- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] 2012-2013 ALAC Officers and Liaisons - Results of Elections and Appointments
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

Firstly please note my personal and heartfelt congratulations to this returning ALAC Leadership Team (nee ExCom) and of course to my fellow ALAC Liaisons for 2012-13 Secondly as you all know I intend to facilitate and support some 'in training as assist/second' talent in my role as Liaison with the ccNSO to hopefully provide ALAC with some great choices to replace me next year, and I hope ALAC will support their other Liaisons (especially the bylaw mandated ones) in doing the same... redundancy and support planning IS important... Finally I can't help but note with Regional pride where the diversity in these important roles is coming from => well done AP/Regional ladies... and note that of course I'm the only RALO one, Rinalia is a NomCom appointment to ALAC (as is Carlton and Alan) and Julie is Regional expertise based... So this is way more than a gender diversity issue... something to be very proud of in my view at least... On Oct 31, 2012 6:39 AM, "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> wrote: > Dear All, > > We are pleased to announce the results of the calls for the 2012-2013 ALAC > Officers and ALAC Liaisons: > > ALAC Officers making up the ALAC Executive Committee: > > ALAC Chair - Olivier Crépin-Leblond (Two year term: AGM 2012 - AGM 2014) > ALAC Vice-Chair - Evan Leibovitch (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > ALAC Vice-Chair - Carlton Samuels (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > ALAC Rapporteur - Tijani Ben Jemaa (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > ALAC Regional Representative - Rinalia Abdul Rahim (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > For additional details, please see the ALAC Officer Election Schedule - > 2012< > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Officer+Election+Schedule+… > > > > ALAC Liaisons: > > ccNSO Liaison - Cheryl Langdon-Orr (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > GNSO Liaison - Alan Greenberg (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > NCSG Liaison - Evan Leibovitch (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > SSAC Liaison - Julie Hammer (AGM 2012 - AGM 2013) > > For additional details, please see the 2012-2013 ALAC Liaison Selection - > Schedule and Nominees Workspace< > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/2012-2013+ALAC+Liaison+Selectio… > > > > All positions were elected or appointed by acclamation by the ALAC. > > Congratulations to the members of the ALAC Excom and the ALAC Liaisons! > > Regards, > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie > Peregrine, and Julia Charvolen > ICANN Policy Staff in support of the ALAC > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> > > > _______________________________________________ > AFRI-Discuss mailing list > AFRI-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/afri-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.afralo.org > > Posting guidelines to ensure machine translations of emails sent to this > list are more accurate: > http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#… >

2 1

Is There a Payoff from Top Team Diversity?
by Carlton Samuels Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

...some evidence in the affirmative offered here...... https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Organization/Talent/Is_there_a_payoff_fro… - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

Fw: Blue Coat Systems.....again
by Carlton Samuels Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

...I saw this and remembered the arguments raised when the kerfuffle was about the use of these systems by the [U.S.] Patent and Trademark Office. Apparently some fool contractor in Syria mis-configured the damn thing! And only after it was 're-directed' from its original destination, that cradle of democracy and exemplar of the open Internet, Iraq. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203687504577001911398596328.h… - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

FW: NYT: Killing the Computer to Save it
by Carlton Samuels Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

...Dr Neumann is featured..... http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/science/rethinking-the-computer-at-80.htm… - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

2 2

Fwd: [council] Call for Volunteers: IGN-INGO Protections Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group Members
by Alan Greenberg Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

FYI. Alan ><http://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29oct12-en.htm>http://gnso.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29oct12-en.htm > > >Call for Volunteers: IGN-INGO Protections Policy >Development Process (PDP) Working Group Members >Date: 29 October 2012 > > > > > >Introduction > > > >At its meeting on 17 October 2012, the GNSO >Council initiated a Policy Development Process >(PDP) on the Protection of Certain International >Organization Names in all GTLDs. (see ><http://gnso.icann.org/en/resolutions#20121017-2>20121017-2). >The GNSO Council decided at this meeting that a >group of volunteers should now be convened to >draft the charter for the IGO-INGO PDP Working >Group, which is to be approved by the GNSO Council. > > >Task of the Drafting Team > > > >The Drafting Team will be tasked with developing >a charter for the PDP Working Group on the >Protection of Certain International Organization >Names in all GTLDs. The Charter should include, >at a minimum, the following elements as >specified in the ><http://gnso.icann.org/council/summary-gnso-wg-guidelines-06apr11-en.pdf>GNSO >Working Group Guidelines: Working Group >identification; Mission, Purpose and >Deliverables; Formation, Staffing and >Organization, and; Rules of Engagement. The >proposed charter will be submitted to the GNSO >Council for its consideration. Upon completion >of the Charter by the Drafting Team, the Working >Group will then begin execution of the Charter. > > >Volunteers > > > >If you are interested to participate, please >send an email to the ><mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>GNSO >Secretariat. You will be required to complete a ><http://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/New+SOIs>Statement >of Interest in order to participate. It is >proposed that the group meet each Wednesday at 18:00 UTC for two hours. > > >Background Information on the Issue > > > >The ICANN Board has requested policy advice from >the GNSO Council and the GAC on whether special >protections should be afforded for the names and >acronyms of the Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement >("RCRC"), the International Olympic Committee >("IOC") and/or International Government Organizations ("IGOs"). > >In September 2011, the GAC sent advice to the >GNSO with a proposal for granting second level >protections based upon the protections afforded >to IOC/RCRC at the first level during the >initial round of new gTLD applications, and that >such protections are permanent. As a result of >the GAC proposal submitted to the GNSO, the GNSO >IOC/RCRC Drafting Team was formed and created a >set of recommendations for protecting the >IOC/RCRC names at the second level of the >initial round new gTLDs, including the >initiation of an "expedited PDP" to determine >appropriate permanent protections for the RCRC and IOC names. > >The latest inquiry to examine the issue of >protecting IGO names emerged as a result of a >request from the ICANN Board in response to >letters received from the OECD and other IGOs in >December 2011. Specifically, IGOs are seeking >ICANN approval of protections at the top level >that, at a minimum, are similar to those >afforded to the RCRC and IOC in the Applicant >Guidebook. In addition, IGOs are seeking a >pre-emptive mechanism to protect their names at >the second level. On 11 March 2012, the ICANN >Board formally requested that the GNSO Council >and the GAC provide policy advice on the IGO's request. > >The Final Issue Report was submitted by ICANN >Staff on 1 October 2012 (see ><http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo-names-final-issue-report-01o…>http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo-names-final-issue-report-01o…) >and in this report a number of issues are >outlined that will need further consideration during the PDP. > >The GNSO Council approved the IGO-INGO PDP at its 17 October 2012 meeting. > > >Recommended Reading for Volunteers > > > > * > <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/protection-igo-names-final-issue-report-01o…>Final > Issue Report on the Protection of IGO Names > * > <http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-08apr11-en.pdf>GNSO > Working Group Guidelines, including charter guidelines > > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat >gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org >

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC-Internal] [IDN-WG] [APAC-Discuss] Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
by Evan Leibovitch Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

I hope my intervention at the public forum on this issue was helpful. I recall Tina Dam from .music (and former ICANN staffer) going up to say "I love IDNs, *however*, people aroiund me are saying ....". I wanted to ensure the Board was immediately reminded of the broad support for IDN prioritization within At-Large. Not that I have been deeply involved in At-Large IDN policy, but IMO Tina's comment could not let sit unanswered. And I too support Hong's and Jean-Jacques' comments. - Evan

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [IDN-WG] [APAC-Discuss] Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

Dear IDN WG and ALAC, Please find below the revised statement on the* "Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations" *that incorporates additions proposed during the Toronto meeting. Suggestions for further amendments *must be received by Friday (November 2nd)* for the ALAC to commence a vote in time to meet the Reply Period deadline on November 9th. Thanks. Rinalia Abdul Rahim* * ** * * * * *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years. We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later. We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users. We note with concern that the draft recommendations consider selected IDN ccTLD strings to be confusingly similar based on their appearance to “a reasonable Internet user who is unfamiliar with the script” although "linguistic, technical, and visual perception factors" will be taken into consideration. Notwithstanding the merit and rationale for this assessment criterion, an assessment on confusing similarity based primarily on the appearance of selected strings to users unfamiliar with the script may not be consistent with the nature and purpose of IDN ccTLDs, which are fundamentally introduced for the use and benefit of local IDN users in pertinent ccTLD territories. Without taking into account sufficient linguistic factors, problematic results may occur. For example, an IDN ccTLD that is assessed as not confusingly similar by a user "who is unfamiliar with the script" may well be deemed confusingly similar by the local IDN user and vice versa. We believe that this particular issue can be addressed in the policy making process through more consultations with the IDN communities in implicated ccTLD territories. Finally, we wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet. Towards this end, the attribution of IDNs should take into account the fact that some languages have a wide geographical distribution that go beyond national borders and are thus not the sole property of one sovereign state alone. It follows, therefore, that due consideration should be given to protecting the rights of concerned language communities which, though falling outside the jurisdiction of one nation state, share with its inhabitants a common language or script. END

1 0

MSM Internet Governance Mpa
by Carlton Samuels Oct. 30, 2012

Oct. 30, 2012

Here's something y'all could use. http://icann.xplane.com/questionaire/internet_governance - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

Fw: Internet Traffic Exchanges - A Very Successful Model
by Carlton Samuels Oct. 29, 2012

Oct. 29, 2012

....peering agreements are instituted on a handshake. This should be of interest in areas of the world where the challenge to Internet for the many is access...and the [direct and indirect] costs of access. It makes the case for IXPs and their widespread proliferation. This is not to say there aren't increasingly contentious challenges on the horizon... http://oecdinsights.org/2012/10/22/internet-traffic-exchange-2-billion-user… - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

3 4

Re: [At-Large] [lac-discuss-en] Fw: Internet Traffic Exchanges - A Very Successful Model
by Carlton Samuels Oct. 29, 2012

Oct. 29, 2012

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < apisan(a)unam.mx> wrote: > That said, the recent increase in attention to IXPs is also associated > with the fact that some of them appear to be of a new breed, attracting > content and cloud-based service providers as well as CDNs > (content-distribution networks, such as Akamai). > > Well said, Alejandro! Yessir, very true. The major disability in the Caribbean is access. Some of us are hoping that development of IXPs in the Caribbean will act exactly in this way, stimulating growth in local content development which in turn might drive deeper broadband penetration. We have to use push/pull strategies to get out from under this one. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0