- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Is the ALAC preparing to submit: APNIC 26 - Call for policy proposals and informational presentations
by Jeffrey A. Williams July 7, 2008

July 7, 2008

All, As far as I can asertain, the ALAC doesn't seem to be prepaired to, or have a draft proposal. Will the ALAC be doing so? Time is short. Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

POSTPONED: ALAC Monthly Teleconference for July
by At-Large Staff July 7, 2008

July 7, 2008

Dear all, The ALAC Vice-Chair decided to postpone the monthly ALAC teleconference scheduled for tomorrow at 1330 UTC. The meeting has been rescheduled to July 22nd at 1330 UTC. You will receive the agenda and a reminder for this meeting in due course. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

3 2

Wrapping up the thread/discussion - Apoligies
by Robert Guerra July 6, 2008

July 6, 2008

I wanted to not post any further messages related to the topic on the list, but specific private comments from Evan and others have made me post one last message. First, If my comments offended you veni - well, I do apologize. Secondly, my recent posts on the issue of the fall meeting and internet freedom and how it can be discussed inside ICANN, come not as a result of a "Red Bull binge" as some might suggest - but after consultation and discussion with numerous internet experts, users and NGOs at last week's computers, Freedom & Privacy conference at Yale University. Specifically, the request that ICANN comment on rights at the upcoming Egypt meeting came from the session on Internet Freedom & during the open discussion on technology policy recommendations to the new US administration. Ref: http://www.cfp2008.org/ http://cfp.wikia.com/wiki/CFP08 Thought many on this list might not believe internet freedom should be discussed inside ICANN, suffice it to say that others have a different opinion. I've posted a specific proposal. If there's no support among At-large or regionally at NA RALO, then i will not comment further on this list. regards Robert

12 15

ICANN lack of will to do anythng except for the money interests
by Bill Silverstein July 5, 2008

July 5, 2008

> From: John Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com>> app for the web was and is search > engines. These days I know a lot of > people whose home page is Google, John, that is because because don't realize that they can change their 'homepage'. > and who have no idea what the difference > is between the Google search box and the browser address box. Domains and I have had people do that withhh their domain name and then ask me to help them figure out who hacked their site because the top result is not their web site. > PS: FYI, the message to which you were responding was from Canada, where > the speech laws are more like European ones than US ones. Not everyone in > North America grew up with the 1st amendment. You mean there is still a first amendment in the USA? > From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com> > > I and our members agree fully with your last paragraph of > your argument entirely. It is essentially a significant part of > our core concerns for the past 9+ years. ICANN hasn't > shown that it can manage much of anything very well to date > including it's own Domain Names, IP addresses, root servers, > or web site and mailing lists. Yet the ICANN leadership for One of the best examples of the failure of ICANN to do anything that does not promote the interests of the money sources is http://www.icann.org/correspondence/touton-letter-to-beckwith-03sep02.htm which exemplifies their lack of willingness to enforce 3.7.7.2.

3 2

Aigrain's Blog:Corruption overflow in the telecom policy-making environment
by Jeffrey A. Williams July 5, 2008

July 5, 2008

All, FYI, and something to think about and/or consider in respect to new gTLD's and IDN gTLD's... "On Monday 7 July 2008, two committees of the European Parliament is going to vote on proposed amendments to the telecomm packet regulation, in what is but a provisional step of a skirmish in a much bigger struggle on the regulatory environment for intellectual rights and freedoms. This is a good time to take a step back and look at another much bigger problem." More here: http://paigrain.debatpublic.net/?p=158 Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

An Internet for the Rich
by LB July 5, 2008

July 5, 2008

I am ashamed of myself for being a fool. For years I believed in ISOC, I agreed to come to the IETF in trust, I agreed to support the ALAC because @large are the Internet lead users, I learned about America as the protector of equality on the Internet. Now I see ICANN has been captured and they want/accept an internet for the rich. Where keywords (top-level domain name) will cost $ 100,000 plus expenses. Those who should protect us the users, and defend an Internet for everyone are silent. ALAC does not have time. IDNABIS wants to help ICANN to develop its plan in every languages and cultures. The IETF does not even consider is architectural solutions could help democracy resist moneycracy. -- LB RFC 3271: "Internet is for everyone - but it won't be if it isn't affordable by all that wish to partake of its services, so we must dedicate ourselves to making the Internet as affordable as other infrastructures so critical to our well-being".

1 0

Re: [At-Large] News gTLDs and e-mail
by Patrick Vande Walle July 4, 2008

July 4, 2008

Jeff, This is on the main IETF list. Thread at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg52148.html Other references: http://www.imc.org/ietf-smtp/index.html RFC 2821: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt RFC 2821bis: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt (Please note that RFC 2821bis is currently blocked by the IESG http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg51960.html) My comments were prompted by this particular message http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg52246.html On Thu 03/07/08 11:26 , "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Patrick, > Which IETF list?

1 0

Bavarian Police Can Legally Place Trojans On PCs
by Jeffrey A. Williams July 4, 2008

July 4, 2008

All, Is goose stepping next? One thing is for sure, no traveling to Bavaria for me! See: "The Bavarian Parliament passed a law that allows Bavarian police to place 'http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Bayerischer-Landtag-setzt-den-Bayerntrojaner… Remote Forensic Software' ( http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewstic… Google translation) on a suspect's computer as well as on the computers of a suspect's contacts. They may break into houses in secret to install the RFS if a remote installation is not possible; and while they are there a (physical) search is permitted too. The RFS may be used to read, delete, and alter data." The translation says that RFSs may be used in cases of an "urgent threat to the existence or the security of the Federation or a country or physical, life or liberty of a person... Even where there is a reasonable assumptions on concrete preparatory acts for such serious offenses." Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten July 4, 2008

July 4, 2008

Total of 63 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jul 4 00:53:02 EDT 2008 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 41.27% | 26 | 56.69% | 393353 | jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com 9.52% | 6 | 6.98% | 48455 | evan at telly.org 7.94% | 5 | 4.48% | 31112 | johnl at iecc.com 6.35% | 4 | 4.88% | 33836 | jefsey at jefsey.com 4.76% | 3 | 3.89% | 26975 | dthompson at gov.nu.ca 4.76% | 3 | 3.84% | 26644 | vb at bertola.eu 3.17% | 2 | 1.53% | 10636 | dannyyounger at yahoo.com 1.59% | 1 | 2.23% | 15473 | jam at jacquelinemorris.com 1.59% | 1 | 2.13% | 14808 | bashar at kuwaitnet.net 1.59% | 1 | 1.73% | 12016 | fsylla at gmail.com 1.59% | 1 | 1.63% | 11280 | carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com 1.59% | 1 | 1.31% | 9100 | danielmonastersky at gmail.com 1.59% | 1 | 1.15% | 7946 | aislan at uol.com.br 1.59% | 1 | 1.08% | 7509 | narten at us.ibm.com 1.59% | 1 | 1.03% | 7176 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 1.59% | 1 | 1.00% | 6916 | veni at veni.com 1.59% | 1 | 0.94% | 6537 | joly at punkcast.com 1.59% | 1 | 0.90% | 6273 | iza at anr.org 1.59% | 1 | 0.90% | 6260 | hongxueipr at gmail.com 1.59% | 1 | 0.85% | 5868 | michele at blacknight.ie 1.59% | 1 | 0.83% | 5734 | bfausett at internet.law.pro --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 63 |100.00% | 693907 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] News gTLDs and e-mail
by Jeffrey A. Williams July 3, 2008

July 3, 2008

JFC and all, One very important thing you left out here is that SMTP and ESMTP protocols will need to be updated as well. I don't see that happening in the near term. So Patricks concern he raised still remains to the vast majority of Internet users. Than the additional problem is of "Upgrade" by service providers. Some, if not most Email server applications will need significant modification. Of course this is not a ICANN problem or concern, nor an IETF problem or concern. Frankly as a result of the above and below ( JFC's remarks ) I don't see IDN gTLD's as being widely supported but I also see no good reason to not making them avaliable either. JFC Morfin wrote: > Dear Patrick, > this point is a key point because it means that one of the main > Internet applications will be hampered by the new TLD policy. > > This new TLD policy also includes ML-TLDs. I don't really see IETF > issuing a solution that supports xxx@ASCII-TLD and not > xxx@UNICODE-TLD. As a consequence every mail oriented software will > have to be updated to support TLD only mail names. > > These TLD can be ASCII or punycoded UNICODE. It would seem very odd > if this mail system update did not consistently extend to the other > Internet host logics and did not support both ASCII and UNICODE TLDs. > It would be surprising if the consensus was not to use the same > logisitic effort to deploy a fully consistent Multilingual Internet. > > We (with James Seng and Vint Cerf) identified at the WG-IDNABIS > [http://wikidna.org] that: > - (a) the IDNA proposition was not the ML-DNS france@large identified > as the world expectation (a DNS to delivers the same QoS in every > language and scripts as it does in English ASCII) > - (b) france@large was perfectly legitimate according to the IETF > process to give a try to such a development [we are lead users, not > engineers]. We confirmed that this was our intent at our 2008/07/02 > meeting. We committed that our effort will strive to stay IDNA > interoperable and will be based upon LS640 (Linguasphere System 640) > which is the bassis for the now reduced ISO 639-6 and now an open standard. > > The basic difference between IDNA and ML-DNS is that IDNA is not end > to end (what the user types is not what the other end receives). This > is to support a possible lack of understanding of IDNA by the > receiving end, specially in the mail case. This leads > - (1) to an impossible entropy problem: Unicode is degraded by > punycode and has no way to restore the intial entrry on the other end > - (2) an increasing barely sustainable set of complex constraints in > order to limit the cases where this may happen. The confusion also is > that these constraints only apply at adhering registries' level. > > Would the end to end be acceptable (the ML-DNS hypothesis) most of > the multilinguisation oriented issues would be addressed at the > internet and not at the user application layer. This is because there > would not be a specific presentation layer need anymore: we would be > back to the internet as a single shared space (one single > presentation and session default layer). This conforms with the IETF > core values documented in RFC 3935, which makes a feature from the 4 > layers internet model. > > In this case the need is only for transition management: > > 1. it will be a matter of a few months period once it has been > documented, tested and validated. This is because I do not think we > can repeat the January 1st, 1983 approach. However, we could > "virtualize" it, for example in using legacy/Multilingual Internet > OPES Gateways (work is to be resumed as the WG-OPES which favored > SMTP over the DNS as their second and currently last protocol support > documentatoin after HTTP). > > 2. I fear that the community starts thinking about many other needs > such a deployment could help (security, IPv6, semantic, etc.). This > means, not to confuse and to overload the project, that the initial > deployment would be conceived as a pilot experimentation towards a > permanent Internet update process (this is part of the france@large > plan to be detailed hopefully before September). > > jfc > > At 08:57 04/07/2008, Patrick Vande Walle wrote: > > >There is an interesting discussion currently on the IETF list about > >the consequences of the approval of the new gTLD process by ICANN. > >One possible issue may be with vanity gTLDs like apple, ebay etc. In > >this context, an email address may just be user@tld > > > >This may be confusing to email clients and MTAs which try to be > >"smart". Currently , the current standard is defined in RFC 2821 as such: > > > >2.3.5 Domain > > A domain (or domain name) consists of one or more dot-separated > > components. > > [...] > > The domain name, as described in this document and in [22], is > > the entire, fully-qualified name (often referred to as an "FQDN"). A > > domain name that is not in FQDN form is no more than a local > > alias. Local aliases MUST NOT appear in any SMTP transaction. > > > >Hence, if either the mail client or the MTA expect to see a dot in > >the domain name and there is none, its behaviour may be unpredictable. > > > >The new gTLD context is addressed in the draft RFC2821bis, which states: > > > >2.3.5. Domain Names > > A domain name (or often just a "domain") consists of one or more > > components, separated by dots *if more than one appears*. (emphasis added) > > > >Unfortunately, the current implementations are based on the original > >RFC2821, not the revised draft. There may be a lot of software out > >there that would treat user@tld as a local e-mail address (ie not FQDN). > > > >I am not aware of any study by SSAC on that matter (pointers > >appreciated). Where I think it matters for the user community is > >that we actually expect our e-mails to complaints@ebay or > >support@apple to be delivered. I see here an opportunity for the > >ALAC to ask ICANN for a report on this. > > > >Patrick > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ALAC mailing list > >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0