October 2017 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Provides Update on Review of the Community Priority Evaluation Process
by Evan Leibovitch Oct. 4, 2017

Oct. 4, 2017

Given that this issue (the way communities were evaluated -- and in the view of At-Large, mostly unfairly rejected) is big one for At-Large. why is the review being done by outside consultants and not the community? I would like to flag this -- the treatment of communities in the allocation of gTLDs -- as a major At-Large issue should ICANN be foolish enough to engage in more rounds. Perhaps it is worth the effort of the community to draft a comment, using the work of this Review and the existing community efforts to engage in new rounds of gTLD allocations, as a catalyst from which we may draft a coherent high-level ALAC policy on the issue. Once created, this policy can/should take form of Formal Advice to the Board, which is still ALAC's primary (and only bylaw-mandated) channel to make itself heard. In a recent post I referred to the too-frequent practice of being distracted by the trivial while major issues of concern -- that are more complex and difficult for reaching consensus -- are bypassed. I would like to suggest that this issue -- the treatment of communities -- become one of the primary concerns of At-Large should ICANN consider further namespace expansion. We have a number of case studies -- .music, .gay, .kids among them -- as clear communities that were denied (or cheated, depending on opinion) out of the ability to apply. The problem with community evaluation also completely rendered useless the Applicant Support Program that At-Large and the GAC championed in the last round. I offer to help draft such a policy but I won't do it alone. There must be broader desire within the community for this than one person, should this issue be given the weight of authority that IMO it needs. But I am happy to coordinate and add what I can. - Evan On 5 September 2017 at 13:54, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> wrote: > > > [image: CANN][icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org_&d=DwMFaQ…> > News Alert > > https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2017-09-01-en[icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_ann…> > ------------------------------ > ICANN Provides Update on Review of the Community Priority Evaluation > Process > > LOS ANGELES – 1 September 2017 – The Internet Corporation for Assigned > Names and Numbers (ICANN) today issued an update[newgtlds.icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newgtlds.icann.org_en_…> > on the review of the Community Priority Evaluation (CPE) process. > > Community Priority Evaluation is a method to resolve string contention, > described in full detail in section 4.2 of the Applicant Guidebook > (AGB)[newgtlds.icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newgtlds.icann.org_en_…>. > The evaluation determines if the community based application qualifies to > earn priority and eliminate all non-community applicants in the contention > set as well as any other non-prevailing community applicants. In CPE, the > application is evaluated against the following four criteria: Community > Establishment; Nexus between Proposed String and Community; Registration > Policies, and Community Endorsement. The evaluations were conducted by the > Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). The EIU was selected for this role > because it offers premier business intelligence services, providing > political, economic, and public policy analysis to businesses, governments, > and organizations across the globe. > > At various times in the implementation of the New gTLD Program, the ICANN > Board has considered aspects of CPE process, including certain concerns > that some applicants have raised regarding the process. On 17 September > 2016[icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…>, > the ICANN Board directed the President and CEO, or his designees, to > undertake a review of the process by which ICANN has interacted with the > CPE provider. In his letter of 26 April 2017 to concerned > parties[icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste…> > [PDF, 405 KB], Chris Disspain, the Chair of the Board Governance Committee, > provided additional information about the scope and status of the review. > Below is additional information about the review, as well as the current > status of the CPE process review. On 2 June 2017[newgtlds.icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newgtlds.icann.org_en_…>, > the ICANN organization published an update on the Review. > > Below is the current status of the Review since the last update. > Current Status of the Review > > The 2 June 2017 update[newgtlds.icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newgtlds.icann.org_en_…> > made clear that the Review is being conducted in two parallel tracks by FTI > Consulting Inc.’s (FTI)[fticonsulting.com] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.fticonsulting.com_&…> > Global Risk and Investigations Practice (GRIP) and Technology Practice. The > work of the first track, which focuses on gathering information and > materials from the ICANN organization, has been completed. The work of the > second track, which focuses on gathering information and materials from the > CPE provider, is still ongoing. The interview process of the CPE provider > personnel that had involvement in CPEs has been completed. FTI is also > working with the CPE provider to obtain the reference materials for the > evaluations that are the subject of pending Reconsideration > Requests[icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…>. > The CPE provider has been producing documents on a rolling basis. FTI is > currently evaluating whether the CPE provider’s production is complete. > Once the underlying information and data collection is complete, FTI > anticipates that it will be able to inform ICANN of its findings within two > weeks. > > Recently, the ICANN Board and the ICANN organization have received > numerous inquiries for documentation and information about the Review. > These inquiries have been and will continue to be addressed through ICANN’s > Documentary Information Disclosure Policy (DIDP), and are published on the > DIDP page at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/ > transparency-en[icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…> > . > > The ICANN Board recognizes the desire by many to conclude this Review and > proceed with the process. The ICANN Board also looks forward to concluding > the Review and proceeding as appropriate. > > For more information about the CPE process, please visit > https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe[newgtlds.icann.org] > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__newgtlds.icann.org_en_…> > . > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

4 3

Open Public Comment Proceedings
by Ariel Liang Oct. 3, 2017

Oct. 3, 2017

Dear ALAC Members, This is a friendly reminder on the currently open public comment proceedings that no one has volunteered to work on: Proposed Dates for ICANN Public Meetings 2021–2023<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=69278806> Proposed Changes to the NCUC Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Pro…> Proposed Renewal of .MUSEUM Sponsored Registry Agreement<https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Pro…> If you wish to volunteer to review any of these proceedings and advise whether the ALAC should comment or not, please be so kind to let me know. Have a great weekend! Thank you, Ariel

9 15

Re: [ALAC] Fwd: Re: [Ext] Re: Open Public Comment Proceedings
by Seun Ojedeji Oct. 2, 2017

Oct. 2, 2017

You are right Maureen and my comment was not to fault the pen holder at all. Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Oct 2, 2017 5:10 PM, "Maureen Hilyard" <maureen.hilyard(a)gmail.com> wrote: I think it would have been helpful for Yrjo if he had been notified of these examples *on the wiki (or specifically directed to his email) *so that he could incorporate them into his statement. It is difficult to go through every email to decide what is relevant to a public comment. The wiki is set up to provide contributors with a space to voice their vews, and the penholder can actually start to create something that is appropriate and inclusive of these contributions. It can be frustrating exercise for a penholder to get a whole pile of comments right at the end of a public comment period. M On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I think Beran also mentioned a Muslim festival conflict for one of the > dates. While it may not be possible to avoid all the conflicts, it's good > to indicate them. > > Regards > > Sent from my mobile > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > > On Oct 2, 2017 3:38 PM, "Judith Hellerstein" <judith(a)jhellerstein.com> > wrote: > >> HI Ariel, >> >> Thanks for this. I see that my comments did not make it to the At large >> comment page. It is **INCORRECT** to say the following "As far as we can >> see, the tentative dates for 2021-2023 do avoid conflicting with major, >> globally recognized holiday periods." When **IT DOES conflict**. 15 – 21 >> October 2022 falls near the end of the Jewish Holiday season and in the >> middle of the meeting there are two days that fall during a Jewish holiday >> that is the holiday of Shmini Atzeret (eighth day of Assembly) and Simchat >> Torah (Celebration of the Torah). This is a globally recognized holiday >> period. In the US the US Federal Government allows people to request a day >> off for these holidays without getting approval from a supervisor as it is >> a globally recognized holiday. The Same is true with state and local >> governments. As such it is NOT CORRECT to state that it does not conflict. >> I would appreciate if you could clarify this statement or let me know where >> I can add it to the page >> >> Best, >> >> Judith >> >> _________________________________________________________________________ >> Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO >> Hellerstein & Associates3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 <https://maps.google.com/?q=3001+Veazey+Terrace+NW,+Washington+DC+20008&entr…> >> Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein >> Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 <+1%20202-333-6517> >> E-mail: Judith(a)jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com >> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ >> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide >> >> >> >> >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [ALAC] [Ext] Re: Open Public Comment Proceedings >> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 15:34:47 -0400 >> From: Judith Hellerstein <judith(a)jhellerstein.com> >> <judith(a)jhellerstein.com> >> Reply-To: judith(a)jhellerstein.com >> Organization: Hellerstein & Associates >> To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> HI All, >> >> Thanks Beran for checking the dates. I see no problems with most of the >> dates except for the ICANN75 Annual General Meeting 15 – 21 October 2022 >> falls near the end of the Jewish Holiday season and there is one/two day >> that falls during a Jewish holiday that is the holiday of Shmini Atzeret >> (eighth day of Assembly) and Simchat Torah (Celebration of the Torah) these >> two holidays are added to the end of the Jewish Holiday of Sukkot -Festival >> of the Booths. It would be good to add this issue to the comments in the >> effort not to impinge on any persons religious observances >> >> Best, >> >> Judith >> >> _________________________________________________________________________ >> Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO >> Hellerstein & Associates3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 <https://maps.google.com/?q=3001+Veazey+Terrace+NW,+Washington+DC+20008&entr…> >> Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein >> Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 <+1%20202-333-6517> >> E-mail: Judith(a)jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com >> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ >> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide >> >> >> On 9/5/2017 3:12 PM, Beran Dondeh via ALAC wrote: >> >> I must say I am happy to say the none of the 2021 and 2022 meetings will >> fall during the muslim month of Ramadan. However, the 2023 Community Forum >> will be at the beginning of Ramadan. Perhaps good to add that to the >> comments. >> >> Thanks >> >> Beran >> >> On Sep 5, 2017, at 4:05 PM, Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> wrote: >> >> Thanks Holly! >> >> In fact, the other two public comment proceedings that are not mentioned >> have been assigned to members to review and advise whether a Statement is >> necessary. I will update the wiki workspace after hearing feedback on those >> two proceedings. >> >> Thank you, >> Ariel >> >> *From: *"h.raiche(a)internode.on.net" <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net> >> *Reply-To: *"h.raiche(a)internode.on.net" <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net> >> *Date: *Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 9:05 AM >> *To: *Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org>, "alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" >> <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> *Cc: *Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [ALAC] Open Public Comment Proceedings >> >> >> Hi Ariel >> >> Thanks for the reminder. I've had a look at all three, and am not sure >> they are of real importance to ALAC - but could be easily convinced >> otherwise. >> >> The other two items on our policy page that you didn't mention (and with >> deadlines for comment much closer) are the ITEMS final report on the ASO >> and the statistical analysis of DNS abuse. I've only skimmed the ASO >> report - some interesting recommendations but, while interesting, not >> critical. I haven't had time to look at the DNS Abuse study - but imagine >> it may be important to us. Have they been considered by the ALAC and >> rejected for comment? >> >> Holly >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* >> "Ariel Liang" <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> >> >> *To:* >> "alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> *Cc:* >> "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >> *Sent:* >> Fri, 1 Sep 2017 20:14:35 +0000 >> *Subject:* >> >> [ALAC] Open Public Comment Proceedings >> >> Dear ALAC Members, >> >> >> This is a friendly reminder on the currently open public comment >> proceedings that no one has volunteered to work on: >> >> >> Proposed Dates for ICANN Public Meetings 2021–2023[community.icann.org] >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_pa…> >> >> >> Proposed Changes to the NCUC Charter[community.icann.org] >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_di…> >> >> >> Proposed Renewal of .MUSEUM Sponsored Registry >> Agreement[community.icann.org] >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_di…> >> >> >> If you wish to volunteer to review any of these proceedings and advise >> whether the ALAC should comment or not, please be so kind to let me know. >> >> >> Have a great weekend! >> >> >> Thank you, >> Ariel >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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+A >> dvisory+Committee+(ALAC) >> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28…> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing listALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.orghttps://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… <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28…> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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/di >> splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC) >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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/di > splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC) >

1 0

ACTION TODAY: Review ALAC Statement
by Ariel Liang Oct. 2, 2017

Oct. 2, 2017

Dear ALAC, The Statement on the Proposed Dates for ICANN Public Meetings 2021–2023 has just been posted: https://community.icann.org/x/VhwhB. Public Comment will close today (2 October 2017 at 23:59 UTC). Please be so kind to review this Statement and flag anything that needs to be revised. In the interest of time, we will have to submit this Statement before ratification. Thank you, Ariel Ariel Xinyue Liang Policy Analyst | Washington, DC Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

1 0