May 2011 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Announce] Statement of the ALAC on Academia Representation on the NomCom
by presidencia Internauta Argentina May 29, 2011

May 29, 2011

I fully endorse the statement made by theEURALOcolleagues. I understand that only communities can elect their members and not an entity organized outside the community (in this case the Board of ICANN) *Sergio Salinas Porto Presidente Internauta Argentina Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.internauta.org.ar>FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.fuilain.org>LACRALO - ALAC Member facebook:salinasporto twitter:sergiosalinas MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... Skype:internautaargentina Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819 * * "Ojalá podamos ser desobedientes, cada vez que recibimos órdenes que humillan nuestra conciencia o violan nuestro sentido común" -Eduardo Galeano- * El 29/05/2011 12:18 a.m., ICANN At-Large Staff escribió: > Hello, all, > > > > Attached is the final Statement of the ALAC on Academia Representation on the NomCom, submitted to the staff person responsible for this public comment topic, as well as to the Board Secretary, on 28 May. > > Regards, > Heidi Ullrich, Seth Greene, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber-White, and Marilyn Vernon > ICANN At-Large Staff > > email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org > website: www.atlarge.icann.org > > ________________________________ > From: ICANN At-Large Staff > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 4:29 PM > To: academia-nomcom(a)icann.org; Secretary > Cc: ocl(a)gih.com; ICANN At-Large Staff > Subject: RE: Statement of the ALAC on Academia Representation on the NomCom > > Hello, all, > > Attached to the below e-mail was a Word version of the Statement of the ALAC on Academia Representation on the NomCom. Of course, it was our intension to attach a PDF version. Apologies for the error. > > The PDF version is now attached here. If you would kindly post the PDF, not the Word version, it would be appreciated. > > Many thanks, > Heidi Ullrich, Seth Greene, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber-White, and Marilyn Vernon > ICANN At-Large Staff > > email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org > website: www.atlarge.icann.org > > ________________________________ > From: ICANN At-Large Staff > Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 3:06 PM > To: academia-nomcom(a)icann.org; Secretary > Cc: ocl(a)gih.com; ICANN At-Large Staff > Subject: Statement of the ALAC on Academia Representation on the NomCom > > Dear all, > > The At-Large staff has the honor of transmitting to you, on behalf of the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), the Statement of the ALAC on Academia Representation on the NomCom. > > The ALAC ratification vote on this Statement will start imminently -- on ICANN's next business day. We will inform the Board of the results of this vote. > > Christopher Wilkinson, a member of an At-Large Structure ( ALS) in the European Regional At-Large Organization (EURALO), composed a first draft of this statement, which he shared with the EURALO community and later with the wider At-Large community. > > With the support from several At-Large members, a wiki workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/lYLu> containing this statement was created. The At-Large staff sent out a call for comments from the At-Large community, to be submitted via this workspace, on 20 May 2011. > > Comments were received not only on the workspace but also during the ALAC and ALAC Executive Committee monthly calls held on 24 May 2011. > > On 28 May 2011, Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC, (a) wrote a second draft of this statement, attached here, incorporating the received comments, and (b) requested that the At-Large staff begin a five day ALAC ratification vote on this statement on the next business day. > > With this same e-mail, this ALAC Statement is being transmitted to the ICANN Board Secretary and Amy Stathos, the ICANN staff member responsible for this public comment topic. > > Regards, > Heidi Ullrich, Seth Greene, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber-White, and Marilyn Vernon > ICANN At-Large Staff > > email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org > website: www.atlarge.icann.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC-Announce mailing list > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Call for Expertise for a drafting team to develop a Whois Service Requirements survey
by Alan Greenberg May 27, 2011

May 27, 2011

>From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> >Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:14:20 -0400 >Subject: [liaison6c] Call for Expertise for a >drafting team to develop a Whois Service Requirements survey > >Dear All, > >http://gnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19may11-en.htm > >Invitation for volunteers to form a Drafting >Team to develop a survey to estimate the level >of agreement that the conclusions and >assumptions in the Inventory of Whois Service >Requirements Report of 29 July 2010 have in the >ICANN community. See: ><http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-service-requirements-final-report-…>http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-service-requirements-final-report-…. >The goal of the Drafting Team would be to assist >staff in developing the format, questions, >response scale and scope of the survey. >In May 2009 by the GNSO Council requested that >staff prepare a compilation of potential future >requirements for WHOIS service, based on current >requirements and a review of previous GNSO WHOIS >policy discussions. This resolution reflected >increasing community concerns that the current >WHOIS service is deficient in a number of ways, >including data accuracy and reliability, as well >as in other technical areas noted in recent SSAC >reports, such as accessibility and readability >of WHOIS contact information in an international >environment. The report is a compendium of >potential technical requirements and makes no >policy recommendations. Some of the potential >technical requirements included in the report >are the following: a mechanism to find >authoritative WHOIS servers; structured queries; >a standardized set of query capabilities; a >well-defined schema for replies; standardized >error messages; improved quality of domain >registration data; internationalization; >security elements; thick vs. thin WHOIS; and a >Registrar abuse point of contact. Staff >published a first draft of the report 26 March >2010, solicited input from SOs and ACs, and >posted a draft final report reflecting SO and AC input on 31 May. >Thus, on 19 May the GNSO Council asked ICANN >staff to begin the process of seeking community >volunteers Drafting Team for the purpose of developing a survey of views. >This invitation is extended to all members of >the ICANN community. We urge you to forward to >this to all members of the community who may be >interested in participating. Expertise in the >technical aspects of gTLD Whois, and background >on the history of gTLD Whois policy development, >would be particularly useful to this group. >Please contact the GNSO Council Secretariat at ><mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >by 01 June 2011 if you are interested in joining >the Drafting Team. Please contact Liz Gasster >at ><mailto:liz.gasster@icann.org>liz.gasster(a)icann.org >if you have any questions about the report or the work of this group. > >Thank you. >Kind regards, >Glen > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat >gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org

2 1

INET New York - Call for attendees
by Joly MacFie May 27, 2011

May 27, 2011

* Please a) forward this invite to anyone who might be interested b) print out and display the flyer anywhere appropriate c) make use of the embeds when blogging. The Internet Society (ISOC) will present an INET Regional Conference on June 14 2011 at the Sentry Center in NYC. The conference will take the form of a one day forum with the theme “It’s your call. What kind of Internet do you want?". The distinguished line up of speakers includes ‘Father of the Internet’ Vint Cerf, World Wide Web inventor Sir Tim Berners Lee, and Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information at the U.S. Department of Commerce Lawrence Strickling. You are cordially invited to attend in person. What: INET New York - “It’s your call. What kind Of Internet do you want?" When: Tuesday June 14, 2011: 9am-5.30pm EDT Where: Sentry Center, 730 Third Avenue, NY NY 10017 Who: ISOC Members $25, Others $50 Register: http://isoc.org/nyinet Agenda: http://bit.ly/inetnyagenda Hashtag: #inetny Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=145503388852445 Linked In: http://events.linkedin.com/INET-New-York/pub/649653 Flyer: http://isoc-ny.org/inet/INET-NY_flier.pdf Embeds: http://isoc-ny.org/inet/embeds.html Shorturl: http://bit.ly/inetny Along with the remarkable keynoters named above, three expert panels will identify and examine the critical decisions that will shape the Internet's future, including: * Who will help define the Internet’s evolution? * What role should government and private industry play? * What is the public interest? * How do we provide greater bandwidth and access? * What does online privacy mean in the age of Facebook and Wikileaks? Finally the event will conclude with a three way dialog between the keynoters, moderated by Internet Society President Lynn St. Amour. As you will see from the program we have gathered some of the top minds in Internet development from all sides of the spectrum. While we are looking foremost to make serious strides on setting the agenda for Internet progress in the foreseeable future, obviously this INET will also provide a great networking opportunity. We've deliberately kept the cost affordable to gain a wide audience. Space is limited so it is advisable to register a.s.a.p. For those of you unable to attend in person, or who miss the cut, there will be free remote participation, details to be announced nearer the day. Again, the registration link is http://isoc.org/nyinet About the Internet Society The Internet Society (ISOC) is a nonprofit organisation that is built on a network of over 80 local chapters around the world. We are dedicated to ensuring the open development, evolution and use of the Internet for the benefit of people throughout the world. The Internet Society has organized the INET in cooperation with our New York Chapter to provide leadership in Internet related standards, education and policy. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

IGF 2011 website live AfIGF to follow?
by Joly MacFie May 27, 2011

May 27, 2011

Nairobi IGF website: http://igf.or.ke/ There are also plans afoot to hold an African IGF directly following the event. See http://bit.ly/AFIGFplan <http://igf.or.ke/>One can also follow @AfrIGF<http://www.twitter.com/AfrIGF> on twitter j -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 27, 2011

May 27, 2011

Total of 7 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 27 00:53:03 EDT 2011 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 14.29% | 1 | 95.33% | 1066272 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 14.29% | 1 | 0.92% | 10315 | william.drake at uzh.ch 14.29% | 1 | 0.92% | 10303 | vivekvc2001 at yahoo.co.in 14.29% | 1 | 0.91% | 10169 | cintra.sooknanan at gmail.com 14.29% | 1 | 0.73% | 8113 | presidencia at internauta.org.ar 14.29% | 1 | 0.65% | 7324 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 14.29% | 1 | 0.54% | 6067 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 7 |100.00% | 1118563 | Total

1 0

Fwd: [ssac] PROTECT IP white paper
by Patrick Vande Walle May 26, 2011

May 26, 2011

Greetings, I wanted to share with you this document, prepared by well known DNS experts for the US Senate. It explains in plain words why filtering DNS queries is technically problematic. Although this was written as a reaction to a US law proposal, its contents are relevant well outside the US context. If you do not wish to read the document in full, read the executive summary and the conclusions, which I have appended below: "as discussed in this paper, the mandated DNS filtering provisions found in the PROTECT IP Act raise very serious security and technical concerns. We believe that the goals of PROTECT IP can be accomplished without reducing DNS security and stability, through strategies such as better international cooperation on prosecutions and the other remedies contained in PROTECT IP other than DNS-related provisions. We urge Congress to reject the DNS filtering portions of the Act." Patrick Vande Walle -------- Original Message -------- SUBJECT: [ssac] PROTECT IP white paper DATE: Wed, 25 May 2011 20:34:08 -0400 FROM: Steve Crocker TO: SSAC SSAC , ICANN of Directors Board CC: Steve Crocker Folks, A handful of technical folks in the DNS community, including me, have written and released the attached white paper regarding the pending legislation in the U.S. Senate called PROTECT IP. This is not an ICANN effort, though ICANN people have helped a lot. Sharing with you for info. Feel free to share further. Thanks, Steve -- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Announce] Results of the 2011 APRALO election calls
by presidencia Internauta Argentina May 23, 2011

May 23, 2011

Congratulations to all APRALO members of the elections in your region! *Sergio Salinas Porto Presidente Internauta Argentina Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.internauta.org.ar>FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.fuilain.org>LACRALO - ALAC Member facebook:salinasporto twitter:sergiosalinas MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... Skype:internautaargentina Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819 * * "Ojalá podamos ser desobedientes, cada vez que recibimos órdenes que humillan nuestra conciencia o violan nuestro sentido común" -Eduardo Galeano- * El 20/05/2011 12:15 a.m., ICANN At-Large Staff escribió: > Hello, all, > > At-Large staff is please to present to APRALO and the At-Large Community the following report on the outcome of the recently closed APRALO 2011 election calls. See also the "2011 Election Calls - APRALO" wiki page athttps://community.icann.org/pages/editpage.action?pageId=11994663#<https://community.icann.org/pages/editpage.action?pageId=11994663>. > > > 1. Leadership-selection processes to date > > 6 April 2011 -- At-Large staff announced elections and call for nominations. > > 6-29 April 2011 – Nomination period. > > 6 May 2011 -- Deadline for nomination acceptances (all nominees accepted nominations no later than seven days after the nomination period ended on 29 April 2011). > > 11-19 May 2011 -- Elections (One election was held -- for the position of APRALO Chair. This online poll closed at 23:59 UTC on 19 May 2011; for the report on this poll from BigPulse, see below). > > > 2. Poll Result: APRALO Chair Elections May 2011 > > Report date: Friday, 20 May 2011, 00:52 UTC. > > The poll was closed on Thursday, 19 May 2011, at 23:59 UTC. > > Number of voters: 15. Group size: 19. Percent voted: 78.95%. > > Ranking > > by votes > Candidates > Votes > % > > 1 > Charles Mok > 11 > 73.33 > > 2 Sivasubramanian Muthusamy > 4 26.67 > > 3 Abstain > 0 0.0 > > > > 3. APRALO-selected leadership for 2011-13, as a result of these election calls > APRALO Chair: > For both interim term of 19 May 2011 through 30 June 2011 and official term of 01 July 2011 through 30 June 2013 > > > Mr. Charles Mok > (ISOC-HK) > > > EFFECTIVE from 20 May 2011 through 30 June 2013 > > > APRALO Vice-Chair: > For official term of 01 July 2011 through 30 June 2013 > > > Ms. Holly Raiche > (ISOC-AU) > > > > EFFECTIVE from 01 July 2011 through 30 June 2013* > > > APRALO Secretariat: > For official term of 01 July 2011 through 30 June 2013 > > ISOC Hong Kong (appointment of Mr. Pavan Budhrani; continues to hold this position) > > EFFECTIVE from 01 July 2011 through 30 June 2013 > > > *APRALO has two Vice-Chairs, each elected for two-year terms in alternate years. Mr. Fouad Bajwa continues as one of the Vice-Chairs until 30 June 2012. The other position becomes vacant with the election of Mr. Charles Mok (currently serving as Vice Chair until 30 June 2011) to the position of APRALO Chair. Therefore, Holly Raiche will serve as Vice Chair-elect from 20 May through 30 June 2011; her official two-year term begins on 01 July 2011. > > The At-Large staff wishes to thank all those involved in this process, especially those who nominated or accepted nominations for these critical leadership roles in APRALO. We look forward to continuing our work with this new leadership team. > > Regards, > Heidi Ullrich, Seth Greene, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber-White, and Marilyn Vernon > ICANN At-Large Staff > > email: staff[at]atlarge.icann.org > website:www.atlarge.icann.org > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC-Announce mailing list > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce > > At-Large Official Site:http://atlarge.icann.org >

3 2

GigaNet Nairobi CFP
by William Drake May 21, 2011

May 21, 2011

GIGANET Global Internet Governance Academic Network in co-operation with Research ICT Africa CALL FOR PAPERS Sixth Annual Symposium 26 September 2011 Nairobi, Kenya The Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GIGANET), in co-operation with the Research ICT Africa (RIA), is seeking submissions of research about Internet Governance to be presented at the Sixth GigaNet Annual Symposium, held on 26 September 2011, one day before the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Nairobi, Kenya. Since 2006, GigaNet has organized an Annual Symposium to showcase research about Internet Governance, focusing on an interdisciplinary approach. Prior successful symposia took place in Greece (2006), Brazil (2007), India (2008), Egypt (2009) and Lithuania (2010). In 2011, the Internet Governance Forum has entered its second phase, after having reached the end of its first 5-years mandate. This year’s event will provide room to discuss the challenges encountered and results achieved during the first five years of IGF. As in previous years the GigaNet Symposium will further discuss current and future questions of Global Internet Governance. Organizers GigaNet is a scholarly community that promotes the development of Internet Governance as a recognized, interdisciplinary field of study and facilitates informed dialogue on policy issues and related matters between scholars and governments, international organizations, the private sector and civil society. http://giga-net.org/ Research ICT Africa is a network of researchers in 20 African countries conducting research on ICT policy and regulation and facilitating evidence-based and informed policy making for improved access, use and application of ICT for social development and economic growth. http://www.researchictafrica.net/ Symposium Themes GigaNet is interested in receiving abstracts related to Internet Governance themes, especially those containing innovative approaches and/or emerging research areas. We encourage submissions on the following topics: § The first 5 years of the IGF: Taking stock and the way forward § Developing countries perspectives on internet governance § New approaches to theorizing internet governance § Between global and local: the question of territory in internet governance § Freedom of Expression / Right to Information § New approaches to Human Rights on the Internet § Internet governance and political uprising § International relations and cyber-security § Online privacy and dataveillance § Cloud Governance Other proposals on more general questions of Global Internet Governance will also be considered. Submissions Interested scholars should submit abstracts of research paper not later 15 July 2011, through Easy Chair platform at: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=giganet2011. Paper proposals should be submitted following theses requirements: § An abstract of 800-1000 words, in English, where it is mandatory to describe the main research goal(s) and the methodological background of the paper § A one-page curriculum vitae focused on institutional affiliations, advanced degrees, scholarly publications and work in the field of Internet Governance and related issues (for example ICTs). Evaluation Process The Program Committee members will evaluate the abstracts submitted and decisions will be sent to applicants by email on August 1st. Accepted papers for oral presentations should be followed by a full research paper, to be sent by September 15th. Some quality papers submitted that are not accepted for oral presentations will be recommended for poster presentations. Accepted speakers and poster presenters’ submissions and final papers will be published on the GigaNet website. Registration process The GigaNet Annual Symposium is free of charge. However, a registration process will be required close to the event. Please continue visiting our website for further information about registration, venue and accommodation. Financial Assistance One outstanding accepted paper by an African researcher may be awarded financial support by the Research ICT Africa. This support includes a travel grant up to US $ 1.000,00 to facilitate the participation of (emerging) African scholars who otherwise would not be able to attend. If available, information regarding additional scholarship options will be available following notification of acceptance. GigaNet 2011 Program Committee § Leo Van Audenhove – PC Chair, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium § Roy Balleste – St. Thomas University, Miami, USA § William Drake - University of Zurich, Switzerland § Dmitry Epstein – Cornell University, USA § Marianne Franklin – Goldsmiths University London, UK § Raquel Gatto – Catholic University of São Paulo, Brazil § Alison Gillwald – Director Research ICT Africa § Nanette Levinson – American University, USA § Milton Mueller – Syracuse University, USA § Rolf H. Weber – University of Zurich, Switzerland Schedule Summary July 15th: abstract submission deadline August 1st: notification of acceptance September 15th: submission deadline for complete papers September 26th: Sixth Annual GigaNet Symposium If you have any question related to the submission or the symposium activities, please e-mail the Program Committee Chair: leo.van.audenhove(a)vub.ac.be --Please note new email address-- *************************************************** William J. Drake International Fellow Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland william.drake(a)uzh.ch www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake www.williamdrake.org ****************************************************

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 20, 2011

May 20, 2011

Total of 23 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 20 00:53:03 EDT 2011 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 13.04% | 3 | 13.44% | 23783 | carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com 13.04% | 3 | 12.63% | 22357 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 13.04% | 3 | 11.73% | 20762 | ocl at gih.com 8.70% | 2 | 10.90% | 19284 | cintra.sooknanan at gmail.com 8.70% | 2 | 9.58% | 16954 | cw at christopherwilkinson.eu 4.35% | 1 | 6.74% | 11934 | vivekvc2001 at yahoo.co.in 4.35% | 1 | 6.18% | 10940 | dthompson1 at gov.nu.ca 4.35% | 1 | 4.64% | 8207 | iza at anr.org 4.35% | 1 | 4.57% | 8088 | vanda at uol.com.br 4.35% | 1 | 3.87% | 6847 | joly at punkcast.com 4.35% | 1 | 3.54% | 6257 | narten at us.ibm.com 4.35% | 1 | 3.10% | 5492 | ajp at glocom.ac.jp 4.35% | 1 | 3.09% | 5471 | cdel at firsthand.net 4.35% | 1 | 3.07% | 5435 | ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net 4.35% | 1 | 2.92% | 5162 | presidencia at internauta.org.ar --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 23 |100.00% | 176973 | Total

1 0

eG8 Forum
by Joly MacFie May 20, 2011

May 20, 2011

Just before the G8 meeting (26-27 May, Deauville) there will be an eG8 Forum (24-25 May, Paris) gathering the “leaders of the Internet”. Several I* organizations have been invited to participate (ICANN, W3C, IAB, ISOC, etc.), and it is understood that the outcomes of the discussions of the eG8 (format tbd) will be submitted to the G8 itself. <goog_974868408> The Internet Society is inviting comments from it's members, with a deadline of Wed 18 May, details on http://isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=2058 Is ICANN making a similar effort? j -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

11 18

Re: [At-Large] At-Large Digest, Vol 34, Issue 24
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 19, 2011

May 19, 2011

I think a point to make is the kinds of "public interest" ... The GAC is capable of representing the public interests of competing, and cooperating, sovereigns. The ALAC is capable of representing the public interests uninformed by sovereigns. ISOC's scope is not specific to the addresses, domain names, and autonomous system numbers, the public end point and resource identifiers and the public routing infrastructure, in its conception of the public interest and promotion of network technology. The W3C is a corporate member organization, with very limited invited expert involvement. The IAB shares the diversity of interest property of the ISOC, and to a very large extent, shares the corporate focus of the W3C. Each of the W3C and the IAB lack the means to organically include substantive participation by populations currently served by "narrow band" or "intermittent" link technologies. So the broadband-is-the-world view of the IAB/W3C/ISOC is defensible for the G8 member states, but it misses what the structure of the ALAC brings to ICANN (whether ICANN cares about narrow-or-no-band or not), and what the rest of the GAC, not just the G8 reps, also bring to ICANN. I spent most of the past 24 hours in transit and not sleeping so I'm not offering a perfect paragraph. But three years off-grid using a VSAT taught me a lot about networking that isn't high-speed and high-capital and high-profile. Eric

1 0

Internet day
by presidencia Internauta Argentina May 17, 2011

May 17, 2011

Today May 17 is celebrated the Day of Internet and communications. In the 74th Plenary Session held on March 27, 2006, the United Nations at the request of the Second World Summit on Information Society in Tunis, approved designating 17 May as World Telecommunication Day and Information Society, sharing the same objectives to the Internet Day. That's why I wish you all a Happy Internet Day! -- *Sergio Salinas Porto Presidente Internauta Argentina Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.internauta.org.ar>FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.fuilain.org>LACRALO - ALAC Member facebook:salinasporto twitter:sergiosalinas MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... Skype:internautaargentina Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819 * * "Ojalá podamos ser desobedientes, cada vez que recibimos órdenes que humillan nuestra conciencia o violan nuestro sentido común" -Eduardo Galeano- *

2 1

Re: [At-Large] eG8 Forum
by Christian May 14, 2011

May 14, 2011

Or he believes the problem with the Internet is where it is not like his minitel. Adam Peake <ajp(a)glocom.ac.jp> wrote: >Olivier, thanks. > >But as Izumi mentions, this does not make multistakeholder. Which is >a shame. Particularly as participation of private sector seems to be >tied to sponsorship (pay and you get a chance to speak... really is a >terrible step backwards.) > >The multistakeholder environment has been essential in driving >development of the Internet, particularly in maintiaing openness and >ensuring accountability and transparency. Non-commercial actors have >been crucial to this. Shame on the French Presidency for not >understanding the thing it's proposing pontificate on. > >(this little rant not aimed at the ALAC chair :-)) > >Adam > > > >On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 1:10 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> wrote: >> Hello Joly, >> >> On 13/05/2011 23:39, Joly MacFie wrote : >>> Who is attending on behalf of ICANN I wonder. >> >> Rod Beckstrom + Peter Dengate Thrush. Bertrand de la Chapelle also will be. >> There might be others. >> Kind regards, >> >> Olivier >> >> -- >> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD >> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> At-Large mailing list >> At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >> > >_______________________________________________ >At-Large mailing list >At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 13, 2011

May 13, 2011

Total of 50 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 13 00:53:03 EDT 2011 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 8.00% | 4 | 36.94% | 186729 | ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net 22.00% | 11 | 10.25% | 51810 | johnl at iecc.com 12.00% | 6 | 12.71% | 64248 | derek at aa419.org 10.00% | 5 | 6.38% | 32271 | karl at cavebear.com 6.00% | 3 | 6.78% | 34279 | avc at avc.vc 6.00% | 3 | 4.18% | 21122 | dogwallah at gmail.com 6.00% | 3 | 3.66% | 18481 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 4.00% | 2 | 3.10% | 15684 | avc at namesatwork.com 4.00% | 2 | 2.37% | 11969 | evan at telly.org 4.00% | 2 | 2.30% | 11611 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 4.00% | 2 | 2.01% | 10151 | cdel at firsthand.net 2.00% | 1 | 2.38% | 12018 | avri at acm.org 2.00% | 1 | 1.41% | 7149 | franck.martin at gmail.com 2.00% | 1 | 1.32% | 6657 | beaubrendler at earthlink.net 2.00% | 1 | 1.23% | 6220 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 2.00% | 1 | 1.15% | 5789 | narten at us.ibm.com 2.00% | 1 | 0.95% | 4805 | joly at punkcast.com 2.00% | 1 | 0.90% | 4546 | ocl at gih.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 50 |100.00% | 505539 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Depository (was Re: Privacy and domain abuse vs the IP constituency)
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 10, 2011

May 10, 2011

> [snip] > on that note, there IS a "proposal" sent to ICANN (altho not via > normal channels) to create "IP address registrars" AND make them > subject to the same kind of rules that domain registrars must follow: > > > http://icann.org/en/correspondence/statement-ip-address-registrar-accredita… > > Not sent via normal channels, as they don't think they will get a fair > hearing from the ASO: > > http://icann.org/en/correspondence/holtzman-to-jeffrey-02mar11-en.pdf > > I imagine At-Large might want to weigh in on this at some point? > My view, having followed this on the ARIN-PPML list from its inception, is that the substance of this "proposal" is not in the public interest, nor is the process pursued by claimed by its advocates, correctly defined as "getting a fair hearing". Like myself, McTim (<dogwallah(a)gmail.com>) has commented on the thread begun by a "free market, anti-government, anti-pseudo-government" poster Mike Burns (<mike(a)nationwideinc.com>), who in addition to advocacy of this particular issue for frankly ideological reasons, imagines that ICANN is the "higher authority" to which some appeal can be made to overturn the policies of the regional address registries. Of course, the Depository correspondence (David Olive et seq.) does not necessarily share Mr. Burns' motivation, as the pecuniary interest of Depository in acquiring a franchise for address registry services is self-evident. Broadly, Burns, and Depository, seek to replicate the structure of the domain names market in v4 addresses. In my view, this is not a desirable transformation of the management of v4 addresses, which despite significant self-interest advocacy retains "good stewardship" properties absent in almost all* of the domain names market. Eric * The .cat, .coop and .museum name space operators, and perhaps others, and the respective primary registrars exhibit "good stewardship".

8 15

Comment on the .NET auto-renew and contract terms
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 10, 2011

May 10, 2011

Colleagues, I've drafted a comment in response to http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-11apr11-en.htm The comment raises two issues, first, that renewal of legacy monopoly contracts does not achieve a competition policy goal, and second, that the contract could, whether awarded to the legacy monopoly operator or any other party, distinguish between the "registry operator" and "registry technical backend services operator" sets of functions, allowing registrants to select, through their registrars, one of one or more competing registry technical backend services operator(s) for domains in the .NET zone. For those not familiar with the second issue, the original Shared Registry Proposal by Crispin, Gaetano, Langlois and others, developed in the IETF, reduces the registry operator's monopoly power to the few functions of producing (and modernly signing) a unified zone, and coordination among two or more registrars (transfer functions and data pointers where the registry data model is "thin"). If there is anyone who wishes to go on record questioning the wisdom of auto-renewal for Verisign's franchises, and/or ending monopoly in the registry function, drop me a line today as comments close tomorrow. Eric

2 1

Privacy and domain abuse vs the IP constituency
by Derek Smythe May 9, 2011

May 9, 2011

Hi Folks Here is a more than excellent example of why domain abuse issues belongs at the registrar and why true privacy will not be possible until abusers are taken care of. It all started off with a report of a phishing site. Doing a reverse lookup on the IP the domain was hosted on, we get the list included below. Spending a bit of time on the search engines quickly shows numerous frauds related to the relevant domains. Digging a bit deeper keeps on leading to a specific "hosting provider" with a track record of these type of domains and even SSL certificate abuse. Now, looking a bit closer at them in terms of whois details, we find gross privacy abuse for the domains used in fraud and fraud attempts. For those that know how, looking very closely at them leads to victims to this fraud and details showing them all to be of the same origin as regards certain design elements. Now, considering the background of the hosting provider, he specializes in these. How do we counter the the IP constituency if they throw these examples at us? How do we deal with this form of domain abuse? The authorities are in the know for a more than a while know. The SSL certificate providers are in the know as well. The domain registrars are in the know. Doing a bit of backtracking leads to this post: http://www.jaguarpc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24529 Now here is the sad part; Since that post, the hosting was terminated and simply moved to another IP at the same hoster, later we have two more more victims in Australia after this move. http://www.rbol-uk.com/INT-UK/ (as I said, those that know how ...) In fact the Nigerian hosting provider is simply moving hosting once caught out. In the meantime the "free one year privacy" is abused to for anonymity and to make tracking more difficult. Without finding, stopping and disabling these domains, the misery they create at the hands of the abusers continues. As you will see, there is no easy way to do a 1-to-1 mapping of domain name against the spoofed domain, so more TLDs will just compound the issue. It also does not help if we claim that domain names have no special meaning, in the eyes of the "ordinary user", how can http://www.barclaysonlineservice.com not be part of Barclays Bank PLC? Just one such IP - 209.217.237.134: adamscolechambers.com airfrcdcuk.com Download your scam kit at https://airfrcdcuk.com/images/intcourier.zip ... or use the online pages: https://airfrcdcuk.com/intcourier/contactus.htm if you search a bit on the contact details, you will see it's a continuation of http://www.complaintsboard.com/?search=Air%20Freight%20Courier%20Delivery%2… albmb-my.com (http://www.albmb-my.com/INT-BANKING/ - initial report) albmb-my.net babaplc.com banquefinamauk.com barbplcuk.com barcba-uk.com barcbplcuk.com barclaysonlineservice.com barristermayallemersonstuart.com bdl-eu.com boabn.com boaplc-online.com cahootbplc.com capitalcrownbplc.com cbplconline.net chelseabuk.com chevronoilcompany-uk.com chmbchina.com ctmfirm.com davidhunterpartnerschambers.com daviesandpartnerschambers.com ddicourier.com dhlhome-uk.com dib-ae.com dislamiconline-ae.net e-alliancetrustsonline.com e-clydesdalebauk.com e-clydesdalebauk.net e-creditalliance.com eu-finciu.com eurolacbn.com expressparceldelivery-ng.com fbi-govs.com fbi-uk.com fbidirect.org fcmbdirect.com fcmbhome.com frontierforwardings.com fsaofficeonline.com fwcdsonline.com g-maildirect.com gainvestmentlimited.com gcc-as.com globalinvestltd.net halimicrofinance.com hlisbs.com ibarclaydirect.com iraqreconstructionjobs.net irsukonline.com katiemarchart.com kayenterprisesinsurance.com kmiexpresscourier.com leighdaysolicitors.com ltsb-official.com macsreview.com milestonemonetaryfirm.com monitoringcommission.org nbgroupplc.com nokiastaff.com norwichcitybn.com ntwstbnplc.com nwsttbplc.com planfslimited.com rbimb.com rbnsplc.net rbosmy.com responsecs.com rrs-asociados.com thehotmailupdate.com thestudenteventhost.com tpcapitallimited.com uknl-office.com ukpdac.com ukworldlinkcourier.com un-worldwide.org upds-ng.com wapblogin.com yahoo-maildirectonline.com zenithb-ng.com zenithoffices.com Note the impunity with which even the FBI, IRS, United Nations is being impersonated, never mind Yahoo, Hotmail and the rest. And this party has been doing it for years now. Now ask yourself: what number of legitimate domain owners are targeted by lack of domain privacy vs what number of the public are victimized by domain "anonymity"? Which is the lesser of the two evils? Just some real world food for thought. Derek Smythe Artists Against 419 http://www.aa419.org

8 21

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Comment on the .NET auto-renew and contract terms
by Beau Brendler May 9, 2011

May 9, 2011

I support this also. We can bring it up for possible wider support in the NARALO meeting in an hour or so if that would help. -----Original Message----- >From: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> >Sent: May 9, 2011 12:17 PM >To: Avri Doria <avri(a)ella.com> >Cc: At-Large Worldwide <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, NARALO Discussion List <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Comment on the .NET auto-renew and contract terms > >Hello all, > >We don't get around it. We can't.We have no effect on the GNSO. > >But under the authority mandated in the ICANN bylaws, ALAC has the ability >-- arguably an obligation -- to communicate to the Boards directly when it >encounters ICANN activity that goes against the public good. > >And in perfect bottom-up fashion, this is how it's supposed to work. >Discussions happening in the regions that percolate up to become global >assertions of the public interest. Especially in a case in which Avri and >Eric find common ground. :-) > >I would fully support ALAC's escalation if it can be suitably informed of >the issues by those here who are knowledgeable on it. > >- Evan > > > > > > > >On 9 May 2011 10:03, Avri Doria <avri(a)ella.com> wrote: > >> Hi Eric, >> >> On 9 May 2011, at 09:46, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: >> >> > If there is anyone who wishes to go on record questioning the wisdom >> > of auto-renewal for Verisign's franchises, and/or ending monopoly in >> > the registry function, drop me a line today as comments close tomorrow. >> >> >> Not that we have a great record of working together, but I would be >> interested in seeing some telling and convincing comment made. >> >> My problem is that the contract itself and the contractual conditions >> recommended by the GNSO give a presumption of renewal (I argued against it >> in the Task Force but as usual, was not successful it getting it removed). >> How do we get around that? >> >> a. >> >> >> ------ >> NA-Discuss mailing list >> NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss >> >> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >> ------ >> > > > >-- >Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada >Em: evan at telly dot org >Sk: evanleibovitch >Tw: el56 >_______________________________________________ >At-Large mailing list >At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Comment on the .NET auto-renew and contract terms
by Evan Leibovitch May 9, 2011

May 9, 2011

Hello all, We don't get around it. We can't.We have no effect on the GNSO. But under the authority mandated in the ICANN bylaws, ALAC has the ability -- arguably an obligation -- to communicate to the Boards directly when it encounters ICANN activity that goes against the public good. And in perfect bottom-up fashion, this is how it's supposed to work. Discussions happening in the regions that percolate up to become global assertions of the public interest. Especially in a case in which Avri and Eric find common ground. :-) I would fully support ALAC's escalation if it can be suitably informed of the issues by those here who are knowledgeable on it. - Evan On 9 May 2011 10:03, Avri Doria <avri(a)ella.com> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 9 May 2011, at 09:46, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: > > > If there is anyone who wishes to go on record questioning the wisdom > > of auto-renewal for Verisign's franchises, and/or ending monopoly in > > the registry function, drop me a line today as comments close tomorrow. > > > Not that we have a great record of working together, but I would be > interested in seeing some telling and convincing comment made. > > My problem is that the contract itself and the contractual conditions > recommended by the GNSO give a presumption of renewal (I argued against it > in the Task Force but as usual, was not successful it getting it removed). > How do we get around that? > > a. > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Depository (was Re: Privacy and domain abuse vs the IP constituency)
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 8, 2011

May 8, 2011

Karl, I accept that in your view Depository is attempting to innovate and experiment. I don't think it is. Absent the suggestion by McTim that this Advisory Group should form a view on the ASO process, or the appeal to an untested authority inherent in ICANN through "hierarchy" offered by Mike Burns, the substance and process are appropriately addressed on the ARIN-PPML list, in which you are free to participate. Turning to the history of RIRs, two mechanisms intended to scale as the price of network adapters and of network attachment dropped have been adopted. I proposed a regional scheme, based upon the ITU's X.121 Recommendation, specifically the zone, represented as the first octet of a Data Network Identification Code (DNIC) to create a small number of regional registries. The ISO 3166 scheme was adopted instead, creating two orders of magnitude more registries, for name to address mappings. The model of a regional scheme was adopted for address allocation registries, as much in recognition that no specific competency existed in North America which did not also exist in Western Europe and Japan, as for territorial diversity, and the attendant jurisdictional diversity. If consolidation were seriously proposed, it would be as arbitrary now as it was earlier to assert which of {ARIN, RIPE, and APNIC} is the first RIR to be eliminated. I don't think the characterization "For no technical reason, but for every political reason ... created two more RIRs" is correct. There is technically defensible reason for delegation in technical institutional development, a course pursued with diligence by the Network Startup Resource Center, and others. There is technically defensible reason for non-revocable delegation of address resources, as Geoff Huston's projections show, the AFNIC and LACNIC regions will be capable of general allocating v4 resources for several years after the APNIC, ARIN and RIPE regions transition to exhaustion allocation policies. The aggregation is an enemy of regional registries claim would be more credible if, as a general rule, access networks were predominantly trans-regional. As they are not, for pricing and tariff and other jurisdictionally scoped policy reasons, this is a weak claim of non-necessity or inefficiency. Finally, assuming all of the initial claims of Depository for the purposes of argument, there is the specific choice of replicating the domain market structure, in the address market. There are two final claims to consider: first, that the domain market structure is good, and the second, that innovation and experiment are actually less useful than replication of an existing structure. I don't think either of those are reasonable claims, or capable of proof, though I understand they are offered as proved by assertion by Depository, in its own pecuniary interest. Eric

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Privacy and domain abuse vs the IP constituency
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 8, 2011

May 8, 2011

In the context of the Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Process (PDDRP), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) made a comment (attached) which, while registry operator specific, has a bearing upon the issue. The WIPO proposal, if adopted, would hold a registry operator accountable for trademark infringement that occurs within a TLD if it "knowingly permitted, or could not have reasonably been unaware of" infringing domain names within the TLD. This is sometimes referred to as "Willful Blindness" and is used by trademark owners to hold third parties liable for contributory trademark infringement. Support for this proposal came from the International Trademark Association, the Intellectual Property Constituency of ICANN, the International Olympic Committee and other trademark owners and associations. Quoting from Jeff Neuman's note to the Temporary Drafting Group Legal (tdg-legal) mailing list of May 5th, 2010: "In the United States, with respect to whether or not domain name registries and registrars can be liable for contributory trademark infringement is well settled. The 1999 case of Lockheed Martin v. Network Solutions [1] controls. In that case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that Network Solutions was not liable to Lockheed Martin for contributory infringement as a matter of law because it was acting merely as a domain name registrar in registering domain names. More specifically, it found that in order for a service provider to be liable under the doctrine of contributory infringement, the service provider must exercise sufficient control over the infringing conduct itself. See also Tiffany v. Ebay [2] decided on April 1, 2010. If a trademark owner cannot establish that a service provider has sufficient control over the infringing conduct, then whether or not the service provider knew, should have known or turned a blind eye towards the infringing conduct, is irrelevant." I suggest that asking the set of registrars which currently control the Registrar Stakeholder Group's (RrSG) process if they would like a registrar to held accountable for trademark infringement that occurs within the TLDs it provides registrations if it "knowingly permitted, or could not have reasonably been unaware of" infringing domain names for which it is the registrar of record would have a similar outcome to that provided by the set of registries which currently control the RySG process. A defect in the argument offered by NeuStar to the WIPO proposal that wilfull blindness should be the sole basis for direct or contributory infringement was shown by the authors of the .C variant of the Conficker distributed system. The .C variant attempted to create rendezvous points (domain names) in more than one namespace. The proper scope of the issue is not the isolated affirmative acts of any contracted party, but what contracted parties can reasonably know. The NeuStar defense, if applied to the .C fact pattern, would hold a registry operator or registrar immune from any claim arising from the registry operator's or registrar's failure to block the portion of the algorithmically predicted rendezvous point buys over which the registry operator or registrar has control by the .C attack engine for command and control purposes of a botnet consisting of hundreds of thousands of covertly repurposed computors, if the immediate conduct of the .C system was trademark infringement, aka "cybersquatting". What registry operators can reasonably know, having access to their own, and any and all other gTLD zone files through the zone file bulk access right, is patterns of registration utilizing one or more registrars, and one or more namespaces. I believe that that is the expectation of Derek Smythe. The issue of contracted party conduct and liability, under national law or private contract, is not new, and my participation in an ALAC regional organization is a few weeks short of six months, so I have little idea of prior deliberation on the issue by ALAC or its regional organizations. However, the interest of the contracted parties, or rather, those amongst the contracted parties which manage to be influential on issues which potentially affect their pecuniary interests should not be limiting, nor should any particular national law, on the deliberation of what is in the public interest, by the ALAC. I think a useful and interesting "step" to take, one not in the direction of "WHOIS", is determining what pattern(s) of conduct, by a contracted party, rises to the level of "wilfull blindness", where ever there is a public interest. This necessarily includes the area of trademark infringement. This would form a basis for advice the ALAC may provide. Eric [1] http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15162974496362566611&q=194+F.3d… [2] http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/65a5a693-7086-4d06-a0d2-13e…

2 1

Keynote Remarks from Larry Strickling - supports multi-stakeholder model
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 8, 2011

May 8, 2011

*Keynote Remarks by Lawrence E. Strickling* *Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information* *Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) * *Washington, DC* *May 5, 2011* http://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2011/Strickling_GigaNet_05052011.html Some of the content might greatly affect that will happen in Singapore. Kind regards, Olivier

6 5

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 6, 2011

May 6, 2011

Total of 15 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 6 00:53:03 EDT 2011 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 20.00% | 3 | 18.22% | 16664 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 13.33% | 2 | 17.39% | 15896 | avc at avc.vc 13.33% | 2 | 9.91% | 9062 | ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net 6.67% | 1 | 9.45% | 8644 | isolatedn at gmail.com 6.67% | 1 | 7.70% | 7045 | cintra.sooknanan at gmail.com 6.67% | 1 | 7.29% | 6668 | joly at punkcast.com 6.67% | 1 | 6.66% | 6087 | avc at namesatwork.com 6.67% | 1 | 6.36% | 5813 | omar at kaminski.adv.br 6.67% | 1 | 6.00% | 5487 | narten at us.ibm.com 6.67% | 1 | 5.82% | 5320 | avri at acm.org 6.67% | 1 | 5.19% | 4749 | karl at cavebear.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 15 |100.00% | 91435 | Total

1 0

ICANN Generic Top-Level Domains (gTLD) Oversight Hearing
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 4, 2011

May 4, 2011

Colleagues, The House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet will hold a hearing on: "ICANN Generic Top-Level Domains (gTLD) Oversight Hearing", on Wednesday 5/4/2011 - 10:00 a.m., at 2141 Rayburn House Office Building. There is, as yet, no hearing documentation and no witness list, though these will be forthcoming. http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_05022011.html I'll post a follow-up when either hearings documentation or witnesses are posted at the Subcommittee's web site. Eric

8 10

Tomorrow: Cyrus Farivar – The Internet of Elsewhere - NYU
by Joly MacFie May 4, 2011

May 4, 2011

You may have seen the recent Freedom House report on Internet Freedom that cited Estonia as the most free Internet in the world, and Iran as among the least. As we know Korea has some of the fastest, while Senegal is rapidly developing. SO this should be an interesting talk about the contrasts.. As noted we do intend to webcast live. Please fwd. J On May 4 2011 the Internet Society’s New York Chapter (ISOC-NY) will present broadcaster, author & journalist Cyrus Farivar reading and discussing his imminent (May 8 ) book ‘The Internet of Elsewhere<http://internetofelsewhere.com/blog/>‘ (Rutgers University Press). All welcome. There will be a live webcast. In the book Farivar explores the Internet’s history and effects in four distinct and, to some, surprising societies — Iran, Estonia, South Korea, and Senegal. He profiles Web pioneers in these countries and, at the same time, surveys the environments in which they each work. After all, contends Farivar, despite California’s great success in creating the Internet and spawning companies like Apple and Google, in some areas the United States is still years behind other nations. *What*: Cyrus Farivar – The Internet of Elsewhere *When*: Wednesday 4 May 2011 7pm-9pm EDT (1100-0100 UTC) *Where*: Warren Weaver Hall, rm 201, 251 Mercer Street, NY NY 10012 *Who*: Free. All welcome. Capacity limited. No RSVP reqd. *Webcast*: http://livestream.com/internetsocietychapters *Hashtags*: #isocny <http://search.twitter.com/search?q=isocny>; #farivar<http://search.twitter.com/search?q=farivar> *Back Channel*: http://backchan.nl/meetings/view/786 -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] ICANN Generic Top-Level Domains (gTLD) Oversight Hearing
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 3, 2011

May 3, 2011

I rarely have the opportunity to agree with Antony van Couvering, so after a quick glance at his post on CircleID [1] I concur with it in all parts, though I would have attempted to address the difference of venue -- a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee rather than a subcommittee of the House Commerce Committee. Yes, it is a stacked deck, that's pretty much a given going in. And a concise comment is what I've in mind. Eric [1] http://www.circleid.com/posts/2011050_intellectual_property_interests_lineu…

1 0

WHOIS Review Team Followup Meeting
by Carlton Samuels May 3, 2011

May 3, 2011

Dear All: You would have by now be aware that a WHOIS Review Team was announced. Public comments on specific areas of its mandate are being solicited thru April 17, 2011. See http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#whois-rt Your feedback was also solicited before and after the ALAC developed and posted its Statement on the WHOIS Review Team in response to these Terms of Reference reflected in the public announcement. See: https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/ALAC+Statement+on+the+Who… The WHOIS Review Team has proposed a followup meeting with the At-Large for Singapore. Your further inputs are now being solicited for representation at this meeting. You may send your comments directly to the At-Large WHOIS WG list at whois-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org. Kind regards, Carlton Samuels Chair, WHOIS WG ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

2 1