the table? The last question can be deferred, but we have a nominal deadline of the April 15th to set topics. Alan

4 4

I* Meeting - Views and Blogs
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim May 6, 2015

May 6, 2015

Dear ALAC, Sharing some links carrying views of I* leaders regarding the recent I* meeting, which (among other things) touched on the IANA Stewardship Transition: ISOC https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/public-policy/2015/05/thoughts-london-… IETF http://www.ietf.org/blog/2015/05/internet-organisations-coordination-meetin… NRO https://www.nro.net/news/nro-statement-on-the-internet-coordination-meeting… APNIC https://blog.apnic.net/2015/05/05/i-wrap-from-the-london-meeting/ ICANN [out soon] Best regards, Rinalia

2 1

Fwd: [IANA-issues] Comments for 2nd Draft Proposal of the Cross Community Working Group IANA Stewardship
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 2, 2015

May 2, 2015

Dear all, since we are now reaching ALAC commenting - please be so kind to take note of the message below and spend time to read and comment. The ALAC has conducted a Webinar on the Topic. The slide deck plus and full recording and transcripts of the Webinar in French, Spanish and English can be found on https://community.icann.org/x/iConAw This is arguably one of the, if not the most important policy process of the year - a process that will greatly affect end users. If you have any question, please do not hesitate to ask them. Now's the time. Kindest regards, Olivier -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [IANA-issues] Comments for 2nd Draft Proposal of the Cross Community Working Group IANA Stewardship Date: Sat, 02 May 2015 11:02:40 +0200 From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> To: iana-issues(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <iana-issues(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Dear all, the public comment period is closing in merely 18 days. As mentioned on our Webinars and on the ALAC monthly call, please be so kind to take some time over the week-end to read all pertaining documentation. https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52898396 We are at the stage of identifying issues which the ALAC should comment about. One such issue is that of Jurisdiction. I have heard several concerns in this part of the world that no part of the proposal contains any aspect of globalisation, with the Post Transition IANA (PTI) proposed to be located in the United States - and little work having been done by the CWG on looking for alternative jurisdictions. Please be so kind to find Jean-Jacques' proposal, which he makes as a member of the At-Large IANA Issues Working Group. On 26/04/2015 17:24, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote: > > IMHO, the idea I put forward has several crucial elements: > - In order to keep alive the notion of a more global Internet, one should consider the possibility of such oversight bodies being endowed, some day, with some sort of legal status. PRF and CSC will no doubt begin as lightweight, non-legal entities, but there may come a time when a different structure may become desirable and possible: excluding an international dimension right from the start would seem short-sighted. > - It's not about having a jurisdiction "in Europe", but rather a jurisdiction outside of, and additional to, the USA. The reason I mentioned Geneva is because in its recommendations, the papar by ICANN PSC (President's Strategy Committee), "Improving Institutional Confidence", studied in detail various locations in all 5 geographic zones for a potential "additional jurisdiction" (additional to USA), and Geneva came out as (by far) the most suitable location for a thing like ICANN. > - ICANN and PTI would remain in the US jurisdiction. What I was suggesting was for PRF and CSC to be registered in a different, additional jurisdiction. This would not have any impact on the operations of ICANN and PTI. > - There is a sociological reality: status quo almost always favours tradition, and the beneficiaries of entitlement. In this case, keeping PRF in the single US jurisdiction, can of course be supported in terms of operational simplicity, but the Internet community from outside the USA cannot ignore that this is not the surest way to evolve towards a more global Internet or Internet governance system. > > I remain at your disposal for any clarification. > > Best regards, > Jean-Jacques. > Please comment! Olivier _______________________________________________ Iana-issues mailing list Iana-issues(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iana-issues

1 0

Statement on the FY16 Budget regarding Policy Staff
by Alan Greenberg May 2, 2015

May 2, 2015

During the ALAC call yesterday, Olivier suggested that the ALAC make a focused comment on the FY16 budget pointing out that there was no apparent planned increase in Policy Staff (serving among others, At-large and the GNSO), despite what seems to be an increasing need for such staff driven by ramping up workloads on these communities. We received approval to draft such a statement and to submit it on behalf of the ALAC prior to the close of comments at 23:59 today (01 May 2015). Olivier drafted what I thought was a perfect statement which was also supported by several other ALT members. Accordingly I instructed Staff to post it. The formal message can be found at http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-op-budget-fy16-18mar15/msg00008.html and the contents of the statement are reproduced below for your convenience. I thank Olivier for his quick and skillful work on this. Alan ========================== The ALAC thanks the ICANN Finance Department for the significant improvements in the establishment of the proposed budget, specifically when it comes to engaging ICANN Communities at an early stage. The ALAC is satisfied with the Budget proposal as a whole, but has one specific item of concern, related to the evolution of support for ICANN Policy Development. Both the GNSO and the ALACs activities are essentially funded under the ICANN Policy budget. Policy Development is a Core activity at ICANN. It is this Multistakeholder Policy Development that differentiates ICANN from any other organisation. The overall budget allocated to Policy Development and supporting the SO/ACs, including constituency travel support, is about 11.4 million US Dollars a figure derived from the document supplied. Although it is understood that this might not strictly be the total budget for SO/AC Policy Support, this figure constitutes the bulk of its budget. Yet, this is a comparably small figure compared to the overall ICANN Budget expense for the year of 118.6 million US Dollars (113 million US Dollar baseline excluding initiatives) surprisingly less than 10% of total budget for a Core Activity and Key differentiation factor. The ALAC has significant concerns about the growth of this budget which it believes to be too low. This concern translates directly to concerns about staffing levels. Data in the table on page 9 of the Draft FY16 Budget by Portfolio and Project (1.1 Resource Allocation) indicates that in the coming financial year 27 FTEs will support policy development, or around 8% of total FTEs. The budget indicates that 16 new staff hires are expected for FY16, yet, although there appears to be a rise of 1.7 FTE in Policy Support, none of the hires seem to be in Policy Support. Both the GNSO and the ALAC have not seen, nor are they expecting a reduction in their activities. Quite the contrary, the ALAC forecasts a number of new PDPs, review processes, as well as a potential next round of gTLDs which will only serve to increase the demand on already busy Staff. Its Community of At-Large Structures will soon reach the 200 mark translating to a need for increased support of its increased activity. The ALAC is therefore concerned that this need to increase FTEs supporting Policy both in the GNSO and in the ALAC is not currently reflected in the budget and may lead to both Staff overwork and Community frustration, thus leading to a reduction in Community involvement that risks making long term evolution of the Multistakeholder model unsustainable.

1 0