- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Response from the Board New gTLD Process Committee
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 24, 2014

Dec. 24, 2014

I have received that attached message from the Board New gTLD Process Committee in response to the advice we provided on Top Level Domains related to highly regulated sectors. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time that we have had such a response to any Board advice and I find this extremely encouraging. Alan

3 3

Translation of ALAC statements
by Hadja OUATTARA/ SANON Dec. 22, 2014

Dec. 22, 2014

Dear Alan, Would it be possible to translate into French (and Spanish if needed) the final statements submitted to ALAC vote??? ICANN has interpreters! It would be very appreciated for an inclusive participation in ALAC if you can do it! Unfortunately I spend much time with google translate to understand and less time to contribute unfortunately..... Sorry for this! Kind regards Hadja OUATTARA / SANON Conseiller Technique Ministère du Développement de l'Economie Numérique et des Postes Administrateur des TIC - CAPES SG Fondation Femme, TIC et Développement Durable Présidente Initiative TIC & Citoyenneté Cell. : +22670231399

2 2

Season Greetings and 2015 full of joy!
by Vanda Scartezini Dec. 22, 2014

Dec. 22, 2014

A gift to all of you with the art, the architecture and the human been¹s capacity to transform. All the best, http://player.vimeo.com/video/71501596 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

CONSENSUS CALL: Selection of Accountability CCWG Co-Chair
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 20, 2014

Dec. 20, 2014

As you will recall, we have selected five Members of the Accountability CCWG (Sebastien, Leon, Tijani, Chery and me). As the selection committee did not recommend a Co-Chair, the Co-Chair was to be picked from among the five Members. After extensive consultation, I am recommending the León Sanchez be confirmed as the ALAC Co-Chair of the CCWG. The next meeting of the Accountability CCWG is on Tuesday, 23 December at 0600 UTC, and I would like to announce the selection at that meeting. Alan

2 1

Re: [ALAC] ALAC statement on the IANA Stewardship
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 16, 2014

Dec. 16, 2014

I should add that some comments already made implied the need for possible changes, but I did not feel that they were sufficiently understood (by me!) to incorporate them. Alan At 16/12/2014 06:29 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >As planned, the statement had a few updates made based on comments, >and was posted to the Public Comment as well as to the wiki - >https://community.icann.org/x/YoEHAw. > >Also as planned, comments will continue to be received until Friday. > >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

ALAC statement on the IANA Stewardship
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 16, 2014

Dec. 16, 2014

As planned, the statement had a few updates made based on comments, and was posted to the Public Comment as well as to the wiki - https://community.icann.org/x/YoEHAw. Also as planned, comments will continue to be received until Friday. Alan

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Nominating Committee ALAC Requirements Document
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 14, 2014

Dec. 14, 2014

40 hours in a week, or a month????? At 08/12/2014 02:39 PM, Carlton Samuels wrote: >Alan: >Estimate of time commitment is low; well, if you want to configure a >'me too' personality that would do it. If one must participate in >at least one standing At-Large WG and at least one GNSO WG then >realistically that commitment moves closer to 40 hours in a 7-day week! > >I would advise minimum 30 hours of effort. > >-Carlton > > >============================== >Carlton A Samuels >Mobile: 876-818-1799 >Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround >============================= > >On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >The Nominating Committee has a document describing what the ALAC >does and the requirements and expectations for people applying for >LAC positions. This year the NomCom will be selecting ALAC Members >for Africa, Latin America / Caribbean Islands and Asia/Australia/Pacific). > >The document has not been revised since 2010, and I think it >important that we update it. I should have attended to this earlier, >but unfortunately the other issues we are working on seem to have >taken precedence. > >So we are now VERY late. Attached is the current version that has >been used 2010-2014 and one I have edited for use this coming year. > >I would appreciate all ALAC members (or past ALAC members) quickly >looking at this and letting me know what I have omitted or got wrong. > >In particular I would appreciate your experience regarding how many >hours per month we should realistically say is expected. We used to >have 20-26 and I changes that to the simpler 25. My rationale is: >- Monthly ALAC call: 2 >- e-mail: 30 minutes per day = 15 >- participation in various WG, drafting, webinars: 2 hours per week = 8 > >Even if you don't make any other changes, please comment on what >YOUR experience is regarding the number of weeks for a normal >(non-ALT, non-Liaison) ALAC Member. > >Sorry for the rush, but I need to get this sent in by mid-week, so >please don't put this off. > >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… >

4 4

Draft Statement on IANA Stewardship CWG Proposal
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 12, 2014

Dec. 12, 2014

The draft statement is now up - https://community.icann.org/x/YoEHAw. It is a significant revision of the version presented at the Webinar on Wednesday. There are 5 versions posted. - 10 December 2014 Webinar version (PDF) - Redline compared to Webinar version (PDF) - Clean copy (PDF) - Clean copy (DOCX) - Wiki format As discussed on the Webinar and the last Ad Hoc IANA Issues call, we really need to get this posted on the Public Comment in time to allow other groups to see it and hopefully support it. Accordingly, I am opening this for comments and suggestions until 22:00 UTC on Monday. It will then be revised and posted to the PC AS A DRAFT as soon as practical. PLEASE TRY TO GET IN ANY SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS BEFORE THE DEADLINE. Once posted, we can still refine it and the formally approve in the following week before the comment period closes on 22 December.

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Next round in the battle of letters regarding PICs
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 11, 2014

Dec. 11, 2014

Well, there is no way to know if Thomas would have sent his letter reminding the Board of unanswered GAC advice without our action, but in the absence of knowledge, we can take credit. ;-) On the Board, I think that you are being a bit unfair. They deserve all the knocks for not doing things properly when the issues first arose, and for allowing critical contracts to be signed creating the potentially uneven playing field. However, now that we are where we are, it is not just an issue of who do you love more. They have placed themselves in a VERY difficult position (and as I said I have little sympathy), but if I was in a position to "fix" things, I am not at all sure exactly how I would go about doing that. I too hope to be pleasantly surprised, but if I am, it will be because they have worked there way through a complex maze. Alan At 10/12/2014 11:35 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >I would like to think that the ALAC motion taken in LA has been the >catalyst for this flurry of activity on an issue so many in ICANN >thought (hoped?) was dead. > >The letters we have seen lately on the Public Interest Commitments >issue simply re-enforce what we saw in the Public Comment Process on >it -- it's the domain industry versus the rest of the world. > >We now have what is actually a moment of unusual clarity at ICANN. >The lines have rarely been drawn this sharply, on a matter that at >its core directly concerns public trust in the domain name system. > >At a time when it is under more global scrutiny than ever, the ICANN >Board is now forced to reveal its true loyalties between the public >interest (in this case, a coalition of governments, registrants and >end users) and the industry it is supposed to be regulating. > >In its decision, ICANN will tell the world -- which is already >watching its every move with scepticism -- to whom it is ultimately >accountable, and whether the term "multistakeholder" actually means something. > >I await the Board's response. I hope to be surprised but do not expect to be. > >- Evan > > >On 10 December 2014 at 21:51, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: ><https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gtld-rysg-to-crocker-i…>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gtld-rysg-to-crocker-i… > >Alan > >

1 0

Next round in the battle of letters regarding PICs
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 11, 2014

Dec. 11, 2014

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gtld-rysg-to-crocker-i… Alan

2 1