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

Webcast: ISOC Chennai seminars on Sun. Jun 26
by Joly MacFie June 26, 2011

June 26, 2011

* The first session of this will start shortly* The Internet Society Chapters Channel <http://www.livestream.com/internetsocietychapters>will be webcasting two seminars this Sunday Jun 26 hosted by ISOC Chennai<http://www.isocindiachennai.in/> - *Morning Session: Seminar on IPv6*1000-1230 IST | 0430-0700 UTC | 0030-0300 EDT *Session Chair:* Dr Olivier Crepin LeBlond, Chair of ICANN At Large *Panelists:* Shankar Vridagiri, SIFY Srinivas Gudipudi, Tech Mahindra Srinivas Chendi, APNIC Nurul Roman Islam, APNIC Sebastien Bachollet, Member, Board of Directors, ICANN *Evening Session: Internet for the IT Sector: the Impact of Altered Core Internet Values in Business*. 1630-1900 IST | 1100-1330 UTC | 0700-0930 EDT *Session Chair*: Sebastien Bachollet, Member of the Board of Directors of ICANN, *Panelists*: Dr Olivier Crepin LeBlond and two others to be confirmed * Webcast*: http://www.livestream.com/internetsocietychapters *Hashtags*: #IPv6 <http://twitter.com/#!/search/%23IPv6>, #coreinternetvalues <http://twitter.com/#!/search/%23coreinternetvalues>, @isocchennai <http://twitter.com/#!/search/%40isocchennai> -- --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 June 24, 2011

June 24, 2011

Total of 19 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jun 24 00:53:03 EDT 2011 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 5.26% | 1 | 39.36% | 101731 | annette.muehlberg at web.de 10.53% | 2 | 22.63% | 58501 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 21.05% | 4 | 7.76% | 20048 | johnl at iecc.com 15.79% | 3 | 7.94% | 20513 | joly at punkcast.com 15.79% | 3 | 7.33% | 18959 | franck.martin at gmail.com 10.53% | 2 | 4.61% | 11913 | dogwallah at gmail.com 5.26% | 1 | 3.98% | 10287 | cintra.sooknanan at gmail.com 5.26% | 1 | 2.24% | 5784 | narten at us.ibm.com 5.26% | 1 | 2.23% | 5756 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 5.26% | 1 | 1.93% | 4988 | cdel at firsthand.net --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 19 |100.00% | 258480 | Total

1 0

New discussion started at the IETF on a WHOIS-like standard
by Patrick Vande Walle June 22, 2011

June 22, 2011

Dear colleagues, Some have started another run at whois. The effort is intended to address the shortcomings of whois and also to get people to deploy the result. IRIS succeeded, unfortunately, only at one of these. There are a few groups on the Internet who have put together a whois-like service using REST. The idea behind the current effort is to standardize something along these lines. We have some drafts: http://tools.ietf.org/id/weirds [1]. There is also an IETF non-WG mailing list: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds [2]. I think it might be useful if some folks from the At-Large community could participate in the discussion. It would be weird to complain later on that engineers did not take our requirements into consideration if we do not tell them from the start what we expect from a new WHOIS like system. Note that this is about the WHOIS standard, not the WHOIS service as such. But obviously, you need the standard should be able to deliver the service we want. Regards, Patrick Vande Walle -- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu Links: ------ [1] http://tools.ietf.org/id/weirds [2] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds

3 2

Audio: APRALO showcase
by Joly MacFie June 21, 2011

June 21, 2011

There was no audiocast on the APRALO showcase - and then the posted archive mp3 link was bad. Here is the correct link: http://audio.icann.org/meetings/singapore2011/apralo-showcase-20jun11-en.mp3 Looking forward to listening to it. 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

Board Session- New gTLD Programme
by Cintra Sooknanan June 20, 2011

June 20, 2011

SUMMARY for At Large- 1. Rita read the resolution which refers outreach, Draft FY12 and support for applicants for applicants from developing countries. It includes at 4. Details on JAS including that the system receive seed funding of $2M and be in place before the opening of the application window. Resolution is seconded +13 Cherine gives a statement that while it is a multi-stakeholder model we must “seek better consensus and reaching closure” and supports the resolution. Erika states that the multi-stakeholder model is working well and it is embedded that we will not exactly reach consensus. This is the strength as it brings out the optimum solution possible not as a story that ends but as a mechanism for improvement. She is confident that the Resolution has been drafted at its optimum and supports. She states her conviction that the seed fund will help organisations from developing countries. She states that one can negotiate forever and that compromise is needed on this level. Steve notes the nostalgia and the historic moment in ICANN that we are presently upon. He states their commitment to be supportive in the future by refinement but it is a mistake to wait to try to get everything exactly right. He suggests that you strap yourself in there will be turbulence but it will be an exciting ride. Katim states that the multi-stakeholder process has to serve as a new paradigm for development partnership and international coorporation, and congratulates the achievement of this. He notes that we must provide applicant support under Resolution 20 that there be an inclusive process. The issue is not whether we should do it or not, this is agreed. He continues that this is best practice in the international community which ICANN is becoming apart of. Notes the work done in the community and states we should not patronise it because it s what is best for the developing world and what is best of ICANN. It has to be best for all of us. Sebastien states that is would have been better for all stakeholders to be included not just GAC Board consultations. He states the proposed timeline is too long but he hopes it can help the ICANN community to build a safe community to help needy applicants. He hopes that we can develop a programme without having the timeline slip and suggests we state when the second round will be to reduce the stress of the first round. In the case of New gTLD he states that he hopes the stress will be brief and we can take GAC and other stakeholder input. The only way to do this is to place it in reality is to support its launch. Kuo gives his support notes future challenges including Ipv6. Gonzalo expresses his gratitude to the community because of the work and demonstration of the multi-stakeholder model. He notes that nothing is perfect in public policy and he thinks the Board has reached a level of seriousness and maturity to approve the programme. He notes we need to continue working but he is happy to see how the dialogue was carried out. Rita states that she does not agree with everything in the AG, but believes in the multi-stakeholder process, compromise an innovation. She approves of the creative chaos and fostering of ground rules that allow security and stability but allows freedom. She notes that they are not necessarily making everyone happy but is excited to find out the next steps. She recognises the hard work still ahead. - 1 George stated he will vote against the resolution because of the GAC, peoples of the developing world and the limitations to build out of IDNs. Points out that it should not be a zero sum game and there must be strong and shared agreement among the community (which does not exist as yet). Believes that we can do better for needy applicants and current proposals are not sufficient. Observes that there should be planning and development for the developing world; and that the developing world was not asked what they need. He states the proposal is based on giving funds ignores the opportunity costs of directing funds elsewhere, that ICANN choose winners; that ICANN should not define who is needy. He suggests that we determine the reasonable goals to support in partnership with others. -2 ABSTAIN Bruce Mike states this is based on the process that resulted in the resolution and based on the interaction of the Board and GAC the process is close to finality but not quite there. He could not conclude that the facts were being developed with the bottom up process. He does not think that applying funds to a few needy applicants will cover the requirements or serves the community. He notes that the GAC should be more responsive to the fast paced nature of these issues. He says that the program close is driven by artificial and ego. Raymond notes the peculiarities and details of a negative and abstention and that any other abstention other than by Bruce is a NO vote. 2. Peter states the focus is on obtaining advice from GAC and expresses his gratitude to them. He states the resolution that the Board and GAC have not reached a mutually acceptable solution on some areas. Bertrand seconds. Bruce abstains, all others approve. 3. Bruce notes the work done by the GNSO and GAC, and their commitment to consider all the recommendations. He acknowledges and thanks the support of staff. He puts the resolution of the work done by the GAC. George seconds. Sebastien states the difficulty for non-English speakers to participate and thanks the work of non-English speaking members of the community. Heather notes the multistakeholder model and thanks the Board for their consideration. Bertrand acknowledges the strengthening of the structure by the discussion of the GAC with the Board and other members of the community. He hopes there will be continued participation to ensure that everyone is aware of it and also to ensure that necessary adaptations can be made. Rita is hopeful that the Board, GAC and rest of the community can engage in the future. Unanimously approved Rod summarises the work done to this point, thanks and congratulates everyone. Next steps are the communications programme, but will also rely on the community. Recognises the contributions of Kurt Pritz, John Jeffrey and all ICANN staff. Peter closes the meeting- Perfect is the enemy of the good.

3 2

Letter from DOC to ICANN about new TLDs
by Annette Muehlberg June 19, 2011

June 19, 2011

Hi John, thanks to Yrjö, here is the EC letter you were looking for. All the best Annette ______________________________________________________________ Von: "Yrjö Länsipuro" <yrjo_lansipuro(a)hotmail.com> Gesendet: 19.06.2011 17:49:33 An: euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, annette.muehlberg(a)web.de Betreff: RE: [EURO-Discuss] FW: [At-Large] Letter from DOC to ICANN about new TLDs Hi Annette, Here's the EC letter, from the ICANN website. Best, Yrjö > Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 14:44:20 +0200 > From: Annette.Muehlberg(a)web.de > To: euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: [EURO-Discuss] FW: [At-Large] Letter from DOC to ICANN about new TLDs > > Hi, > can anyone of our european members give some information about the below mentioned EU-Commission letter to the ICANN board? > best > annette > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "John R. Levine" <johnl(a)iecc.com> > Gesendet: 18.06.2011 02:49:08 > An: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Betreff: [At-Large] Letter from DOC to ICANN about new TLDs > > Lawrence Strickling of the US Dep't of Commerce wrote to ICANN yesterday > reiterating the US government's unhappiness with ICANN's rush to new TLDs, > and in particular their abandoning the registry-registrar split. A copy > of the letter is on the ICANN web site. > > That letter refers to a letter to the ICANN board from the European > Commission dated June 14th. I have been unable to find a copy of that > letter. Has anyone here seen it? > > DOC letter here: http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/ > > Regards, > John Levine, johnl(a)iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", > Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-Discuss mailing list > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

2 1

ISOC SEEKING INPUTS} US Department of Commerce IANA Further Notice of Inquiry
by Joly MacFie June 19, 2011

June 19, 2011

FYI Video and audio of Strickling'e INET NY comments are at http://bit.ly/inetnyarchive. j ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Markus Kummer <kummer(a)isoc.org> Date: Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:17 AM Subject: [Chapter-delegates] SEEKING INPUTS} US Department of Commerce IANA Further Notice of Inquiry To: Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates(a)elists.isoc.org>, isoc-members-announce(a)elists.isoc.org, ISOC Chapter Support < chapter-support(a)isoc.org> Dear Chapter Delegates and Members, You may already have looked at the IANA Functions Further Notice of Inquiry (FNOI), which was officially published on 14 June 2011. The document is being made available through NTIA's website: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/frnotices/2011/FR_IANA_FurtherNOI_06102011.pdf NTIA is seeking public comment on a draft statement of work (Draft SOW), which will be part of the procurement process for the new IANA functions contract. Comments are due within 45 days after publication. We plan to prepare a response and would be grateful for your input. Any comments received by 5 July will be considered and, to the extent possible, incorporated in a first draft. We will of course give you an opportunity to comment on the draft before submitting it to NTIA. You may recall that among other things we had suggested in our response to the original NOI that: - the US government should not under any circumstances expand the scope of the IANA function contract or their role in it; - there is a desire to gradually increase independence from the USG; - the roles of the IETF, IAB, RIRs, and ccTLD operators should be recognized in the system without implying US government control over them; - there is a need to build international confidence in how the IANA function is operated and administered; - there should be increased predictability for the IANA contractor by moving away from short-term contracts to a more stable instrument. It may be of interest to you that Lawrence Strickling, Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator, commented on the FNOI at last Tuesday’s INET in New York on the very day it was published. He summed it up as follows: Quote: First, we propose a functional separation between DNS policy making wherever it occurs at ICANN or elsewhere in the actual execution of tasks associated with the IANA functions. Second, we propose enhanced transparency and accountability through the development of documentation processes as well as performance standards and metrics to establish service levels. Third, we propose that the contractor needs to include documentation that demonstrates how proposed new top level domain strings have received consensus support from relevant stakeholders and are supported by the global public interest. Unquote Below are some of the key elements contained in the FNOI in more detail: The FNOI makes it clear “that it is not in discussions with ICANN to transition the IANA functions nor does the agency intend to undertake such discussions.” It also states that “NTIA does not have the legal authority to enter into a cooperative agreement with any organization, including ICANN, for the performance of the IANA functions.” NTIA envisages a one year extension of the contract and makes the following comments in this regard: “NTIA does not view the previously awarded IANA functions contracts as short-term contracts. Typical contracts are for one year, while the previous IANA functions contracts had terms, once options were exercised, of five years.” On the documentation processes, mentioned by Assistant Secretary Strickling, the SOW “requires the contractor, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders, to develop a process for documenting the source of the policies and procedures and how it has applied the relevant policies and procedures in processing all TLD requests (…) For delegation requests for new generic TLDS (gTLDs), the Contractor shall include documentation to demonstrate how the proposed string has received consensus support from relevant stakeholders and is supported by the global public interest. In addition, “the IANA functions contractor should document its decision making with respect to relevant national laws of the jurisdiction which the TLD registry serves, how the TLD reflects community consensus among relevant stakeholders and/or is supported by the global public interest.” The SOW proposes automating the root zone management process and considers this a priority. It requires that “the contractor generate a monthly audit report to track each root zone change request and include the identification of the policy under which the changes were made.” Furthermore, NTIA will “require the Contractor to designate a Director of Security and consult with NTIA on any changes in this critical position. During the procurement process, NTIA will also require the identification of this key personnel and a demonstration of their qualifications for the position prior to contract award.” Lastly, it is proposed that the contractor undergoes an annual security audit by an external, independent specialized compliance auditor against relevant international standards. Assistant Secretary Strickling’s speech at the INET gives some insight into the thinking behind the FNOI. He made it clear that the US is fully supportive of the multistakeholder ICANN model, but he also identified some questions that needed to be addressed, first and foremost the recommendations proposed by the accountability and transparency review team. He said in this regard: “But the question now is whether the ICANN board and management have the discipline and willpower to embrace and implement these recommendations in a serious and meaningful way. (…) A second challenge facing ICANN in Singapore is finding a way to adequately address the collective concerns of governments as expressed through the government advisory committee regarding the expansion of the generic top level domain names." The full transcript of his speech can be read at: http://isoc-ny.org/inet/transcripts/INETNY6_strickling.txt The FNOI will need to be carefully analyzed. While some of our concerns with regard to enhancing the transparency of all processes are addressed and the roles of key institutions are recognized, some key points are not met, such as the demand for a more stable and long-term instrument. There are also a number of questions with regard to the documentation processes. Does this mean the USG reserves a right to veto ICANN board decisions if they fail to “reflect community consensus among relevant stakeholders and/or is supported by the global public interest”? Also, the proposed NTIA involvement in the hiring of the IANA Security Director signals an expanded USG role, which would be contrary to what we had hoped for. It is our intention to comment on the FNOI in the light of the key points we had made in our first submission. We look forward to your input into the discussion. Best regards - Markus Markus Kummer Vice President, Public Policy Internet Society, Geneva Email: kummer(a)isoc.org www.isoc.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 -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

Webcast today 6pm EDT: Issues in Domain Name Dispute Resolution
by Joly MacFie June 18, 2011

June 18, 2011

The Internet Society Chapters Channel will webcast today an ISOC Puerto Rico event - Issues in Domain Name Dispute Resolution. Speaker is Scott Donahey http://www.livestream.com/internetsocietychapters That said, event organizer Eduardo Diaz is at this moment flying to Singapore. So we trust his fellow members will have success providing a feed! The talk will be English. More info: http://isocpr.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 -------------------------------------------------------------- -

5 8

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten June 17, 2011

June 17, 2011

Total of 8 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jun 17 00:53:02 EDT 2011 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 62.50% | 5 | 61.46% | 26037 | joly at punkcast.com 12.50% | 1 | 13.54% | 5735 | cintra.sooknanan at gmail.com 12.50% | 1 | 12.76% | 5405 | narten at us.ibm.com 12.50% | 1 | 12.24% | 5186 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 8 |100.00% | 42363 | Total

1 0

INET New York - remote participation details
by Joly MacFie June 15, 2011

June 15, 2011

Tomorrow Tuesday June 14 2011 is INET New York. For those of you coming in person, we look forward to seeing you! For the rest of you - here are the remote participation details: * Webcast: http://www.livestream.com/internetsocietychapters * Transcription: http://www.streamtext.net/text.aspx?event=ISOC * Questions: http://inetny.backchan.nl There is no need to register for remote participants - all are welcome. For those unfamiliar with backchann.nl, one can not only ask questions but also vote on questions already asked. There are chatrooms associated with both the transcription and the webcast. For those wishing to comment via twitter the hashtag is #INETny - to look at comments see http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23INETny Here'a brief schedule (times are EDT = UTC+4): 09:00 Opening remarks 09:30 Keynote + Q&A: Sir Tim Berners-Lee 10:30 Panel: Pushing technology boundaries 12:00 Lunch 13.00 Keynote + Q&A: Vint Cerf 13:30 Panel: People Power 15:00 Keynote: Lawrence E. Strickling 15:20 Panel: New Privacy Models 16:30 Closing discussion 17:30 End The full agenda is on http://bit.ly/inetnyagenda More info: http://isoc.org/nyinet -- --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- -

3 5