January 2017 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] Consensus Call: ICANN Leadership Program
by Javier Rua Jan. 12, 2017

Jan. 12, 2017

I support all candidates (except myself)! Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua > On Jan 12, 2017, at 7:07 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > > This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca) Add cleanup rule | More info > There have been no substantive issues raised regarding the selection noted below. > > With this message, I am initiating a Consensus Call of the ALAC to ratify the endorsement of Sarah Kiden, Satish Babu, Andrei Kolesnikov, Maritza Aguero Minano and Javier Rua-Jovet as participants in the Leadership Training Program to be held prior to the ICANN 58 meeting in Copenhagen. > > The Consensus Call will end at 23:59 UTC on Tuesday, 17 January 2016. > > If there are any questions of comments, please direct them to either this list or to me directly. > > Although messages indicating support are welcome, they are not necessary. This Consensus Call will be deemed to have succeeded in the absence of significant opposition (greater than 20% as specified by ALAC RoP 12.3.3.1). > > Alan > > At 09/01/2017 11:02 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >> As has been the case in the past, RALOs have been asked to name their candidate for the ICANN Leadership Program. Generally, the people chosen are either new to our community, those who have assumed leadership positions, or those who have lots of experience and can help in the training. >> >> This year the RALOs have recommended: >> >> AFRALO - Sarah Kiden >> APRALO - Satish Babu >> EURALO - Andrei Kolesnikov >> LACRALO - Maritza Aguero Minano >> NARALO - Javier Rua-Jovet >> >> The ALAC generally does not alter this selection, but it has at least one time in the past, so I am opening a 2 day period for any objections (including rationale and suggestion of who should replace). Please respond to this list or privately to me if there is an issue. >> >> Barring problems, I will open a Consensus Call to ratify the selections. >> >> 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+(AL…

1 0

Call for Candidates: CCWG Auction Proceeds
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 11, 2017

Jan. 11, 2017

This is a CALL FOR CANDIDATES in the At-Large Community for the ICANN Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) on New gTLD Auction Proceeds. The new generic top level domain (gTLD) Program established auctions as a mechanism of last resort to resolve the competition sets between identical or similar terms (strings) for new gTLDs Currently the fund contains over $230 million dollars (note that $132 million of this is related to an auction that is being disputed). The CCWG is tasked with developing a proposal(s) for consideration by the Chartering Organizations (those ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees that have adopted the CCWG Charter) on the mechanism that should be developed in order to allocate the new gTLD Auction Proceeds. That proposal will then be submitted to the ICANN Board. Note that the CCWG will NOT be deciding on projects to be funded, but rather on the mechanism to be used to allocate funds. MEMBERS As one of the Chartering organizations, the ALAC may name five people to be Members of the CCWG and presuming sufficient qualified candidates, our intent is to select one per ICANN region (based on citizenship as per ALAC membership). Full details of the CCWG may be found at <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2016-12-13-en>https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2016-12-13-en. Members must commit to actively participate in the activities of the CCWG. The estimated average workload will be no less than 3-4 hours per week. This means attending conference calls which will likely last 60-90 minutes per week (some of which will be held at inconvenient hours to accommodate world-wide participation) and mailing list participation. Past CCWGs have also formed sub-groups to divide the work. If this CCWG does so, that might increase workload. The total length of engagement is likely to be at least 1 year. The CCWG, any sub-groups it forms, and its mailing lists will all be conducted in English and all Members must be sufficiently fluent. There will be a Working Group within At-Large which will support our five CCWG Members, and all Members are also expected to participate in that WG as well. Members will also participate in any At-Large briefings and Webinars on the subject. Those interested in applying to be formally appointed to the CCWG Auction Proceeds by the ALAC should submit an Expression of Interest (EoI) including: * A resume (maximum three pages) * A statement explaining why they are interested in serving in this capacity and what skills or background they have which will help them in this CCWG. * A Declaration of Interests indicating any potential or actual conflicts. * A declaration that they can devote the time needed to participate in the CCWG and the associated At-Large WG activities. * Agreement that prior to the formal selection by the ALAC, they will attend CCWG meetings (see IMPORTANT NOTE at bottom of this message). CO-CHAIR The ALAC may also name a Co-Chair of the CCWG and the ALAC has indicated that it intends to do so. Applications are also invited to be the ALAC Co-Chair of the CCWG. The Co-Chairs play an administrative role only and do not participate in the substantive discussions of the CCWG. The time commitment of the Co-Chair is expected to be larger than that of a CCWG Member. Co-Chairs should have experience in chairing meetings and managing multi-cultural, diverse and potentially difficult groups. The EoI for Co-Chair should include all of the items required for Members. PROCESS All EoIs must be sent to staff(a)atlarge.icann.org by Sunday, 22 January 2017 at 23:59 UTC. All applications will be reviewed in confidence by the ALAC Appointee Selection Committee (AASC) which will make recommendations to the ALAC on who to appoint. For AASC Membership, see https://community.icann.org/x/VwebAw. EoIs will be available only to the AASC and ICANN At-Large Staff. Based on an initial review of the EoI, a telephone/Skype interview of the candidates may be conducted by members of the AASC. IMPORTANT NOTE: The first meeting of the CCWG will take place on Friday, 26 January at 15:00 UTC for 60 Minutes. Since the ALAC selections will not be done by then, ALL Applicants must either attend this meeting and subsequent meetings or listen to the recordings. Alan Greenberg Chair, ALAC

1 0

Fwd: Re: RDS Review
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 10, 2017

Jan. 10, 2017

I am attaching a document from the GNSO on the proposed RDS (formerly WHOIS) Review to be started very soon. You will recall that we previously had approved a narrowing of the scope of the RDS Review to focus just on the extent to which the previous WHOIS Review Recommendations had been implemented. This GNSO proposal widens the scope considerably. Although there is no question that the wider scope is interesting and ptentially useful, it will also require far more community involvement that the earlier proposal. The call for volunteers was to close on 13 January and a decision needs to be made quickly on exactly what the Review should be. Comments please, with some urgency. Alan >From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com> >Subject: Re: RDS Review >Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 17:42:53 +0000 > > >Dear Karen and Community Leaders > >The GNSO Council, working with its component >Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, has >produced this document (attached), which >outlines our feedback and concerns with the >proposed âlimited scopeâ for the upcoming >RDS review. The document was submitted to ICANN >Staff, and sharing with this team for your reference. > >Thank you, > >J. >---------------- >James Bladel >GNSO Chair

11 22

Re: [ALAC] RDS Review
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 10, 2017

Jan. 10, 2017

Evan, you are coming into this late. To refresh everyone's mind... The Board has made it clear that it is not a Board decision to decide on a recommended scope, but a community decision. The idea on the table for a limited review was mine, and the ALAC has formally supported it. All other AC/SOs either supported it or did not (initially) object. Since then, the GAC has said they do not favour a reduced scope. One GNSO person had indicated that she had concerns about the limited scope. By the time the GNSO finished discussing it, the message I forwarded was the result. It will be hard to revewrse the direction again given that this is largely a GNSO issue and supported by the GAC. Given that, how At-Large staffs this with knowledgable volunteers will be difficult. With the reduced scope, I was willing to volunteers (as one of the few people who had fully studied the last WHOIS RT). I am not willingto do so for a widened scope. I have forwarded the message to the RDS PDP. Alan At 09/01/2017 04:28 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >It would seem that the logical next step would >be for ALAC to send suscinct advice to the Board >(and the GNSO) recommending against the expanded >scope, for the redundancy reasons Holly reasonably offers.â > >- Evanâ > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Disposition: inline >X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > >1;DM5PR03MB2714;9:nP4UdfgI46A0m34F2m5BJQsJU9VhuA5lZC5weP88BgplP0skgaBeevboNOtoWPGDlvuIrsC47EdnIOumnkjdqrI2vUwaoUv9fu3DiFM3NqMd+4M7zIE7oYjG8wnL8XnfSxi0jc7BB92/8C0xcannC1VFbHiO9X3YE5iaFqWajB+Zg0PeHg5uvOfQP2ZhxzTGqvS/xm1+V68iBSrYA34VaqpRf2zkYXHWuLCWP2tv4OWyUCinZFYb/x3/G1DK9ECKMx8sncVcVbRVu1+wP15oqm4cMkBhBw1TCa0AG+UQJ01+QVVq+gamcLWqG8FBlOdfpQ9sXWLpDPABqRaBDqpV2HpmMlYxsgtAartESjqL5qHnlmWC7cEpHCGUOkPI2LoiPuDwiguGspNykeNqwU6vdt2ox3Bm4WS4ReAFFg1XyLmkECNvY3PmYeLkhFbdvOE7 >X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery: > ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(20160514016)(520000050)(520002050)(750028); > >_______________________________________________ >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

IMPORTANT: Statement on Supplementary Procedures for Independent Review Process (IRP)
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 8, 2017

Jan. 8, 2017

A wording problem was brought to my attention regarding the statement that is currently undergoing a vote. I have reviewed the statement again and must admit that this slipped by me the first time. The 4th point currently reads: 4. The ALAC recommends that an ongoing observation of this new IRP Supplementary Procedures is performed to foster the continued improvement exercise for the benefit of end users. I find the wording awkward, and it conflicks with the closing remarks which correctly say that users are only affected indirectly. I am proposing that instead we say: 4. The ALAC recommends that as we gain experience with these new procedures, there is ongoing monitoring ensure continued improvement. I have discussed this with Leon who authored the statement and he has no problem with it. If anyone has a concern with this, please let me know immediately. At this point, only six people have voted. If any of them wish to alter their vote, that is fine. Alan

7 6

Re: [ALAC] IMPORTANT: Statement on Supplementary Procedures forIndependent Review Process (IRP)
by Javier Rua Jan. 6, 2017

Jan. 6, 2017

Ok. I agree with new language. Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua > On Jan 6, 2017, at 1:07 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > > This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca) Add cleanup rule | More info > A wording problem was brought to my attention regarding the statement that is currently undergoing a vote. I have reviewed the statement again and must admit that this slipped by me the first time. > > The 4th point currently reads: > > 4. The ALAC recommends that an ongoing observation of this new IRP Supplementary Procedures is performed to foster the continued improvement exercise for the benefit of end users. > > I find the wording awkward, and it conflicks with the closing remarks which correctly say that users are only affected indirectly. > > I am proposing that instead we say: > > 4. The ALAC recommends that as we gain experience with these new procedures, there is ongoing monitoring ensure continued improvement. > > I have discussed this with Leon who authored the statement and he has no problem with it. > > If anyone has a concern with this, please let me know immediately. At this point, only six people have voted. If any of them wish to alter their vote, that is fine. > > 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+(AL…

1 0

Re: [ALAC] RALO is correct.C] URGENT: Who did what when
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 5, 2017

Jan. 5, 2017

Oh dear! That is Auto-complete filling in what it thought was the rest of your name (since I had done AFRALO first with Fatimata) and I didn't notice it. Thanks for catching it. Alan At 05/01/2017 02:36 PM, Fatima Cambronero wrote: >Dear Alan, > >Thanks for your email. >Just a correction: my name is Fatima no Fatimata :) > >Thanks. > >Best Regards, >Fatima > >2017-01-04 22:48 GMT-06:00 Alberto Soto ><<mailto:asoto@ibero-americano.org>asoto(a)ibero-americano.org>: > >Dear Alan, I thinks LACRALO is correct. > >Best > >Alberto > > > >De: ><mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Alan Greenberg >Enviado el: Thursday, January 5, 2017 1:07 AM >Para: ALAC <<mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Asunto: [ALAC] URGENT: Who did what when > > > >The At-Large Review Team has been told by many >people that we in At-Large almost never provide >opportunities for people to move up and just >keep on shuffling jobs between the same few people. > >To demonstrate that this is not quite the case, >I have been preparing charts of who occupied >each position since the ALAC began. > >I am attaching four spreadsheets. > >- ALAC Membership (the contents of each cell >says who appointed the person, the Board (for >the Interim ALAC), the NomCom, or a RALO) >- Liaisons to ICANN AC/SOs >- NomCom Delegates >- RALO Leadership > >I am reasonably sure that I have the first three >pretty much correct. But if you find an error, please let me know. > >For RALO leadership, things are not quite as good. > >- I am pretty sure I have NARALO and LACRALO correct. >- For EURALO, I am missing the early >Secretariats (presuming there were some) but hope that all else is ok. >- For AFRALO I think I have it right but am not >sure. It seems like there was only a Secretariat >for the first few years, until the Operating >Procedures were completed - the same as happened in LACRALO. >- For APRALO, I had a lot of trouble finding >records, and I did some guessing, particularly >in the first 3-4 years, and also am unshure >about Holly's terms as Vice-Chair and Chair. > >For the ALAC and Regional leaders charts, I show >who held each position at the time of the ICANN >meeting. For the NomCom and Liaisons, it is just by year. > >If you have ANY corrections, please get them to >me ASAP. I am incorporating these spreadsheets >into a report that I need to have complete by >the end of tomorrow!!!! for discussion at the >At-Large Review Working Party meeting scheduled for very late tomorrow night. > >Hopefully the membership of this list includes >some people with long and accurate memories. > >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… > > > > >-- >Fatima Cambronero >Responsable del Ãrea de Derecho InformÃ¡tico de R10S Abogados ><http://www.riosabogados.com>www.riosabogados.com >MÃ©xico > >Phone: MÃ©xico: +52 (55) 5252 2581 >Twitter: @facambronero >Skype: fatima.cambronero

1 0

RALO is correct.C] URGENT: Who did what when
by Alberto Soto Jan. 5, 2017

Jan. 5, 2017

Dear Alan, I thinks LACRALO is correct. Best Alberto De: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Alan Greenberg Enviado el: Thursday, January 5, 2017 1:07 AM Para: ALAC <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: [ALAC] URGENT: Who did what when The At-Large Review Team has been told by many people that we in At-Large almost never provide opportunities for people to move up and just keep on shuffling jobs between the same few people. To demonstrate that this is not quite the case, I have been preparing charts of who occupied each position since the ALAC began. I am attaching four spreadsheets. - ALAC Membership (the contents of each cell says who appointed the person, the Board (for the Interim ALAC), the NomCom, or a RALO) - Liaisons to ICANN AC/SOs - NomCom Delegates - RALO Leadership I am reasonably sure that I have the first three pretty much correct. But if you find an error, please let me know. For RALO leadership, things are not quite as good. - I am pretty sure I have NARALO and LACRALO correct. - For EURALO, I am missing the early Secretariats (presuming there were some) but hope that all else is ok. - For AFRALO I think I have it right but am not sure. It seems like there was only a Secretariat for the first few years, until the Operating Procedures were completed - the same as happened in LACRALO. - For APRALO, I had a lot of trouble finding records, and I did some guessing, particularly in the first 3-4 years, and also am unshure about Holly's terms as Vice-Chair and Chair. For the ALAC and Regional leaders charts, I show who held each position at the time of the ICANN meeting. For the NomCom and Liaisons, it is just by year. If you have ANY corrections, please get them to me ASAP. I am incorporating these spreadsheets into a report that I need to have complete by the end of tomorrow!!!! for discussion at the At-Large Review Working Party meeting scheduled for very late tomorrow night. Hopefully the membership of this list includes some people with long and accurate memories. Alan

2 1

ALAC Resignation
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 5, 2017

Jan. 5, 2017

It is with regret that I must announce that Veronica Cretu has submitted her resignation as an ALAC Member. When she agreed to run for the ALAC position within EURALO, she believed that she would have sufficient time to devote to ICANN. Due to a number of ongoing and new professional assignments, she feels that is no longer the case. Veronica is not the type of person to make a commitment to work with the ALAC and then not deliver on her commitment, so she feels that in good conscience, she must resign. I have notified Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Chair of EURALO and he along with the EURALO Board will decide how to fill the vacancy. Hopefully this will be done with due haste to allow EURALO to be fully represented on the ALAC and in Copenhagen. Veronica holds a number of positions on ALAC sub-groups, and I will be working with EURALO and the two remaining European ALAC members to ensure that EURALO is well represented. Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] URGENT: Who did what when
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 5, 2017

Jan. 5, 2017

A replacement table for regional leaders correcting (hopefully) several errors related to the terms of Holly, Siranush, Satish, Ali and Fouad. Early years in APRALO still need work. Alan At 04/01/2017 11:06 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >The At-Large Review Team has been told by many people that we in >At-Large almost never provide opportunities for people to move up >and just keep on shuffling jobs between the same few people. > >To demonstrate that this is not quite the case, I have been >preparing charts of who occupied each position since the ALAC began. > >I am attaching four spreadsheets. > >- ALAC Membership (the contents of each cell says who appointed the >person, the Board (for the Interim ALAC), the NomCom, or a RALO) >- Liaisons to ICANN AC/SOs >- NomCom Delegates >- RALO Leadership > >I am reasonably sure that I have the first three pretty much >correct. But if you find an error, please let me know. > >For RALO leadership, things are not quite as good. > >- I am pretty sure I have NARALO and LACRALO correct. >- For EURALO, I am missing the early Secretariats (presuming there >were some) but hope that all else is ok. >- For AFRALO I think I have it right but am not sure. It seems like >there was only a Secretariat for the first few years, until the >Operating Procedures were completed - the same as happened in LACRALO. >- For APRALO, I had a lot of trouble finding records, and I did some >guessing, particularly in the first 3-4 years, and also am unshure >about Holly's terms as Vice-Chair and Chair. > >For the ALAC and Regional leaders charts, I show who held each >position at the time of the ICANN meeting. For the NomCom and >Liaisons, it is just by year. > >If you have ANY corrections, please get them to me ASAP. I am >incorporating these spreadsheets into a report that I need to have >complete by the end of tomorrow!!!! for discussion at the At-Large >Review Working Party meeting scheduled for very late tomorrow night. > >Hopefully the membership of this list includes some people with long >and accurate memories. > >Alan > >

1 0