July 2017 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] [registration-issues-wg] Changes to .vlaanderen and .brussels TLDs
by Alan Greenberg July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

I've added the ALAC list back onto the recipients. To be clear, I did not advocate a comment. I asked whether this had user implications. The only answer to date was from John Levine who noted that the only implication was that the drop of the Add Grace Period (AGP) would stop registrants from cancelling a domain if they made a mistake. Since in fact very few (if any) Registrars actually extend that privilege to registrants these days (the AGP was added when registrations tended to be done on the phone and errors were much more common), I do not consider that as a real impact. The issue will be raised as a possible comment on the ALAC call on Tuesday, so it would be good if any any further research were done prior to that time. If we have a problem with the timing, a public comment on the specifics of an RSEP is not, in my mind, the proper place to do it. It will just be made and largely ignored since those processing the comments have no discretion to do anything about it. If RSEP needs to be changed, we should approach it head on. The timing is one issue, and the lack of consideration of registrant rights is another that we might want to focus on. If we think it is of sufficient import to put time into it. Alan At 22/07/2017 11:42 PM, Holly Raiche wrote: >I agree with Olivier and Christopher and Alan. > >Yes, the issue is tiny - the principle is >not. There is nothing wrong with saying that >our concern is not with these facts, but that >there is so little time for a considered >response. It takes a sentence or two - but >thats an important sentence or two. > >Holly >On 22 Jul 2017, at 11:43 pm, Olivier MJ >Crépin-Leblond <<mailto:ocl@gih.com>ocl(a)gih.com> wrote: > >>I understand that the case itself is minor, but >>isn't the principle itself important? If the >>principle is as Alan has described it, the case >>could create a precedent thus opening the door to other cases? >>Kindest regards, >> >>Olivier >> >>On 22/07/2017 10:19, Christopher Wilkinson wrote: >>> >>>Based in Belgium I naturally pay some attention to this one. >>>However I think that John is right here. >>> >>>Regards >>> >>>CW >>> >>>On 22 Jul 2017, at 09:07, John R. Levine >>><mailto:johnl@iecc.com><johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Is it out of line to formally reply that >>>>>>this is not enough time to deliver a quality response? >>>> >>>>This is a tiny change to a pair of tiny TLDs, with about 6000 names each. >>>> >>>>As far as I can tell, the main thing >>>>registrants will see is that if they register >>>>the wrong name, they can't get their money >>>>back, They still have auto-renew and >>>>redemption grace periods so inattentive >>>>registrants aren't going to lose their names. >>>> >>>>This does not strike me as a good use of our limited time. >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>John Levine, >>>><mailto:johnl@iecc.com>johnl(a)iecc.com, >>>>Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", >>>>Please consider the environment before >>>>reading this e-mail. <https://jl.ly/>https://jl.ly >>>>_______________________________________________ >>>>registration-issues-wg mailing list >>>><mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>registration-issues-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>registration-issues-wg mailing list >>><mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>registration-issues-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg >>> >> >> >>-- >>Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD >><http://www.gih.com/ocl.html>http://www.gih.com/ocl.html >> >>_______________________________________________ >>registration-issues-wg mailing list >><mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>registration-issues-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [lac-discuss-en] IO recommends .amazon reconsideration
by Alan Greenberg July 21, 2017

July 21, 2017

I have a somewhat different viewpoint. It is true that the position of the GAC and its advice may be changing, but we need to look at the specifics of this particular case. The GAC has given lots of advice. Some is followed, some is rejected and in some cases a middle-ground is found. In all such cases, there is plenty of debate and discussion. In the case of .amazon, the GAC provided no rationale for the advice (they were not required to at the time). But more surprisingly, the Board did not subject this to debate but rather, and without rationale (which WAS required!) simply accepted the GAC advice. The IRP, in my mind, is simply recognizing that the Board did not follow its usual and proper practice of attempting to balance competing interests in this case. Alan At 19/07/2017 09:55 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote: >Yes mam, this is indeed the key strategic implication from the IRP. >In my own view however, ALAC [re]action may be premature for objective. > >Recent developments, especially this empowered community model, has >already undermined the "GAC advises, Board follows" scheme. I see >this IRP decision as adding grist to the mill in any downstream >federal court action. If and when a federal district court makes >that pronouncement, then stick a fork in it. It is roasted. > >-Carlton > > >============================== >Carlton A Samuels >Mobile: 876-818-1799 >Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround >============================= > >On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:36 AM, Jacqueline Morris ><<mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com>jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> wrote: >But to me, far more important in the long term is the very clear >rejection of "the GAC advises, the Board follows" model. The ruling >has chipped away at the power of the GAC "advice" , and may change >the dynamic of the stakeholder roles in ICANN. >Might this be an opportunity for At-Large to work towards balancing >the roles of the ACs? Given that the relationship with the Board is >different for the various ACs, based on the bye-laws. >Jacqueline > >On 18 Jul 2017 11:38, "Dev Anand Teelucksingh" ><<mailto:devtee@gmail.com>devtee(a)gmail.com> wrote: >The IRP decision: ><https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-amazon-final-declaration-11…>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-amazon-final-declaration-11… > >Dev Anand > >On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Carlton Samuels ><<mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Adds to the kerfuffle surrounding geographic names in the DNS. > > > > > <http://domainnamewire.com/2017/07/18/amazon-com-gets-big-win-domain-battle-…>http://domainnamewire.com/2017/07/18/amazon-com-gets-big-win-domain-battle-… > > > > > > -Carlton > > > > ============================== > > Carlton A Samuels > > Mobile: <tel:876-818-1799>876-818-1799 > > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround > > ============================= > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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… >_______________________________________________ >lac-discuss-en mailing list ><mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org>lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en > > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Disposition: inline >X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > >1;DM5PR03MB2714;27:CMV/fUuyPTmq0Go815gG9Jsumao2rNupQ1hHg8i+Lus2/PvqCJ6fRkdd721Nv0JyhCSB+/f6N7KrW6IeMKVb3I5D/VBtvPUjfPyyAsMaGm2AS967yrO0mYdb6LoJPOeebnbXvRHoWrLJeGkpMbM0ww== >X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery: > >ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160514016)(750103)(520002050)(400001001223)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095); > >_______________________________________________ >lac-discuss-en mailing list >lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en

3 3

Changes to .vlaanderen and .brussels TLDs
by Alan Greenberg July 21, 2017

July 21, 2017

A registry service request has been submitted to ICANN for the .vlaanderen and .brussels TLDs to remove certain GRACE periods. Some Grace periods impact Registrars only, and others may impact Registrants. The Request can be found at https://www.icann.org/resources/files/1208363-2017-07-20-en. I am a bit troubled because one of the questions the Registry must answer is "Were consultations with end users appropriate? Which groups were consulted? What were the nature and content of these consultations?", and the reply was that Registrars were consulted. I am looking for a volunteer to look at the request and ensure that these grace period removals will not have any impact on Registrants. The timing on these requests is tight and ICANN has only 15 days to review the request, so any comments we wish to make must be within this window. Alan

1 0

RDS-WHOIS2-RT
by Alan Greenberg July 21, 2017

July 21, 2017

As some of you may know, I have been selected as Chair of the RDS-WHOIS2-RT (on an interim basis, but likely permanent). My intent as Chair is to keep this process as lean and short as possible, and my hope is that it will not have a great impact on my serving as ALAC Chair. But to the extent that there will be some impact, I will be looking to the ALT and other ALAC members to help ensure that the ALAC does not suffer from this. Alan

1 0

Fwd: Empowered Community Approval Notice for Board Resolution 201 7.05.18.04 - 2017.05.18.07
by Alan Greenberg July 21, 2017

July 21, 2017

The ICANN Empowered Community has formally taken its first action with the support of all five decisional participants. Alan >From: Stephen Deerhake <sdeerhake(a)nic.as> >Subject: Empowered Community Approval Notice for >Board Resolution 2017.05.18.04 - 2017.05.18.07 >Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:33:57 +0000 > >Greetings, > >Pleased see the attached correspondence from the >Empowered Community Administration certifying >the decisions made by each Decisional >Participant regarding the Fundamental Bylaw >change proposed by the ICANN Board of Directors >in their Board resolution 2017.05.18.04 2017.05.18.07. > >I am pleased to report that all five Decisional >Participants, through their internal procedures, >reached a decision regarding the matter before >them, and further, that all five Decisional >Participants approved the proposed Bylaw change. > >Best Regards, >Stephen Deerhake >ccNSO Representative to the Empowered Community Administration >

1 0

ALAC Decision: Proposed Revision to Fundamental Bylaw
by Alan Greenberg July 20, 2017

July 20, 2017

To the ICANN Empowered Community Administration: The ALAC conducted an online vote during the period 13-19 July 2017 on whether there ALAC supports the proposed ICANN Fundamental Bylaw revision creating the Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee. In accordance with ALAC Rules of Procedure 24.1 All decisions of the ALAC exercising its power within the EC must be decided by an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the sitting ALAC Members. With 14 of 15 ALAC Members voting, 13 Members voted to approve the Bylaw revision and 1 Member voted to reject the Bylaw revision. Accordingly, with more than two-thirds of sitting ALAC Members casting an approving vote, the ALAC supports the proposed Fundamental Bylaw Revision. Alan Greenberg Chair, ALAC ALAC Member of the EC Administration

1 0

Google Asked to Take Down Over 1M websites!
by Carlton Samuels July 20, 2017

July 20, 2017

;;from the latest Google transparency Report.... Story Here: https://www.engadget.com/2017/02/14/google-has-been-asked-to-take-down-over… Transparency Report Here: https://transparencyreport.google.com/copyright/overview#glance -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [lac-discuss-en] IO recommends .amazon reconsideration
by Carlton Samuels July 19, 2017

July 19, 2017

Yes mam, this is indeed the key strategic implication from the IRP. In my own view however, ALAC [re]action may be premature for objective. Recent developments, especially this empowered community model, has already undermined the "GAC advises, Board follows" scheme. I see this IRP decision as adding grist to the mill in any downstream federal court action. If and when a federal district court makes that pronouncement, then stick a fork in it. It is roasted. -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:36 AM, Jacqueline Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com > wrote: > But to me, far more important in the long term is the very clear rejection > of "the GAC advises, the Board follows" model. The ruling has chipped away > at the power of the GAC "advice" , and may change the dynamic of the > stakeholder roles in ICANN. > Might this be an opportunity for At-Large to work towards balancing the > roles of the ACs? Given that the relationship with the Board is different > for the various ACs, based on the bye-laws. > Jacqueline > > On 18 Jul 2017 11:38, "Dev Anand Teelucksingh" <devtee(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> The IRP decision: >> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-amazon-final >> -declaration-11jul17-en.pdf >> >> Dev Anand >> >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Carlton Samuels >> <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > Adds to the kerfuffle surrounding geographic names in the DNS. >> > >> > http://domainnamewire.com/2017/07/18/amazon-com-gets-big- >> win-domain-battle-may-yet-get-amazon-domain/ >> > >> > >> > -Carlton >> > >> > ============================== >> > Carlton A Samuels >> > Mobile: 876-818-1799 >> > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround >> > ============================= >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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+Advisor >> y+Committee+(ALAC) >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> >

1 0

IO recommends .amazon reconsideration
by Carlton Samuels July 18, 2017

July 18, 2017

Adds to the kerfuffle surrounding geographic names in the DNS. http://domainnamewire.com/2017/07/18/amazon-com-gets-big-win-domain-battle-… -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

2 1

Fwd: [CCT-Review] ICANN59: Blog Post
by Carlton Samuels July 17, 2017

July 17, 2017

Please see the blog post which succinctly outlines the CCT RT's work at ICANN59. -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jean-Baptiste Deroulez <jean-baptiste.deroulez(a)icann.org> Date: Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:15 AM Subject: [CCT-Review] ICANN59: Blog Post To: Jordyn Buchanan via CCT-Review <cct-review(a)icann.org> Dear CCTRT Members, The following blog post was published today to provide the community with an update on the CCTRT face-to-face meeting in Johannesburg and the next steps of the review team https://www.icann.org/news/ blog/new-gtlds-competition-consumer-trust-and-consumer- choice-review-team-icann-59-update-next-steps. We encourage you to spread the word. Thanks! Kind regards, Jean-Baptiste _______________________________________________ CCT-Review mailing list CCT-Review(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cct-review

1 0

ALAC Decision on Fundamental Bylaw Change
by Alan Greenberg July 14, 2017

July 14, 2017

The ICANN Board has requested Empowered Community approval for a change to an ICANN Fundamental Bylaw as documented at https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-bgc-2017-03-31-en. The change creates a new Board Committee (Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee - BAMC) and assigns responsibilities associated with ICANN Accountability Mechanisms to it. Following the Community Forum on the change held during the Johannesburg meeting, we have 21 day following the close of the meeting during which we may approve or reject the Bylaw change. For the change to take effect, at least three of the five Empowered Community Members (GNSO, ccNSO, ASO, ALAC, GAC) must approve the change and no more than one may reject the change. The ALAC comment said that we would have appreciated more detail in the charter (which is pointed to by the link above). The response was only that this would be done by the Board in due time. At the Community Forum, I made it clear that this answer was not an encouraging one. The Board member representing the Board, Chris Disspain agreed that the staff reply was not good. That being said, I beleive that the Charter that was provided does give sufficient information to allow me to feel comfortable in recommending that the ALAC approve the Bylaw change. During discussion in Johannesburg, Sebastien raised the issue of why it was essential to make this change now, and not to wait until the CCwG Accountability had completed. During the Community Forum in Johannesburg, the rational was described in some detail. The core of it being that the current committee had a lot on its plate, and the Accountability actions were diverting it from its core work. Moreover, there is little dependency on other CCWG activities, so there is not a lot of linkage. Moreover, although not the reason for acting now, but an added benefit is the ability to "test" the Empowered Community processes on an issue that is not as onerous as some of the powers. With this message, I am requesting that Staff initiate, a BigPulse vote of the ALAC on the motion below. The vote should start as soon as possible and must end no later that 12:00 UTC on 20 July 2017. To pass, in accordance with ALAC RoP 24.1, the motion must receive the support of at least 10 ALAC Members. Motion: Whereas: - The ICANN Board has proposed a revision to the ICANN Fundamental Bylaws; - As prescribed by the ICANN Bylaws on the Empowered Community, the revision was discussed at a Community Forum held in Johannesburg on 26 June 2017 Therefore: - The ALAC wishes to exercise its power as a Decisional Participant in the ICANN Empowered Community by supporting the Fundamental Bylaw revision creating the Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee.

2 2

Re: [ALAC] Criteria/Selection for Additional Travel Slots to ICANN50.
by Alan Greenberg July 14, 2017

July 14, 2017

Thanks Satish. At 10/07/2017 09:14 PM, Satish Babu wrote: >Hi Alan, > >I'll represent APRALO in this group. > > > > > > >satish > > >On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >As discussed in Johannesburg, The ALAC has requested additional >revel slots to be used for "At-Large workers who are active >participants in At-Large and other ICANN policy activities". > >We were allocated two such slots as a pilot program for FY18 >starting at ICANN60. > >To use these slots, we must establish criteria to be met. > >As we must decide on who is attending this before the end of July, >time is tight. > >I am requesting a small group, one person per RALO to be created to >work with the ALT to develop criteria and recommend participants to >the ALAC. My strong preference is that the RALO representative be >the current or incoming RALO Chair. > >Whoever is selected must be available to work over the next few >weeks. It is not expected to be a heavy workload, but the timing is tight. > >With this message, I am asking each RALO Chair to identify who will >participate from their RALOs, with a deadline of no later than >Friday, preferably earlier. > >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] [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Please participate - survey charter questions #4 and #7 now live
by Alan Greenberg July 13, 2017

July 13, 2017

No, not really, since the fact that the Auctions funds came from gTLD auctions is really peripheral to how the funds will be used, which is the subject og the CCWG. The funds could well have come from selling lollipops and the questions in the CCWG would be largely the same. Alan At 13/07/2017 10:43 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh wrote: >Wouldn't the gTLD WG be fit for this since its dealing with processes >related to gTLD auctions? > >Dev Anand > >On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Alan Greenberg ><alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > > At the moment, we have little choice but to respond on our own behalf, but > > with whatever knowledge is available about other At-Large opinions. > > > > We really need to convene a support group for this though! > > > > Alan > > > > At 06/07/2017 04:15 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I just responded to one of these forms then it occurred to me that I > > probably should have consulted to know how we intend to go about this since > > am participating as a member. > > > > So @Chair how do we go about responding to the questions? Should each > > member/participant go ahead independently or does ALAC intend to agree on > > default set of response? > > > > Regards > > > > Sent from my mobile > > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > > > > On Jul 6, 2017 8:13 AM, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings(a)icann.org > wrote: > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > > > The surveys for charter question #4 and #7 are now live. Thank you for the > > input received Ã¢â some updates have been > made as a result. Please respond > > to the survey by Wednesday 12 July at 18.00 UTC at the latest. > > > > Survey Charter Question #4: > > https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/charterquestion4 Survey Charter Question #7: > > https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/charterquestion7 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Marika > > > > > > > > Marika Konings > > > > Vice President, Policy Development Support > GNSO, Internet Corpooration for > > Assigneed Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > > > Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org > > > > > > > > Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO > > > > Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting > > the GNSO Newcomer pages. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list > > Ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org > > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds > > > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Content-Disposition: inline > > X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > > > > > 1;DM5PR03MB2714;27:ZNFQPdjB4oe/ZcURoduuTT5gbMtBc4N4I0ShrHGNrPGa9H35H5hINVYMriWA8RS0rekDtdTfv82Y9v3nV6RRiOjrNQPEt1UVgl7rXYJHZ6hSyVCwVItlDAi+bzE190BAHnvLsTSkNDdhDRWswRAVEQ== > > X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery: > > > > > ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160514016)(520000050)(520002050)(750028)(400001001223)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095); > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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… > > ) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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…

2 1

Re: [ALAC] [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Please participate - survey charter questions #4 and #7 now live
by Alan Greenberg July 13, 2017

July 13, 2017

At the moment, we have little choice but to respond on our own behalf, but with whatever knowledge is available about other At-Large opinions. We really need to convene a support group for this though! Alan At 06/07/2017 04:15 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: >Hello, > >I just responded to one of these forms then it >occurred to me that I probably should have >consulted to know how we intend to go about this >since am participating as a member. > >So @Chair how do we go about responding to the >questions? Should each member/participant go >ahead independently or does ALAC intend to agree on default set of response? > >Regards > >Sent from my mobile >Kindly excuse brevity and typos > >On Jul 6, 2017 8:13 AM, "Marika Konings" ><<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>marika.konings(a)icann.org> wrote: > >Dear All, > > > >The surveys for charter question #4 and #7 are >now live. Thank you for the input received â >some updates have been made as a result. Please >respond to the survey by Wednesday 12 July at 18.00 UTC at the latest. > > >Survey Charter Question #4: ><https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/charterquestion4>https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/charterquestion4 > >Survey Charter Question #7: ><https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/charterquestion7>https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/charterquestion7 > > > >Thanks, > > > >Marika > > > >Marika Konings > >Vice President, Policy Development Support >GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigneed Names and Numbers (ICANN) > >Email: <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>marika.konings(a)icann.org > > > >Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO > >Find out more about the GNSO by taking our ><http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso>interactive >courses and visiting the ><http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>GNSO >Newcomer pages. > > > >_______________________________________________ >Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list ><mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>Ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds > > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Disposition: inline >X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: > >1;DM5PR03MB2714;27:ZNFQPdjB4oe/ZcURoduuTT5gbMtBc4N4I0ShrHGNrPGa9H35H5hINVYMriWA8RS0rekDtdTfv82Y9v3nV6RRiOjrNQPEt1UVgl7rXYJHZ6hSyVCwVItlDAi+bzE190BAHnvLsTSkNDdhDRWswRAVEQ== >X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery: > >ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160514016)(520000050)(520002050)(750028)(400001001223)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095); > >_______________________________________________ >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…

2 1

Re: [ALAC] WHOIS Element Usage for GDPR Analysis
by Alan Greenberg July 13, 2017

July 13, 2017

Here is what I have come up with. From a simple "user" perspective, there are not an awful lot of situations when you need to do a WHOIS query. Far more for registrant. But I am sure I have missed some use cases. Please let me know what I am missing and what I have wrong. Alan At 12/07/2017 09:29 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >ICANN web page on these issues has gone live - >https://www.icann.org/dataprotectionprivacy. > >Alan > >At 12/07/2017 08:25 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >>This is coming very late, but following Johannesburg I was swamped >>with non-ICANN issues and am trying to dig my way out. >> >>As was discussed at the meeting, ICANN has (finally) woken up and >>is addressing the GDPR. As I understand it, as part of this, ICANN >>needs to get expert legal opinion and present a case to European >>data commissioners. >> >>The first step is to identify how various parties use WHOIS data >>elements today. This is not an exercise in determining whether the >>particular elements are in fact "personal information" nor to >>determine if the usage is legitimate (under any particular rules). >>It is just to identify uses. >> >>I am looking at this from three different perspectives: >> >>1. User >> >>2. Individual registrant >> >>3. What I call user "tech support" - those of us who, for free or >>charge, help non-technical users and registrants solve their problems >> >>Attached you will find. >> >>A. Meeting notes from the introductory meeting held in Johannesburg >> >>B. A list of WHOIS elements >> >>C. Matrix Instructions >> >>D. Usage Matrix ("User Stories") to be filled in. >> >>I will send you what I have completed shortly. >> >>I must submit it by the end of Saturday, so time is short. >> >>Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] WHOIS Element Usage for GDPR Analysis
by Alan Greenberg July 13, 2017

July 13, 2017

ICANN web page on these issues has gone live - https://www.icann.org/dataprotectionprivacy. Alan At 12/07/2017 08:25 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >This is coming very late, but following Johannesburg I was swamped >with non-ICANN issues and am trying to dig my way out. > >As was discussed at the meeting, ICANN has (finally) woken up and is >addressing the GDPR. As I understand it, as part of this, ICANN >needs to get expert legal opinion and present a case to European >data commissioners. > >The first step is to identify how various parties use WHOIS data >elements today. This is not an exercise in determining whether the >particular elements are in fact "personal information" nor to >determine if the usage is legitimate (under any particular rules). >It is just to identify uses. > >I am looking at this from three different perspectives: > >1. User > >2. Individual registrant > >3. What I call user "tech support" - those of us who, for free or >charge, help non-technical users and registrants solve their problems > >Attached you will find. > >A. Meeting notes from the introductory meeting held in Johannesburg > >B. A list of WHOIS elements > >C. Matrix Instructions > >D. Usage Matrix ("User Stories") to be filled in. > >I will send you what I have completed shortly. > >I must submit it by the end of Saturday, so time is short. > >Alan

1 0

WHOIS Element Usage for GDPR Analysis
by Alan Greenberg July 13, 2017

July 13, 2017

This is coming very late, but following Johannesburg I was swamped with non-ICANN issues and am trying to dig my way out. As was discussed at the meeting, ICANN has (finally) woken up and is addressing the GDPR. As I understand it, as part of this, ICANN needs to get expert legal opinion and present a case to European data commissioners. The first step is to identify how various parties use WHOIS data elements today. This is not an exercise in determining whether the particular elements are in fact "personal information" nor to determine if the usage is legitimate (under any particular rules). It is just to identify uses. I am looking at this from three different perspectives: 1. User 2. Individual registrant 3. What I call user "tech support" - those of us who, for free or charge, help non-technical users and registrants solve their problems Attached you will find. A. Meeting notes from the introductory meeting held in Johannesburg B. A list of WHOIS elements C. Matrix Instructions D. Usage Matrix ("User Stories") to be filled in. I will send you what I have completed shortly. I must submit it by the end of Saturday, so time is short. Alan

1 0

Criteria/Selection for Additional Travel Slots to ICANN50.
by Alan Greenberg July 11, 2017

July 11, 2017

As discussed in Johannesburg, The ALAC has requested additional revel slots to be used for "At-Large workers who are active participants in At-Large and other ICANN policy activities". We were allocated two such slots as a pilot program for FY18 starting at ICANN60. To use these slots, we must establish criteria to be met. As we must decide on who is attending this before the end of July, time is tight. I am requesting a small group, one person per RALO to be created to work with the ALT to develop criteria and recommend participants to the ALAC. My strong preference is that the RALO representative be the current or incoming RALO Chair. Whoever is selected must be available to work over the next few weeks. It is not expected to be a heavy workload, but the timing is tight. With this message, I am asking each RALO Chair to identify who will participate from their RALOs, with a deadline of no later than Friday, preferably earlier. Alan

4 5

Re: [ALAC] [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Please participate - survey charter questions #4 and #7 now live
by Seun Ojedeji July 6, 2017

July 6, 2017

Hello, I just responded to one of these forms then it occurred to me that I probably should have consulted to know how we intend to go about this since am participating as a member. So @Chair how do we go about responding to the questions? Should each member/participant go ahead independently or does ALAC intend to agree on default set of response? Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Jul 6, 2017 8:13 AM, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings(a)icann.org> wrote: Dear All, The surveys for charter question #4 and #7 are now live. Thank you for the input received – some updates have been made as a result. Please respond to the survey *by Wednesday 12 July at 18.00 UTC* at the latest. - Survey Charter Question #4: https://www.surveymonkey.com/ r/charterquestion4 - Survey Charter Question #7: https://www.surveymonkey.com/ r/charterquestion7 Thanks, Marika *Marika Konings* *Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) * *Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org <marika.konings(a)icann.org> * *Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO* *Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-…>. * _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds

1 0

CCWG update
by Glenn McKnight July 1, 2017

July 1, 2017

Here is a short video in English and Spanish on CCWG English https://youtu.be/iCQHnqevOLI Spanish Version https://youtu.be/WjTGQNotbeM Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight 289-830 6259 .

1 0