June 2008 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] Who's ashamed?
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 6, 2008

June 6, 2008

Dominik and all, Well argued and articulated here Dominik. Same for Danny's original response. Evan, at least in America we don't have riots at nearly every soccer game. I am quite sure Danny was not speeking only as an American or with the same view of an American. Personally as one who represents as spokesman for users in over 100 countries, your anti-American bias is understood, but not largely shared by our members. I hope in the future you will obtain a more ballanced attitude. But also let me be clear that indeed there is much room for improvement from my country towards other peoples of the world, and conversly there is just as much if not more of those that spew hateful words and tone towards my fellow countrymen/women and government. -----Original Message----- >From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >Sent: Jun 6, 2008 1:01 PM >To: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org>, At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] Who's ashamed? > >Evan, > >Please read my remarks below... > >>At-Large is meant to be the home of >>individuals, but not simply the handful of >>elitist, baggage-laden, largely-American >>noisemakers that Danny falsely believes >>speak for the "public at large". > >Do you see the five points enumerated by Danny elitistic and sort of romanticized vision? You then perhaps want to get rid the Board as a whole and replace it by a brand new structure where the wide community voice would be inherently reflected (in votes) in a fully transparent manner. I would second it. Just please explain how this could be feasible. > >>At-Large is for everyone else -- the consumers >>of the Internet, so to speak, who generally >>don't own domains but are greatly affected >>by their allocation and use. To do this, the >>current ALS infrastructure is designed to get >>as many people as possible involved -- or at >>least aware -- through membership organizations >>that don't nominally have Internet policy as >>a mandate. Computer user groups, free speech >>advocates, community co-operatives, consumer >>groups and others from everywhere on Earth all >>have a role to play here. Personally I believe >>that maximizing public involvement through >>otherwise-ambivalent public groups was a smart >>-- bordering on brilliant -- idea. It strives >>to reserve a corner of the ICANN process for >>those who were not self-described policymakers >>and to whom ICANN has been inaccessible to date. > >Great vision, indeed. I fully agree. Just one weak point out here. All this effort can be spoiled in a minute by a vote of few unaccounatble individuals whose the only interest is to stuff the pockets. And this negligible detail turns the whole great vision into a fairy tail. > >>Danny's romantic vision of At-Large is, in fact, >>a repudiation of this objective. The ALS structure >>is actually ICANN's best shot at accomplishing this, >>though one can certainly take issue with the quality >>of execution. > >No, it is not a repudiation. But without the representative voting power the ALS is actually ICANN's best shot at accomplishing a persuasive cover-up to the outside world. > >>Of course, ALAC doesn't have a Board vote, >>so this one is not really fulfilled. We can >>wait and see how the ALAC review group handles >>that one. > >So far so very good. The problem is in the words "wait and see". I'll tell you how the ALAC will handle that one. Exactly the same way as it did in domain tasting. You will be persuaded of not feasibility of a stronger solution and you'll finally back off. > >>Indeed, it is his view of At-Large that is >>grossly perverted, and must be avoided. > >Ah, now I fully understand. > >>There is a process -- long and drawn out it may >>be -- and we are following it. I would be the >>first to argue that until now ALAC has lacked >>either the maturity or the mandate to deserve >>a Board vote. While the maturation process >>still has far to go, the environment has >>improved by leaps and bounds since my ALS got >>involved. > >Correct. And I hope you'll find some of my observations helpful in achieving this goal. > >>I am certainly not ashamed of my role in >>At-Large; indeed, I believe most of the current >>members of ALAC and At-Large deserve praise for >>their perseverance at working to achieve a most >>difficult task. Given that At-Large should not >>be dominated by self-styled experts who create >>policy in their bedrooms, I'd say it's doing >>reasonably well. The new allocation of staff >>will help provide badly needed resources to >>a group of volunteers, most of whose day jobs >>take us far away from Internet policy. > >Certainly not. And I do believe too that many people are doing good job. They just perhaps do not fully realize that waiting and seeing might be sort of naïve expectations. > >Nevertheless, the litmus test is the upcoming bringing of the GNSO improvements into life. This step will no doubt be significant in revealing the further direction. Let's see what is going to happen. > >Dominik > > >-----Original Message----- >From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch >Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 6:07 PM >To: At-Large Worldwide >Subject: [At-Large] Who's ashamed? > >Danny Younger wrote: >> The real problem, of course, is the current perverted definition of the at-large. >> >Ah, back to that old romantic vision... at least you're persistent, no matter how sad and tired the crusade. > >> Since early 1999 the operative definition was "At-large membership should primarily represent those individuals and organizations that are not represented by the Supporting Organizations (SOs)." -- see the Membership Advisory Committee (MAC) documents. >> > >So far so good. > >> As non-commercial organizations are represented within the SOs, namely by way of the NCUC, they are, by definition, not the at-large (which is supposed to be primarily the home of individuals). > >Let's stop there. > >At-Large is meant to be the home of individuals, but not simply the handful of elitist, baggage-laden, largely-American noisemakers that Danny falsely believes speak for the "public at large". > >NCUC is the rightful place for academia, and for organizations and people actively involved in making Internet policy as part of their mandate. At-Large is for everyone else -- the consumers of the Internet, so to speak, who generally don't own domains but are greatly affected by their allocation and use. To do this, the current ALS infrastructure is designed to get as many people as possible involved -- or at least aware >-- through membership organizations that don't nominally have Internet policy as a mandate. Computer user groups, free speech advocates, community co-operatives, consumer groups and others from everywhere on Earth all have a role to play here. Personally I believe that maximizing public involvement through otherwise-ambivalent public groups was a smart -- bordering on brilliant -- idea. It strives to reserve a corner of the ICANN process for those who were not self-described policymakers and to whom ICANN has been inaccessible to date. The voice of the global public goes far beyond the elitist cadre that forms the core of Danny's tragically romanticized vision. > >The extra level of indirection -- ALSs -- between ICANN and the public allows various core individuals to help drive the process, supported by ICANN but ultimately charged with helping to build a grassroots that simply could never happen under Danny's model. > >Indeed, it is his view of At-Large that is grossly perverted, and must be avoided. > >> "The goals of the at-large membership are as follows: >> (a) to include any Internet user with access and verifiable >> identity in order to reflect the global diversity of users (membership >> should not be limited to IP address or domain name holders), >We got that. As At-Large matures it will even get beyond its current concentrations of ISOC chapters and attract more groups such as Consumers Union. Not only should At-Large not be limited to domain name holders, it is in our interests -- to keep to the vision -- that the vast majority of At-Large is comprised of those who do not own domains. > >> (b) to elect Directors to the ICANN Board by procedures that >> are valid and authentic, >"Valid and authentic" is in the eye of the beholder. Danny wants a return to elitism, I want to broaden the base exactly to give the At-Large voice more validity. It is no surprise that, in other mail, Danny has defended the NomComm and attacked outreach initiatives; his vision actually *fears* greater public involvement and accountability. > >Of course, ALAC doesn't have a Board vote, so this one is not really fulfilled. We can wait and see how the ALAC review group handles that one. > >> (c) to ensure that ICANN s corporate structure operates for >> the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, is not captured, and >> continues to provide fair and proportional representation of the >> entire user community, > >Danny's romantic vision of At-Large is, in fact, a repudiation of this objective. The ALS structure is actually ICANN's best shot at accomplishing this, though one can certainly take issue with the quality of execution. > >> (d) to provide input from the user community to the ICANN >> Directors and >We do that now. Wendy's success in getting approval in principle for the Summit is only one recent example. Of course a Board vote (or, IMO more than one vote) would be better. > >> (e) to do so in a cost-efficient manner." >> > >The effort to engage an otherwise-disinterested public comes with an expense; for that I make no apology. Otherwise all you hear are the noisemakers who think they have all the answers but certainly do not represent the global public POV. > >> So, what steps has your "pretend At-Large" taken to secure voting representation on the ICANN Board of Directors? >> >Don't know about anyone else, but I had a very prepared and thought-out submission (actually, more than one) to the ALAC review. Not sure what else we are expected to do ... stage sit-ins? Boycott IPv6? Deface websites? Write angry emails with a hundred Ccs that all get ignored? > >There is a process -- long and drawn out it may be -- and we are following it. I would be the first to argue that until now ALAC has lacked either the maturity or the mandate to deserve a Board vote. While the maturation process still has far to go, the environment has improved by leaps and bounds since my ALS got involved. > >> It's pathetic, and an insult to every At-Large member that voted in the earlier global elections. You should all be ashamed. >> >I am certainly not ashamed of my role in At-Large; indeed, I believe most of the current members of ALAC and At-Large deserve praise for their perseverance at working to achieve a most difficult task. Given that At-Large should not be dominated by self-styled experts who create policy in their bedrooms, I'd say it's doing reasonably well. The new allocation of staff will help provide badly needed resources to a group of volunteers, most of whose day jobs take us far away from Internet policy. > >And we get to do this all in the face of virtual rock-throwers, of saboteurs from within who claim we're irrelevant yet still insist on engaging us. Such distractions are annoying, but must not deter achievement of the vision that the current ALS/RALO/ALAC structure is well capable to deliver. > >- Evan > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Bad domains McAfee study
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 6, 2008

June 6, 2008

Jacque and all, Please excuse the lengthy CC list. But due to the mismanagement of the ALAC list ensuring receipt of my response to this was required. I'm quite sure that (HKDNR) was very surprised. I am however not sure that the reasons they gave for being so surprised are entirely honest. I myself have not experienced much spam/phishing Email originating from .HK domains. Nor have I heard from any our members of such either. I will check with our study group that has been engaged on an ongoing basis in tracking, researching, and collecting data on "Bad Domains" as you put it Jacque. Our study also did show a high recidivism of spam, phishing, SQL injection attempts, and attempted hacking from .INFO domains and were tracked to various bogus IP address assignments. My own personal data base going back to 2004 shows that approx. 16% of the spam and phishing attempts originated from .INFO domains. Currently I block 47 .INFO domain Names as a result. All have been reported to us-cert.gov and several have been reported to ic3.gov for investigation as is appropriate. Although I along with several of our members have attempted in to prevail with Afilias in doing a much better job of policing their registrants, those efforts have been almost entirely not effective. Ergo it is our policy by majority decision to discontinue contacting Afilias on such incidents, and simply reporting each and every incident, blocking those domain names and associated IP addresses first, than forwarding those reports to afilias if our members feel so inclined in hopes of breaking the errant recessive cycle of abuse by Afilias'es registrants and Afilias itself. To date, this has met with only some cooperation. In my professional capacity at work, we currently for our customers, whom are mostly service providers and independent hosters for those that have requested, we block all .INFO related network traffic and internally due to the recidivism and ongoing arogant and inconsiderate attitude as well as slowness or response to incidents by Afilias, all .INFO traffic is blocked until the Registry for .INFO is redelegated. The response vs cost of resources just wasn't and isn't worth the effort. -----Original Message----- >From: "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> >Sent: Jun 6, 2008 10:33 AM >To: "Brendler, Beau" <Brenbe(a)consumer.org> >Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] Bad domains McAfee study > >Hi Beau >There's been some discussion on the cc lists about this as you can imagine. >Here's the .hk response to the media: > >We are very surprised to learn about the research findings from McAfee. >In fact, in a meeting organized by Anti-Phishing Working Group last week >in Tokyo Japan, Hong Kong Domain Name Registration (HKDNR) was invited >to present its best practice in combating suspicious websites. We are >trying to get in touch with the research author to gain more insights >into this research and the findings. The research report shows the >figures and analysis of the whole of last year. In particular, the >report claimed that 9.9 million websites have been tested. It is >suspected that most of the malicious sites were tested several months >ago and no long exist. > >HKDNR is committed to providing a safe Internet environment for the >community and has put in place various measures against suspicious >websites. We have been working closely with Office of the >Telecommunications Authority (OFTA), Hong Kong Police and Hong Kong >Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Centre (HKCERT) to monitor >and control the situation. In August last year, in conjunction with the >list of suspicious domains provided by OFTA, we suspended over 10,000 >domains in regard. Following that initiatives, the situation with ‘.hk’ >related suspicious websites has been greatly improved. > >We actively review our systems and domain name registration procedures >and policies. Particularly, we have more stringent documentary >requirements to combat suspicious websites registered overseas in order >to catch up with the fast-changing Internet world. We also want to call >for the general community to be aware of the issue and report to related >authorities whenever they have queries accessing a web site. > > >Brendler, Beau wrote: >> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24966835?GT1=43001 >> >> "McAfee found the most dangerous domains to navigate to are ".hk" (Hong >> Kong), ".cn" (China) and ".info" (information)." >> >> Apologies if you've seen this already. >> >> BB >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] RES: Notice of Opening for Board Liaison Nominations Period
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 6, 2008

June 6, 2008

JFC and all, No one had really heard of France@large even in France itself until recently. Most of those frenchmen and women that do now and recently were and are INEGroup members which number over 4k today. Additionally France@large's DN's DNS is grossly miscongfigured and as a result, currently represents a clear a present danger to users everywhere. Open relays are s significant danger. See: http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=franceatlarge.org&tok… So JFC, although I recognize your effort to create from whole thread a @large that is of French origin, what your promoting, and to a degree how your promoting it, is more than a bit disengenious, and due to technical deficiencies, again represents a clear a present danger to users everywhere. -----Original Message----- >From: JFC Morfin <jefsey(a)jefsey.com> >Sent: Jun 6, 2008 5:24 AM >To: Thomas Roessler <roessler(a)does-not-exist.org>, "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> >Cc: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >Subject: Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] RES: Notice of Opening for Board Liaison Nominations Period > >At 12:47 06/06/2008, Thomas Roessler wrote: >>On 2008-06-06 06:41:34 -0400, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: >> > Not that JFC was self-nominating Sebastien, which of course is >> > ridiculous. >> >>It would explain a lot, though. >>(sorry, Sebastien, couldn't resist) >>-- >>Thomas Roessler <roessler(a)does-not-exist.org> > >Dear Thomas and all, >This joke should help all of you understand how ALAC management may >be perceived by new and candid new commers. france@large is certainly >the most advanced, concerned and involved lose net of @large people. >They do not focus on ICANN they consider as a set of cons and pros. >They focus on their own personal interests which is networked with >the interests of others. In life, business, culture, language, etc. >etc. including the Internet. > >They also are an advanced group of people in terms of grassroots >evolution of the Internet and probably one of the few ALS having an >Internet usage architectural alternative under way, liaising with the >IETF, and active at the IGF level (local, european and worldwide). >This is why I personnally pushed them to welcome ICANN and enter ALAC. > >Their reasoning is simple : > >1. ALAC does not want us. Why to bother about them. We are on a >technical trend to societally by-pass them. > >I agree with them, but, they do not necessarily evaluate correctly >the anglosaxon legacy we also have to support, the same as the >anglo-saxon world does not evaluate what is needed and developping in >the rest of the world. Making this understood by both sides is difficult. > >2. This made I could not be a candidate to Euralo, and we cannot vote >in Paris. They know they are legitimate and that all this would be >administratively settled had I called upon the Ombudsman or/and the >BoD, instead of trusting Wolf and waiting to see him in Paris. > >Wolf did not help in disregrading our invitation to the diner we >planned at Saff suggestion. They infered there would have a closed >BoF. To calm this, I nominated Sebastien as the only ALAC person >knowing the issues we are dealing with (I underlined I could not do it). > >4. the very unfortunate comment of Staff on "self-nomination" came on >top of all this. It shows they equal Sebastien's positions with ours. >Everyone know we a very friendly with ISOC but very different too. >Your comment adds to it :-) ! They deduce the feud is by "merchant >concepts" (as per the IAB RFC 3869) - they daily suffer from in their >france@large endeavours, and against the "Internet French/WSIS/people >centric concepts". > >For everyone to better undestand, I quote IAB (two years ago): "The >principal thesis of this document [RFC 3869] is that if commercial >funding is the main source of funding for future Internet research, >the future of the Internet infrastructure could be in trouble. In >addition to issues about which projects are funded, the funding >source can also affect the content of the research, for example, >towards or against the development of open standards, or taking >varying degrees of care about the effect of the developed protocols >on the other traffic on the Internet." > >The solution proposed by IAB are: non-commercial R&D funding by >Governements (US mainly) or @large. The USG has not followed and said >US industry should be the funding source. Some IETF geeks then >switched to Google or Yahoo! france@large wen excluded but >sucessfully opposed (at IETF, ISO, SMSI) some of their most >contentious positions. A few days ago, france@large has closed a >mutual de facto understanding with the IETF/WG-IDNABIS over >IDNA/ML-DNS. In our mind, it should help a smooth transition from a >cahotic and born dead Internationalised Internet to a stable >Multilngual Internet, and permit the emergence of the Semantic Internet. > >You may understand why they are upset and now laughing at the >ALAC/Staff's attitude. The question I constantly have is "what did >they produced, whet did they help?. > >For ten years I tell ICANN "let get real". Then Esther Dyson said the >same. Many will say the same in coming months and two years (JPA and >IGF understanding of ICANN). There is a place for ICANN in the world >digital and semantic ecosystem supported by the Internet. This role >can only be introduced and made credible to users by ALAC, as the >ICANN own's users. Otherwise there will be a split, the USG/ICANN >dreaming of a new world shape and the world building itself >differently ...until there is a US/World interoperability clash. > >The Internet is an interconnected computer assisted people's network, >the IETF only wants to influence the design, use and management for >it to work better along its own values [RFC 3935]. This means it >really is what the people think how it is built. ICANN is a >regulating organisationware tool for these computers. People can keep >using it, people can feel it is a bug. People will decide from what >they gather from @larges, as their nearest technical/legal pole of >responsible and authoritative competence. > >jfc > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] RES: Notice of Opening for Board Liaison Nominations Period
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 6, 2008

June 6, 2008

Jacque and all, Here is a novel idea. In that as you say that only 15 ALAC members can nominate anyone, why not each of them self nominate? I suppose that these same 15 members are the only ALAC members that can vote as well? ROFLMAO! This is one of the most skewed situations I've ever seen in my lifetime! Utterly ridiculous! -----Original Message----- >From: "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> >Sent: Jun 6, 2008 3:41 AM >To: LB <lbleriot(a)gmail.com> >Cc: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >Subject: Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] RES: Notice of Opening for Board Liaison Nominations Period > >I now understand what you were talking about ! The note indicated that >only the 15 ALAC members could submit nominations, either of themselves >or someone else. So JFC had no standing to nominate anyone. Not that JFC >was self-nominating Sebastien, which of course is ridiculous. >Bad translations are a powerful tool for misunderstanding. >Jacqueline >LB wrote: >> >> 4. the most fun is the note of Staff who reminds JFC that >> self-nominations are prohibited when they comment on his nomination of >> Sebastien Bachollet. >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten June 6, 2008

June 6, 2008

Total of 60 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jun 6 00:53:02 EDT 2008 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 25.00% | 15 | 30.08% | 153148 | jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com 11.67% | 7 | 10.97% | 55872 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 8.33% | 5 | 10.02% | 51024 | cheryl at hovtek.com.au 6.67% | 4 | 5.89% | 30012 | lists at privaterra.info 5.00% | 3 | 4.47% | 22778 | jefsey at jefsey.com 5.00% | 3 | 3.39% | 17269 | dannyyounger at yahoo.com 3.33% | 2 | 3.69% | 18765 | dthompson at gov.nu.ca 3.33% | 2 | 3.66% | 18614 | lbleriot at gmail.com 3.33% | 2 | 3.44% | 17518 | carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com 3.33% | 2 | 2.69% | 13719 | nick.ashton-hart at icann.org 3.33% | 2 | 2.54% | 12954 | jam at jacquelinemorris.com 3.33% | 2 | 2.38% | 12107 | johnl at iecc.com 3.33% | 2 | 2.37% | 12056 | michele at blacknight.ie 3.33% | 2 | 2.26% | 11486 | joly at punkcast.com 1.67% | 1 | 2.54% | 12955 | brenbe at consumer.org 1.67% | 1 | 2.03% | 10355 | vanda at uol.com.br 1.67% | 1 | 1.60% | 8157 | huenguyen at netnam.vn 1.67% | 1 | 1.56% | 7954 | narten at us.ibm.com 1.67% | 1 | 1.55% | 7905 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 1.67% | 1 | 1.53% | 7779 | sricciardi at fibertel.com.ar 1.67% | 1 | 1.33% | 6773 | derek at aa419.org --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 60 |100.00% | 509200 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [EURO-Discuss] [ALAC-Internal] Notice of Opening for Board Liaison Nominations Period
by Nick Ashton-Hart June 5, 2008

June 5, 2008

As a point of clarification, nominations or self-nominations per the Rules of Procedure (Rule 9.2) may only be made by ALAC members. On 05/06/2008 14:23, "JFC Morfin" <jefsey(a)jefsey.com> wrote: Dear Wolf, I nominate Sebastien Bachollet. jfc PS. I know that france@large Members who do not exist cannot nominate candidate right-now nor france@large to vote. But who knows if this will not have been corrected before the closure of the vote. I also suppose that, as one of the largest and most involved European ALS, our opinion should be considered. I do not nominate Sebastien because he is French and because I know him well, but due to his long and successful experience with ICANN issues as a non-American citizen, a former BC active leader, a specialist of the Internet Governance, the founder and organiser of the EGENI leading meeting on Naming Governance, the French ISOC Chapter Chair, an active Civil Society actor at the IGF and the Chair of the AGIFEM project which made ICANN to come in Paris and made the resulting costs financed. IMHO this is the kind of experience and of doer ALAC need to liaise with the BoD and keep them moving in the proper direction (which is necessarily @large oriented) if we want ICANN to survive the transition (JPA and IGF) as an international entity. At 13:01 05/06/2008, Wolf Ludwig wrote: >we received a call from the ALAC Chair recently on the Opening for >Board Liaison Nominations Period for the position of the At-Large >Liaison to the ICANN Board of Directors. This position is currently >held by Wendy Seltzer, a law professor from the US who I had the >pleasure to meet in February in New Delhi. _______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org -- 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

2 1

Briefing On new Generic Top-Level Domains: Select your preferred briefing time/date
by At-Large Staff June 5, 2008

June 5, 2008

Dear ALAC New GTLD Policy Working Group members: As you know, the ALAC has asked the members of the working group to accelerate efforts to provide a draft statement on the work of ICANN to create a process for the inclusion of new generic top-level domains on the Internet. In order to help with this effort, a briefing by Karla Valente and Olof Nordling on the ICANN staff will be provided to working group members, and those members of the At-Large community who wish to attend, to provide an update on the work of the staff to design the implementation process for the policy developed by the GNSO. We would like to offer two windows of time when this briefing can be held, in order to facilitate the broadest participation in the briefing. The times and dates available may be found, and your participation preferences recorded, at http://www.doodle.ch/participation.html?pollId=binhbh6zcs6m8afa. You may fill in your preferences on or before 1800 UTC on 6 June 2008. We will announce the meeting shortly after that time. Homepage for the New GTLD Policy Working group: https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?new_gtld_policy Co-Coordinators: Erick Iriarte Ahon & Sebastian Ricciardi ALAC Issue Coordinator: Beau Brendler Members: Gurumurthy Kasinathan (AP) Erick Iriarte Ahon (LAC) Sebastian Ricciardi (LAC) Veronica Cretu (EURO) Beau Brendler <Brenbe(a)consumer.org> (NA) The working group is still seeking members from Africa - and of course more may join from other regions too! -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [Fwd: [ccnso-members] Report on global domain name use by phishers - released by AntiPhishing Working Group]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 5, 2008

June 5, 2008

All, Resending this via Matthias request... Derek, Jacque and all, This is a very good report. Our independant survey indicated that there were over 68k DN's used for phishing purposes in 2007 all of which DNS were mis-configured. We were a bit more exact in whom the top 10 phishers were. The top 5 are as follows: Yahoo.com, Gmail.com, googlemail.com, mac.com, yahoo.co.uk, google.com, live.com, live.ru, ATT.net, and wikipedia.com. Currently most of our members are blocking/filtering these DN's and their associated IP addresses, and will continue to do so until or unless those whom are responsible for these phishiers and their Sr. managment are prosecuted to the fullist extent of the law. -----Original Message----- >From: Derek Smythe <derek(a)aa419.org> >Sent: Jun 4, 2008 8:07 AM >To: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Fwd: [ccnso-members] Report on global domain name use by phishers - released by Anti Phishing Working Group] > >Hi Jacqueline and all > >Jacqueline, thank you posting this brilliant document. > >Indeed many of the observations in this document highlights some >serious issues. > >I am sure the publishers would not mind me saying this; many of these >identical issues are not only found in phishing scams, but also in >advance fee fraud/419 scams, escrow scams, job/money mule scams and >non-existent goods scams and other criminal enterprise. > >Many of the above scams at different levels of sophistication, but >sooner or later we note the same trends for most of them, the general >targets being unsuspecting other internet users and service providers. > >This document is a definite MUST read for anyone involved in domain >names or hosting in any form, more so their staff and/or agents >dealing with fraud issues. > >Brilliant! > >Regards > >Derek >http://www.aa419.org > > >Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: >> FYI >> Jacqueline >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: [ccnso-members] Report on global domain name use by phishers - >> released by Anti Phishing Working Group >> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 04:30:56 -0700 >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> The Antiphishing Working Group (APWG) has released the results of a survey on "Global >> Domain Name Use and Trends in 2007" - it's a study on how phishers use domain names and to what purposes. >> >> The study describes an analysis that the APWG did of a comprehensive database of the phishing that took place in 2007. Basing on this, the APWG has defined the ways that phishers use domain names in their attacks. >> >> The study is available at: http://www.apwg.org/reports/APWG_GlobalPhishingSurvey2007.pdf >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Gabi / ccNSO Secretariat >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >> > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

CONFIRMED: Briefing Session on Draft Operational Plan and Budget
by At-Large Staff June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Dear all, This is to confirm that Mr Kevin Wilson, ICANN¹s Chief Financial Officer, will give a briefing session on the Draft Operational Plan and Budget for FY 08/09. Tuesday, 10 June 12:30 UTC (one hour before the start of the monthly ALAC teleconference). There will be French and Spanish interpretation for this call. Please find a list with international toll-free numbers and the conference access code on our meeting page. https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?draft_operating_plan_and_budget You will also find reference material such as the ALAC Statement on the Draft Budget on this page. Further, we will soon post an agenda and a Powerpoint presentation. In order to follow the presentation during the call, please follow the link to the Adobe connect meeting room and that page. If you have never used Adobe Connect, please follow the instructions on the meeting page. We would like to thank Mr. Wilson for the time and effort he has put into this and look forward to his presentation next week. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

[Fwd: [ccnso-members] Report on global domain name use by phishers - released by Anti Phishing Working Group]
by Jacqueline A. Morris June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

FYI Jacqueline -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ccnso-members] Report on global domain name use by phishers - released by Anti Phishing Working Group Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 04:30:56 -0700 Dear all, The Antiphishing Working Group (APWG) has released the results of a survey on "Global Domain Name Use and Trends in 2007" - it's a study on how phishers use domain names and to what purposes. The study describes an analysis that the APWG did of a comprehensive database of the phishing that took place in 2007. Basing on this, the APWG has defined the ways that phishers use domain names in their attacks. The study is available at: http://www.apwg.org/reports/APWG_GlobalPhishingSurvey2007.pdf Kind regards, Gabi / ccNSO Secretariat

3 2