- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Questionnaire ccNSO-ALAC coordination working group
by Rudi Vansnick March 2, 2010

March 2, 2010

Dear colleagues, Following the decision to launch a working group focusing on outreach between ccTLDs and ALSes I have prepared a questionnaire with input from my counter part Ron Sherwood. The questionnaire below is a proposal, not the final one and I'm asking you to comment / add any question you estimate of importance to this phase of action. The questionnaire will be presented during the ALAC Nairobi meeting, I hope in a more complete form by integrating your input. Many thanks already. Rudi Vansnick ccNSO liaison _*Introduction*_ In a first phase we would like to send out a questionnaire to all ALSes helping us to define to actual status of relationship between ccTLDs and ALSes. Furthermore, we could also obtain information about possible new ALSes at present being involved in the ccTLD. The questionnaire focus on the relationship between ccTLD and the ALS, but of course, we can add some complementary questions that fit into a broader _*Proposed questionnaire to our ALSes :*_ Are you involved in your country's ccTLD business? * on a daily basis; * once in a while; * none Are you, as an ALS, a member of the ccTLD in your country ? * a voting board member; * a non-voting board member; * not a member; Reason for not being a member : * geographic distance * limited knowledge of ccTLD working process * ccTLD does not allow membership or external collaboration * another ALS is already a member Are you a partner of the ccTLD ? Yes - No If yes, what is the relationship between your ALS and the ccTLD ? * regular meetings * exceptional meetings * occasional events * others – please describe How often do you meet with the ccTLD ? * monthly * quarterly * twice a year * once a year Are members of the ccTLD board members of your ALS ? * Yes - No Have you approached the ccTLD and suggested a collaborative arrangement? * Yes - No Has the ccTLD approached your ALS and suggested a collaborative arrangement? * Yes - No IF the answer to either of the above questions is Yes: Has there been any request, or offer, of technical outreach or education (namespace or ICANN) for the community? Is the ccTLD in your country a : * private company * NGO (Non Government Organization) – non profit organisation * public company (government involvement) * governed by government only * other – please describe Does the ccTLD in your country work with NGO – civil society ? * Yes - No What is the cost of registration for a ccTLD domain name ? * free of charge; * cost per year; * cost several years * cost for life time Would your ALS like to be more closely involved in the activities of the ccTLD ? * as a partner in activities or events * as a board member of the ccTLD * as the representative organisation for the citizens * other – please describe Do you think the ccTLD is open to a closer collaboration with ALSes ?

1 0

NTIA - Lawrence Strickling comments on ICANN and other things
by Adam Peake March 2, 2010

March 2, 2010

<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2010/MediaInstitute_02242010.html> Speech by NTIA head Lawrence Strickling about new directions for U.S. Internet policy and issues NTIA will be working on. A lot of interesting comments, but ICANN related: "Internet Governance: In our role administering the Federal government's relationship with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), how do we ensure that ICANN serves the public interest and conducts its activities with the openness and transparency that the global Internet community demands? Last fall, NTIA and ICANN set forth a framework for technical coordination of the naming and numbering system and I am looking forward to soon participating in the first of the administrative reviews to ensure that these commitments are carried out in full." So he does expect to participate (I said on the last ALAC call I though not likely. Wrong...) So it will be high level, and may change the intensity of the work of the team (Strickling's not going to be joining calls every few weeks.) Commenting on the need for increased trust in the Internet, one of the examples given "If foreign governments do not trust the Internet governance systems, they will threaten to balkanize the Domain Name System which will jeopardize the worldwide reach of the Internet." Enhanced role for the GAC as suggested in the AoC? Adam

1 0

ICANN Board agenda for 12 March 2010 in Nairobi
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 28, 2010

Feb. 28, 2010

Should be an interesting meeting: AoC Reviews, new gTLD EoI, .XXX and the December meeting (which will hopefully be somewhere even the moderately timid will go to). Alan >From: http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/agenda-12mar10-en.htm > > >Board Meeting - Agenda > >12 March 2010 > >1. Consent Agenda Resolution: > > a. Minutes of 4 February 2010 Meeting > > b. Minutes of 19 February 2010 Meeting > > >Main Board Meeting > >2. President's Report > >3. Acknowledgment of Committee Reports Received by the Board > >4. Affirmation of Commitments Reviews - Status Report > >5. New gTLDs > > a. Status > > b. Consideration of Expressions of Interest > >6.Framework for FY11 Operating Plan > >7.Consideration of the Independent Review Panel Declaration ICM Registry >v. ICANN > >8.Approval of Location of ICANN International Meeting December 2010 > >9.Issues Arising from the Nairobi Meeting > >10.Any Other Business > >11.Thank You Resolutions

1 0

XXX Saga Continues
by Patrick Vande Walle Feb. 20, 2010

Feb. 20, 2010

Rod tweeted the following yesterday: An Independent Review Panel has rules in ICM Registry’s favor 2-1, issuing advisory declaration that #ICANN Board must consider 2007 decision denying .XXX TLD application. Thanks to Michele for the summary you did of this long story. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100220_xxx_saga_continues/ Patrick

2 1

URGENT: Process to select ALAC representative to AoC Review
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 20, 2010

Feb. 20, 2010

I am distributing this on behalf of Cheryl. Since the last ALAC meeting and the submission of the approved ALAC comments on the Affirmation of Commitments review process, there have been numerous discussions at many levels on the review process. From an At-Large perspective, we need to decide how we will address the selection of one or more people to be candidates for the first review team - the one assessing ICANN's accountability, transparency and support of the interests of global Internet users. Attached is a document that summarizes the issues and identifies what decision we must make. Because it includes a lot of background information, it is not short. The important issues are listed at the end, and most importantly, it includes a series of steps that we must take WITHOUT DELAY. For your convenience, the text of the document is also appended to this e-mail. If we do not act quickly, we will lose the ability to effectively participate in the very important review. PLEASE REVIEW IMMEDIATELY, AND DECIDE IN WHAT WAY YOU NEED TO INVOLVE THE REST OF YOUR RALO SO THAT WE CAN EFFECTIVELY MAKE DECISIONS NEXT WEEK. Alan --------------- Proposed ALAC Process for the "endorsement" of candidates responding to the Call for Accountability & Transparency (A&T) Review Team applicants (further to the discussion at the January 26th ALAC Meeting on this matter). Background · The Affirmation of Commitments (AoC - http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm) calls for several reviews to be carried out periodically, with the first review being one on ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of global Internet users (for short Accountability and transparency A&T). The AoC requires that this review be concluded no later than December 31, 2010. · The review team will include the following (or their designated nominees): the Chair of the GAC, the Chair of the Board of ICANN, the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the DOC, representatives of the relevant ICANN Advisory Committees and Supporting Organizations and independent experts. · Composition of the review team will be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members) and the Chair of the Board of ICANN. · The team composition will be published for public comment, but the draft review proposal does not seem to allow for changes based on these comments. · The Call for Applicants for membership in the review team was issued on January 13, 2010 - http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/call-for-applicants-11jan10-en.…. · The draft review proposal calls for one representative of the ALAC. - Our comments suggested that one was insufficient. We know that other organizations have made similar comments. At this point there is no indication that it will change, but it may. - Note the term representative defined as a person who has been chosen to act or make decisions on behalf of another person or a group of people. · The draft review proposal requires that any candidate to be considered for the review team be endorsed by the group they are to represent. · The draft review proposal requires that applications be submitted directly to ICANN. - We have been assured that we will receive copies of any such applications. · The original deadline for submitting applications was February 17th at 23:59 UTC with the intent of selecting the final review team by February 20th. The submission deadline has since been extended to February 22nd and we have been told that the deadline for us submitting endorsements is March 1, 2010 at 23:59 UTC. · The call for applications did not allow for any ALAC-specific criteria, but since that time, the GNSO indicated that they may want to collect additional information on their behalf. · Any people who we endorse but who are not selected for the A&T review will be kept on file and may be appointed to a later review without further consultation with us. · The GAC and the Board are given the courtesy of being represented on the review team by their Chair or a delegate (it is unclear when they must decide whether they themselves are participating or replaced by a delegate), but the ACs and SOs are not. Current Situation As of February 11th we are told that there have been just two applications. One is from a Kurt Snyder. He is not currently affiliated with any At-Large entity, but (according to his e-mail to the ALAC Chair I have been looking for ways to volunteer with ICANN and I believe this would be a fantastic opportunity for me. Moreover, my background is well suited for such an endeavor. I am an attorney with technology and assessment experience. Mr. Snyder apparently incorrectly interpreted a reply from the ALAC Chair as implying that we had already formally endorsed him. This has been corrected. The second is from Christopher Wilkinson, an At-Large participant from Europe. Wolf has sent an e-mail saying that EURALO supports his candidature. Christopher has a long and illustrious history with ICANN. He is a member of EURALO/ISOC Chapter of Wallonia (Belgium) and is a former EU representative to the GAC, former GAC vice-chair, and former Secretary of the GAC. We have argued that the time-frame is unreasonable, particularly given the hierarchical structure of At-Large, but there is no indication that it will be altered. It is unclear to what extent our representative, once selected, will be allowed to interact with us once he/she is appointed to the review team. Although not planned for the purpose, we have an ALAC meeting scheduled for February 23, 2010, a few hours after the close of the application period. In communications to date, we have assumed that we will publicly post the submitted information of all applicants seeking our endorsements on out wiki/web site (URL to be determined). Decision Requirements · Do we wish to endorse all applicants to want to represent us? · If not, how do we select one or more? · Regardless of the above, do we want to indicate an order of preference? · If we do any sort of selection, what criteria do we use? Specifically, how do we recognize the person(s) who we will endorse to represent us. To what extent should prior knowledge of ICANN, prior involvement with ICANN, and prior involvement with the formally defined At-Large Community be factored in? · Given the time frame, to what extent can the entire At-Large Community - the ALSs, RALOs and even the entire ALAC MEANINGFULLY participate? · To what extent do we wish to require ALAC specific information from the candidates? If any, what? Note that the inclusion of the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the US Department of Commerce sets the tone for this group it is a HIGH-level group of people. · To what extent, at this late date, do we issue a further call for applications? · Do we wish our endorsed but not accepted candidates to be held for future reviews? · Do we want to consider the option of equity with the GAC and the Board by allowing our Chair or her/his delegate to participate in the process? Among other merits, it makes the representative responsible to and answerable to the ALAC and implicitly At-Large? *Immediate Action* The earliest that we can formally act on these questions is during our ALAC meeting of February 23rd. That will be too late to solicit applications or additional ALAC-specific information. It is therefore suggested that IMMEDIATELY: 1. All RALOs, through whatever mechanism they choose, should select and forward any preferred candidates to the ALAC and to the designated ICANN address. The earlier this can be done, the better, but if ALAC members will have the time to adequately review the documentation, they must be received no later than the end of February 20th. The candidates must follow the specific requirements specified in the Call for Applicants PLUS must include a statement of why they believe: a. they are in a position to fairly access ICANNs accountability, transparency and the focus on the interests of global Internet users; b. they will be able to do this from the perspective of the global ICANN At-Large Community and the ALAC. 2. All RALOs, through whatever mechanism they choose, decide how their representatives can help the ALAC come to closure on the above decisions on February 23rd. We do NOT have the option of deferring these decisions. If we do not formally make them in a timely manner, we may lose our say in the process of selecting an ALAC representative and we lose our ability to adequately participate in the review. 3. We should schedule a tentative ALAC meeting on Friday, February 26 to finalize our endorsements in case we do not do so at our ALAC meeting on February 23rd.

3 3

Board meeting on the Nairobi conference later today
by Alan Greenberg Feb. 18, 2010

Feb. 18, 2010

As you may have heard, there will a Board meeting later today (Feb 19, 03:00 UTC, about 8 hours from now). Current indications are that it is to discuss security issues, meeting organization and remote participation, and not cancellation. The attached statement has been provided to Vanda. It is a revision of the one we provided for the Jan 22 meeting. If the above assumption is correct, the relevant part of the message is section 2. Due to the tight time constraints, we have not had an opportunity to fully discuss this, but if you disagree with this message, or have additional comments, please let the ALAC and Vanda know. Alan

1 0

Matters for Policy Advice Development
by Carlton Samuels Feb. 16, 2010

Feb. 16, 2010

Dear Colleagues: There are now fourteen (14) issues on our Policy Advice Development Calendar by virtue of them becoming open for comment. As it is and toi my mind, this gives us a ripe opportunity to cherry-pick the ones we feel will improve with our influence. I lay them out hereunder: 1. Uniform Rapid Suspension 2. TM Clearinghouse 3. Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (PPDRP) 4. Registry Restrictions Dispute Resolution Procedure ( RRDRP) 5. IDN 3 Character 6. IDN Variants 7. Benchmarking of Registry Operations 8. Process of gTLD Registry Agreement Amendments 9. Proposed Framework for FY 2011 Operating Plan and Budget *All of the above* shall close for public comment on *1st April, 2010*. The ALAC must decide whether there will be a *formal* At-Large response by *19th February, 2010* and assign a lead to marshal that response with a draft response made available for public/at-large comment by *16th March, 2010*. In addition, there are seven (7) others with various closing dates: 10. Draft Report on WHOIS Accuracy will close on April 15, 2010 11. Global DNS-CERT Business Case will close on March 29, 2010 12. Proposed Strategic Initiatives for Improved DNS Security, Stability and Resiliency (SSR) will close on March 28, 2010 13. Registration Abuse Policies Initial Report will close on March 28, 2010 14. Working Group Guidelines which closes on March 22, 2010 For further details, go see all of them at http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#urs> . Carlton Samuels -- +========+++++++++++++++====== Carlton A Samuels Strategies for Education Technologies in Curriculum Development, Policy, Governance and Process Improvement

1 0

Re: [ALAC] LOPSSI en France suite à HADOPI ...
by Patrick Vande Walle Feb. 15, 2010

Feb. 15, 2010

Rudi, I agree this law is a concern (just like ACTA)but I am not sure what the impact would be on the policy work in the ICANN context. can you enlighten us ? Thanks Patrick Sent from a mobile device -- message original -- Sujet: [ALAC] LOPSSI en France suite à HADOPI ... De: Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick(a)isoc.be> Date: 13.02.2010 09:33 LOPSSI en France suite à HADOPI ... LOPSSI = /loi d’orientation et de programmation pour la performance de la sécurité intérieure/ Looks like this new law has been voted ... prohibits access to websites with childpronography or it this law just a first step to block everything else ? Best regards, Rudi Vansnick _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

3 2

LOPSSI en France suite à HADOPI ...
by Rudi Vansnick Feb. 13, 2010

Feb. 13, 2010

LOPSSI en France suite à HADOPI ... LOPSSI = /loi d’orientation et de programmation pour la performance de la sécurité intérieure/ Looks like this new law has been voted ... prohibits access to websites with childpronography or it this law just a first step to block everything else ? Best regards, Rudi Vansnick

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Volunteer Review Team Member -- Accountability and Transparency
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Feb. 5, 2010

Feb. 5, 2010

Hello Kurt, pleasure to make your virtual acquaintance... and delighted to encourage you to engage as an active volunteer in the ICANN community via At-Large <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/>. I've replied c.c. to the At-Large Advisory Committee working list to inform the AC of your request for endorsement by as as an applicant for the position of Volunteer Review Team Member by ICANN. I will with your permission also forward to our confidential list the resume and motivation letter you attached in your email to me (so do let me know by return email if you wish that to happen) and am including this link <http://www.xsimple.com/bio.html>from your companies web site to help the Committee get to know you by the information you already post in public. ALAC will forward notice of all applicants it endorses immediately prior to the deadline of February 17th 2010, midnight UTC and I'm happy to include your documentation along with that (and material from other endorsed applicants received) if you have not already sent it under separate cover. Again do let me know if that is desired. You should also note that ALAC will place for public view on our wiki a copy of this advice/ list of endorsements but will not link or post any of the motivation letters or resumes we receive. We would also like to encourage you to become active in our policy development work and so I will encourage you and the Chair of the Regional Organisation in North America (NARALO) Mr. Evan Leibovitch (email in c.c.) to communicate more on this matter. You should also note that the ICANN Nominating Committee is also looking for volunteers for key positions in ICANN and if you have not already done so you should look at http://nomcom.icann.org/ as North America is a region that they are hunting volunteers from. Kindest regards, Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) ALAC Chair 2010/2/5 Kurt Snyder <ksnyder(a)xsimple.com> > Ms. Langdon-Orr: > > > > As you probably know, ICANN is seeking volunteers to help in its periodic > review of four key ICANN objectives. I have been looking for ways to > volunteer with ICANN and I believe this would be a fantastic opportunity for > me. Moreover, my background is well suited for such an endeavor. I am an > attorney with technology and assessment experience. > > > > To be considered for such an assignment I need the endorsement of a > Supporting Organization or Advisory Committee. I am seeking such an > endorsement from your organization. For your convenience, I have attached > my resume and motivation letter. > > > > Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. > > > > Thank You! > > > > Kurt Snyder, Esq. > > (317) 810-9305 > > > > > -- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO)

1 0