June 2015 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

URGENT: ALAC Review of Sensitive TLDs and necessary PICs
by Alan Greenberg June 16, 2015

June 16, 2015

As you will all remember, in LA, we issued advice to the Board regarding the highly regulated and sensitive TLD for which the GAC had requested specific safeguards. To date, that advice has neither been accepted or rejected and is still the subject of discussion. I have summarized the overall story and have provided the assessment that I, Evan and Olivier have made of the TLD in question. The board interaction with the ALAC on this issue has been revolutionary (and will also be raised in the ALAC Board meeting in BA). In Buenos Aires, this issue will be on the agenda and there will be a discussion with the GAC which will include this topic. Please review this document and the assessments that have been made, and be prepared to indicate whether you agree with the assessments, or to further discuss them. Alan

7 9

Re: [ALAC] [Alac-sc-outreach] Review Requested: New ALAC Outreach Document - Deadline 8 June
by Ariel Liang June 12, 2015

June 12, 2015

Hi Murray, Thank you very much for the comment. In the latest version (phase 4) <https://community.icann.org/x/nIw0Aw> , the QR code will direct you to the intended webpage. Please note that the QR code is dynamic, which means that it can redirect scanners to other webpages (e.g. the future At-Large website) without changing its appearance. Thank you, Ariel From: Murray Mckercher <murraymckercher(a)gmail.com> Date: Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 11:48 AM To: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org>, "alac-sc-outreach(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <alac-sc-outreach(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Alac-sc-outreach] Review Requested: New ALAC Outreach Document - Deadline 8 June ?I scanned the QR code with my phone and assume it was a mockup? As it did not lead to the At-Large website. Murray 416.803.3183? From: ICANN At-Large Staff Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2015 19:21 To: alac-sc-outreach(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [Alac-sc-outreach] Review Requested: New ALAC Outreach Document - Deadline 8 June Dear All, Based on the feedback received from the Outreach and Engagement Sub-Committee, we are pleased to be able to show you the third revision of the new ALAC outreach document. There are three versions of the trifold that you will be able to select from (see: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Outreach+and+Engagement +Document+Workspace). Could you please review the design and the text and post any final comments on the wiki page by Monday, 8 June at 23:59 UTC? Please indicate whether you prefer style A, B, or C on the wiki by using the comment function. So that the final document can be ready by ICANN 53, this will be the final round of review prior for this print cycle. 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 <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge <https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge <https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge>

1 0

Final Review on New ALAC Outreach Document - Deadline 14 June
by ICANN At-Large Staff June 12, 2015

June 12, 2015

Dear All, Thank you for your comments on the previous versions of the new ALAC outreach document. Based on your comments, we are happy to show you the fourth, and final, version of the ALAC outreach document (see: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Outreach+and+Engagemen…) In order to have the printed documents available at ICANN 53, we will need to send them to the printer on Monday, 15 June. Please could you review the fourth version and comment only if you see an major errors. Please note your comments on the wiki page by Sunday, 14 June at 23:59 UTC. 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<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0

ACTION: CWG-Stewardship Response for Chartering Organization Consideration and Approval
by Alan Greenberg June 11, 2015

June 11, 2015

Attached is the Final Proposal of the CWG on IANA Stewardship Transition. As a Chartering Organization, the ALAC is being requested to approve or otherwise comment on the Proposal no later than Thursday, 25 June 2015. I ask that At-Large Staff create an At-Large Policy Development wiki page for this report where comments can be submitted. I have reviewed the report against the comments made by the ALAC on the draft proposal. In my mind, this Proposal warrants serious consideration by the ALAC, and I suspect ratification. Our largest problem with the Draft Proposal was that the GNSO and ccNSO were the bodies that both had to approve a CSC request to initiate a Special IANA Review (SIFR). We had a number of reasons, but the largest was that the GNSO was not fully representative of the non-ccTLD world. Specifically, the ALAC, the GAC, the SSAC, the RSSAC and others who have an interest in the outcome are not members of the GNSO. The final proposal does not alter the formal process, but now does require that the GNSO initiate meaningful consultation with other AC/SOs. This is not 100% satisfactory, but given that: - it is highly unlikely that this will ever happen; - if the ccNSO and gNSO *BOTH* think there is a problem, there likely *IS* a problem; - we would be represented on the SIFR; I think that this is a reasonable compromise. It does simplify things in that we are not invoking yet another body in the decision, although the GNSO does have some thinking to do about how it would make such a decision if this ever happens. The other point we raised was that we (and other bodies with a single IFR representative) should be allowed alternates to ensure that we can always participate fully. Given that the AoC reviews have been pretty flexible on this, I do not think that the omission at this stage is a show stopper. At the time of the closure, we had not come to closure on the composition of the PTI Board. We were definite in it not being controlled by registries. The proposal calls for two ICANN employees who have specific responsibilities in the area now to sit on the Board, the Senior IANA administrator, and two independent Directors named by the NomCom or a similar body. This Board is ultimately controlled by ICANN, so it does not need accountability measures of its own, three of the members are people who will implicitly have skills needed to resolve problems should they arise, and there is a component of external and community input. I find this quite acceptable. Please take the time to review the report, and I look forward to your wiki comments and discussion in Buenos Aires. Alan At 11/06/2015 10:53 AM, Grace Abuhamad wrote: >Sent on behalf of CWG-Stewardship Chairs by support staff. > >To: CWG-Stewardship Chartering SOs and ACs > >The ALAC, ccNSO, GAC, GNSO, and SSAC > > > >Dear SO and AC Chairs, > >CWG-Stewardship proposed response to the ICG RFP the IANA >Stewardship Transition > >The Cross Community Working Group on Naming Related Functions >(CWG-Stewardship) is pleased to provide its Chartering Organizations >with its proposed response to the IANA Stewardship Transition >Coordination Group (ICG) Request for Proposals on the IANA >Stewardship Transition for your consideration and approval as per its Charter. > >The response is the result of extensive work by the CWG's 19 >members, 133 participants and a team of highly qualified legal >advisors over the past year, which included over 100 calls or >meetings, 2 public consultations and more than 4,000 email messages. >It represents a carefully crafted balance between key requirements, >specific legal advice, and significant compromises by all who >participated and includes diligent attention to the input received >through the Public Comment proceedings. The final proposal has >received the consensus support of the CWG-Stewardship with no >objections or minority statements recorded for Chartering >Organization consideration. > >As noted in the CWG-Stewardship proposal itself, the proposal is >significantly dependent and expressly conditioned on the >implementation of ICANN-level accountability mechanisms proposed by >the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability >(CCWG-Accountability). The co-chairs of the CWG-Stewardship and the >CCWG-Accountability have coordinated their efforts and the >CWG-Stewardship is confident that the CCWG-Accountability >recommendations, if implemented as expected, will meet the >requirements that the CWG-Stewardship has previously communicated to >the CCWG. If any element of these ICANN level accountability >mechanisms is not implemented as contemplated by the CWG-Stewardship >proposal, this proposal will require revision. > >We also note that there are certain implementation elements that >will require further dialogue in the near future, including with the >other operational communities, and these have been marked as such in >the final proposal. Two specific issues are particularly important >to highlight. One is the finalization of the service level >expectations (SLEs), where the proposal includes a set of agreed >principles between the CWG and IANA, but these remain to be >finalized in the form of a mutually agreed set of SLEs. A detailed >plan for this finalisation is being worked on and it is our view >that this detail, whilst vitally important, does not impact on the >substance of the proposal put to you for approval. The second issue >entails the location of intellectual property rights and this needs >further discussion with the other respondents to the ICG RFP and ICANN. >As per the CWG-Stewardship's Charter we now seek your approval to >submit this final proposal to the ICG and ask you to consider this >approval in accordance with your respective SO or AC rules and >procedures by 25 June 2015 to meet the overall timing requirements >which would allow the transition to proceed, noting that final >approval is conditional on the approval of the CCWG-Accountability >Work Stream 1 recommendations. > >We will make ourselves, together with or other key contributors, >available to you at the ICANN 53 meeting in Buenos Aires in order to >answer any questions you may have and to explain any details of the >proposal. For your information, further background documents as well >as the slides, recordings and transcripts of recent webinars explain >the details of the final proposal are available here: ><https://community.icann.org/x/sJc0Aw>https://community.icann.org/x/sJc0Aw. > >Should you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact us. > > >Lise Fuhr & Jonathan Robinson >Co-Chairs, CWG-Stewardship > > >

2 1

Fwd: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Public Comment Review Tool
by Alan Greenberg June 11, 2015

June 11, 2015

FYI. >To: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org>, >"cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org" <cwg-stewardship(a)icann.org> >From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Public Comment Review Tool > >I have reviewed the replies to the ALAC submission and offer three comments. > >The first is a general one. Although I am not sure how we could have >done otherwise given the volume of comments and the time-frame in >which the CWG had to review them, I find many of the answers lack >specificity and if I an my colleagues had not been on the calls to >argue the issues when they were discussed, I am not sure we would >have been very happy with how the answers were formulated. My next >point is one such example. > >In 200, the ALAC requested that at least for IFR members where where >is only one person per represented group, that Alternates be >formally allowed. The reply was that it would be considered by the >CWG in its further deliberations. To the best of my knowledge, this >was not considered (ie neither accepted nor rejected) and the >Proposal was unaltered. > >In 228, The ALAC raised the issue of the SIFR being triggered by a >vote of the ccNSO and GNSO. This was ultimately not changed >(although words were added regarding consultation). However the >reply says that the GNOS was replaced by the RySG, something that >simply did not happen. This needs to be corrected. But I am troubled >that there may be other similar examples where the CWG reply does >not mesh with what is in the final proposal. > >Alan > >At 11/06/2015 11:11 AM, Grace Abuhamad wrote: > >>Dear all, >> >>Attached is the updated Public Comment Review Tool. I have included >>a redline and a clean version. The document is now 300-pages, so >>quite lengthy to review. In the interest of time, to make sure >>those who submitted comments can see how the CWG addressed their >>submissions, we will post this Review Tool to the Wiki and Public >>Comment page. Should there be a need for further updates, we can >>update the documents as requested. >> >>The Wiki page is here: >><https://community.icann.org/x/x5o0Aw>https://community.icann.org/x/x5o0Aw. >> >>Best, >>Grace

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [ALAC-Announce] IMPORTANT - Thursday 11 June - WEBINARS: Briefing on Final CWG-Stewardship Proposal
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond June 10, 2015

June 10, 2015

Hello all, these two Webinars which will cover the same material are meant to help you through the proposal of the Names Community. This is particularly important for the ALAC as the next step is for the ICANN Supporting Organisations and Advisory Committees, ALAC included, to ratify this proposal. This is a smart way to catch up if you haven't been paying attention or have become confused or dropped off. :-) Kindest regards, Olivier On 10/06/2015 16:22, ICANN At-Large Staff wrote: > > Webinar Details & How to Attend > > The webinars will be run in an Adobe Connect room > <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/si-webinar/>. If you are interested in > attending the webinar and would like to receive dial-in details, please > send an email to brenda.brewer(a)icann.org > <mailto:brenda.brewer@icann.org> and indicate: > > * The time at which you would like to attend the webinar; and > * Your language request (if needed). Live interpretation services are > available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Portuguese, Spanish, and Russian. > > Please note that the webinars will be recorded and transcribed. > Subsequently the transcripts will be posted on the CWG-Stewardship > Wiki here > <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778352>. > > > > > ICANN News Alert > ICANN <http://www.icann.org/> > > > News Alert > > https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-06-03-en > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > WEBINAR: Briefing on Final CWG-Stewardship Proposal > > 3 June 2015 > > Following Public Comment periods in December 2014 and April/May 2015, > the Cross Community Working Group to Develop an IANA Stewardship > Transition Proposal for Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) has > finalized its proposal and delivered it to SO/AC chartering > organizations for approval. Chartering organizations will deliberate > during the ICANN53 meeting in Buenos Aires, with expected delivery of > the proposal to the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) > by 25 June 2015. > > In order to brief the community on the contents of the final proposal, > the CWG-Stewardship Chairs will host two identical briefing webinars on > 11 June at different times to facilitate participation across time > zones. The webinars will take place on: > > * *11 June from 06:00 – 07:30 UTC *(time zone converter here > <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+We…>) > > * *11 June from 13:00 – 14:30 UTC *(time zone converter here > <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CWG-Stewardship+We…>) > > > Webinars will be conducted in English. Live interpretation services are > available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Portuguese, Spanish, and Russian. > *Interpretation services will be provided /by advance request only/, so > please be sure to request language services when submitting an RSVP > (details below).* Language requests must be received by 9 June in order > to adequately resource the webinars. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Webinar Details & How to Attend > > The webinars will be run in an Adobe Connect room > <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/si-webinar/>. If you are interested in > attending the webinar and would like to receive dial-in details, please > send an email to brenda.brewer(a)icann.org > <mailto:brenda.brewer@icann.org> and indicate: > > * The time at which you would like to attend the webinar; and > * Your language request (if needed). Live interpretation services are > available in Arabic, Chinese, French, Portuguese, Spanish, and Russian. > > Please note that the webinars will be recorded and transcribed. > Subsequently the transcripts will be posted on the CWG-Stewardship Wiki > here <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778352>. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Further information > > For further information about the CWG-Stewardship's work, please see > https://community.icann.org/x/37fhAg. > > For further information about the ICG and the IANA Stewardship > Transition, please see https://www.icann.org/stewardship > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >

1 0

CCWG statement
by Alan Greenberg June 5, 2015

June 5, 2015

The statement was slightly modified today (see Wiki for details) and has been resubmitted. Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [IANA-issues] CCWG Proposal Comment - **REVISED**
by Alan Greenberg June 5, 2015

June 5, 2015

Thanks Jordan. Alan At 05/06/2015 02:00 AM, Jordan Carter wrote: >hi all > >I'd just like to say this is a well thought out and excellent >contribution to the CCWG's deliberations - thank you! > >best >Jordan > >On 5 June 2015 at 12:15, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >Olivier and I have reviewed the draft statement on the CCWG Proposal >- word by word. > >We have made a significant number of edits which substantially >improves its readability and hopefully it acceptability to the >community. Both of us believe that to be the case. > >And hopefully I have not introduced any additional typos. > >The Wiki has been updated - ><https://community.icann.org/x/koU0Aw>https://community.icann.org/x/koU0Aw, >and both redline and clean versions are attached here for your convenience. > >Alan >_______________________________________________ >Iana-issues mailing list ><mailto:Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org>Iana-issues(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iana-issues > > > > >-- >Jordan Carter > >Chief Executive >InternetNZ > >04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob) ><mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>jordan(a)internetnz.net.nz >Skype: jordancarter > >A better world through a better Internet

1 0

CCWG Proposal Comment - **REVISED**
by Alan Greenberg June 5, 2015

June 5, 2015

Olivier and I have reviewed the draft statement on the CCWG Proposal - word by word. We have made a significant number of edits which substantially improves its readability and hopefully it acceptability to the community. Both of us believe that to be the case. And hopefully I have not introduced any additional typos. The Wiki has been updated - https://community.icann.org/x/koU0Aw, and both redline and clean versions are attached here for your convenience. Alan

1 0

Review Requested: New ALAC Outreach Document - Deadline 8 June
by ICANN At-Large Staff June 4, 2015

June 4, 2015

Dear All, Based on the feedback received from the Outreach and Engagement Sub-Committee, we are pleased to be able to show you the third revision of the new ALAC outreach document. There are three versions of the trifold that you will be able to select from (see: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Outreach+and+Engagemen…) Could you please review the design and the text and post any final comments on the wiki page by Monday, 8 June at 23:59 UTC? Please indicate whether you prefer style A, B, or C on the wiki by using the comment function. So that the final document can be ready by ICANN 53, this will be the final round of review prior for this print cycle. 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<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge>

1 0