October 2007 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Thank you
by Thompson, Darlene Nov. 22, 2007

Nov. 22, 2007

I just wanted to add my thanks to Vittorio for all of your hard work. You have really kept us all informed as to what is happening and have given several bits of excellent advise that has really assisted us in the work we are doing. Thank you very much. Welcome to Wendy as well! D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-6531 Fax: (867) 979-8870 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca

2 5

WHOIS Comments Requested
by Danny Younger Nov. 7, 2007

Nov. 7, 2007

Please note that the following two documents have been posted on page: http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/ Staff Overview of recent WHOIS activities http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/icann-staff-overview-of-whois11oct07.pdf Staff Implementation notes WHOIS working group report http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-whoiswg-report-staff-implementation-notes… Public comments are open on the WHOIS process until 30 October 2007. http://www.icann.org/public_comment/ Please submit comments to: <whois-comments-2007(a)icann.org> Comments may be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/whois-comments-2007/ Explanation: A Whois taskforce convened in June 2005 completed its work and sent a final report to the GNSO Council in March 2007. In that report, a majority of members endorsed a proposal called the "Operational Point of Contact" (OPOC) where a domain name registrant would be able to choose a third-party to appear in the public Whois information for this domain and the registrants contact details would no longer be displayed. Expanding on that work, the GNSO Council in March created a Whois working group to examine three issues and make recommendations on them: 1. To examine the roles, responsibilities and requirements of the OPOC, and what happens if they are not fulfilled; 2. To examine how legitimate interests will access unpublished registration data; and 3. To examine whether publication of registration contact information should be based on the type of registered name holder (legal vs. natural persons) or the registrant's use of a domain name. The working group's report [pdf] was published on 20 August 2007. On 6 September 2007, the GNSO Council approved a resolution for further public comment on the report with the intention to lead to a vote on the issue on 31 October 2007 during the Los Angeles ICANN meeting. The resolution called for ICANN staff to prepare a "draft final report" covering the Whois reports referenced above and called Staff Overview of Recent GNSO WHOIS Activity [pdf]. Public comments are invited on both of the GNSO Council's Whois reports and recommendations referenced above and summarized in the Staff Overview of Recent GNSO WHOIS Activity. Comments will be taken until 00:00 UTC (17:00 PDT) on 30 October 2007. Please take time to submit comments. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469

3 2

Latest version of IPv4V6 statement
by Izumi AIZU Nov. 6, 2007

Nov. 6, 2007

I am in the meeting with the Board and AtLarge community, and will take the floor soon to give some presentation on IPv4-v6. Here attached is the material. Nick, could you put it on the screen when we do. izumi

7 17

WHOIS Stalemate: more studies, any you'd like?
by Wendy Seltzer Nov. 5, 2007

Nov. 5, 2007

Colleagues, The GNSO Council has just concluded the WHOIS PDP by refusing to endorse the Working Group's Operational Point of Contact recommendations. They also, on a closer margin, voted down the negotiation-forcing sunset proposal. Instead, the Council called for more studies. While many of us would have preferred to see action, after five years of WHOIS debate, at-large can contribute to the definition of these studies. Are there concrete questions about WHOIS harms, benefits, or alternatives that you (ALSs, individuals, and all) would like to see addressed with data-driven research? According to the draft of the motion passed, "Council shall provide additional definition regarding the potential data gathering and study requirements no later than February 15th, 2008." I'm assuming ALAC should pass its recommendations to the Council through Alan. Council will be preparing a Board submission shortly, and I'm happy to convey ALAC's comments when that is discussed. Thanks, --Wendy -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/

7 8

Comments about at-large/ALAC in ICANN newsletter
by Robert Guerra Nov. 1, 2007

Nov. 1, 2007

Several colleagues are reporting that inappropriate and false information on and about at-large and ALAC meetings this week are being printed in the ICANN newsletter. I would like to ask : 1. that the text present in the newsletter be posted to the list, and 2. should the text and/or comments be deemed as inappropriate, then ALAC should take appropriate actions regards Robet

13 22

Re: [At-Large] DRAFT ALAC comment on IPv4 depletion and IPv6 migration
by cheryl＠hovtek.com.au Nov. 1, 2007

Nov. 1, 2007

Good afternoon, I have just come from the presentation of this statement by Carlos on behalf of ALAC, to the ASO... (please note I have not included here the draft text as I was off the email grid when it was circulated to lists on Monday but if it did not go to both lists then I implore someone to rectify that I now have read on local network and send via my mail server as the only option :-( Some *brief points* that will be further discussed in ALAC meetings should be noted by all of you interested in this matter of v4 -> v6... Firstly our presentation was most warmly and generously received, and our thanks go to Carlos Aguirre for both his presentation and his work in preparing for this matter when Izumi (our normal lead in this topic) was unable to stay in LA for this meeting... It is my firm belief that as a result of his representation to the ASO meeting, we have established a clear profile as a 'party of interest' which needs to be involved with the policy deliberation processes that occurs in this group (not only in the important issue of IPv4 distribution) but also any other matters that effect us as the end user (i.e. consumers of the services) that the addressing infrastructure provides for... Secondly several questions were asked, and comments made, after the presentation... Carlos will fully outline these in his report back to ALAC on this meeting, but a few excellent suggestions regarding a change of the terms used in our draft document were made, and should be noted by the At-Large Community, as we will desire YOUR input on these particular points, as we do our edit... Specifically these were the use of 'migration' this term has certain contextual / interpretation issues and it is advised that we should replace it in our documentation with the term "transition", and the very valid point that the use of the term "black-market" needs replacing with a nomenclature that indicates that it is an undesirable secondary market... the potential of what does the word 'hype' means in the draft was pre-emptively dealt with by Carlos in his annotation to that section and also requires attention. Also ARIN have kindly supplied us with access to some of their plain language summary of issues texts which will greatly enhance our own outreach efforts in our regions and local environments and *most importantly* have already done extensive translation pieces of this text which we can use AND seem willing to explore possible assistance to us in translation to language not currently addressed in their document repository. Finally this is a clear invitation (if not mandated requirement) for us to be actively involved in the policy development *particularly* at the policy development points in the community input into the regional registry processes this constituency uses... And as they use a regional based system which mirrors our own interaction and mutual exchange of idea points do not need to be "created" they do however need to be locally actioned. And I know I personally look forward to our future work together in matters of mutual interest. Kindest regards, Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO)

5 5

Thank you
by Izumi AIZU Oct. 31, 2007

Oct. 31, 2007

Dear all, I have to leave LA now, for I need to organize a conference in Japan from Friday - Sunday. I wish I could stay for the rest of the week to continue the work at ALAC, but that is not possible. I like to express my big thanks to all the "outgoing" members, as well as all new ones and old timers, for your great help and teaching me. And those who supported us. Let's keep on our good work, and see you again soon either in Rio or in New Delhi! best, izumi

1 0

Fwd: [NA-Discuss] FW: Information on respectful communication
by Nick Ashton-Hart Oct. 31, 2007

Oct. 31, 2007

Dear ALAC Members and Secretariat Members: I thought I should forward this very thoughtful and insightful post from Dharma Dailey. Dharma, I'm hopeful that we can all work to help create an environment in which you will wish to become more active, given a bit of time and for what it is worth, on ICANN's part, I'm committed to doing whatever I can, or we can, do to help foster that happening. Once the dust settles from the LA meeting I will try and find some time if you are willing when I can speak further with you about how to operationalise some of your perspectives? Begin forwarded message: > From: Dharma Dailey <dharma(a)ethoswireless.com> > Date: 29 October 2007 20:20:50 GMT-07:00 > To: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com > Cc: Darlene Thompson <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA>, NA Discuss <na- > discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Informationonrespectful > communication > > It takes a lot of effort to make things easy for people to > participate well. > > I consider myself to be one of the people who has taken my ball and > gone home due to the culture around ICANN. Poor process= poor > outcomes and unhappy people. Poor process makes good people act > foolishly. I walked away from San Juan with a very favorable view of > most people that I met, but a very unfavorable view of the scene. > > One argument that I would give for at-large as a separate entity from > an NGO centered body is the fact that there is a big cultural divide > between the way mom and pop groups build consensus and the way NGOs > do. I believe that culture-clash is part of what we are witnessing > in at-large. At-large is a kind of ad-hoc group trying to interact > within the "big NGO" culture of ICANN. In order to fix the > troubles of at-large -- and perhaps more generally ICANN itself-- it > will take a lot more than a chat with the ombudsmen. Within the > networks that I work most closely with- open source, appropriate > technology, community media, local broadband projects-- there is an > awareness that you need to have "process artists" in the fold of any > functioning group in order to make it cohere well enough to get stuff > done. *AND* unless its a very small affinity group -- there *MUST* > be more than one involved. You need a critical mass of people who > can corral people back to the agreed upon topic, the agreed upon > process for getting things done, and so forth. For groups as large > and international as the ones that meet around ICANN there is the > additional challenge that there are very distinctly different ways of > approaching the work that we each bring with us. Therefore the > people who are shepherds of the process need to be highly skilled. > They need have more than one or two tricks up their sleeves because > they won't make friends by saying, "This is what we do in XYZ place > and it always works for us." > > While I can appreciate the sentiment of the PDF that Jaqueline sent > around, I think it is too general to be of use on its own. There are > some nice principles in it, but to actually get stuff done principles > need to be spelled out into clear modes of action. Recently, > Gareth Shearman of Telecommunities Canada and I went to an ARIN > (American Registry of Internet Numbers) meeting. It was both > amusing and refreshing to watch the cartoon at the Newcomers meeting > that modeled exactly how to speak at the open mic. It was both > ridiculous and a very useful tool to get up to speed on how to fully > participate in the odd little world that is ARIN. The cartoon leaves > nothing to the imagination in terms of process. I would say a good > 2/3 of the ARIN community are "process artists" and they do seem to > be able to move through a lot of dense techno-political material in > an amazingly efficient way with lots of input from those present. > *And* the process is dynamic with suggestions from the community > constantly refining the process. > > "Making friends" is also a critical part of volunteer, ad-hoc > groups. It should be fostered as it leads to better outcomes, higher > levels of participation, longer cycles of involvement and so forth. > Time honored traditions such as breaking bread are small investments > in the long run. Time for reflection and interaction among peers are > critical to plan into the work cycle. As far as I'm concerned, the > ancillary benefit of being able to rub elbows with others who care > about the social impact of networks outweighs the benefit of > participating in ICANN per se. Therefore, if there is value to > recruiting "people like me" into the ICANN process, the structure > leaves little incentive for me to be involved because 1) the > structure doesn't allow much lateral interaction 2) I'm not learning > much about how ICANN policies affect the issues I care about 3) It's > not fun to participate. In short, there is no payoff. > > Those of you whom I spoke with in San Juan have heard me say this, > but I believe that it would be worthwhile to hire a trained > facilitator for the meetings and, for that matter, for the email > lists. Someone who has experience working within ad hoc structures. > At-Large has so much potential, and yet... > > -Dharma Dailey > Emerging Futures Network > > > On 29-Oct-07, at 9:21 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: > >> To repeat >> >> I did not refer anything to the Ombudsman, as ALAC Chair or as a >> private >> individual. However, if I were to do so as an individual, that >> would be >> confidential and I wouldn’t have to discuss with anyone. As >> Chair, I >> continue on the path of asking for respectful communication that >> has been >> ongoing for months. He’s one of the sources that I have checked as >> experts >> in the matter and he sent me info that I passed on. Other experts >> have >> provided input into the emails I have sent in the past, have >> provided other >> background information, etc. The Ombudsman is an ICANN resource, >> not only a >> tribunal. >> >> And others have indicated to me that they have approached the >> Ombudsman. I >> don’t expect that they will post to this list, as part of the >> problem is >> that they feel oppressed and unable to participate. >> >> >> >> You are perfectly within your rights to disagree with anything and >> everything on all lists. Just please do it without personal attacks, >> disrespect, threatening language, insults etc. As I have been >> asking for a >> while, as is in the NARALO code of conduct, as in the ALAC Rules. I >> haven’t >> indicated in any emails in public any persons from any region as >> being >> culpable. So this isn’t an anti-NA thing. There is no attempt to >> muzzle >> anyone from expressing their opinion in a respectful and polite >> manner. >> There however is an ongoing attempt to make these lists comfortable >> for >> everyone, from all regions, to express their opinions, to not be >> afraid to >> say what they think. I would hope that as great advocates of free >> speech, NA >> in particular would support actions taken to ensure the rights of >> all to >> participate freely. >> >> >> >> And before anyone takes this as proof that I think that this email >> is any of >> those things, I am saying this in a general way. >> >> Jacqueline >> >> >> >> From: Thompson, Darlene [mailto:DThompson@GOV.NU.CA] >> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 17:45 >> To: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com; Robert Guerra; NA Discuss >> Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Informationonrespectful >> communication >> >> >> >> Jacqueline, >> >> >> >> It is still true that you did not get full support from ALAC to go >> to the >> Ombudsman. >> >> >> >> Cultural sensitivity goes both ways. I worded my e-mails as >> politely as >> possible but I sitll had to disagree with what was happening. I am >> really >> tired of people complaining about the lack of sensitivity from NA >> people. >> If it there were actually any insults or threats then you would be >> fully >> justified in doing what you did just as an individual. As ALAC >> Chair, you >> did not - not without a quorum from the ALAC - unless you made it >> clear that >> you were doing so as an individual. Using your power to stifle >> contrary >> view is not appropriate and I refuse to back down from this point. >> >> >> >> Therefore, what Robert says, still goes. I support him 100%. >> >> >> >> Darlene >> >> >> >> _____ >> >> From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of >> Jacqueline A. >> Morris >> Sent: Mon 10/29/2007 8:33 PM >> To: 'Robert Guerra'; 'NA Discuss' >> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Informationonrespectful >> communication >> >> Robert >> >> Not at all. >> >> And I told you that in my reply to your private email to me. >> >> Mis-representing what I said is not kosher at all. >> >> >> >> I sent some info that was sent to me by Frank after a discussion with >> several people about how to improve the respect in online >> communication. He >> is the ICANN expert in this. This is a follow up to the emails I >> have sent >> previously on list communication. >> >> >> >> With regard to who has contacted the Ombudsman to date about emails >> sent to >> the public list (NOT the NARALO list) - I cannot say, as Ombudsman >> referrals are confidential and he hasn’t told me anything about >> that. Others >> have however indicated to me that they have considered approaching >> or have >> approached him about some emails on the public list. I haven’t been >> informed >> by anyone about complaints to him on any communication on the >> NARALO list to >> date. >> >> >> >> That is the correct information, and I hope that you will correct >> any emails >> that you have sent out with the erroneous information . >> >> >> >> Jacquelin >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Robert Guerra [mailto:lists@privaterra.info] >> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 17:03 >> To: NA Discuss >> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Information onrespectful >> communication >> >> >> >> As some of you might have seen. it seem that Jacqueline thinks that >> comments >> from myself and others on NA RALO are soo inappropiate that it >> requires a >> referral to the ombudsman for his comment. >> >> >> >> Frankly, i'm amazed and shocked. I ask that if you feel strongly on >> this >> that you comment - ASAP. >> >> >> >> thanks >> >> >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> >> >> From: Robert Guerra <HYPERLINK >> "mailto:lists@privaterra.info"lists(a)privaterra.info> >> >> Date: October 29, 2007 4:59:08 PM PDT >> >> To: At-Large Global List <HYPERLINK >> "mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org"alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> >> Subject: Re: [At-Large] FW: Information onrespectful communication >> >> >> >> Jacqueline: >> >> >> >> Huh ! >> >> >> >> Either don't understand your email, or am so surprised that as >> outgoing >> chair you would take such an action. To be hones, after a >> productive and >> team building day yesterday - you take this bombshell and drop this >> on us. >> i'm frankly shocked ... >> >> >> >> >> >> I am assuming correctly that differences of opinion are such that >> you - in >> your own personal capacity - are asking the ombudsman to pass a >> judgement >> on individuals in at-large that are exercising their freedom of >> speech? >> >> >> >> An action such as a referral should be done in consultation with >> the ALAC, >> and not done on your whim. Please seek the support of your peers, >> to take >> such drastic steps. >> >> >> >> Might I suggest that - instead - you seek the input of the alac, >> and see if >> indeed we concur with your course of action. If obtain support, >> fine. If >> not, then no course of action - should be obtain. >> >> >> >> >> >> In summary - I think I speak for many of those on the ALAC in >> saying, please >> seeking clarify your proposed actions. Personally, I think they are >> most >> inappropriate. >> >> >> >> >> >> regards, >> >> >> >> Robert >> >> --- >> >> Robert Guerra <HYPERLINK >> "mailto:rguerra@privaterra.ca"rguerra(a)privaterra.ca> >> >> Managing Director, Privaterra >> >> Tel +1 416 893 0377 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 29-Oct-07, at 4:01 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: >> >> 0" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> >> Dear all >> >> As so many of the postings to this list are so disrespectful I have >> asked >> the Ombudsman for his input informally, before he gets brought >> into it >> formally by people who this has affected negatively. He has offered >> the >> following. Please read and attempt to follow some of the >> suggestions in the >> documents he has sent, so we can all work productively. >> >> Jacqueline >> >> >> >> From: frank.fowlie [HYPERLINK >> "mailto:frank.fowlie@icann.org"mailto:frank.fowlie@icann.org] >> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 15:51 >> To: jacqueline Morris >> Subject: >> >> >> >> wellington comment from page 6 on >> >> >> >> and >> >> >> >> >> >> HYPERLINK >> "http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf"http:// >> www.ican >> n.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf >> >> >> >> Frank Fowlie, MACAM >> Ombudsman >> >> The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 >> Marina del Rey >> California, USA, 90292 >> >> tel: +310-823-9358 >> fax: +310-823-8649 >> >> HYPERLINK "http://www.icannombudsman.org/"www.icannombudsman.org >> >> The Values of this Office are: >> -Respect for Diversity; >> -Excellence in Ombudsmanship; >> -Professionalism; >> -Confidentiality; >> -Impartiality; >> -and Independence. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: >> 10/27/2007 >> 11:02 >> >> >> >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: >> 10/27/2007 >> 11:02 >> >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: >> 10/27/2007 >> 11:02 >> >> >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: >> 10/27/2007 >> 11:02 >> >> <winmail.dat> >> ------ >> NA-Discuss mailing list >> NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge- >> lists.icann.org >> Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/ >> ------ > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge- > lists.icann.org > Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/ > ------ -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 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

1 0

Re: [At-Large] FW: ccTLD IDN
by Hong Xue Oct. 31, 2007

Oct. 31, 2007

Dear Mr. Chris Disspain, Please find the ALAC Statement for the ICANN Board Request for Responses at https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?alac_statement_for_the_icann_board_requ…. This document has been approved by ALAC on October 30, 2007 and has been submitted to the ICANN Board. It contains all our comments and recommendations on the principles, policies and implementation of IDN ccTLDs, covering both fast-track approach and a PDP proposal. We are looking forward to working with the ccNSO in the following policy making process. Hong

1 0

FW: Domain tasting in Phishing - report
by Robert Guerra Oct. 31, 2007

Oct. 31, 2007

Attached is a paper that was created by the Domain Name System Policy Working Group of the Anti-Phishing Working Group. This compilation of this paper was initiated because of the formation of your group - the DNSPWG wanted to determine whether or not phishers use domain tasting. In general, the conclusions are that phishers do not use domain tasting but domain tasting does negatively impact the anti-phishing organizations due to increased infrastructure needs for monitoring domain registrations. If you have questions about this paper, don't hesitate to contact me. -

1 0

NCUC ALAC meeting
by Adam Peake Oct. 30, 2007

Oct. 30, 2007

NCUC would like to meet with you. ALAC schedule for today shows NCUC as TBC. Ideal time for us would be 16:30. We'll come to you as you will want translation etc. Please confirm to <ajp(a)glocom.ac.jp> and <mueller(a)syr.edu> Best, Adam

3 2

<IMPORTANT> Draft Plan for Tuesday's AtLarge community meeting with ICANN Board
by Izumi AIZU Oct. 30, 2007

Oct. 30, 2007

Here is the draft plan prepared by Annette, Alan, Wendy, Beau and Izumi this morning. Please read them carefully, and if your name is listed, then you are assigned a task for that.Don't miss it!! If you have additional topics to be discussed or any suggestions on how to operate this meeting, please send them to this list as soon as possible. We like to let ALL members of ALAC to speak up, but be mindful for the time allocations. Jacqueline to Chair the meeting, Izumi assist Jacqueline as time-keeper Introduction – Jacqueline Acknowledgement and introduction for outgoing and incoming ALAC members New members introduction - what they expect to do RALO-elect ALAC members and NomCom-select ALAC members to say a few words, 2 min max [10 - 15 min?] ALAC in Transition- Veronica/Cheryl – 3 min max Report on – One day Workshop Policy Areas – share ALAC views* *"ALAC" here means the collective voices with ALS and RALO community, not only 15-members. Followings are the list of topics and "speakers" who are responsible to prepare the draft sentences, hopefully in one or two paragraphs max this afternoon, circulate them online – to the open list – and the compile/edit them. They will be the speakers on the subject at the meeting to introduce them. If other members have additional comments, dissenting opinions, they are free to add – within limited timeframe. The Board may ask questions to us, or we may ask their opinions as a two-way dialogue. 1. New gTLDs - Wendy and Beau 2. gNSO improvement – Alan 3. Domain tasting, Domain name front running - Robert 4. geoTLDs - Annette 5. WHOIS – Wendy 6. IDNs - Hong – Annette 7. IPV4 and IPV6 – Izumi 8. Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAAs), Registry Escrow - Beau 9. ccNSO issue area- Siavash 10. ALAC Review – Robert ALAC Operations issues 1. Bylaws changes, outreach plan - Alice and Mohamed ? (Robert to contact them) 2. Budgets- Cheryl and Annette 3. introducing the Secretariat (to be discussed tonight on how to) Thanks, izumi --

21 54

Accountability and Transparency
by Bret Fausett Oct. 30, 2007

Oct. 30, 2007

Just a reminder that I started a wiki page on accountability and transparency. This may be worth discussing with the Board tomorrow. I noted several occasions in the President's report when comments on the ICANN transparency process were solicited (and Dr. Cerf said comments would be more helpful "sooner rather than later"). https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?alac_comments_on_accountability_and_tra… -- Bret

2 1

budget
by Annette Muehlberg Oct. 30, 2007

Oct. 30, 2007

All, In preparation of the Board meeting tomorrow, I think we should refer to the proposal of procedure, the ALAC budget committee reached consensus on in the last ICANN meeting in San Juan: Annette --- Minutes of the Budget Sub-Committee Meeting 29th of June 2007 Participants, all members of the Budget Committee: Jaqueline (in function of chair) Cheryl (CLO) Annette (AM) Planning of the ALAC budget current finacial term 2007/2008 as well as next term 2008/2009 General procedure of budget application approval: 1. ALAC, based on the proposals of its Budget Sub-Committee, plans a prioritised proposed budget / funds requirement forecast, for a given period, based upon RALOs and ALAC members input. 2. ICANN decides on funds availability and proposes a match of funds (modified, full or partial) to each prioritised proposal (and if certain project proposals are not accepted as being either of merit OR able to be funded) ICANN gets in touch with ALAC before denial and explains its reservations, so that the SC can act to find a consensus for the budget plan. Function of the Budget Committee (as already practiced beginning of last year): - puts together a proposal for fiscal year activity and project plan for the ALAC - receives every single extra request (workshops etc. of RALOs and ALAC as well as individual demands of ALAC and RALO members (such as travel costs to meetings other than ICANN meetings) for reason of transparency and to give recommendation to staff (larger projects in consultation with ALAC). (AM: Personal comment: I think, that the ALAC should always have access to a forum where all the budget expanses - planned and already realized - are listed. Agreed by CLO, adding the proposal to include a nominee(s) contact from the RALO's, agreed by AM) A form for application (perhaps a small modification for endorsment from RALO others?/ comments from ALAC SC etc., etc., to the current form available would work for this) for funding has to be used. SC Actions:- After San Juan Meeting, Chair sends out to all regional lists a request for planning their regional projects and handing in budget applications within the following four weeks. Budget Committee puts proposals together and for finalizing the planning 2007/2008 online before LA Meeting and Doug Brent will be invited to take part in a Budget SC telefon conf and at the ALAC meeting in LA. (AM Comment: request for proposals for current financial year 2007/2008 should be sent out immidiately, answers to be made within 3 weeks - deadline monday the 15th of october - so there will be (short, but at least some) time for the budget committee and the ALAC to come up with a plan before next ICANN meeting end of october in LA, where we should arrange a meeting with Doug Brent. Agreed on) Now request for proposals for current financial year 2007/2008 by COB 27th September end dated 15th of October, this gives 21 days. For clarification: this will be the 1st round funding proposals from the Regions and their organisation / members and we can then allow for other activities to be included that come up in LA. For planning the fiscal year 2008/2009 the Budget Committee proposes the deadline for applications by RALOs and ALAC for the 2008-09 Fiscal year is 10th of December. (We should also think about some contingency funding request to be set aside for new activities that come up in response to urgent need...) Review by Budget Committee to ALAC: 21st of december. Back from ALAC to Budget Committee 31st of January. 21st of february (or later) Budget Committee sends out to RALO/ ALAC. --- End of the minutes of our Budget SC Meeting. Further actions: I'll work with Cheryl to create announcement texts to the lists and any form links (new / modified forms we might need as well) The Final minutes of this meeting should go onto a Wiki page dedicated for this purpose (CLO volunteered to set it up). All the best to all of you Annette -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal_atlarge-lists… ALAC Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac ALAC Official: http://alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

5 5

DRAFT ALAC comment on IPv4 depletion and IPv6 migration
by Izumi AIZU Oct. 30, 2007

Oct. 30, 2007

Here is my "try". Crude. Please send any comments and suggestions to make it better. izumi -------------- ALAC comment on IPv4 depletion and IPv6 migration We are aware that sometime within a few years time, current pool of IPv4 address will expire which may have significant impact on the use of Internet by broad public. Everyone agree the importance of making sure to allocate remaining pool of IPv4 address in a fair, equitable and predictable manner. The challenge here is what exactly we mean by "fair, equitable and predictable" that is pragmatic and implementable for all global users. We respect the policy works done by the RIRs so far, and are willing to actively participate more. We are concerned about the potential creation of "black market" and call for a rational ways to make secondary market a realty. We also call for a reasonable way of recollecting the unused IPv4 address blocks. We also like to call for more outreach work initiated by the ICANN community to make sure the issues are understood clearly and the solutions are communicated openly to broad public. We understand that the best solution to this challenge is to make smooth and orderly transition to the broad use of IPv6. There are several challenges and tasks to make that to happen: - Organize awareness campaign for the need for timely transition, - Avoid media hypes by providing accurate information to wider public - Make sure all "public sites" by governments and commercial service providers implement IPv4-v6 dual capacity in time - Measures be taken to help developing countries to prepare the transition in timely and affordable manner

9 22

FW: FW: Information onrespectful communication
by Jacqueline A. Morris Oct. 30, 2007

Oct. 30, 2007

Since Robert forwarded his “private” email to me to the list, it’s only reasonable for me to forward my private response to him as well. Jacqueline From: Jacqueline A. Morris [mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 17:21 To: 'Robert Guerra' Subject: RE: [At-Large] FW: Information onrespectful communication I asked the ombudsman for information, and passed it on. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech except in the freedom of individuals to participate in discussion without feeling that they will be attacked personally, libeled, threatened or just made to feel uncomfortable with expressing themselves. I haven’t made any referral to the ombudsman, and if I were to, then I would do it in my personal capacity, and as Ombudsman contacts are confidential, I certainly wouldn’t need to discuss it with the ALAC or anyone. I do not do things on whims and I resent the implication. This is something that has been in process for a LONG time, I’ve sent emails asking for a higher class of communication, people have emailed me, people have told me in confidence that they are turned off and not participating because of this exact kind of email that you are sending here. This is an additional step in the same process. Other people are talking to the Ombudsman about this ALREADY. I am trying to prevent this reaching to the stage of formal investigations, by providing information to the group that might assist in building respectful communication. Seems as if you didn’t bother to read it. From: Robert Guerra [mailto:lists@privaterra.info] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 16:59 To: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com Subject: Re: [At-Large] FW: Information onrespectful communication Jacqueline: Huh ! Either don't understand your email, or am so surprised that as outgoing chair you would take such an action. To be hones, after a productive and team building day yesterday - you take this bombshell and drop this on us. i'm frankly shocked ... I am assuming correctly that differences of opinion are such that you - in your own personal capacity - are asking the ombudsman to pass a judgement on individuals in at-large that are exercising their freedom of speech? An action such as a referral should be done in consultation with the ALAC, and not done on your whim. Please seek the support of your peers, to take such drastic steps. Might I suggest that - instead - you seek the input of the alac, and see if indeed we concur with your course of action. If obtain support, fine. If not, then no course of action - should be obtain. In summary - I think I speak for many of those on the ALAC in saying, please seeking clarify your proposed actions. Personally, I think they are most inappropriate. regards, Robert --- Robert Guerra <HYPERLINK "mailto:rguerra@privaterra.ca"rguerra(a)privaterra.ca> Managing Director, Privaterra Tel +1 416 893 0377 On 29-Oct-07, at 4:01 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: 0" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all As so many of the postings to this list are so disrespectful I have asked the Ombudsman for his input informally, before he gets brought into it formally by people who this has affected negatively. He has offered the following. Please read and attempt to follow some of the suggestions in the documents he has sent, so we can all work productively. Jacqueline From: frank.fowlie [HYPERLINK "mailto:frank.fowlie@icann.org"mailto:frank.fowlie@icann.org] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 15:51 To: jacqueline Morris Subject: wellington comment from page 6 on and HYPERLINK "http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf"http://www.ican n.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf Frank Fowlie, MACAM Ombudsman The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey California, USA, 90292 tel: +310-823-9358 fax: +310-823-8649 HYPERLINK "http://www.icannombudsman.org/"www.icannombudsman.org The Values of this Office are: -Respect for Diversity; -Excellence in Ombudsmanship; -Professionalism; -Confidentiality; -Impartiality; -and Independence. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02 <wellington comment.doc> ///////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////// No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02

3 2

FW: Information onrespectful commuication
by Jacqueline A. Morris Oct. 30, 2007

Oct. 30, 2007

Dear all As so many of the postings to this list are so disrespectful I have asked the Ombudsman for his input informally, before he gets brought into it formally by people who this has affected negatively. He has offered the following. Please read and attempt to follow some of the suggestions in the documents he has sent, so we can all work productively. Jacqueline From: frank.fowlie [mailto:frank.fowlie@icann.org] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 15:51 To: jacqueline Morris Subject: wellington comment from page 6 on and HYPERLINK "http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf"http://www.ican n.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf Frank Fowlie, MACAM Ombudsman The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey California, USA, 90292 tel: +310-823-9358 fax: +310-823-8649 HYPERLINK "http://www.icannombudsman.org/"www.icannombudsman.org The Values of this Office are: -Respect for Diversity; -Excellence in Ombudsmanship; -Professionalism; -Confidentiality; -Impartiality; -and Independence. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02

5 4

SSAC Commitments - ICANN / LA Meeting
by Robert Guerra Oct. 29, 2007

Oct. 29, 2007

Wanted to share with all of you (below) the meetings that i'll be attending as the committee's liaison to the Security and Stability advisory committee (SSAC). The SSAC private session - that i'm allowed into, is tomorrow at the same time as our meeting with the board. So, I have to send my regrets for tomorrow morning's meeting. I will however confirm my attendance to this afternoon/evening's session - so that I can try to make the case for key issues concerns and issues that I have, as well as those from the NA (north america) region can be presented to the board tomorrow. see you all this evening. regards Robert -- MONDAY, Oct 29 * 11:00 - 12:30 Marina Room - DNSSEC in the Field: Asia- Pacific and IANA (attended) TUESDAY, Oct 30 * 9:00 - 11:00 Newport C - SSAC Private Meeting * 11:45 - 13:00 Newport C - SSAC Briefing to the GAC and ccTLD Operators on DNSSEC WEDNESDAY, Oct 31 + 13:00 - 15:00 Marina Room - AntiPhishing Working Group * 13:30 - 15:00 Carmel Room - SSAC Open Meeting

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] IMPORTANT: YOUR POSITIONS ON PRESSING POLICY ISSUES
by Brendler, Beau Oct. 29, 2007

Oct. 29, 2007

no problem. Duly posted. <mailto:brenbe@consumer.org> Beau Brendler ________________________________ From: Wendy Seltzer [mailto:wendy@seltzer.com] Sent: Sun 10/28/2007 7:50 PM To: Brendler, Beau Cc: alac-internal(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [ALAC-Internal] IMPORTANT: YOUR POSITIONS ON PRESSING POLICY ISSUES Any reason not to put this on the public list? --Wendy Brendler, Beau wrote: > FOR TUESDAY'S ICANN BOARD MEETING > > Please send to this list at your earliest convenience the position you believe ALAC should take on the following topics: > > gTLDS > WHOIS > IDNs (we will make reference to the existing documentation) > IPV4 and IPV6 > Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAAs) > domain tasting > geoTLDs > > Izumi and I will coordinate these so that we can give the board advice on each topic. > > It's OK if you don't have a particular opinion on a topic. Just send us the ones you believe ALAC should advocate for on behalf of users. > > We will send out a draft final document to you once we have a chance to coordinate them. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC-Internal mailing list > ALAC-Internal(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal_atlarge-lists… > > ALAC Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac > ALAC Official: http://alac.icann.org > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org phone: +1.914.374.0613 // office: 617.373.7331 Visiting Professor, Northeastern University School of Law Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ *** Scanned

5 4

Re: [At-Large] IMPORTANT: YOUR POSITIONS ON PRESSING POLICY ISSUES
by Alan Greenberg Oct. 29, 2007

Oct. 29, 2007

The issues I put on the agenda on the Wiki follow, along with my thoughts on them. 1. Status of ALAC Review. My recollection is that the review was scheduled to start just after the review of the NomCom. The report on the NomCom has now been issued but still no word on our review. What is happening? 2. ALAC/At-Large and the Board Governance Committee proposed GNSO Improvements. There are three issues related to this new document. 1. There is a discussion on whether At Large should be represented on the GNSO which ends with the statement that users could participate in the commercial or non-commercial groups "depending on how they viewed their registration". Surely the BGC understands that not all users have there own registrations. Something over 1 billion of then are just "users". 2. The argument is made that since the ALAC/At-Large exists to advise the Board, they do not need a presence on the GNSO. This presumes that it is adequate to be reactive to GNSO policy drafts. In reality, inputs received during comment periods do not have a good record of making it into next revisions unless there are strong advocates for it. The move to working groups which can include individuals may help this, but a vote on the GNSO council will still be an effective mechanism for helping to ensure that end user needs are addressed during the policy creation process instead of after. 3. The new Board Governance Committee proposal does not mention Liaisons, apparently because the BGC did not see any reason to change things. But the report does explicitly say that there should be regular contact between the various SO and the ALAC and mentions telephone conference calls between the Chairs. If such calls make sense, certainly the corresponding Liaison should also be included. 3. New gTLD concerns. Recent comments and others. We need to say something regarding whether the ALAC is endorsing the document submitted by Danny. Either yes we will, or no we won't, or we will be meeting later in the week to decide whether to endorse some or all of the comments. 4. Board perception of way forward on gTLD proposal. I would like to hear the Board thoughts on how they think this process will proceed. Alan At 28/10/2007 07:45 PM, Brendler, Beau wrote: >FOR TUESDAY'S ICANN BOARD MEETING > >Please send to this list at your earliest convenience the position >you believe ALAC should take on the following topics: > >gTLDS >WHOIS >IDNs (we will make reference to the existing documentation) >IPV4 and IPV6 >Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAAs) >domain tasting >geoTLDs > >Izumi and I will coordinate these so that we can give the board >advice on each topic. > >It's OK if you don't have a particular opinion on a topic. Just send >us the ones you believe ALAC should advocate for on behalf of users. > >We will send out a draft final document to you once we have a chance >to coordinate them. >_______________________________________________ >ALAC-Internal mailing list >ALAC-Internal(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal_atlarge-lists… > >ALAC Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac >ALAC Official: http://alac.icann.org >ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

2 1

ALAC meeting Tonight at 7:30
by Izumi AIZU Oct. 29, 2007

Oct. 29, 2007

six of us are meeting this morning for the preparation of the meeting with the Board members tomorrow morning, and agreed that we propose to start our meeting tonight with RALO secretariat from 7:30 pm, not 7, but not 8 pm either. The agenda on the wiki is as follows: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?29_october_2007 Man of these topis are the ones we like to bring to the Board meeting, as well, so it will be a good opportinity to preapre, as well. izumi ----- A G E N D A Agenda is in draft form until adopted by the Meeting. Documents are linked for download next to the agenda items they belong to where available. 1. Current Policy Engagement "Roundup" 1. New gTLDS 2. IDNs - ALAC Statement for the ICANN Board Request for Responses 3. RAA Review 4. WHOIS Services 5. IPv4 - IPv6 Migration 6. Domain Tasting Note that the discussion of the RAA is expected to be brief, as the At-Large community has a special workshop on Wednesday from 0900 - 1030 on this subject, and there is also a general workshop on the RAA as part of the main ICANN meeting. The ALAC highlights the importance of concluding work on the IDN statement as this must be delivered to the Board of ICANN on Thursday. -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita Kumon Center, Tama University, Tokyo Japan * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org

2 1

SAC 022 - SSAC Advisory on Domain Name Front Running
by Robert Guerra Oct. 29, 2007

Oct. 29, 2007

Domain Name Front Running Executive Summary This Advisory considers the opportunity for a party with some form of insider informa- tion to track an Internet user’s preference for registering a domain name and preemptive- ly register that name. SSAC likens this activity to insider trading in stock and commodi- ties markets and calls this behavior domain name front running. In the domain name in- dustry, insider information would be information gathered from the monitoring of one or more attempts by an Internet user to check the availability of a domain name.

1 0

Fwd: Dial-in info for new gTLD workshop Monday 29 October at 13:00 local time, 20:00 UTC
by Nick Ashton-Hart Oct. 27, 2007

Oct. 27, 2007

Dear All: Please find below the remote participation details for voice input to the meeting below. Please note that in order to be in the 'queue' of speakers, you will need to signify your wish to speak using the chatroom attached to the meeting, which you will be able to find at: http://losangeles2007.icann.org/node/45. Note that you will need to register with the site so you can login, in order to use the chat facility. Note that we are trying to arrange that audio streaming will be available in all the languages in which this session will be simultaneously interpreted - French, Spanish, and Russian. There will at a minimum be live audio in English however. Begin forwarded message: > From: "GNSO.SECRETARIAT(a)GNSO.ICANN.ORG" > <gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org> > Date: 26 October 2007 14:36:11 GMT-07:00 > To: Nick Ashton-Hart <nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org> > Subject: Dial-in info for new gTLD workshop Monday 29 October at > 13:00 local time, 20:00 UTC > > Dear All, > > Please find the dial-in information and the time below for the new > gTLD > public forum on Monday 29 October 2007. > Time: 20:00 UTC, 13:00 Local time Los Angeles. > > Please distribute this information in the interest of giving the > opportunity for as broad a participation as possible. > > Let me know if you have any questions. > Thank you so much. > > Kind regards. > Glen > > Dial-in information: > Leaders name: Glen de Saint Géry > PASSCODE: GTLD > > Toll numbers Toll free numbers > ARGENTINA: Toll Free number: 0800-777-0494 > AUSTRALIA 61-2-8211-1386 1-800-880-485 > AUSTRIA 43-1-92-89-654 0800-999-636 > BELGIUM 32-2-402-2432 0800-4-8360 > BRAZIL 0800-8912038 > CHILE 1230-020-0281 > CHINA* 10800-712-1193 > 10800-120-1193 > COLOMBIA 01800-9-156463 > CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-15 > DENMARK 45-7014-0238 8088-6075 > FINLAND 358-106-33-164 0-800-1-12056 > FRANCE > LYON: 33-4-26-69-12-75 080-511-1431 > MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-00-75 080-511-1431 > PARIS: 33-1-70-75-00-04 080-511-1431 > GERMANY 49-69-2222-52104 0800-216-1601 > GREECE 30-80-1-100-0639 00800-12-5999 > HONG KONG 852-2286-5632 800-964-136 > HUNGARY 06-800-15227 > INDIA 000-800-852-1216 > INDONESIA 001-803-011-3500 > IRELAND 353-1-246-0036 1800-931-782 > ISRAEL 1-80-9303048 > ITALY 39-02-3600-0326 800-906-585 > JAPAN 81-3-5539-5154 00531-12-1149 > LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1314 > MALAYSIA 1-800-80-8121 > MEXICO 001-866-627-0541 > NETHERLANDS 31-20-710-9321 0800-023-4655 > NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4641 0800-443-793 > NORWAY 47-21-59-00-14 800-11982 > PANAMA 011-001-800-5072119 > POLAND 00-800-1210067 > PORTUGAL 8008-12179 > RUSSIA 8-10-8002-9613011 > SINGAPORE 65-6883-9197 800-120-4057 > SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-15 > SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-93390 > > SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1052 00798-14800-6323 > SPAIN 34-91-414-15-44 800-099-279 > SWEDEN 46-8-566-10-782 0200-887-612 > SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-7718 0800-000-038 > TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7346 00801-137-565 > THAILAND 001-800-1206-65091 > UNITED KINGDOM > BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9015 0800-018-0795 > GLASGOW: 44-141-202-3215 0800-018-0795 > LEEDS: 44-113-301-2115 0800-018-0795 > LONDON: 44-20-7019-0812 0800-018-0795 > MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-1415 0800-018-0795 > URUGUAY 000-413-598-3439 > USA 1-210-795-0472 877-818-6787 > VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-3205 > > > -- > Glen de Saint Géry > GNSO Secretariat - ICANN > gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 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

1 0

Agenda for Discussion with members of the ICANN Board on Tuesday
by Nick Ashton-Hart Oct. 27, 2007

Oct. 27, 2007

Dear Members: This is a reminder to please provide the topics you wish to discuss with the members of the Board of ICANN on Tuesday between 0900 - 1100 PDT. These can be provided under the agenda item section on the page for that meeting, which can be found at https://st.icann.org/alac/ index.cgi?30_october_2007_bo. FYI, I am informed that At-Large is the only community meeting with the board on Tuesday which has yet to provide the items it wishes to discuss. All members of the community are invited to participate in this meeting - in person if you are in Los Angeles, or via remote participation if you are not present - full details may be found at the above-referenced page. Community members may also provide, via the comment button, topics that they would like to see discussed on the above-referenced page. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 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

1 0

Board meeting agenda
by Vittorio Bertola Oct. 27, 2007

Oct. 27, 2007

This is the agenda for the Board meeting on Friday: 1. Approval of Board Minutes from 16 October 2007 Special Board Meeting 2. Discussion of Status of Strategic Plan 3. Update on Internationalized Domain Names 4. GNSO Improvements - *Link for information for Board and public: a) LA Workshop on GNS Improvements agenda webpage < http://losangeles2007.icann.org/node/44>; b) GNSO Improvements webpage < http://icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/> 5. Status of Independent Reviews of ICANNs Component Groups - *Link for information for Board and public: Independent Reviews webpage < http://icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/> 6. Discussion of Contractual Conditions Policy Development Process - *Link for information for Board and public: GNSO issues page < http://gnso.icann.org/issues/gtld-policies/> 7. Review of proposed ALAC Bylaw changes - *Link for information for Board and public: ALAC wiki < https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?at_large_advisory_committee> 8. CCNSO Geographic Region Reform - *Link for information for Board and public: ccNSO website < http://ccnso.icann.org/> 9. Informational update on the status of WHOIS - *Link for information for Board and public: public comment page on whois< http://icann.org/public_comment/> 10. Discussion of New GTLD Policy and proposal for Implementation - *Link for information for Board and public: LA Workshop on New gTLDs (includes handout) < http://losangeles2007.icann.org/node/45> 11. Approval of SSAC Nominations – Recommendations to be made to the Board during the Los Angeles Meeting 12. Board Finance Committee’s Recommendation on ICANN Investment Policy 13. Discussion of MOUs of Cooperation with Regional and International Organizations (CITEL, CTO) 14. Consideration of .MUSEUM Contract Modification Proposal 15. Discussion of Registrar Escrow Agreements 16. Other Business 17. Acknowledgements and Thanks -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0