- ALAC - lists.icann.org

RES: Wednesday's teleconference on travel policy
by Vanda Scartezini UOL Aug. 22, 2008

Aug. 22, 2008

HI EVAN, Carlton Exactly the point raised by Denise which shall be questioned. In my understanding what she said as "essentially" not change doesn't mean "nothing"will change right now. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Alameda Santos 1470 #1407 Tel - +55113266.6253 Mob- +55118181.1464 vanda(a)uol.com.br  Before print think about the Environment "The information contained in this message - and attached files - is restricted, and its confidentiality protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the sender immediately. Please be advised that the improper use of the aforementioned information will create grounds for legal action." "As informações existentes nesta mensagem e nos arquivos anexados são para uso restrito, com sigilo protegido por lei. Caso não seja o destinatário, favor apagar esta mensagem e notificar o remetente. O uso impróprio das informações desta mensagem será tratado conforme a legislação em vigor." -----Mensagem original----- De: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Carlton Samuels Enviada em: sexta-feira, 22 de agosto de 2008 15:38 Para: 'Evan Leibovitch' Cc: ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Assunto: Re: [ALAC] Wednesday's teleconference on travel policy Evan: There was no such qualification! What was said is that this was a policy *proposal* and is being handled in the way proposals are supposed to be - discussed and a consensus position adopted. Whatever form was adopted would not come into effect until the new fiscal year, which begins in June 2009. In fact, from my perspective, both Denise & Brent were at pains to ensure these essential factors were understood! Carlton -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:04 PM To: ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [ALAC] Wednesday's teleconference on travel policy While there are certainly various reactions being contemplated in regards to the ICANN travel policy, this message is specifically intended to call attention to one interesting detail from Wednesday's teleconference on the issue. I refer to the summary minutes of the meeting: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?summary_minutes_20_august_2008 and the 12th paragraph, which currently begins: > D Michel wanted to address a couple of issues. First of all, she noted > that nothing will essentially change for At-Large until a year from now. This is very significant, if it is accurate, for it indicates a substantial change in policy from what we have been told to date. What I have been explicitly told by ICANN staff is that -- starting IMMEDIATELY with the Cairo meeting -- only the 15 ALAC members people would be funded. No liaisons, no RALO chairs or secretariats, and no regional ALS reps. I can understand the lack of regional rep funding for Cairo given that the Summit takes place the following meeting, and it is intended to welcome ALSs from everywhere. However, the cut off of Chair, Secretariat and Liaison funding is definitely not the "status quo" for At-Large. Denise's statement above, as reported in the summary minutes, appears to contradict the announcement of earlier cuts. However, I am informed that what she really meant to say (as was Doug in speaking of "maintaining the status quo") is that nothing will change **FOR ALAC ONLY**. An examination of the recording will confirm or deny what Denise was reported as saying, which means that either: - Indeed, nothing is changing for the next year, which means Liaison and RALO leadership funding for Cairo, Mexico City, and June 2009 in AsiaPac or - There is some doublespeak going on, which suggests that the status quo for At-Large is being maintained when it clearly is not. If even the ICANN staffer taking the summary minutes had not caught any intended nuance that distinguished between "ALAC" and "At-Large", why would we? As far as I know, ALAC and At-Large are not separated as budget categories. In any case, I look forward to the clarification of this matter. If, indeed, the At-Large status quo will not change this year, I applaud ICANN staff on this show of good faith, and look forward to its constructive engagement with At-Large on this and other issues. - Evan PS: I am very aware that Denise explicitly said that a few Summit organizers and two of the Liaisons would be funded to go to Cairo. But there is a difference between making some arbitrary exceptions to the cuts, and saying there is no change to what had been done before. _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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

2 1

ALAC teleconference of 22 July 2008
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 21, 2008

Aug. 21, 2008

During the July 22 teleconference, the ALAC passed a motion in principle which needed some final word-smithing, and I was assigned the task. The place-holder motion was: "ALAC shall formally dissent from the result of the working group on GNSO Improvements if the word 'registrant' is not replaced with the word 'user' as regards representation in the GNSO." The formal wording should be adjusted to read: "If the report of the Working Group on GNSO Council Restructuring is issued without endorsing the the user of the term "user" instead of "registrant" for the non-contracted commercial and non-commercial stakeholders groups, the ALAC shall formally advise the Board to do so." Since the Working Group did ultimately endorse the use of the term "user" instead of "registrant", no further action is required at this time, but I request that the minutes be suitably adjusted. Alan

1 0

Fast flux update, part 1
by Brendler, Beau Aug. 15, 2008

Aug. 15, 2008

Colleagues: The Fast Flux working group is calling for constituency statements. The bad news is, they are in fact due now, though I would guess that delivering one by the middle of next week would not be problematic. The good news, if you can call it that, is that only two other constituencies have made statements -- the registries and intellectual property. The IP statement is brief and is pasted directly below. "The IPC appreciates very much the activity of the Fast Flux WG. We recognize that Fast Flux is a serious topic which so far has not been widely discussed and analysed. The work of the Fast Flux WG enables members of the IPC to learn more about the issues involved. At the moment IPC does not have any specific comments or recommendations regarding Fast Flux and the most appropriate resolution of negative impacts connected with Fast Flux, nevertheless we hope to be able to comment in detail at a later stage of the work of the WG." The registry statement is longer, and I have attached the PDF. In part 2 of this message, which I will send later this afternoon, I will suggest what ALAC's statement should be. I do not believe it has to be as long as the registry constituency's statement, but should make the point that fast flux is used by criminals to do bad things that make the Internet an unpleasant experience for users. Probably there will be a critical points of disagreement: Those who argue for ICANN to have a limited scope will say that enforcement activities are outside ICANN's scope (you can see this to some degree in the registry statement, though they also acknowledge that fast flux's only real purpose is criminal activity). Part 2 will come later this afternoon. Beau Brendler **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ********

2 2

Re: [ALAC] Further Information about At-Large Travel
by Thompson, Darlene Aug. 14, 2008

Aug. 14, 2008

Both Evan and Dharma's comments are right on the money, as far as I'm concerned. D ________________________________ From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Carlton Samuels Sent: Thu 8/14/2008 12:03 PM To: 'Evan Leibovitch'; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' Cc: 'ALAC Working List' Subject: Re: [ALAC] Further Information about At-Large Travel For the record and speaking only for myself, Evan is pithily correct in his assessment. Carlton -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 03:24 AM To: Nick Ashton-Hart Cc: ALAC Working List Subject: Re: [ALAC] Further Information about At-Large Travel Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > For At-Large travel in FY 2009, in addition to funding the At-Large Summit, ICANN will be funding the 15 members of the ALAC to attend the Cairo meeting and the meeting being held in the Asia-Pacific region (location TBA) in June 2009. > Will the RALO secretariats, chairs and ALAC liaisons also be attending? > The funding for the 15 members will be on the same basis as has been the case for recent At-Large travel to ICANN meetings: > > * Hotel > * Per-Diem > * Airfare > > Of course, all the RALOs will be meeting during this fiscal year as a part of the Summit, and of course ALAC members will attend the Summit as well. > This is all stating the obvious. It also conveniently ignores that fact that in calendar 2009 there will be no F2F meeting for either NARALO or LACRALO since there is no ICANN meeting held in the Americas this year. The possibility of having regional meetings was put on hold because of the possibility that the Summit would happen this year. > The result is that overall, At-Large travel is considerably increased for this FY over that provided for previous years. "Considerably"? By your own estimate, the increase would be a MAXIMUM of 28% over the previous year. And then the FY2010 amount would be far, far lower ... dramatically lower than the FY2008 amount. So there would be a short term spike followed by a long-term reduction. Future years will be funded far less than present and previous ones. Repeating the obvious point (that the Summit creates a one-time surge in travel cost) cannot obfuscate the fact that the new travel policy is designed to outlast the Summit and is a long-term cutback. The presence of a Summit does not magically diminish the value and importance of having Chairs, Secretariats and Liaisons funded for regular meetings, nor does it justify halving the funding of elected ALAC member attendance. And at a time when RALO outreach is desperately needed (how many ALSs have joined in the past year?), that resource (ie, regional F2F meetings) is being cut too. > To compare it in terms of the number of attendees, see below: > > FY 2008: 35 At-Large attendees funded per ICANN meeting = 105 persons total > FY 2009: 15 At-Large attendees at 2 meetings plus up to approximately 105 attendees at one meeting = up to 135 attendees > Since you insist on belabouring this point, why stop at 2009? Let's examine at what the policy will do the following year (and every year subsequent): FY 2010: 10 At-Large attendees (5 NomComms + 50% of the rest of ALAC) funded per meeting = 30 persons total FY 2011: 10 At-Large attendees (5 NomComms + 50% of the rest of ALAC) funded per meeting = 30 persons total ... and so on... So... we go from 105, to 135, to 30, and set to remain at 30 for subsequent years. That means that after a one-year spike, At-Large suffers a long-term reduction of travel funding of 72%. The "horror excesses" of the Summit are more than recouped the very next year thanks to these cuts. > Please let me know if you have questions. > - How can anyone supposedly supporting the activities of At-Large defend a 72% resource reduction at this crucial stage in its evolution? - Why is the one-time Summit (some spike -- a _maximum_ 28% over 2008) brought up as justification for such long-term resource slashing? - Can we keep the status quo if we cancel the Summit? (If that is the main reason for the long term cut then perhaps we should reconsider the penalty that the Summit would exact on At-Large's long-term effectiveness.) (And if the answer to the above is "no", then for heaven's sake stop linking the Summit to the long-term cutback.) - Evan _______________________________________________ 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 <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac _______________________________________________ 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 <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

1 0

Further Information about At-Large Travel
by Nick Ashton-Hart Aug. 14, 2008

Aug. 14, 2008

Dear At-Large community members: The travel procedure for FY 2009 has been published - available at http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13aug08-en.htm. Additional information on how this affects At-Large travel in the current FY is included below. For At-Large travel in FY 2009, in addition to funding the At-Large Summit, ICANN will be funding the 15 members of the ALAC to attend the Cairo meeting and the meeting being held in the Asia-Pacific region (location TBA) in June 2009. The funding for the 15 members will be on the same basis as has been the case for recent At-Large travel to ICANN meetings: * Hotel * Per-Diem * Airfare Of course, all the RALOs will be meeting during this fiscal year as a part of the Summit, and of course ALAC members will attend the Summit as well. The result is that overall, At-Large travel is considerably increased for this FY over that provided for previous years. To compare it in terms of the number of attendees, see below: FY 2008: 35 At-Large attendees funded per ICANN meeting = 105 persons total FY 2009: 15 At-Large attendees at 2 meetings plus up to approximately 105 attendees at one meeting = up to 135 attendees Please let me know if you have questions. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

3 5

FW: [ALAC-Announce] Revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 Posted
by Carlton Samuels Aug. 14, 2008

Aug. 14, 2008

For full disclosure. CAS -----Original Message----- From: Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@uwimona.edu.jm] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 11:03 AM To: LAC Discuss Subject: FW: [ALAC-Announce] Revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 Posted Dear Colleagues: See the new and long awaited travel support policy. Quite frankly, this is not the easiest documentation to get thru or understand. And unfortunately, it is not yet available in Spanish. At any rate, the AT-Large staff will be answering questions as best as they can. >From my reading, broad ALS/RALO travel support for attending ICANN meetings seems, by and large, to be relegated to fellowship assistance. From a strategic perspective, this travel policy is merely the thin edge of a sure wedge. Because the declaration that the ALAC is "mature" after the ALS Summit surely means that ICANN would have signalled less interest in the whole ALS/RALO enterprise input to policy; think of yourselves as unloved cousins visiting past your exit date. Carlton -----Original Message----- From: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of At-Large Staff Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 12:46 PM To: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 Posted ICANN Posts Revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 http://www.icann.org./en/announcements/announcement-13aug08-en.htm 13 August 2008 The work to create a community travel support procedure began with a specific call for travel support in late 2007 by some in the community (though this issue has been discussed for some time). There has been extensive consultation on community travel support. It began as a workshop in Delhi, with comments received and an analysis posted. Further, a draft was posted in June, discussed in budget meetings in Paris, and again with fairly extensive comment in person, via email and on the web. These second round of comments were summarized and analyzed. This last summary is available at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/travel-support-draft/msg00013.html The revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 ( http://www.icann.org./en/topics/travel-support/revised-procedure-11aug08.htm ) strives to accommodate the community feedback. Of course, this is a subject about which complete agreement is not possible. However, there is strong agreement within the community that a procedure exist that is documented, transparent, consistent, adhered-to, and reviewed/revised for efficacy. Comparing the final procedure with the draft discussed in Paris, some key changes include: * Guarantees travel support for NomCom-nominated counselors * Stresses transparency in application and post-meeting reporting * Allows for some flexibility in the allocation mechanism within a SO without overburdening the Chair The document strives to be complete without being overly-detailed. This will leave many specific questions unanswered. ICANN staff will develop and post a FAQ (frequently asked questions document) to capture questions, and provide consistent answers to the entire community. If you have questions, please send them to the ICANN staff member with whom you work most closely, or send them to travel-support(a)icann.org . Staff will collect feedback on issues that arise in the first implementation of this procedure, now through the Cairo meeting, and Staff will make clarifications, as needed. Additionally, Staff will conduct a complete review of the Community Travel Support Procedure at year end with a public consultation at the June ICANN meeting, and this will be an opportunity for RSSAC to provide additional input if desired. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce_atlarge-lists. icann.org At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

travel policy
by Brendler, Beau Aug. 14, 2008

Aug. 14, 2008

Colleagues... I have some questions on this -- apologies I have not kept on top of it, due to recent personal circumstances. This document seems vague about the at-large travel budget itself. Here's what I get from these documents referenced in the below news alert: 1. The supporting organizations want and are going to get some additional ICANN funds for travel. So are nomcom appointed people. 2. Chairs and such get some more flexibility and discretion with how travel funding is spent. 3. Because of the expense of the forthcoming at-large summit, the at-large will be considered after the summit to be "matured," and this means: -- limited to no travel funds for those outside the ALAC, i.e., people in ALSs, RALOs, etc. (?) -- limited to no travel funds for the 18-odd people on the ALAC itself (?) Is this correct? -----Original Message----- From: ICANN News Alert [mailto:communications@icann.org] Sent: Wed 8/13/2008 2:35 PM To: Brendler, Beau Subject: ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Posts Revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 ICANN News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13aug08-en.htm ________________________________ ICANN Posts Revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 13 August 2008 The work to create a community travel support procedure began with a specific call for travel support in late 2007 by some in the community (though this issue has been discussed for some time). There has been extensive consultation on community travel support. It began as a workshop in Delhi, with comments received and an analysis posted. Further, a draft was posted in June, discussed in budget meetings in Paris, and again with fairly extensive comment in person, via email and on the web. These second round of comments were summarized and analyzed. This last summary is available at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/travel-support-draft/msg00013.html The revised Community Travel Support Procedure for FY09 http://www.icann.org/en/topics/travel-support/revised-procedure-11aug08.htm document strives to accommodate the community feedback. Of course, this is a subject about which complete agreement is not possible. However, there is strong agreement within the community that a procedure exist that is documented, transparent, consistent, adhered-to, and reviewed/revised for efficacy. Comparing the final procedure with the draft discussed in Paris, some key changes include: * Guarantees travel support for NomCom-nominated counselors * Stresses transparency in application and post-meeting reporting * Allows for some flexibility in the allocation mechanism within a SO without overburdening the Chair The document strives to be complete without being overly-detailed. This will leave many specific questions unanswered. ICANN staff will develop and post a FAQ (frequently asked questions document) to capture questions, and provide consistent answers to the entire community. If you have questions, please send them to the ICANN staff member with whom you work most closely, or send them to travel-support(a)icann.org. Staff will collect feedback on issues that arise in the first implementation of this procedure, now through the Cairo meeting, and Staff will make clarifications, as needed. Additionally, Staff will conduct a complete review of the Community Travel Support Procedure at year end with a public consultation at the June ICANN meeting, and this will be an opportunity for RSSAC to provide additional input if desired. ________________________________ Sign up for ICANN's Monthly Magazine http://www.icann.org/magazine/ This message was sent by: ICANN, 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 , Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6601 Powered by iContact: http://freetrial.icontact.com Manage your subscription: http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=10248929&l=6333&s=96FD&m=16… *** Scanned **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ********

5 6

August 08 ICANN Policy Update now online
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Aug. 14, 2008

Aug. 14, 2008

As not everyone on this list may be currently subscribed to the monthly ICANN Policy Update Newsletter, please note the August update is now available at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/policy/update-aug08.htm CLO

2 1

ALAC-Stmt-on-GNSO-Final.pdf
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Aug. 14, 2008

Aug. 14, 2008

Dear Mr. Jeffrey, Please find attached the recently endorsed (12/08/08) ALAC Statement regarding the outcomes of the recent GNSO Improvements, Council Restructuring Working Group report provided by that committee at the end of July and considered by the Board at its last meeting. This document embodies the ALAC representative and Sub-Committee Report that was appended to that working groups report and includes new sections which outline several additional key points, opinion and issues that the ALAC wishes to be considered by the Board at their August meeting. Yours sincerely, Cheryl Langdon-Orr ALAC Chair 2008-09

1 0

Re: [ALAC] travel policy
by Alan Greenberg Aug. 14, 2008

Aug. 14, 2008

Hong, I'm sorry if my mentioning you by name was taken in any way to reflect negatively on you. And it certainly is not a reflection on your excellent work on IDNs. Unfortunately, you are the only regular Liaison that we have to a potentially unfunded group who is not already funded (this year anyway) by ICANN. Robert and Carlos would probably not get funding as their Liaison positions to the SSAC and NCUC are not mandated by the By-Laws. But they are already ALAC members. Liaisons to GNSO and ccNSO are By-Law mandates, and if not held by ALAC members, are funded under the new rules (perhaps not 100% of course). So it was the only way I could think of to illustrate the case. In prior years, ICANN has funded travel for positions such as yours, but the new proposal does not seem to. Again, sorry if it was not clear what I was trying to say. Alan At 13/08/2008 08:44 PM, Hong Xue wrote: >With respect to this newly released document, I don't understand why >I'm singled out for this policy analysis. Is it a negative comment on >my work or for any other reasonable?

1 0