- At-Large - lists.icann.org

IGF meeting -- booth space available
by Adam Peake Oct. 21, 2007

Oct. 21, 2007

I don't think this has been mentioned on this list... There will be booth space at the IGF meeting in Rio. From the IGF website <http://www.intgovforum.org/> "Meeting Point/Village Square: Participants wishing to reserve a space for their institution should contact the Secretariat. Small stalls will be made available for interested institutions. Depending on the demand, interested institutions will be asked to either share stalls or take turns. The stalls will be approximately 1 meter wide and 60 cm deep with a backdrop for presenting posters, as illustrated in this picture <http://www.intgovforum.org/images/Proforma_QUIOSQUE-IGF-ONU.jpg>. (Please note that the final version may differ from the picture shown.)[updated 4 October 2007] (end) I don't know if ICANN has applied for this type of space, or if it's planning to combine any exhibition space with other Internet technical organizations. In WSIS meetings ICANN and the RIRs organized joint exhibition space, so might be good to find out what ICANN's plans are. But would be worth ALAC asking for space, an opportunity to introduce the regional organizations, etc. Adam

1 0

New Community input into IGD processes web site.
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr Oct. 21, 2007

Oct. 21, 2007

Following is some information about a new web site to facilitate Community input into IGF processes, that some of you may have an interest in contributing to. Firstly let me apologise for the cross posting between lists but it is important IMO that information such as this gets out to the Regional Lists as well as the public At-Large list subscribers. This information was recently posted to the ISOC Public Policy list as well, so some of you no doubt are already aware of this new initiative, but I have been requested by Jeremy Malcolm to assist my spreading the word and encouraging participation from the widest possible audience ( so feel free to pass it on) into this new and important initiative. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) <SNIP> from email previously sent to : plenary(a)intgovforum.org, governance(a)lists.cpsr.org , memberpubpol(a)elists.isoc.org on 19th October 2007. A new Web site for the IGF community has just been launched at http://igf-online.net/ by the Online Collaboration Dynamic Coalition (ODCD), a bottom-up multi-stakeholder working group of the IGF. The new site already hosts a number of useful resources including a community blog, wiki, calendar, chat and needs feeds, most of which were selected for their capacity to support multilingual usage. It also features a specially-designed menu running along the top of most pages of the site, that links in external Web sites including the Secretariat's official Web site and that of the Rio hosts. This new site for the Rio meeting and beyond supersedes last year's site (which, beset by hosting troubles, is currently inaccessible), and thanks to a sponsor's generosity now provides the IGF community with a dedicated server on which a large variety of online tools can be hosted without the limitations of a standard Web hosting service. Members of the IGF community, including dynamic coalitions, are encouraged to begin using the new site now. By registering (or logging in with your existing OpenID) you can begin posting on the community blog, adding events to the calendar, and entering information on the wiki. Hosting of other content will be accommodated on request. Volunteers are needed to help with translating the site's content into other languages, designing a complementary set of themes, and spreading the word. Please contact me or the Online Collaboration Dynamic Coalition if you would like to help, have any trouble using the site, or have any new ideas for it. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' <end SNIP>

1 0

GNSO Issues Report posted
by Danny Younger Oct. 20, 2007

Oct. 20, 2007

The GNSO Issues Report on Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy: Clarification of Reasons for Denial of a Transfer Request has been posted: http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg04012.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

FW: ccTLD IDN
by Jacqueline A. Morris Oct. 20, 2007

Oct. 20, 2007

Dear At Large Please take notice of the communication from the ccNSO Chairman below. IDNs are a very important issue, especially to the individual internet user who uses other scripts. The At Large also has a working group on IDNs, chaired by Hong Xue, and you are encouraged to join. At Large IDN Policy work can be found at HYPERLINK "https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?idn_policy_formation"https://st.icann.o rg/alac/index.cgi?idn_policy_formation Thanks Jacqueline A. Morris ALAC Chair From: Chris Disspain [mailto:ceo@auda.org.au] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 21:06 To: 'Jacqueline A. Morris' Cc: Boswinkel, Bart Subject: ccTLD IDN Importance: High Greetings Jacqueline, As you are aware, the ICANN Board resolved in San Juan on 29 June 2007, inter alia, that the ICANN community including the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, and ALAC continue to work collaboratively, taking the technical limitations and requirements into consideration, to explore both an interim and an overall approach to IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes and recommend a course of action to the Board in a timely manner. Since San Juan, the ccNSO Council has undertaken a considerable program of work to determine the best way to respond to the Board’s request. Overall approach At a meeting on 12 September 2007, in accordance with ICANN bylaws, the ccNSO Council requested an Issue Report be prepared to establish whether the ccNSO should launch a PDP to develop the policy for the selection and delegation of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two letter codes. In preparing the Issue Report the Issue Manager (Bart Boswinkel) should take into account the joint ccNSO GAC Issues Paper, the technical limitations and requirements, and any other matters that the Issues Manager considers to be of relevance. The Issues Report is the first step in the process of launching ccPDP and at large input will be sought throughout the preparation of the Report. Should a ccPDP be launched following the Issues Report, the ccNSO will seek to work closely with the at large community. Interim approach The ccNSO Council agreed that the first step in considering an interim approach should be to determine the extent of the pressing need claimed by some in the community. On 5 October 2007 I sent a letter to all ccTLD managers seeking answers to three questions. I anticipate that the responses to this letter will provide guidance as to whether an interim fast-track approach to enable the introduction of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs is a desirable and necessary step. As there is no pre-defined process to deal with such an interim approach, the ccNSO has released two discussion documents (attached) regarding a possible interim approach to IDN ccTLDs. The Designing an Interim Approach document considers how an interim approach could be managed and canvasses time lines. The Charter IDNC document is a first draft of what the charter for an interim approach committee might look like. The principle of having an interim approach, the results of my letter to ccTLD managers, and these two documents will be discussed by the ccNSO in Los Angeles. As you will appreciate there is some urgency to resolve the issue of an interim approach and this is why the ccNSO is working to a tight schedule. I would hope, in the event that an interim fast-track approach can be developed to enable the deployment of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs into the root, that the timing for this be closely aligned with the release of gTLD IDNs. I shall be grateful if you will forward this email to the ALAC, At Large and RALO lists for their information. Kind Regards, Chris Disspain Chair – ccNSO Important Notice - This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.0/1077 - Release Date: 10/18/2007 09:54 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.0/1077 - Release Date: 10/18/2007 09:54

2 1

FW: ICANN Translations
by Jacqueline A. Morris Oct. 20, 2007

Oct. 20, 2007

Dear At Large For your attention. ALAC has been agitating for more multilingual materials and consultations in order to engage the rest of the world, and Paul Levins has responded here with the initiatives underway within ICANN. Please let us know your thoughts, suggestions etc. Jacqueline From: Paul.Levins [mailto:Paul.Levins@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 16:45 To: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com Cc: Vint Cerf; ICANN Board of Directors; Theresa Swinehart; Nick Ashton-Hart; Kieren McCarthy Subject: Re: ICANN Translations Hi Jacqueline, I entirely agree with you on the fundamental point that ICANN’s work must become more accessible to non-English-fluent communities worldwide. In fact on Wednesday of this week we posted the next draft of the Frameworks and Principles for Accountability and Transparency. As you know amongst those, for the first time, is a Translation framework. We've modified it to accommodate a range of comments, but it lays down a firm commitment to multi-lingual access. But that general commitment means nothing unless we actually change our approach. To that end we have several short and long-term initiatives underway that will be of interest to the At-Large community and I hope demonstrate that we are doing more than many realize on this front. 1. Staff, led by the Director for At-Large, are testing an interface to email communications that will allow incoming emails to be automatically machine translated into multiple languages. I have purchased software called Systrans which will assist ICANN mailing lists to become multi-lingual. A successful beta-test on the At-Large’s mailing lists in Africa and Latin America are a major reason why we have decided to invest in expanding the use of this approach. It's not perfect but it will be a major assistance. 2. The Los Angeles ICANN meeting will feature at least 15 sessions with simultaneous interpretation (not including the At-Large sessions that will have interpreters). This is more than any previous ICANN meeting. We are committed to simultaneous translations at meetings - and that also means we will welcome public comments and questions in languages other than English in the public forums for the first time. In addition, more major documents will be available in non-English editions than any previous meeting, including the draft Strategic Plan, the Frameworks for Accountability and Transparency and documents relating to the introduction of New gTLDs, IDNs, Domain Name Tasting, and WHOIS (to name a few policy development activities of interest to At-Large). We will also hold consultation sessions on the Frameworks and the Strategic Plan in Russian, French and Spanish simultaneously. There will be a separate session on Translation at the Los Angeles meeting on Wednesday October 31 at 2pm. This session will be dedicated to translation within ICANN and will outline ICANN's current work, plans for the future, and lessons learned. The session will have simultaneous translation in Chinese, English, French, Spanish and Russian. Sebastien Bachollet – who has been a keen advocate of improved multi-lingual communication and a participant in ICANN for many years – will be acting as the moderator for part of the meeting. Sebastien speaks fluent French, English and Spanish. 3. Also at the Los Angeles meeting we will have an expert from LionBridge - the largest translation company in the world (Nokia, Microsoft, Google) - who will be acting as ICANN's consultant in drawing up a full translations policy - the enactment of the Framework. The expert will briefly outline his role and will also be making arrangements to meet with different members of the community to discuss what they feel their needs are. He intends meeting with yourself and other ALAC representatives. The policy will be drawn up and put through the usual public comment process and the hope is that we will have a final policy in place after the Paris meeting. 4. I do understand your concerns with respect to English-only public consultations. We are working to do more in this regard. As you have noted in your communication to us, some consultations are taking place in multiple languages. We wish to emphasize that this is a relatively recent development and you should expect to see an expansion of the number of public consultations accessible in multiple languages. (Note that the Board Governance Committee’s Working Group has recently issued a set of proposed “GNSO Improvements” that includes specific recommendations on translations.) 5. We have a cross department team (Corporate Affairs, Policy, Operations) that meets weekly to progress this issue and you are likely already aware, that the Director for At-Large is the Policy Department representative on this team, in addition to Kieren McCarthy, general manager Public Participation. Their work is overseen by myself, Doug Brent and Denise Michel. 6. This year (Financial Year 2007-08) we increased the Translations budget to US$ 381,000. This is up from $172,000 - an increase of $209,000 in one year. Bear in mind that we are doing a lot with a budget of this size. There is simply no way we could ever compete as an organization with approaches by others. For example the UN's expenditure is close to $500 million on translation. 7. In addition to this, the Global Partnerships Team led by Theresa Swinehart, are a vital part of outreach to non-English communities. The regional relations managers are vital to communicating efforts. If you look at the ICANN blog you will find that they post material in Spanish, Arabic, and Russian. 8. You will note that the recent 'campaign' on the IDNs test phase included videos of Tina Dam introducing IDNs and explaining the test. Both have has been subtitle using dotsub. We plan to do more of this. In short, I hope you will agree that while we are still in the early stages of creating the permanent processes and infrastructure that ICANN needs to achieve its multi-lingualism goals, we have made important progress in engaging non-English fluent stakeholders. We will get this right. I'm glad we can work with the At-Large community to continue to work with ICANN to help the whole organisation become more language-accessible. So, thank you for your observations and thanks also to the At-Large community for their advocacy on multi-lingualism and their involvement in ICANN. Please feel free to contact me directly should you have any further questions. I would appreciate having further dialogue with you on this. Paul Levins Executive Officer and Vice President Corporate Affairs ICANN HYPERLINK "mailto:paul.levins@icann.org"paul.levins(a)icann.org +1 310 823 9358 HYPERLINK "http://www.icann.org"www.icann.org No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.0/1077 - Release Date: 10/18/2007 09:54

2 1

dot mobi appointment again
by John L Oct. 19, 2007

Oct. 19, 2007

Is it OK with ALAC members if I tell .mobi that I'll continue as the member for the policy advisory board? They'd like to know reasonably soon, so unless I hear objections within the next week, I'll assume it's OK with people. Regards, John Levine, johnl(a)iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.

3 2

Re: [At-Large] [AfrICANN-discuss] ICANN Establishes Forum on Allocation Methods for Single-letter and Single-digit Domain Names
by Khaled KOUBAA Oct. 19, 2007

Oct. 19, 2007

We should be convinced that the single-digit domain name will be as a business as the registries business. In fact who will buy x.com, an entity interested in selling sub-domain under the X.com ( may pron oriented site ). Who will be interested in o.com, e.com , same thing. So giving possibility to someone to sell subdomain under a one digit domain name is like ccTLD who are selling .com.uk for example. We will have www.mysite.e.net or www.company.c.com and others. I think that the best is to use the same method to allocate a new gTLD or sTLD licence by giving a license to ONLY one entity that will sell to registrat and to registrar what they want of sub-domain under what ever single-digit and PAY contribution to ICANN for each sub-domain. Maybe this contribution should be less than the one payed for a domain name. Anne-Rachel Inné wrote: > > ICANN Establishes Forum on Allocation Methods for Single-letter and > Single-digit Domain Names > > 16 October 2007 > > As recommended by the GNSO Council, ICANN is commencing a forum on > potential allocation methods for single-letter and single-digit domain > names at the second level in gTLD registries. Examples include a.com > <http://a.com>, i.info <http://i.info>, 4.mobi, 8.org <http://8.org>. > Since revenue will result from this allocation, comments regarding the > potential uses for this revenue are also requested. > > ICANN intends to synthesize responses to the forum and present > proposed methods for allocation of single-letter and single-digit > domain names at the second level for community consideration. > > To be considered by ICANN, ideas on potential allocation methods > should be submitted no later than 23:59 UTC, 15 November 2007 to > allocationmethods(a)icann.org <mailto:allocationmethods@icann.org>. > Comments may be viewed at > http://forum.icann.org/lists/allocationmethods/. > > The GNSO Council asked ICANN to initiate a forum on this issue after > considering a report of the Council's Reserved Names Working Group > (RN-WG), which recommended that "single letters and digits be released > at the second level in future gTLDs, and that those currently reserved > in existing gTLDs should be released. This release should be > contingent upon the use of appropriate allocation frameworks. More > work may be needed. In future gTLDs we recommend that single letters > and single digits be available at the second (and third level if > applicable)." The GNSO is one of ICANN's primary stakeholder-populated > policy making bodies. The recommendations of the RN-WG can be found at > http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/final-report-rn-wg-23may07.pdf > [PDF, 713K]. > > *Background* > > Currently, all 16 gTLD registry agreements (.AERO, .ASIA, .BIZ, .CAT, > .COM, .COOP, .INFO, .JOBS, .MOBI, .MUSEUM, .NAME, .NET, .ORG, .PRO, > .TEL, and .TRAVEL) provide for the reservation of single-letter and > single-digit names at the second level. ICANN's gTLD registry > agreements contain the following provision on single-letter and > single-digit names. See Appendix 6 of the .TEL Registry Agreement, > http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/tel/appendix-6-07apr06.htm ("the > following names shall be reserved at the second-level: All > single-character labels."). > > Letters, numbers and the hyphen symbol are allowed within second level > names in both top level and country code TLDs. Single letters and > numbers also are allowed as IDNs -- as single-character Unicode > renderings of ASCII compatible (ACE) forms of IDNA valid strings. > > Before the current reserved name policy was imposed in 1993, Jon > Postel (under the IANA function) took steps to reserve all available > single character letters and numbers at the second level for future > extensibility of the Internet (see 20 May 1994 email from Jon Postel, > http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/namedroppers.199x/msg01156.html) > All but six (q.com <http://q.com>, x.com <http://x.com>, z.com > <http://z.com>, i.net <http://i.net>, q.net <http://q.net>, and x.org > <http://x.org> ) of the possible 144 single letters or numbers at the > second-level in .COM, .EDU, .NET and .ORG remain reserved by IANA. > Those six registrations are an exception to the reservation practice. > Under current practice, these names would be placed on reserve if the > registrations were allowed to expire. > > The RN-WG carefully considered technical implications of releasing > single-letter and single-digit domain names from reservation, and > engaged in discussions with technical experts as the working group > recommendations were being developed. > > There are currently 265 TLDs in the root zone (19 gTLDs and 246 > ccTLDs). Although nearly all single-letter and single-digit domain > names are reserved in gTLDs, 24% of ccTLDs (60) have at least one > single-character name registration. According to IANA, out of 9540 > possible combinations of single-character ASCII names (containing 26 > letters, 10 numbers, but not symbols, across 265 TLDs), 1225 > delegations of single-character ASCII names exist in the TLD zones > (See http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-rn-wg/msg00039.html) > > ICANN has received many inquiries from third parties seeking to > register single-letter and single-digit domain names, and has advised > these parties that the names are reserved. Through the establishment > of the public forum described above, ICANN is following its bottom-up, > multi-stakeholder model to develop suitable allocation mechanisms for > the release of single-letter and single-digit domain names as > recommended by the GNSO working group. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > AfrICANN mailing list > AfrICANN(a)afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann >

6 11

Next Draft of Accountability and Transparency Frameworks
by Bret Fausett Oct. 19, 2007

Oct. 19, 2007

I suspect this will be the last draft of this document before it goes final. I'd be interested in getting an ALAC response on it and am willing to take the laboring oar on putting together a first draft. If you're interested in working up a draft with me, let me know on or off-list. If the ALAC already has something underway, let me know how I can help. Bret On Oct 18, 2007, at 2:44 PM, ICANN News Alert wrote: > ICANN Posts Next Draft of Accountability and Transparency > Frameworks and Principles for Consultation > > ICANN today posts the next version of the Frameworks and Principles > for consultation > > 17 October 2007 > > * Read the Accountability and Transparency Frameworks and > Principles for Consultation <http://www.icann.org/transparency/acct- > trans-frameworks-principles-17oct07.pdf> [PDF, 180K] > * Send comments to draft-mop-2007(a)icann.org > * View comments at <http://forum.icann.org/lists/draft-mop-2007> > > These documents have been in development since late 2006. The > process began with a consultation which asked the community for > their views on accountability and transparency at ICANN. An issues > paper summarising these comments was posted in January this year > (<http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-26jan07b.htm>). > Based on the feedback that was received and the input from the One > World Trust report on accountability and transparency (<http:// > www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-4-29mar07.htm>), a draft > set of Frameworks and principles was released for comment in June. > > A panel discussion and consultation session was conducted at the > San Juan meeting and a public comment forum was opened on the > website (<http://sanjuan2007.icann.org/files/sanjuan/SanJuan- > WorkshopAccountabilityTransparency-27June07.txt>). A summary of the > all comments received was posted recently (<http://forum.icann.org/ > lists/draft-mop-2007/msg00008.html>). > > Next Steps > > Based on this comment and discussion, this revised set of > Frameworks and Principles is being posted for further community > consultation. A public comment forum will be opened on the website > and we will take comments through 12 November. There will also be a > consultation session at the Los Angeles meeting to allow attendees > at the meeting to take part in a discussion of the revised > principles. This will be held on Wednesday 30 October between 1530 > and 1700 hours. > > The Frameworks and Principles will be revised based on the feedback > that is received and it is hoped that a final version will be > submitted to the Board for approval at their December meeting. > > The key changes between this version and previous version are as > follows: > > Financial Accountability at ICANN > > * A separate section on external audit has been included > > Dispute Resolution at ICANN > > * Small changes to clarify meaning > * An additional section on registry and registrar dispute > resolution has been included > > ICANN Consultation Principles > > * Several small changes to clarify meaning > * Changes in response to community comment > > ICANN Translation Principles > > * Significantly rewritten based on feedback and work progressed by > ICANN staff translation committee. > > ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior > > * Renamed to ensure that the standards listed apply to all forms of > exchange within the community > * Small changes to clarify meaning > > ________________________________ > > Sign up for ICANN's Monthly Magazine <http://www.icann.org/magazine/> > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please visit <http:// > www.icann.org/newsletter> > > If you have questions or comments about this mailing list, send an > email to ICANN-Alerts(a)icann.org > > >

1 1

Next version of the Frameworks and Principles for Accountability and Transparency
by Danny Younger Oct. 19, 2007

Oct. 19, 2007

This document cites as an "Internal Accountability" factor the "Representative Composition of the ICANN Board". As we all know, the users have no representatives on this Board -- they were eliminated when ICANN purged all at-large directors from the board several years ago -- as such, there is no internal accountability. Had there been user representatives on half of the board, do you think that we would have gone for the last five years without registrant data escrow? Had there been user representatives on half of the board, do you think that we would have waited for a calamity like RegisterFly before acting to update the RAA? Had there been user representatives on half of the board, do you think that we would have still been paying the outrageous Redemption Grace Period fees that are being assessed? Had there been user representatives on half of the boars, do you think that we would have tolerated the VeriSign price increase? There was a reason why the White Paper called for a balanced board, because you cannot allow special interest communities to dominate an organizational agenda at the expense of the public interest. At the moment we have a Nominating Committee that selects a half of the Board, yet the vast bulk of these nominating committee members hail from the special interest communities -- the end result: board appointments that continue to reflect special-interest community concerns while the needs of the public continue to get scant attention. You know in your hearts that this is neither right nor acceptable. Accountability demands that we honor the principle of a balanced board. This is what ALAC members should be fighting for. It's time to stand up and defend the unrepresented, the user community that nowhere within ICANN has any representation. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

3 8

List Posting tone and behaviour
by Jacqueline A. Morris Oct. 18, 2007

Oct. 18, 2007

Dear All The tone and content of some messages recently have stretched the limits of acceptable behavior on this list. May I remind you all of Rule 22.8 and 22.9 as follows, which explicitly prohibit: 22.9 Unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject, 22.10 Postings libellous being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others, We appreciate that some may feel strongly and get passionate about the topics, but we do not want to have to sanction anyone for their posts. So please, tone it down ASAP. Many of our colleagues are very offended by this behavior. Sincerely Jacqueline A. Morris ALAC Chair No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1075 - Release Date: 10/17/2007 09:38

3 2