- At-Large - lists.icann.org

IPv4 address exhaustion
by Patrick Vande Walle Nov. 21, 2008

Nov. 21, 2008

For those interested in this topic, there is a (non-technical) article in this month's Internet Protocol Journal by Geoff Huston. It pretty well summarizes the issues and suggests different approaches to solve them. Highly recommended. http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_11-3/113_ipv… or in pdf http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_11-3/ipj_11-… Patrick

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Nov. 21, 2008

Nov. 21, 2008

Total of 50 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Nov 21 00:53:02 EST 2008 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 2.00% | 1 | 82.68% | 2707911 | khaled.koubaa at topnet.tn 10.00% | 5 | 1.07% | 34947 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 4.00% | 2 | 5.05% | 165332 | ajp at glocom.ac.jp 8.00% | 4 | 0.71% | 23176 | johnl at iecc.com 6.00% | 3 | 1.16% | 37978 | nick.ashton-hart at icann.org 6.00% | 3 | 1.02% | 33281 | dthompson at gov.nu.ca 6.00% | 3 | 0.85% | 27969 | jefsey at jefsey.com 6.00% | 3 | 0.56% | 18206 | ross at tucows.com 6.00% | 3 | 0.55% | 17945 | dannyyounger at yahoo.com 4.00% | 2 | 0.84% | 27373 | lists at privaterra.info 4.00% | 2 | 0.78% | 25466 | jsalgueiro at cantv.net 4.00% | 2 | 0.66% | 21501 | cheryl at hovtek.com.au 4.00% | 2 | 0.46% | 14917 | ocl at gih.com 4.00% | 2 | 0.45% | 14880 | evan at telly.org 4.00% | 2 | 0.44% | 14258 | carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com 4.00% | 2 | 0.37% | 12003 | dogwallah at gmail.com 4.00% | 2 | 0.36% | 11693 | vb at bertola.eu 2.00% | 1 | 0.50% | 16430 | admin at isoc.sd 2.00% | 1 | 0.48% | 15565 | rajnesh.singh at gmail.com 2.00% | 1 | 0.24% | 7950 | andrespiazzagpj at hotmail.com 2.00% | 1 | 0.23% | 7618 | carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm 2.00% | 1 | 0.23% | 7372 | narten at us.ibm.com 2.00% | 1 | 0.19% | 6193 | jam at jacquelinemorris.com 2.00% | 1 | 0.15% | 5032 | mom at netmom.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 50 |100.00% | 3274996 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] The kiss of death
by Patrick Vande Walle Nov. 20, 2008

Nov. 20, 2008

JFC Morfin wrote, On 20/11/08 16:03: > Dear Vittorio, > ISOC wants ALAC to be a part of the GNSO. Jefsey, this is interesting. Do you have any document that proves your point ?

1 0

Fwd: Fw: Use of DKIM on at-large mailing list
by Patrick Vande Walle Nov. 19, 2008

Nov. 19, 2008

The short term fix is to add "REMOVE_DKIM_HEADERS = Yes" to mm_cfg.py http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/DKIM OK, that will not generate the right DKIM sigs, but at least it will prevent Mailman from forwarding the original ones, and consequently generate false positives in spam filters. Patrick -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [At-Large] Fw: Use of DKIM on at-large mailing list Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:32:21 +0100 From: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl(a)gih.com> To: <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Reply-To: At-Large Worldwide <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Hello everyone, sorry for posting this here, but I sent the enquiry to the at-large-owner address but received no reply, so I think this might have gotten lost or ended up in /dev/null.. In short: DKIM/DomainKeys is incorrectly set-up for atlarge-lists.icann.org Warm regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D Global Information Highway Ltd http://www.gih.com/ocl.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl(a)gih.com> To: <at-large-owner(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:04 PM Subject: Use of DKIM on at-large mailing list > Hello there, > > I have noticed that you are using DKIM/DomainKeys on the at-large > ICANN server. > I think that it is great that you are embracing new technology. It is > also great that the server supports TLS. > > However, it appears that its implementation for domainkeys/DKIM on the > mailing list does not work correctly. > > At present: > > - messages which are DKIM-signed keep their DKIM signature and > therefore FAIL when received, because the at-large mailing list adds a > footer (how to subscribe/unsubscribe), so the message has been > tampered with > - messages which are not DKIM-signed become signed by the > atlarge-lists.icann.org server. However, there is no entry for > default._domainkey.atlarge-lists.icann.org key in the DNS. > > What should really happen: > > - the atlarge-lists.icann.org server should recognise when a domainkey > is active & replace the incoming domainkey with its own domainkey if > positive. > - atlarge-lists.icann.org should have an entry in the ICANN DNS for > its key under: default._domainkey.atlarge-lists.icann.org > > If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. > > Warm regards, > > Olivier > > -- > Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D > Global Information Highway Ltd > http://www.gih.com/ocl.html > _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

2 1

Fw: Use of DKIM on at-large mailing list
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Nov. 19, 2008

Nov. 19, 2008

Hello everyone, sorry for posting this here, but I sent the enquiry to the at-large-owner address but received no reply, so I think this might have gotten lost or ended up in /dev/null.. In short: DKIM/DomainKeys is incorrectly set-up for atlarge-lists.icann.org Warm regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D Global Information Highway Ltd http://www.gih.com/ocl.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl(a)gih.com> To: <at-large-owner(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:04 PM Subject: Use of DKIM on at-large mailing list > Hello there, > > I have noticed that you are using DKIM/DomainKeys on the at-large > ICANN server. > I think that it is great that you are embracing new technology. It is > also great that the server supports TLS. > > However, it appears that its implementation for domainkeys/DKIM on the > mailing list does not work correctly. > > At present: > > - messages which are DKIM-signed keep their DKIM signature and > therefore FAIL when received, because the at-large mailing list adds a > footer (how to subscribe/unsubscribe), so the message has been > tampered with > - messages which are not DKIM-signed become signed by the > atlarge-lists.icann.org server. However, there is no entry for > default._domainkey.atlarge-lists.icann.org key in the DNS. > > What should really happen: > > - the atlarge-lists.icann.org server should recognise when a domainkey > is active & replace the incoming domainkey with its own domainkey if > positive. > - atlarge-lists.icann.org should have an entry in the ICANN DNS for > its key under: default._domainkey.atlarge-lists.icann.org > > If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. > > Warm regards, > > Olivier > > -- > Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D > Global Information Highway Ltd > http://www.gih.com/ocl.html >

2 1

Fwd: [ga] Reminder: Submit comments to "The Role of Individual Internet Usersin the GNSO"
by Patrick Vande Walle Nov. 19, 2008

Nov. 19, 2008

Question: do we plan to submit comments to this document, in addition to what we already did in the framework of the GNSO improvement effort ? If so, how are we going to proceed with only 11 days left ? This question aside, I still issues on the process. I do not remember we were explicitly asked to provide comments. Are we supposed to monitor each and every mailing list to find out what is expected from us ? And again, 3O days is too short for the At-Large community to respond to such requests. Patrick Vande Walle -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ga] Reminder: Submit comments to "The Role of Individual Internet Usersin the GNSO" Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:56:57 -0800 From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> To: "mail=ga(a)gnso.icann.org" <ga(a)gnso.icann.org> [To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org] http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-200811.html#gnso-users The Role of Individual Internet Users in the GNSO Open: 28 Oct 08 Closed: 28 Nov 08 Explanation: The ICANN Board has asked for additional community input on the appropriate role and representation of individual commercial and non-commercial Internet users in the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO). Faced with a number of different recommendations stemming from various independent reviews and GNSO and user-community group efforts, the Board continues to consider this issue and believes that comments from the community, especially stakeholders in the GNSO, ALAC and At-Large groups, and any relevant applicants for new constituencies, would be particularly helpful. Potential commenters are asked to consider addressing the inclusion of registrants and individual users in the GNSO in a manner that compliments the ALAC and its supporting structures and ensures that registrants' and individual Internet users' gTLD interests are effectively represented within the GNSO. A summary document has been prepared by the ICANN Staff to provide background on this issue and to outline a number of potential options being considered by the Board. Deadline and How to Submit Comments The Staff is opening a 30-day public consultation forum, from 28 October 2008 until 28 November 2008, and invites community comments on this topic. Comments on the document are welcome via email at gnso-users(a)icann.org. This public forum will be open through 28 November 2008. An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-users/. For a copy of the public announcement of this forum please see http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-28oct08-en.htm. Is it clear to you what this comment period covers? Do you have all the information you need to respond? Please click "More information please" below to email ICANN directly Staff member responsible: Robert Hoggarth | More information please Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

5 6

Letter to the Board
by Danny Younger Nov. 18, 2008

Nov. 18, 2008

I am of the view that the ALAC needs to write a very strong letter to the Board expressing their disgust with (1) the manner in which the ICANN Public Forum session was conducted that allowed for a very limited amount of time within which to interact with the Board and (2) the almost total lack of remote participation opportunities that were available to at-large members. As someone that attempted to participate remotely, I can't point to a single ALAC session that allowed for meaningful remote participation, nor were audio feeds available for many workshops. This has to be the worst case of both in-person and remote participation management that I have ever seen at an ICANN session.

10 9

Additional ALAC Meeting topic
by Danny Younger Nov. 18, 2008

Nov. 18, 2008

Cheryl and members of the ALAC, As you may be aware, the RAA-WG has recently received correspondance from the following individuals: Rodger Flemming, Alfredo Giascopato, Jay Walker, Simon Templar, Matthew Griesinger, Clive Holton, Chris Ramsden, Brian d'Eon, Barry J Bailey, Jerry Jansa, Peter Naus, Bill Blue, Russell Johnson, John D. Knapp, Patty Sneeden, Sean Gardner, Neal Handly, Gary Li, Bob Wright, groundstar, Alan Cartledge, and Dana Longever. All these parties have requested the public disclosure of registrar main office addresses. It would be appropriate for the ALAC to reply to these users detailing what steps it is taking to address their concerns. Is there anything that you can tell this community other than the fact that you held a meeting with registrars in which this topic was discussed? How does the ALAC intend to solve the problem that they have raised?

2 1

Nov.25 ALAC Meeting: Agenda Items
by Danny Younger Nov. 18, 2008

Nov. 18, 2008

Dear Cheryl and members of the ALAC, Almost two years ago, on 30 November 2006, I first brought the issue of user domain renewal problems at RegisterFly to the attention of ICANN's Senior Management -- see http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg05232.html As events unfolded that put hundreds of thousands of registrations at risk, we finally heard ICANN's CEO calling for decisive action: "What has happened to registrants with RegisterFly.com has made it clear there must be comprehensive review of the registrar accreditation process and the content of the RAA," he said. "There must be clear decisions made on changes. As a community we cannot put this off." Yet as of this moment, we still have no comprehensive review of the registrar accreditation process started or even scheduled, nor has action been taken by ICANN management to implement changes to the RAA in a decisive and timely fashion. What is clear to me is that ICANN Staff has (1) failed to do their job with respect to lauching a comprehensive review of the registrar accreditation process; and (2) has acted to deceive the Board regarding the available options to amend/revise the RAA. Let me address this latter point first. At the Cairo Board Meeting, the Board was told: "So having developed a set of amendments, then, how do we incorporate these and make them effective into the RAA? The Registrar Accreditation Agreement calls for them to be incorporated through a consensus policy..." This above statement is certainly less than fully honest. In addition to consensus policy procedures, the RAA includes (1) an amendments & waivers clause (5.14), and (2) a Right to Substitute Updated Agreement clause (5.5). Choosing not to invoke the amendments and waivers clause and deciding not to substitute an updated agreement while waiting for a lengthy and time-consuming consensus policy development process to fully run its course is an irresponsible way forward. This is not how an organization takes "decisive action"; this is not how one honors a duty to protect the user interest. Proposal for ALAC action: 1. With regard to the staff failure to launch a comprehensive review of registrar accreditation processes a remedy is available through the Reconsideration process. A Reconsideration Request sent to the Committee of the Board on Reconsideration allows a petitioning entity to cite an "inaction of ICANN for which review or reconsideration is sought". Details are available here: http://www.icann.org/en/committees/reconsideration/ 2. With regard to the RAA, the ALAC should request a formal explanation from ICANN Staff as to why (1) invoking the amendments and waivers clause may not be pursued and (2) why an updated agreement may not be substituted. As both of these options are permitted by contract, we need to know why Staff has chosen not to pursue this viable course of action. Ongoing delays do not serve the user interest. When ICANN takes years and years and years to resolve major issues, the broader community loses confidence in ICANN's ability to manage the process. best regards, Danny Younger

1 0

World Summit Youth Award
by Khaled KOUBAA Nov. 17, 2008

Nov. 17, 2008

Dear, The World Summit Youth Award (WSYA) invites young designers and e-Content creators to participate in an international competition. Sought-after are e-Contents that address in an inspiring manner the UN Millennium Development Goals, and use internet and mobile contents to create awareness of the MDGs. The WSYA selects and promotes best practice in e-Content and technological creativity, demonstrates young people’s potential to create outstanding digital contents and serves as a platform for people from all UN member states to work together in the efforts to reduce poverty and hunger, and to tackle ill-health, gender inequality, lack of education, lack of access to clean water and environmental degradation. WSYA is therefore both, a showcase to the world for young designers, technologists and e-Content creators as well as a contribution on a global scale to addressing poverty, protecting the environment, sharing knowledge and empowering young people. Get involved today at http://www.youthaward.org and showcase your project to the world ! Khaled KOUBAA WSYA Ambassador

1 0