- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] At-Large participation in PRO working group
by Wendy Seltzer May 9, 2007

May 9, 2007

Sorry gang, this is too much for me to do for the opportunity to listen to one more conference call. --Wendy Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > Hong and Wendy, I leave it to you to get up to speed and let Kristina > know when you are - perhaps you already have reviewed the previous > meetings. > > Jacqueline, I leave it to you to let Kristina know the issues with the > survey. > > On 08/05/07, Rosette, Kristina <krosette(a)cov.com> wrote: >> Dear Nick, >> >> Many thanks for your message. >> >> I am happy to have them added. However, the PRO WG final report >> deadline is next week so there will be only two (or maybe three) >> meetings left. More importantly, however, it is incumbent on new >> members to listen to the recordings of previous meetings before >> participating. This requirement, which has been applied to everyone, >> has a dual purpose of bringing new members current while ensuring that >> ground previously traversed by the WG is not traversed again for the >> sole benefit of new members at the expense of other WG members' >> schedules. Those recordings are all posted here >> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-pro-wg/ If Hong Xue and Wendy are >> willing to spend the time listening to those recordings before they >> participate, I'll be happy to add them once they've confirmed that >> they've listed to the recordings. >> >> With regard to the questionnaire, unfortunately there is nothing that >> can be done at this point. The questionnaire closed on 4 May. (I must >> confess that I don't recall the context in which Jamaica was mentioned. >> Would you please advise?) >> >> Sincerely yours, >> Kristina >> -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org phone: +1.617.418.3456 / +44 (0)1865 287203 // cell: 07785 550361 Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/

2 1

Fwd: Request for Issues Report on Domain Tasting
by Alan Greenberg May 9, 2007

May 9, 2007

>To: GNSO Council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> >From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >Subject: Request for Issues Report on Domain Tasting > >Dear Council members, > >The At-Large Advisory Committee is requesting that ICANN staff >prepare an Issues Report on Domain Tasting. The formal request is attached. > >According to ICANN Bylaws, no action is required from Council at >this time. Once the Issues Report is delivered to the GNSO, Council >must then decide whether or not to initiate a PDP. > >Alan

1 0

[Fwd: Re: Report to monthly telcon from ccNSO]
by Siavash Shahshahani May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

> I've updated the two action items onto wiki ( > https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?8_may_2007) I do hope we can get both > of them done by San Juan. > > Nick, could you send out the emails to RALO lists to recruit members for > the > working group? Any ALS that is interested in IDNs may send a member to the > WG. With respect to observers, there shouldn't be any limitation but > participants may wish to identify themselves. Nick, we would need a new > list > for this WG. > > For the continuity of the WG, I recommend that Siavash be the lead of the > WG. I may assist him as long as my liaisonship has not expired. > Hi Hong, Regarding the last item, I am already a liaison for something else and I sincerely think that as the IDN liaison you are best suited to organize the WG. Note also that the most active geographic area in IDNs is the Pacific where you have better access. Siavash > Hong > > On 5/8/07, Hong Xue <hongxueipr(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> To have an ALAC WG is a good idea. Meanwhile, we may wish to accelerate >> the drafting of the users' guide on IDNs. I asked PAC for more materials >> for >> drafting but haven't got a reply. I assume Nick wrote to Tina as well. >> Any >> response? >> >> With respect to that "letter" mentioned by Siavash, I'd be interested in >> knowing whether it is written by ccNSO. I'm not in the ccNSO-GAC working >> groups for they are not as open as the GNSO one. I had tried to join as >> an >> observer but did not get any affirmative response. I disagree that ALAC >> fails to make substanstive contribution to IDNs. In GNSO IDN WG, our >> contribution (through my liaisonship) to the policy building-up is quite >> crucial. But, of course, the final outputs were in the name of GNSO WG, >> not >> ALAC. This may remind us we do need have our own policy advocacy vehicle >> through RALOs asap. >> >> Hong >> >> >> >> >> >> On 5/8/07, Nick Ashton-Hart <nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org> wrote: >> > >> > You may remember the discussion in Lisbon, where I suggested that the >> > ALAC could call for volunteers from the regions to act as >> > backup/colleagues for each of the liaisons, but also to establish >> > additional capacity to deal with follow-up to other issues, working >> > groups in GNSO processes, etc. >> > >> > If we can get together a list of the issues that need to be followed, >> > I can craft an email to the various at-large regions, and coordinate >> > lists of volunteers, creating email lists for these groups of people, >> > and facilitating information flowing to them to/from other policy >> > areas? Would that be helpful? >> > >> > We're of course happy to provide the service and support to ensure >> > communication between groups of people following processes and >> > updating wikis etc to give these working groups of At-Large 'homes' >> > online... >> > >> > On 08/05/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> wrote: >> > > Siavash >> > > Good point - we haven't had ALAC working groups per se on any issues >> > in the >> > > past. Now that we have gotten (mostly) over the hump of creating the >> > RALOs, >> > > setting up a process to create WGs on issues might be a good idea. >> We >> > have >> > > started some initiatives on the IDN issue, such as the User Guide, >> > which we >> > > need to follow up with Staff. >> > > Jacqueline >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Siavash Shahshahani [mailto:shahshah@irnic.ir] >> > > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:57 AM >> > > To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > > Subject: [At-Large] Report to monthly telcon from ccNSO >> > > >> > > >> > > Hi All, >> > > On the eve of monthly telecon here's my brief report from the >> > goings-on of >> > > ccNSO mailing list: >> > > >> > > The most prominent item of relevance to at-large community has been >> > IDNs. >> > > In fact it seems that among all ICANN constituencies ALAC is the >> least >> > > involved pro-actively in the subject. I know that Hong is actively >> > > participating in the IDN Working Group(albeit without voting >> power)and >> > is >> > > a member of the President's IDN Committee, but perhaps some kind of >> an >> > > ALAC Working Group can be set up under her leadership to lend weight >> > to >> > > individual user interests in this matter. This is specially >> important >> > > because with most of the RALOs having been formed, ALAC can be >> > expected to >> > > speak for a large international cross-section. As you might know >> > there's a >> > > joint GAC-ccNSO Working Group on IDNs which is supposed to finish >> its >> > > initial deliberations in Puerto Rico and report specific >> > recommendations >> > > to ICANN Board. Further, there was a move in ccNSO to write to ICANN >> > Board >> > > expressing concern that GNSO recommendations on IDN might be adopted >> > > without sufficient input from the rest of the community. In the >> > initial >> > > draft of the letter, ICANN constituencies were identified as GAC, >> GNSO >> > and >> > > ccNSO, with no mention of ALAC. On my intervention, ALAC was also >> > > included, but somebody pointed out that ALAC is not doing any work >> on >> > this >> > > matter(or has no working group on this)- just to let everybody >> > know(!). >> > > This letter will be going to ICANN Chair soon and I wouldn't be >> > surprised >> > > if we were asked to provide a substantive and detailed input. >> > > >> > > Siavash >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------- >> > > IPM/IRNIC >> > > P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. >> > > Tehran 19548, Iran >> > > Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 >> > > Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 >> > > Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 >> > > Email: shahshah(a)irnic.ir, shahshah(a)nic.ir >> > > ----------------------------------------------- >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > ALAC mailing list >> > > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > >> > > >> > > www.alac.icann.org >> > > www.icannalac.org >> > > >> > > No virus found in this incoming message. >> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> > > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.5/792 - Release Date: >> > 5/6/2007 9:01 >> > > PM >> > > >> > > >> > > No virus found in this outgoing message. >> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> > > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.5/793 - Release Date: >> > 5/7/2007 2:55 >> > > PM >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > ALAC mailing list >> > > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > > >> > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > > >> > > www.alac.icann.org >> > > www.icannalac.org >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > -- >> > Regards, >> > >> > Nick Ashton-Hart >> > PO Box 32160 >> > London N4 2XY >> > United Kingdom >> > UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 >> > USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 >> > Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 >> > mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 >> > Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / >> > Skype: nashtonhart >> > Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ALAC mailing list >> > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > >> > >> > www.alac.icann.org >> > www.icannalac.org >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > www.alac.icann.org > www.icannalac.org ------------------------------------------------- IPM/IRNIC P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. Tehran 19548, Iran Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 Email: shahshah(a)irnic.ir, shahshah(a)nic.ir ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- IPM/IRNIC P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. Tehran 19548, Iran Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 Email: shahshah(a)irnic.ir, shahshah(a)nic.ir -----------------------------------------------

1 0

Establishing working groups in At-Large to respond to policy initiatives in other areas of ICANN
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Dear All: Just to summarise what I understand the process will be to operationalise At-Large responding to the many policy initiatives and working groups which are created throughout ICANN: 1) New working group or policy development process is constituted in an area of ICANN external to At-Large 2) I am informed of the existence, mandate, and any home URL by the Policy staff. 3) I post a notice at the ALAC Wiki, in the Policy Working Groups section of the site and send an email to all the regional discuss lists asking for volunteers to work on the issue, together with 1 (or more) concerned ALAC members. 4) At-Large staff then ensure that the online working arrangements for the At-Large working groups are created (mailing lists, other tools as needed ) and help arrange for necessary information about the working groups' source to be linked to the At-Large presence. At-Large staff organises teleconferences and the like as needed. 5) The At-Large WG reports get disseminated for the wider AL community for comment (if applicable). The work of the AL WGs gets documented in their online 'microsite' within the wiki for the time being. We start by issuing a call for those who wish to work with Hong on IDNs to respond. Committee members please let me know if you think I've got any of this wrong. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Board liaison report
by Vittorio Bertola May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

All, sorry about how hard it was to hear me today in the call, I was in the middle of the road with my mobile phone - I tried but didn't seem to work well enough. However, I managed to find an Internet connection here so I can repeat my report in writing. There has not been a lot of activity in the Board after Lisbon - the Board is preparing for its retreat which will happen in Palo Alto this Friday and Saturday, so most of the discussion was focused on its agenda. There was a Board call on April 25th, which did not deal with anything specially important to us, though the fellowship program for non-At-Large participants is IMHO an important step - also, members from Africa may note the .gw redelegation. The agenda of the retreat encompasses mostly strategic issues, including the issue of succession to Vint, where the idea that floats is perhaps for the Board to work more as a team, rather than focusing every responsibility on a charismatic Chair. Also, some initial discussions on next year's budget will happen. However, several Board members (plus the SSAC Liaison) share our concern about the need to work promptly on systemic responses to the Registerfly failure, so there will be half a day discussing on what ICANN should do to respond to that, and what are ICANN's responsibilities to registrants and other stakeholders. I guess that the discussion might start from a better definition of ICANN's role in terms of consumer protection activities, and move to a range of possible actions - RAA revisions, education, best practices etc - and perhaps to the process that the Board asked the CEO to define by San Juan. I have forwarded again to the Board our resolution from Lisbon, and will try to lobby for it if we come to those points. I have been also participating in the calls of the GNSO Review Working Group, which deals with the LSE recommendations and is tasked to prepare a proposal for action to the Board Governance Committee, which will then make a proposal for action to the Board. Several interesting ideas are being floated, and while it is too soon to say what will happen, I think that there should be a way to ensure that GNSO policy development processes don't get stuck in constituency-based power struggles, but work more like the IETF consensus-based working groups; and that the time might be ripe for an individual registrants constituency in the GNSO (rather than the ALAC/NCUC merge, which doesn't really seem to fly with neither of the two groups, nor with anyone else). A couple of minor points in the end: - In theory, the Board owes a reply to the Ombudsman by May 12, on the ALAC case. I've not seen any draft, but it might be that it is being worked upon by staff. In any case, I'd like to get a consolidated current draft of our own (unsolicited) reply to the Board, so that if the issue comes up in a rush, I can have something on which to base my responses. If it doesn't come up, we can continue refining the answer in the next days. - I've seen that some concerns have been expressed on the NA Discuss list about one sentence of the April 25 minutes, the one stating that the ALAC administers funds for travel by At Large leaders. I understand the concerns and I think that the sentence is imprecise, so I've raised the matter and I've been suggested to move to change it at the next Board meeting, which I'll do. As usual, any comments and suggestions on the points above are welcome. Ciao, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Report to monthly telcon from ccNSO
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

You may remember the discussion in Lisbon, where I suggested that the ALAC could call for volunteers from the regions to act as backup/colleagues for each of the liaisons, but also to establish additional capacity to deal with follow-up to other issues, working groups in GNSO processes, etc. If we can get together a list of the issues that need to be followed, I can craft an email to the various at-large regions, and coordinate lists of volunteers, creating email lists for these groups of people, and facilitating information flowing to them to/from other policy areas? Would that be helpful? We're of course happy to provide the service and support to ensure communication between groups of people following processes and updating wikis etc to give these working groups of At-Large 'homes' online... On 08/05/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> wrote: > Siavash > Good point - we haven't had ALAC working groups per se on any issues in the > past. Now that we have gotten (mostly) over the hump of creating the RALOs, > setting up a process to create WGs on issues might be a good idea. We have > started some initiatives on the IDN issue, such as the User Guide, which we > need to follow up with Staff. > Jacqueline > > -----Original Message----- > From: Siavash Shahshahani [mailto:shahshah@irnic.ir] > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:57 AM > To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: [At-Large] Report to monthly telcon from ccNSO > > > Hi All, > On the eve of monthly telecon here's my brief report from the goings-on of > ccNSO mailing list: > > The most prominent item of relevance to at-large community has been IDNs. > In fact it seems that among all ICANN constituencies ALAC is the least > involved pro-actively in the subject. I know that Hong is actively > participating in the IDN Working Group(albeit without voting power)and is > a member of the President's IDN Committee, but perhaps some kind of an > ALAC Working Group can be set up under her leadership to lend weight to > individual user interests in this matter. This is specially important > because with most of the RALOs having been formed, ALAC can be expected to > speak for a large international cross-section. As you might know there's a > joint GAC-ccNSO Working Group on IDNs which is supposed to finish its > initial deliberations in Puerto Rico and report specific recommendations > to ICANN Board. Further, there was a move in ccNSO to write to ICANN Board > expressing concern that GNSO recommendations on IDN might be adopted > without sufficient input from the rest of the community. In the initial > draft of the letter, ICANN constituencies were identified as GAC, GNSO and > ccNSO, with no mention of ALAC. On my intervention, ALAC was also > included, but somebody pointed out that ALAC is not doing any work on this > matter(or has no working group on this)- just to let everybody know(!). > This letter will be going to ICANN Chair soon and I wouldn't be surprised > if we were asked to provide a substantive and detailed input. > > Siavash > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > IPM/IRNIC > P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. > Tehran 19548, Iran > Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 > Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 > Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 > Email: shahshah(a)irnic.ir, shahshah(a)nic.ir > ----------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > www.alac.icann.org > www.icannalac.org > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.5/792 - Release Date: 5/6/2007 9:01 > PM > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.5/793 - Release Date: 5/7/2007 2:55 > PM > > > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > www.alac.icann.org > www.icannalac.org > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 2

[Fwd: Re: Report to monthly telcon from ccNSO]
by Siavash Shahshahani May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

> To have an ALAC WG is a good idea. Meanwhile, we may wish to accelerate > the > drafting of the users' guide on IDNs. I asked PAC for more materials for > drafting but haven't got a reply. I assume Nick wrote to Tina as well. Any > response? Having a Guide is a good idea, but I don't think that's our main mission. More important IMO : > we do need have our own policy advocacy vehicle > through RALOs asap. And this can be a working group of sorts. BTW, I certainly did not mean and did not say that you're not contributing to IDN discussion; what I said that because ALAC does not have a formal structure dealing with the issue, the impression has been created in some circles that ALAC as a group is not paying much attention to the issue. Siavash > Hong > > > > > > On 5/8/07, Nick Ashton-Hart <nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org> wrote: >> >> You may remember the discussion in Lisbon, where I suggested that the >> ALAC could call for volunteers from the regions to act as >> backup/colleagues for each of the liaisons, but also to establish >> additional capacity to deal with follow-up to other issues, working >> groups in GNSO processes, etc. >> >> If we can get together a list of the issues that need to be followed, >> I can craft an email to the various at-large regions, and coordinate >> lists of volunteers, creating email lists for these groups of people, >> and facilitating information flowing to them to/from other policy >> areas? Would that be helpful? >> >> We're of course happy to provide the service and support to ensure >> communication between groups of people following processes and >> updating wikis etc to give these working groups of At-Large 'homes' >> online... >> >> On 08/05/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> wrote: >> > Siavash >> > Good point - we haven't had ALAC working groups per se on any issues >> in >> the >> > past. Now that we have gotten (mostly) over the hump of creating the >> RALOs, >> > setting up a process to create WGs on issues might be a good idea. We >> have >> > started some initiatives on the IDN issue, such as the User Guide, >> which >> we >> > need to follow up with Staff. >> > Jacqueline >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Siavash Shahshahani [mailto:shahshah@irnic.ir] >> > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:57 AM >> > To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > Subject: [At-Large] Report to monthly telcon from ccNSO >> > >> > >> > Hi All, >> > On the eve of monthly telecon here's my brief report from the >> goings-on >> of >> > ccNSO mailing list: >> > >> > The most prominent item of relevance to at-large community has been >> IDNs. >> > In fact it seems that among all ICANN constituencies ALAC is the least >> > involved pro-actively in the subject. I know that Hong is actively >> > participating in the IDN Working Group(albeit without voting power)and >> is >> > a member of the President's IDN Committee, but perhaps some kind of an >> > ALAC Working Group can be set up under her leadership to lend weight >> to >> > individual user interests in this matter. This is specially important >> > because with most of the RALOs having been formed, ALAC can be >> expected >> to >> > speak for a large international cross-section. As you might know >> there's >> a >> > joint GAC-ccNSO Working Group on IDNs which is supposed to finish its >> > initial deliberations in Puerto Rico and report specific >> recommendations >> > to ICANN Board. Further, there was a move in ccNSO to write to ICANN >> Board >> > expressing concern that GNSO recommendations on IDN might be adopted >> > without sufficient input from the rest of the community. In the >> initial >> > draft of the letter, ICANN constituencies were identified as GAC, GNSO >> and >> > ccNSO, with no mention of ALAC. On my intervention, ALAC was also >> > included, but somebody pointed out that ALAC is not doing any work on >> this >> > matter(or has no working group on this)- just to let everybody >> know(!). >> > This letter will be going to ICANN Chair soon and I wouldn't be >> surprised >> > if we were asked to provide a substantive and detailed input. >> > >> > Siavash >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------- >> > IPM/IRNIC >> > P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. >> > Tehran 19548, Iran >> > Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 >> > Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 >> > Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 >> > Email: shahshah(a)irnic.ir, shahshah(a)nic.ir >> > ----------------------------------------------- >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ALAC mailing list >> > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > >> > www.alac.icann.org >> > www.icannalac.org >> > >> > No virus found in this incoming message. >> > Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.5/792 - Release Date: >> 5/6/2007 >> 9:01 >> > PM >> > >> > >> > No virus found in this outgoing message. >> > Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.5/793 - Release Date: >> 5/7/2007 >> 2:55 >> > PM >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ALAC mailing list >> > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > >> > www.alac.icann.org >> > www.icannalac.org >> > >> >> >> -- >> -- >> Regards, >> >> Nick Ashton-Hart >> PO Box 32160 >> London N4 2XY >> United Kingdom >> UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 >> USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 >> Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 >> mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 >> Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / >> Skype: nashtonhart >> Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> www.alac.icann.org >> www.icannalac.org >> > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > www.alac.icann.org > www.icannalac.org

1 0

Today's teleconference details and Agenda
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Dear Committee: Just to remind you that the monthly ALAC teleconference is today at 1330 UTC. The draft agenda and associated documents are all accessible on the wiki in the usual place, which for your convenience is: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?8_may_2007. We will email you all the documents as a package, for those of you who are travelling. Note that at the present we have apologies only from H Diakite, so unless we hear otherwise will assume all of you will be on the call today (please send apologies if not) -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

3 3

Report to monthly telcon from ccNSO
by Siavash Shahshahani May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Hi All, On the eve of monthly telecon here's my brief report from the goings-on of ccNSO mailing list: The most prominent item of relevance to at-large community has been IDNs. In fact it seems that among all ICANN constituencies ALAC is the least involved pro-actively in the subject. I know that Hong is actively participating in the IDN Working Group(albeit without voting power)and is a member of the President's IDN Committee, but perhaps some kind of an ALAC Working Group can be set up under her leadership to lend weight to individual user interests in this matter. This is specially important because with most of the RALOs having been formed, ALAC can be expected to speak for a large international cross-section. As you might know there's a joint GAC-ccNSO Working Group on IDNs which is supposed to finish its initial deliberations in Puerto Rico and report specific recommendations to ICANN Board. Further, there was a move in ccNSO to write to ICANN Board expressing concern that GNSO recommendations on IDN might be adopted without sufficient input from the rest of the community. In the initial draft of the letter, ICANN constituencies were identified as GAC, GNSO and ccNSO, with no mention of ALAC. On my intervention, ALAC was also included, but somebody pointed out that ALAC is not doing any work on this matter(or has no working group on this)- just to let everybody know(!). This letter will be going to ICANN Chair soon and I wouldn't be surprised if we were asked to provide a substantive and detailed input. Siavash ------------------------------------------------- IPM/IRNIC P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. Tehran 19548, Iran Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 Email: shahshah(a)irnic.ir, shahshah(a)nic.ir -----------------------------------------------

2 1

[Fwd: [alerts] ICANN News Alert -- Vint Cerf Says: ICANN Needs You!]
by Wendy Seltzer May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

This mis-quote or misstatement captures it all: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [alerts] ICANN News Alert -- Vint Cerf Says: ICANN Needs You! <http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-07may07.htm> > In an interview on the subject — posted to the ICANN website, the video > site YouTube as well as his employer's Google Video website — Cerf > stressed that it is "difficult to underestimate the importance of ICANN" > because it is "responsible for policy with regard to certain technical > aspects of the Internet". Yes, in an ideal world, ICANN would be so small it would be difficult to understate its importance. Unfortunately those with business interests in it or in businesses it touches have quite successfully made it much larger. --Wendy -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/

1 0