- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] Narelle's Intervention: Public Forum
by Carlton Samuels Feb. 12, 2015

Feb. 12, 2015

Thanks for sharing Sala. What's most interesting to me - and seemingly germane to discussions connecting IANA transition and ICANN Accountability - is the resolution on principles to address CCWG recommendations. I always thought it is overly optimistic to expect the Board of an American Corporation to vote to neuter itself. Especially when it conceives itself as the guardian of and ultimate firewall for the global public interest. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > Further to Narelle's intervention on the Board Resolution re: perception of > changing community perception, kindly find the link to the Resolution > provided by Ram Mohan: > > https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d > > Kind Regards, > > -- > > *Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala T* > > *P. O. Box 17862* > > *Suva* > > > *Republic of Fiji* > > *Cell: +679 7656770; +679 8024129; +6797144838* > > *Home: +679 3362003* > *Twitter: @SalanietaT* > > > > > *"You will never do anything in this world without courage. It is the > greatest quality of the mind next to honour." Aristotle* > _______________________________________________ > 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

Update from Keith Davidson about the FOIWG
by Maureen Hilyard Feb. 12, 2015

Feb. 12, 2015

... and answering some of the questions that came up in todays Wrap Up meeting :) Keith Davidson keith(a)internetnz.net.nz via icann.org Hi FOIWG'ers, Reporting from ICANN52 Singapore, firstly please excuse this lengthy message. I have copied below the ccNSO Council resolutions, the ccNSO report, the GAC Communique and the report from the ccNSO to the ICANN Board in the public forum. In a nutshell, the GAC did not object to the FOI, and the FOI received final approval from the ccNSO. It therefore is referred to the ICANN Board for their consideration, and implementation within IANA. Also the ccNSO will send the FOI to the CWG-IANA and CCWG-Accountability so that relevant recommendations may be incorporated into the IANA Transition Plan. While not the perfect outcome of having full GAC support, it nevertheless enables a useful implementation path. With that, the work of the FOIWG concludes and the FOI has become the property of the ccNSO, and hopefully a property of ICANN in due course. Byron and I will steward the process within ICANN. So as a last act as the Chair of the working group, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to all the active members of the group, and especially to the vice chair Becky, who assisted above and beyond the call of duty. It has been a fantastic experience and a very long haul to get us through, and I admire the tenacity and endurance of you all, and the support you have given me along the way. My last task as your chair will be to ask our secretariat to close the mailing list. Cheers Keith =========== ccNSO Resolutions: 7.1 Support Framework of Interpretation. The ccNSO Council expresses its final support for the "Framework of Interpretation" to provide more accurate and detailed analysis of the existing policies for the delegation, transfer and revocation of country code Top Level Domains. 7.2 Submission Framework of Interpretation and recommendations to CWG Stewardship and CCWG Accountability: The ccNSO Council will provide the Framework of Interpretation as an input to both the CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability working groups, with the request that the Framework and relevant recommendations from the report be incorporated into their work, including into the Service Level Agreement that will be included in the proposal for the IANA Transition Plan." 7.3 Submission of the Framework of Interpretation and recommendations to ICANN Board of Directors. The ccNSO Council empowers its chair and Keith Davidson, former chair of the FOIWG, to recommend the Final Report of the FOIWG to the ICANN Board of Directors, if they consider that the terms of the GAC Communiqué are compatible with such recommendations. The ccNSO Council also recommends that ICANN adopt the Framework of Interpretation and adopt the document as the specific guidance on the interpretation of the existing, applicable policies. With that in mind, the ccNSO Council recommends that certain previous documents including the GAC Principles 2000 (which the GAC superseded in 2005), ICANN's ICP1 and News Memo 1 should be archived and considered no longer used by ICANN or IANA staff. The ccNSO Council urges ICANN and IANA staff to apply the Framework in the near future, and the Council stands ready to assist IANA staff with that work. ========== CCNSO Council Report: Final Report FOI WG Introduction and Background The Framework of Interpretation WG was established in March 2011. According to its charter the FOIWG is to develop and propose a "Framework of Interpretation" (FOI) for the existing policies and guidelines applicable to the delegation and re-delegation of ccTLDs. After a long and intense consultation process of the FOIWG, community and others, the FOIWG finalized its recommendations during the London meeting (June 2014). The chair of the FOIWG submitted the Final Report of the WG to the ccNSO recommending that the ccNSO adopts the proposed FOI and Recommendations contained in the Final Report at the ICANN Los Angeles October 2014 meeting. In accordance with the charter of the FOIWG, its chair submitted the Final Report to the chair of GAC as well, and actively sought endorsement or support from the GAC for the FOI and Recommendations. After an intense discussion with the ccTLD managers present at the ccNSO meeting in Los Angeles (October 2014), the ccTLD managers unanimously endorsed the FOI and expressed their support for the recommendations contained in the Final Report. At its meeting in Los Angeles the ccNSO Council expressed its interim support for the Framework of Interpretation and the Recommendations contained in the Final Report of the FOIWG, requested its chair and the chair of the FOIWG to work with the chair of the Governmental Advisory Committee to engage with the GAC. As part of this engagement the ccNSO has committed to engage with the GAC going forward to provide further guidance on issues relating to delegations, transfers and revocations of ccTLDs, to review and identify any gaps in the existing policies and guidelines, and to consider whether or not a formal policy development process is needed to cover these policy gaps. An example of which would be the "retirement" of ccTLDs, where there is currently no policy basis for decision-making. Further, based on the dialogue at the ccNSO-GAC joint meeting, the ccNSO Council is optimistic that the GAC will not oppose to the Framework of Interpretation and hence not object to submission of the Framework to the ICANN Board of Directors. Finally, the ccNSO Council has been made aware that ccNSO appointed members and ccTLD participants in both the CWG Stewardship and CCWG Accountability reference the Framework of Interpretation in their work. ========== ccNSO Chairs Comments to ICANN Public Forum: The ccNSO, working closely with the GAC has now completed a multi year effort that started in 2009 with the Delegation and Redelegation Working Group. Having given unanimous provisional approval to the ccNSO's Framework of Interpretation at its meeting in <?>, the Council yesterday gave its overwhelming final approval. The FoI WG, in which the GAC was fully represented has been a good example on how different parts of ICANN can work together. The Framework may not constrain the operation of applicable law, nor may it limit the role of nataonal governments as the ultimate decision-maker in matters of public policy; and the Framework says so, explicitly. We welcome the GAC's consideration of our work, as noted in their Communique. The ccNSO Council directed the Chair of the Council and the Chair of the FoI to transmit the Framework to the Board and we look forward to working together with IANA staff as they start to use it as a tool to assist their day to day operations ========= GAC Communique: 1. Framework of Interpretation Working Group (FOIWG) Report The GAC notes the work of the ccNSO FOIWG, and its efforts to provide interpretive clarity to RFC1591. The GAC welcomes the FOIWG’s recognition that, consistent with the GAC’s 2005 Principles, the ultimate authority on public policy issues relating to ccTLDs is the relevant government. As such, nothing in the FOIWG report should be read to limit or constrain applicable law and governmental decisions, or the IANA operator´s ability to act in line with a request made by the relevant government.

1 0

Narelle's Intervention: Public Forum
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Feb. 12, 2015

Feb. 12, 2015

Dear All, Further to Narelle's intervention on the Board Resolution re: perception of changing community perception, kindly find the link to the Resolution provided by Ram Mohan: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-10-16-en#2.d Kind Regards, -- *Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala T* *P. O. Box 17862* *Suva* *Republic of Fiji* *Cell: +679 7656770; +679 8024129; +6797144838* *Home: +679 3362003* *Twitter: @SalanietaT* *"You will never do anything in this world without courage. It is the greatest quality of the mind next to honour." Aristotle*

1 0

Dinner Thursday
by Holly Raiche Feb. 12, 2015

Feb. 12, 2015

Hi For those who have not checked Skype - Gisella recommended a terrific restaurant only 2 blocks from the hotel (in Singapore) which is on the water, inexpensive with great food. I am suggesting that we meet after Board drinks - in the lobby - and Evan can lead us all there Holly

2 1

Session on Policy and Implementation
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 11, 2015

Feb. 11, 2015

There is a session today on the draft report on the GNSO Policy & Implementation WG today at 15:30 local time (http://singapore52.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-policy-implementation) This is (in my opinion) an incredibly important report and session. If the concepts being proposed ae ultimately accepted, the way we develop and implement gTLD policy will be significantly altered, with a number of far-reaching impacts. These impacts are potentially very positive, but could have 2nd order effects which are less positive. Both Cheryl and I who have been very active in this WG have clearly said that we believe that the ALAC should comment on this report. Good participation in this information session will help that. Alan

1 0

Session on Board Reconsideration and Ombudsman Wednesday
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 10, 2015

Feb. 10, 2015

For people who have an interest on accountability issues, there is a meeting on the Board Reconsideration, the Ombudsman, and I am told the Independent Review Process (IRP). It overlaps with the RALO Leadership meeting, but most ALAC members should be able to make it. It may include a discussion of possible improvements. Alan

5 5

Session on Universal Acceptance (9 Feb/17:00-18:15 SGT/Canning)
by Satish Babu Feb. 8, 2015

Feb. 8, 2015

Dear all On behalf of the ALAC Working Group on IDNs, I'd like to invite you all to the session on Universal Acceptance scheduled for Monday, 9 Feb, at 17:00 at Canning. The session addresses the important matter of ensuring that all services and applications on the Internet fully support new gTLDs, IDNs and internationalized email addresses. For Remote Participants, here are the links to the Meeting Room as well as to audio in different languages: http://singapore52.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-universal-acceptance satish

1 0

DNS WOMEN will offer a rare and interesting movie screening open to all!!! on Tuesday evening 6:45 PM CANNING ROOM
by Vanda Scartezini Feb. 6, 2015

Feb. 6, 2015

Dear all On Tuesday evening, under the sponsorship of AUDA and PUBLIC INTEREST REGISTRY and its new Portal for Not for Profit Community, DNS WOMEN will present a movie screening - "Showing of The Computers, The Remarkable Untold Story of the ENIAC Programmers" , from Kathy Kleiman is up on the ICANN 52 schedule in the Canning Room. Date: Tue, 10 February 2015 - 18:45 to 20:00 SGT Room: Canning There are no remote participation services available for this session at this time. Overview: Asian premiere of The Computers, a documentary short produced by Kathy Kleiman, http://eniacprogrammers.org/eniac-programmers-project/founder/ describing the remarkable untold story of the six young women who programmed ENIAC, the world's first all-electronic, programmable computer. Industry-wide preview is hosted during the ICANN Meeting in Singapore by DNS Women. Come join us for this special event - drinks provided! The Venue http://singapore52.icann.org/en/schedule/tue-eniac-programmers Hope you all can join us to this remarkable opportunity. Best regards Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos.

1 0

LAC STRATEGY - LAC SPACE at ICANN 52 -SiNGAPORE meeting
by Vanda Scartezini Feb. 6, 2015

Feb. 6, 2015

Dear all As LAC region had establish from some time now, our region has a 1.5 to 2 hours slots at each ICANN meeting to explore business and engagement opportunities around the world . This Singapore meeting will be no different and our LAC SPACE will be running on Monday 9th, from 10:30 to 12:00 with the following Agenda. I am the coordinator of a wonderful group of collaborators from our community and from ICANN. It is, of course, an open session and you all are invited. Thank you for your attention. 10:30 10:35 Introduction Rodrigo de la Parra ICANN - Vanda Scartezini 10:35 10:55 LAC Strategy Update Rodrigo Saucedo ICANN (remotely) 10:55 11:15 The Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship Proposal (CRISP) Esteban Lescano (remotely) 11:15 11:35 New vision for internet architecture, ³Internet of the Future² Professor Antonio Alberti INATEL (remotely) 11:35 -11:45 Plans and strategy for .ltda Urs EROES dot LTDA 11:45 12:00 DPRD¹s work in LAC Region Nora Abusita - ICANN Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos.

1 0

At-Large mailing list activity reports
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 6, 2015

Feb. 6, 2015

Jean-Jacques Subrenat has raised the issue of the At-Large mailing list reports generated weekly by Thomas Narten. An example is follows: Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 28.57% | 4 | 37.14% | 56728 | jjs at dyalog.net 21.43% | 3 | 22.75% | 34743 | jefsey at jefsey.com 14.29% | 2 | 10.51% | 16050 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 7.14% | 1 | 11.72% | 17899 | mcknight.glenn at gmail.com 7.14% | 1 | 5.16% | 7874 | hilyard at oyster.net.ck 7.14% | 1 | 5.06% | 7731 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 7.14% | 1 | 5.03% | 7687 | narten at us.ibm.com 7.14% | 1 | 2.63% | 4015 | at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 14 |100.00% | 152727 | Total I understand that Thomas produces similar reports for a number of other mailing lists including the main ietf list (https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg91110.html) Jean-Jacques' questions along with my answers follow: - Was there a decision to task any particular individual/firm with carrying out this statistical/nominative tracking? Was this decision taken in ALAC or elsewhere (date, reference)? AG: The tallies were requested by the ALAC Chair. The message documenting this is part of our e-mail archive that is missing, but a copy of the message is attached. - Was this submitted to regular review and approval, or is there a separate decision to grant this as a permanent authorization (date, reference)? AG: Soon after the statistics started, they were questioned with the perception that it violated peoples privacy. It was pointed out that the statistics were generated based on a public archive (which is also indexed by Google). I am not aware of any further concerns raised in the ensuing seven years. - If this is being used as a metrics tool, what is its qualitative relevance? Has it been effectively used to "measure" the value of this or that member, say in ALAC? How were the criteria determined, and by whom (date, reference)? AG: I believe that the original request was made because of a person regarded as a troll who was posting large numbers of messages. The summaries have proven useful from time to time and all e-mail programs have the ability to filter them out for those who do not wish to see them. QUESTION TO THE ALAC: I see no harm in continuing to have these statistics generated, and in fact, the Metrics WG has discussed doing something similar for other lists as well. Are there any ALAC who feel that we need to either curtail this practice or discuss it further? Alan

9 8