April 2016 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Almost final Multi-Year GA/Summit Proposal
by Alan Greenberg May 1, 2016

May 1, 2016

Attached please fine the final proposal, subject to final clean-up editing (and inclusion of the missing URL on the last page). Please forward any critical errors to me and Heidi. Note that this paper must be submitted to the Budget Public Comment prior to 23:59 UTC on Saturday, 30 April. Alan

7 6

GA/Summit Proposal submitted
by Alan Greenberg April 30, 2016

April 30, 2016

The Proposal for Multi-Year Planning for At-Large GAs and Summits has been submitted. A copy is attached. Thank you all for your input, comments, suggestions and edits. Particular thanks and gratitude to Olivier for developing the idea in the first place, and doing the really hard part of drafting the earlier versions which allowed me to do the final adjustments. And thanks to Dev for the time-line graphic which greatly simplified the earlier tables. Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Almost final Multi-Year GA/Summit Proposal
by Alan Greenberg April 30, 2016

April 30, 2016

You were heard before, but I was really at a loss to know how to reduce the size that much and still make the arguments that I (and others) believe are needed to counter the negative perceptions that could lead to rejection. And give that the document must be submitted within a few hours, there is really no way for someone else to take over the task and get ALAC buy-in on the result. Alan At 30/04/2016 05:02 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote: >Hi all > >I've said it before but not with such specificity. My recommendations: > >1. Incorporate the key ideas in the "Proposal" section into the >Executive Summary > >2. Merge the "Background" and the "importance of Face to Face" >meetings into a couple of paragraphs > >3. Shorten the bullet pointed items in the "MultiYear Planning >section" to key ideas only, present them after a short introduction > >4. End with the conclusion and next steps, as is :) > >3 pages MAX. (plus your graphic and annexes). At the moment we are >competing with the bylaws for quantity. > >Maureen > > > >On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >Attached please fine the final proposal, subject to final clean-up >editing (and inclusion of the missing URL on the last page). > >Please forward any critical errors to me and Heidi. > >Note that this paper must be submitted to the Budget Public Comment >prior to 23:59 UTC on Saturday, 30 April. > >Alan > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… >

2 1

Re: [ALAC] Almost final Multi-Year GA/Summit Proposal
by Alan Greenberg April 30, 2016

April 30, 2016

At 30/04/2016 10:43 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: >Thanks for the share, I recall that it was suggested to link this to >the fact that this is also in sync with ICANN multi-year planning >initiative; was that the intent for the last sentence in the >executive summary? It may be good to make it more explicit than that. The last sentence in the Executive Summary is a(very) vague reference to this. The specific on is in the last paragraph of section 5 which points to the exact section in the budget document that addresses multi-year projects. >Can we run this through Rinalia to get comment in regards to the >volume because I agree as well that 7 pages may be quite a lot. >While recognising the volume of pages, I think if we must further >shorten this, then item 2 may go completely, while items 3 and 4 can >be collapsed into one as they are both trying to provide >justification (Infact we may remove 3 and just leave item 4) Rinalia has been a part of this process. While I have no doubt there could be some reductions, we have pretty much run out of time. Alan >That said, I have no strong opposition about the current status as >it looks great and the board should be fine with it [1] but can be >made better if indeed volume becomes a concern. > >Regards >1. Afterall the transition proposals are much more voluminous than this ;-) >Sent from my LG G4 >Kindly excuse brevity and typos >On 30 Apr 2016 5:56 a.m., "Alan Greenberg" ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >Attached please fine the final proposal, subject to final clean-up >editing (and inclusion of the missing URL on the last page). > >Please forward any critical errors to me and Heidi. > >Note that this paper must be submitted to the Budget Public Comment >prior to 23:59 UTC on Saturday, 30 April. > >Alan > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…

2 1

Revised GA/Summit Multiyear proposal
by Alan Greenberg April 26, 2016

April 26, 2016

A clean and redline version of the proposal are attached to tomorrow's ALAC Agenda - <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fx%2F9TSAAw…>https://community.icann.org/x/9TSAAw, agenda item 13. Alan

1 0

URGENT - Call for Comments: Draft ICANN FY17 Operating Plan & Budget and Five-Year Operating Plan Update
by ICANN At-Large Staff April 25, 2016

April 25, 2016

Dear All, On behalf of the ALAC, Tijani Ben Jemaa has developed the first draft ALAC Statement on the Draft ICANN FY17 Operating Plan & Budget and Five-Year Operating Plan Update<https://community.icann.org/x/HiKAAw>. The draft, as well as pertinent resources that provide background to this Statement, can be found in its wiki workspace here: https://community.icann.org/x/HiKAAw. All At-Large members are welcome to comment on this draft. Please take a moment to review this draft and if you have input, please submit it in the wiki workspace using the comment function by 28 April 2016 at 23:59 UTC. You will need to log in to the wiki to use the comment function. If you don’t have a login or have other issue using the wiki, kindly contact staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. 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

Steve Crocker's Op-Ed in the WSJ
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim April 23, 2016

April 23, 2016

Hello, ALAC. Steve Crocker's op-ed in the Wall Street Journal below. Best regards, Rinalia (http://tinyurl.com/zu634s4*).* ------------------------------ *OPINION* *Broadening the Oversight of a Free and Open Internet * *Stewardship by the global community will guard against ‘capture’ by one group or government.* *By Stephen D. Crocker, **April 19, 2016 6:31 p.m. ET* Today the global Internet connects three billion of us. While it has grown, the world has shrunk. Geographic distance has become less relevant as we can more easily access information, communicate and reach new customers. The Internet has matured because it is free and open, led by the private economy and based on voluntary standards. It is built on the principles that define America: free enterprise and limited government. It is those same ideals of privatization that frame a proposal <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/iana-stewardship-transition-pac…> recently sent to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration that would transition stewardship of some key Internet technical functions away from the U.S. to a diverse and accountable global Internet community. Why is such a transition needed? Since the Internet’s inception, the U.S. Commerce Department and the California nonprofit corporation that I head, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, have been in charge of coordinating the global assignment of Internet addresses and domain names. In 2014 the U.S. government decided a more international stewardship was appropriate. Since then, the global Internet community has been working on a proposal that assures that such a transition will not threaten the openness and freedom of the Internet. First and foremost, this proposal guards against “capture” by any one group or government. This is the primary reason the Internet community—along with businesses, civil society and other interest groups—has given its blessing to the changes. On March 17, representatives from the Intel <http://quotes.wsj.com/INTC> <http://quotes.wsj.com/INTC>Corporation, the Internet Society and others told Congress they supported the transition. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Council for International Business, the Information Technology Industry Council, the Software & Information Industry Association and others also approve of the plan. Business leaders from companies like Google, Verizon <http://quotes.wsj.com/VZ>, <http://quotes.wsj.com/VZ>AT&T <http://quotes.wsj.com/T>, <http://quotes.wsj.com/T>Cisco <http://quotes.wsj.com/CSCO> <http://quotes.wsj.com/CSCO>and Yahoo <http://quotes.wsj.com/YHOO> <http://quotes.wsj.com/YHOO>participated in the development of the proposal. Academics from Harvard, George Mason University and other institutions also weighed in. From the International Chamber of Commerce to the Center for Democracy and Technology, diverse organizations have voiced support. These groups understand the vital role of the Internet in strengthening the global economy by creating jobs and economic growth. Almost $8 trillion of commerce takes place on the Internet annually, an example of how dependent the world economy has become on a single, unified network. But there are no guarantees about the Internet’s future. In fact, the transition proposal came from the understanding that maintaining the status quo would risk the single, free and open Internet that we cherish. If the U.S. does not transition its stewardship role to the global Internet community, then other governments may try to move control to organizations like the United Nations. There is also a risk that some governments may form their own national or regional networks. This disruptive splintering would damage the economy and weaken personal Internet use. This potential threat to the Internet was understood as far back as 1997, when the U.S. formalized its largely symbolic role as steward of some of the Internet’s technical functions. It intended to move away from this role once Icann was mature enough to operate without the U.S. as a backstop. In March 2014, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced that it wanted to begin the process of severing its contract with Icann. The government stipulated that Icann remain an incorporated U.S. nonprofit entity and would need to be strongly accountable to diverse stakeholders with an interest in the Internet. Over the past two years, myriad interests and participants in the global Internet community worked tirelessly to meet that challenge. Hundreds of stakeholders undertook an amazing effort that logged more than 400 meetings and calls, some 32,000 mailing list exchanges and hundreds of working hours to devise a transition proposal. A plan describing how the transition always envisioned could be implemented has now been delivered to the Commerce Department. The proposal reinforces the private economy-led model that has allowed policy to keep pace with the Internet’s growth. What could be more American than a world that has a free and open Internet, in which all stakeholders have a voice in its governance and no one interest has a controlling say? A successful stewardship transition will allow online innovation and productivity to continue to thrive. What’s more, it will be a validation of the approaches to other pressing transnational issues such as privacy, online content, interconnection fees, taxation and cybersecurity. This transition, maintaining the global Internet’s role as an incubator for innovation and a stimulator of domestic and international economic growth, merits broad support. We owe it to future generations to assure that the Internet of tomorrow is as free, open and resilient as the Internet of today. *Mr. Crocker is the chairman of the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.*

2 2

Re: [ALAC] Steve Crocker's Op-Ed in the WSJ
by Seun Ojedeji April 23, 2016

April 23, 2016

Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 23 Apr 2016 16:48, "gbruen(a)knujon.com" <gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: > > > Right now we have a pantomime of consumer input, our name is used in vain. > SO: While recognising the reality of consensus building within such a diverse ICANN community , I am definitely in agreement with your statement above especially as it concern transition. Regards > In your previous message you insisted that we should engage directly with the board on this issue. If furture interactions with the board are going to be like the last one, we're not going anywhere. > > -Garth > > > On 4/20/16 1:32 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote: >> >> Hello, ALAC. >> >> Steve Crocker's op-ed in the Wall Street Journal below. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Rinalia >> >> (http://tinyurl.com/zu634s4) >> >> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> >>> >>> OPINION >>> >>> Broadening the Oversight of a Free and Open Internet >>> >>> Stewardship by the global community will guard against ‘capture’ by one group or government. >>> >>> By Stephen D. Crocker, April 19, 2016 6:31 p.m. ET >>> >>> Today the global Internet connects three billion of us. While it has grown, the world has shrunk. Geographic distance has become less relevant as we can more easily access information, communicate and reach new customers. >>> >>> The Internet has matured because it is free and open, led by the private economy and based on voluntary standards. It is built on the principles that define America: free enterprise and limited government. >>> >>> It is those same ideals of privatization that frame a proposal recently sent to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration that would transition stewardship of some key Internet technical functions away from the U.S. to a diverse and accountable global Internet community. >>> >>> Why is such a transition needed? Since the Internet’s inception, the U.S. Commerce Department and the California nonprofit corporation that I head, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, have been in charge of coordinating the global assignment of Internet addresses and domain names. In 2014 the U.S. government decided a more international stewardship was appropriate. Since then, the global Internet community has been working on a proposal that assures that such a transition will not threaten the openness and freedom of the Internet. >>> >>> First and foremost, this proposal guards against “capture” by any one group or government. This is the primary reason the Internet community—along with businesses, civil society and other interest groups—has given its blessing to the changes. >>> >>> On March 17, representatives from the Intel Corporation, the Internet Society and others told Congress they supported the transition. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Council for International Business, the Information Technology Industry Council, the Software & Information Industry Association and others also approve of the plan. >>> >>> Business leaders from companies like Google, Verizon, AT&T, Cisco and Yahoo participated in the development of the proposal. Academics from Harvard, George Mason University and other institutions also weighed in. >From the International Chamber of Commerce to the Center for Democracy and Technology, diverse organizations have voiced support. >>> >>> These groups understand the vital role of the Internet in strengthening the global economy by creating jobs and economic growth. Almost $8 trillion of commerce takes place on the Internet annually, an example of how dependent the world economy has become on a single, unified network. >>> >>> But there are no guarantees about the Internet’s future. In fact, the transition proposal came from the understanding that maintaining the status quo would risk the single, free and open Internet that we cherish. >>> >>> If the U.S. does not transition its stewardship role to the global Internet community, then other governments may try to move control to organizations like the United Nations. There is also a risk that some governments may form their own national or regional networks. This disruptive splintering would damage the economy and weaken personal Internet use. >>> >>> This potential threat to the Internet was understood as far back as 1997, when the U.S. formalized its largely symbolic role as steward of some of the Internet’s technical functions. It intended to move away from this role once Icann was mature enough to operate without the U.S. as a backstop. >>> >>> In March 2014, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced that it wanted to begin the process of severing its contract with Icann. The government stipulated that Icann remain an incorporated U.S. nonprofit entity and would need to be strongly accountable to diverse stakeholders with an interest in the Internet. >>> >>> Over the past two years, myriad interests and participants in the global Internet community worked tirelessly to meet that challenge. Hundreds of stakeholders undertook an amazing effort that logged more than 400 meetings and calls, some 32,000 mailing list exchanges and hundreds of working hours to devise a transition proposal. A plan describing how the transition always envisioned could be implemented has now been delivered to the Commerce Department. >>> >>> The proposal reinforces the private economy-led model that has allowed policy to keep pace with the Internet’s growth. What could be more American than a world that has a free and open Internet, in which all stakeholders have a voice in its governance and no one interest has a controlling say? >>> >>> A successful stewardship transition will allow online innovation and productivity to continue to thrive. What’s more, it will be a validation of the approaches to other pressing transnational issues such as privacy, online content, interconnection fees, taxation and cybersecurity. >>> >>> This transition, maintaining the global Internet’s role as an incubator for innovation and a stimulator of domestic and international economic growth, merits broad support. We owe it to future generations to assure that the Internet of tomorrow is as free, open and resilient as the Internet of today. >>> >>> Mr. Crocker is the chairman of the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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+(AL… > > > > -- > Garth Bruen > gbruen(a)knujon.com > > 617-947-3805 > http://www.knujon.com > Fisher College, Criminal Justice Division > ICANN At-Large Advisory Council > Author: WHOIS Running the Internet > http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1118679555.html > > > _______________________________________________ > 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+(AL…

1 0

ALAC Travel Slots
by Alan Greenberg April 20, 2016

April 20, 2016

As you may know, the ALAC is currently funded for 27 travel slots to ICANN meetings: 15 ALAC Members, 10 Regional Leaders, and the Liaisons to the GNSO and ccNSO. We are not currently funded for the Liaison to the SSAC, but generally SSAC has provided support for that. Currently the two Liaisons to the GNSO and ccNSO (Olivier and Maureen) are funded due to their roles as EURALO Chair and APRALO ALAC Member, and we have not been allowed to reallocate the Liaison funding for other purposes. In our FY17 Community Budget Requests, we requested permission to used these slots for other purposes in support of the ALAC mission, and particularly to bring people to an ICANN meeting where their presence will be of particular merit. Although the formal FY17 process is ongoing, we have been allowed to use the two travel slots for the last meeting of FY16. I requested and received a number of suggestions from the ALAC and Regional Leaders as to how these slots might best be used. There is a long-standing process by which unused travel slots within a region are allocated by regional leadership, and we are doing an equivalent process with these At-Large-wide slots. In consultation and with the unanimous support of the ALT, I am announcing that the additional travellers to the ICANN55 meeting in Helsinki will be Dev Anand Teelucksingh and Daniel Nanghaka. Dev is a (among other things) key participant (and chair of some cases) of the Outreach & Engagement (O&E) SC, the Technology Taskforce and the CROPP-RT. Daniel is (among other things) active in the O&E SC, the CROPP-RT and the GNSO PDP on Next-Generation gTLD Registration Directory Services (RDS) to Replace Whois. Cheryl Langdon-Orr, who was suggested by a number of people, will be at the meeting but funded through a different source. Alan

3 2

New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - Response to Letter From Dr. Crocker
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim April 20, 2016

April 20, 2016

Dear ALAC, Attached is the correspondence to Chairman of the ICANN Board from Stephen Coates, Avri Doria, and Jeff Neuman Co-chairs, GNSO New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group regarding ALAC and GAC concerns on the effectiveness of the Public Interest Commitments (PICs) for sensitive new gTLDs in response to the letter from Dr. Crocker. This is excellent movement on the issue. Best regards, Rinalia

1 0