- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] ALAC Representative on the .NGO Community Advisory Council
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 14, 2017

Jan. 14, 2017

To Evan and all those who supported his thought, I checked with Roberto, and his response was very clear. PIR has no problem with the person coming from an ISOC Chapter, as long as they are active in the field with NGOs. Their main concern is that the Advisory Council provide then with real-world knowledge of the field they are trying to serve, and are sufficiently interested to actually participate actively. Although I clearly understand the connection between PIR:ISOC:ISOC Chapters, I am curious as to exactly what you see as the potential conflict? An ALS that is an ISOC Chapter that receives some funding from ISOC may want ISOC to have more money and thus PIR to be more successful and thus .NGO to be more successful. But that seems to all reinforce what they are looking for, and not be a conflict. And of course, this is just one person on a larger Council. Alan At 12/01/2017 11:06 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >Hi Alan, > >I think this would be a great idea with one proviso. I would suggest >that as a guideline to choosing such a rep, we do not (or at least >strongly discourage) appointment of reps from ALSs that are ISOC >chapters. There appears a clear conflict of interest here since PIR >is the primary source of revenue to ISOC (which in turn provides >funding to Chapters). > >- Evan > >On 12 January 2017 at 22:58, Judith Hellerstein ><<mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com>judith(a)jhellerstein.com> wrote: >HI Alan, > >Great Idea > >Judith > >_________________________________________________________________________ >Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO >Hellerstein & Associates >3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 >Phone: <tel:%28202%29%20362-5139>(202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein >E-mail: ><mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com>Judith(a)jhellerstein.com Website: ><http://www.jhellerstein.com>www.jhellerstein.com >Linked In: ><http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/>www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ >Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide > > >On 1/12/2017 10:24 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >I was approached by Roberto Gaetano (former ALAC Member, former ALAC >Liaison to the ICANN Board, former BCEC Chair, former Vice-Chair of >the ICANN Board) who is the Chair of the Board of the Public >Interest Registry (PIR), the operator of .ORG and now .NGO/.ONG as >well Chinese, Hindi and Russian equivalents of .ORG.as several. As >you likely know, PIR is a not-for profit organization created by the >Internet Society. > >PIR has a Community Advisory Council for the .NGO/ONG TLD (see ><http://pir.org/products/ngo-ong-domain/>http://pir.org/products/ngo-ong-domain/) >and asked if the ALAC was interested in having a representative on >that Council. After having discussed this with a number of At-Large >colleagues, I hope no one will object to my agreeing to do this. > >Following discussion with Roberto on exactly what is required, I >will be sending out a call for volunteers. > >We have been asked to identify a small number of candidates that we >believe would do a good job. The PIR Nominating Committee will >select one person to serve on the Advisory Council. > >Alan

3 3

Call for Volunteers: .NGO Community Advisory Panel
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 13, 2017

Jan. 13, 2017

The Public Interest Registry (PIR), the operator of the .NGO and .ONG top level domains (see http://pir.org/products/ngo-ong-domain/) is looking for one person to represent the ALAC in its NGO Community Advisory Council. The Advisory Council provides important feedback and advice on issues relating to the NGO community ranging from policy considerations to the introduction of new services. The NGO Community Advisory Council plays a vital role in helping Public Interest Registry fulfill its mission. With .ngo domain users representing NGOs of varying size, sectors,scope and geography, it is important to have advocates in the Internet community who fully understand their needs as diverse service-based organizations. The Council continually lends its unique global expertise to help us meet those needs and strengthen our efforts in supporting NGOs worldwide. The Advisory Council meets Face-to-Face annually (generally in September) and via teleconference four times per year. To the extent allowed by PIR confidentiality rules, the successful applicant will be expected to regularly report to the ALAC on Advisory Council issues and if applicable consult with the ALAC. PIR has asked the ALAC to identify a number of candidates. Ideally, such candidates will come from an active At-Large ALS that has a proven record of engagement with the NGO community. Candidates should have notable leadership experience in non-commercial/civil society community and an acute understanding of the issues and policies that affect the NGO society. Candidates should submit their Expression of Interest detailing their experience, expertise and qualifications along with a statement that they have sufficient time and interest to fulfill the Advisory Council duties. The ALAC Appointee Selection Committee will review all EoIs and will select a small number which will be forwarded to PIR. The final selection on the ALAC Representative will be done by the PIR Nominating Committee. All EoIs must be sent to staff(a)atlarge.icann.org by Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 23:59 UTC. Please use an e-mail Subject of: NGO Community Advisory Council. Alan Greenberg Chair, ALAC

1 0

Re: [ALAC] ALAC Representative on the .NGO Community Advisory Council
by Alan Greenberg Jan. 13, 2017

Jan. 13, 2017

Some interesting points, and I will address them one by one. At 13/01/2017 12:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >On 13 January 2017 at 11:02, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > >Although I clearly understand the connection between PIR:ISOC:ISOC >Chapters, I am curious as to exactly what you see as the potential conflict? > > >At a meta level, this: > >PIR does a great many objectively-good things in supporting >user-centric and progressive Internet Governance, not only in its >support of ISOC (though that is its most high-profile benefactor). >But to do that, PIR must still maximize revenue from domain sales, >which presents a potential conflict with At-Large approaches to domain policy. I think that this is an issue that does require some thought and which is why from my perspective I had to think about it. But not an awful lot. I have a pretty good knowledge of PIR. I was the one of those on the ISOC Board who strongly pushed for ISOC to bid on .org (against some strong opposition), and I personally know most of the senior people in PIR. Of all of the entities in the domain business, I feel that they are more closely aligned with what we stand for than anyone else I can think of. And should .NGO one day do something that we are against, this representative will potentially (factoring in the potential need for confidentiality) give use advance notice of more insight into it. And I cannot imagine us not making a negative comment on such an issue just because we have a rep on the advisory council. >I'm also concerned about the optics. As are we all. But optics are PERCEIVED conflicts and they are, to some extent, a fact of life. They must be addressed and where possible managed, but cannot be eliminated. The many patently false statements about us in the quotes in the draft review document are great examples of this. >As I said in an earlier mail, the At-Large Review seems overly >interested by the ALAC/ISOC connections, and this would be a good >opportunity -- if we can so avail -- to bring forward those in the >community outside that alleged influence. That's all. The report is curious in this area. It implies too much focus on ISOC Chapters, then goes on to say we should work more closely with ISOC. >If the talent pool is sufficiently small that the best rep is indeed >an ISOC Chapter member, and PIR is OK with that, then OK by me too. >I just suggest making an explicit effort looking outside ISOC-affiliated ALSs. I will make sure the selection committee factors this in. Hopefully we will have a rich enough candidate pool that this is even relevant. To the extent that those on this list can reach out to appropriate ALSes, the more likely this will be to happen (the Call will be going out in a few minutes). Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] ALAC Representative on the .NGO Community Advisory Council
by wafa DAHMANI Jan. 13, 2017

Jan. 13, 2017

Great Idea and I agree with Evan for the point raised. Wafa De: "Evan Leibovitch" <evan(a)telly.org> À: "Judith Hellerstein" <judith(a)jhellerstein.com> Cc: "ICANN ALAC list" <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Envoyé: Vendredi 13 Janvier 2017 05:06:05 Objet: Re: [ALAC] ALAC Representative on the .NGO Community Advisory Council Hi Alan, I think this would be a great idea with one proviso. I would suggest that as a guideline to choosing such a rep, we do not (or at least strongly discourage) appointment of reps from ALSs that are ISOC chapters. There appears a clear conflict of interest here since PIR is the primary source of revenue to ISOC (which in turn provides funding to Chapters). - Evan On 12 January 2017 at 22:58, Judith Hellerstein < judith(a)jhellerstein.com > wrote: HI Alan, Great Idea Judith _________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein E-mail: Judith(a)jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide On 1/12/2017 10:24 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: BQ_BEGIN I was approached by Roberto Gaetano (former ALAC Member, former ALAC Liaison to the ICANN Board, former BCEC Chair, former Vice-Chair of the ICANN Board) who is the Chair of the Board of the Public Interest Registry (PIR), the operator of .ORG and now .NGO/.ONG as well Chinese, Hindi and Russian equivalents of .ORG.as several. As you likely know, PIR is a not-for profit organization created by the Internet Society. PIR has a Community Advisory Council for the .NGO/ONG TLD (see http://pir.org/products/ngo-ong-domain/ ) and asked if the ALAC was interested in having a representative on that Council. After having discussed this with a number of At-Large colleagues, I hope no one will object to my agreeing to do this. Following discussion with Roberto on exactly what is required, I will be sending out a call for volunteers. We have been asked to identify a small number of candidates that we believe would do a good job. The PIR Nominating Committee will select one person to serve on the Advisory Council. 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… _______________________________________________ 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… BQ_END -- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada BQ_BEGIN Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 BQ_END _______________________________________________ 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] ALAC Representative on the .NGO Community Advisory Council
by Javier Rua Jan. 13, 2017

Jan. 13, 2017

No objection here. Interesting. Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua > On Jan 12, 2017, at 11:24 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 > I was approached by Roberto Gaetano (former ALAC Member, former ALAC Liaison to the ICANN Board, former BCEC Chair, former Vice-Chair of the ICANN Board) who is the Chair of the Board of the Public Interest Registry (PIR), the operator of .ORG and now .NGO/.ONG as well Chinese, Hindi and Russian equivalents of .ORG.as several. As you likely know, PIR is a not-for profit organization created by the Internet Society. > > PIR has a Community Advisory Council for the .NGO/ONG TLD (see http://pir.org/products/ngo-ong-domain/) and asked if the ALAC was interested in having a representative on that Council. After having discussed this with a number of At-Large colleagues, I hope no one will object to my agreeing to do this. > > Following discussion with Roberto on exactly what is required, I will be sending out a call for volunteers. > > We have been asked to identify a small number of candidates that we believe would do a good job. The PIR Nominating Committee will select one person to serve on the Advisory Council. > > 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] 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