- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Call for Statements of Interest | NA RALO Seats on ALAC
by Bret Fausett June 22, 2007

June 22, 2007

CALL FOR STATEMENTS OF INTEREST | NORTH AMERICAN R.A.L.O. IN FORMATION | 18 MAY 2007 Consistent with Paragraph 10 of the Draft Operating Principles ("OP") for the North American RALO in Formation, I am pleased to open the Call for Statements of Interest for persons interested in serving on ICANN's At Large Advisory Committee. Consistent with Paragraph 9 of the OP, the only requirement for service is that a candidate live in the North American region. This initial call for Statements of Interest is to elect two (2) members of the ALAC. One person will serve a two year term and the other will serve a one year term. The ALAC members will be elected by the voting members of the NARALO, only if and after its members ratify the Operating Principles now out for a vote. Each year hereafter, the NARALO will elect one (1) person. This Call for Statements of Interest will remain open from today, Friday, 18 May 2007 through and including Friday, 22 June 2007 (11:59 pm HST). If you are interested in applying, please send an email to Nick Ashton-Hart (nick.ashton-hart (at) icann.org) and to me (bfausett (at) internet.law.pro) with the following information: -- START -- (a) Your name: first name, FAMILY NAME (in capital letters) (b) Your e-mail address. (c) Your telephone number(s) and/or Skype/Yahoo!/Mac or other VOIP or Audio Chat ID. (d) Your country of citizenship. If you hold multiple citizenships please state all. (e) Your city and country of residence and your preferred mailing address. (f) Education and professional background. Summarize your educational background, such as degrees achieved and the university(s) where you studied, and the three most recent places of employment and positions held. (g) Internet Involvement and Interest in ICANN. Help us understand the skills and experience you would bring to the ALAC and how you would help the ALAC achieve its mission. (h) Conflicts of Interest. Please refer to the ICANN Conflicts of Interest policy http://www.icann.org/committees/coi/coi-policy-04mar99.htm. This document is aimed at conflicts for ICANN Directors and Officers, but should provide guidance for all ICANN leadership positions. If you have had any relationship with an ICANN accredited registry or registrar (other than registering a domain name) or any organization that has been in dispute with ICANN, please describe that relationship here. Conflicts of interest are not necessarily disqualifying, since we anticipate that many experienced people may have such relationships. -- END -- PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL RESPONSES WILL BE PUBLIC AND WILL BE POSTED FOR REVIEW ON THE ALAC WEB SITE AND THE NA-RALO MAILING LISTS AS APPROPRIATE. Please let me know if you have any questions. Bret Fausett Interim Chair, North American RALO General Assembly Member, WEB405, Accredited ALS

2 2

ALAC Review Terms posted
by Izumi AIZU June 21, 2007

June 21, 2007

The review of ALAC will start in the 2nd Quarter of 2007 - http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-20jun07.htm There is no deadline I could find to submit the proposal, but should be very soon. izumi

5 4

Guidelines for evaluating ALS applications
by Alan Greenberg June 21, 2007

June 21, 2007

Folks, as a diversion from talking about meeting logistics and organizations, I thought perhaps we could focus for a bit on issues. One of the issues to be discussed by the ALAC in San Juan is what criteria should an candidate ALS meet to be certified as an ALS. The ICANN Bylaws, as appropriate for their level of control, are suitably vague. They say: The criteria and standards for the certification of At-Large Structures shall be established in such a way that participation by individual Internet users who are citizens or residents of countries within the Geographic Region (as defined in <http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VI-5>Section 5 of Article VI) of the RALO will predominate in the operation of each At-Large Structure within the RALO, while not necessarily excluding additional participation, compatible with the interests of the individual Internet users within the region, by others. This has generally been interpreted by the ALAC to mean that individual members of the organization must either directly (that is, classical Athenian democracy where all members participate in decisions) or more likely, indirectly, by selecting/electing the groups leaders (managers, board, whatever). There has also been another generally accepted philosophy that the group must have a practical way of communicating with its members and there should be some mechanism for getting input back from these members. This has worked for the vast majority of applicants. However, a number of scenarios have come up where the current interpretation does not seem to come up with the right answer: - Recently there have been a number of applicants which do not have individual members but rather have other organizations as members. In at least some of the cases, they are known by trusted individuals to be "good ALS material" - that is, they believe in and practice those ideas which we would normally associate with an ALS. - there are entities that could (vaguely) be called members, but with virtually all relevant communication going outwards only. In essence, the participants are effectively users of a web site. But again, the organizations principles and sympathies are in line with those we associate with an ALS, and conceptually, incoming communications could be easily added. - Although it seems generally accepted that an ALS should not primarily be a for-profit business, and there are other venues in ICANN for such businesses, the current rules would not refuse ALS status to for-profit organizations that otherwise meet the criteria. It is vitally important that ICANN sets and uses an understandable and implementable set of criteria for certifying ALSs. Specifically, the ALAC must establish a process under which all ALAC members are using the same criteria for judging an ALS candidate. Although each member may certainly come to different conclusions about whether criteria are met, they need to be using the same criteria. Moreover, the criteria cannot change capriciously from month to month. If we do not adhere to these principles, we put ICANN in an ethically and legally awkward position. Therefore, we need to decide on just how we are interpreting the Bylaw wording, or if necessary to achieve our goals, recommend new wording to the Board. Prior to the Lisbon meeting, Nick distributed a proposed criteria for ALS membership. It (and French and Spanish translations) can be found at the very bottom of https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?lisbon_documents. I think that it is a good start, but I find there are a number of problems with it. With no attempt to re-word the document here, I propose that the criteria be altered to include the following: 1. If an organization is composed partly or solely of other organizations, either it can be an ALS, or one or more of its component organizations can be an ALS, but not both. 2. Although an ALS need not have any specific legal organization, but it cannot exist for primarily for-profit reasons. 3. The proposed Criteria 1 be altered to make it clear that an ALS has a responsibility to disseminate information on behalf of ICANN and its RALO, and to solicit feedback from its individual user participants. 4. If any of the criteria which qualify an ALS for certification changes, the ALS is obliged to bring this to the attention of its RALO which must in turn involve ICANN At-Large support and/or the ALAC. Comments from ALAC members and from interested individuals PRIOR TO THE SAN JUAN MEETING would be very helpful, both on Nick's original document as well as my thoughts here. Alan

5 6

Re: [At-Large] RES: Internet access at the Caribe Hilton
by Nick Ashton-Hart June 20, 2007

June 20, 2007

Breakfast is not included in the room price of either hotel. On 20 Jun 2007, at 15:08, sylvia wrote: > and what about breakfast at Courtyard Miramar Hotel? > > Sylvia Herlein > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > > ONG: Internauta Brasil www.internautabrasil.org > > messenger: silvialeite(a)hotmail.com > > skype: Sylvia_Leite > > > > De: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac- > bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de RJGlass | America@Large > Enviada em: quarta-feira, 20 de junho de 2007 07:34 > Para: Alan Greenberg > Cc: At-Large Worldwide > Assunto: Re: [At-Large] Internet access at the Caribe Hilton > > > > They advertise free access: > > " > > Courtyard San Juan Miramar > > 801 Ponce de Leon Avenue > San Juan, 00907 Puerto Rico > Phone: 1 787 721 7400 > Fax: 1 787 722 1787 > Sales: 1 787 721 7400 ext. 5551 > Toll-free: 1 800 289 4274 > Hotel Highlights > > 136 rooms including 10 Suites/ large working desk, ergonomic chair > and FREE high speed internet > 24 hrs Food Marketplace, 24 hrs Self Laundry Service, 24 hrs > Internet area and 24 hrs Fitness Room > Two boardrooms, two on-site restaurants. Wireless HSIA: lobby, pool > & restaurants" > > > On 6/15/07, Alan Greenberg < alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > > They claim that it is in all rooms and that the current fee is > $14.95. The ICANN web site says that there is "wireless access in the > meeting rooms, public areas and participants rooms in the conference > hotel only". Since presumably they are not going to charge us for > access in the meeting rooms, that sentence sounds like room access > has been negotiated into the $170 price. However, it is *possible* > that for rooms booked and paid for by ICANN, they negotiated an > Internetless price. > > Alan > > At 15/06/2007 05:01 PM, John L wrote: > >I've stayed there. There's Internet in most if not all of the > rooms, but > >they charge the usual $10/day unless ICANN negotiated a better > deal for > >its rooms. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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://www.alac.icann.org > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org > > > > > -- > ------------------------- > AmericaAtLarge.org > RJPacific.com > DDMF.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://www.alac.icann.org > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nashton(a)consensus.pro Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 2

Remote Participation in San Juan ICANN At-Large Events
by Nick Ashton-Hart June 20, 2007

June 20, 2007

Dear All: I'm happy to announce that the remote participation options, as well as the agendas of At-Large Related events at the San Juan ICANN Meeting, have been finalised. You are requested to review: For LAC Attendees: https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi? san_juan_icann_meeting For NA Attendees: https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi? puerto_rico_icann_meeting For the ALAC: https://st.icann.org/ALAC/index.cgi?san_juan_meeting Those who live in countries where no free telephone access number exists may request that the conference service calls them - please send such requests to staff(a)alac.icann.org, with your name and your first and second preference telephone numbers to be called on. Due to logistical concerns we do need 48 hours notice in advance of the meeting you wish to be called out for in order to arrange this for you. If you participate remotely, please review the following tips on how to make the remote participation service work most effectively for you: https://st.icann.org/ALAC/index.cgi?remote_participation For those unable to attend a session, recordings will be available after the meeting ends (allow 24 hours delay) for review. Documents of concern to the community in translated editions are available from: https://st.icann.org/ALAC/index.cgi?san_juan_documents with more being made available every day. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

W Seltzer Airfare Ticketing Issue
by Nick Ashton-Hart June 20, 2007

June 20, 2007

Dear Wendy: Since you have seen fit to deal with the situation with respect to your travel in the most public way possible, and because you have made serious and unsubstantiated allegations about the role of the staff in ‘manipulating the travel policy to exclude participation’, this response is being sent to the public At-Large list. May I take this opportunity to state that I take no pleasure whatever in having to send such communications and I would have preferred that the matter be dealt with in a normal way between those directly concerned instead. Since you were informed that you would not receive travel support because you didn’t book your tickets in the allotted time, you have: Accused the staff, in public email communications, of deliberately manipulating the travel policy to exclude participation in San Juan. Considering the amount of funding which ICANN provides to the At- Large community to attend ICANN meetings year in and year out - and considering that you personally have been supported for something like five years to attend three meetings a year, this accusation is unhelpful, inflammatory, and untrue. You have chosen to make untrue statements that you had complied with the travel deadlines on several occasions when that was demonstrably not the case. As is clear from the chronology of your contacts with American Express that you have not disputed, you had repeated opportunities to book your travel in the time provided and American Express repeatedly offered to help you – you on several occasions told them you were not ready to be ticketed yet. You have suggested that ‘policies’ about the amount of time for booking your tickets were ‘hidden’ when you were clearly aware of them. You replied to the email that contained them. Suggesting that the email that contained the travel deadlines from the vendor was somehow hidden when you as well as everyone else were notified by me that you could expect an email from American Express containing details of how and when to arrange your flights “within 24 hours” (email of 31st May). Suggested that you were somehow not able to use ‘the full period’ to book your travel when that is demonstrably not true. Suggested that the travel vendor failed to call you or follow up with you on public email lists when in fact you didn’t ask them to call you, and when they followed up with you the next day, you did not indicate that they should have called you – and in fact told them that you were not yet ready to book your travel. Your representation of the travel system is inaccurate, the accusations made against members of the ICANN staff are untrue and alleged incompetence in the actions of the travel vendor belied by the detailed record of communication between you and Amex. The result of the inaccurate and inflammatory statements you have made, as well as the very public way in which you have chosen to present them, is that a great deal of time and energy has been consumed by several people in and out of ICANN on a matter that should have been a straightforward decision based upon facts. This has resulted in time that could have been spent on providing services to the whole community being spent instead on this matter. As a community leader, it seems to me that you are meant to be helping the community help itself, not providing opportunities to waste the time of staff and of others and making untrue and inflammatory statements which require time to be spent correcting the record. Out of a total of 40 people attending the San Juan meeting, of which 35 used the American Express service, you are the only person who didn’t manage to make the arrangements in time. There were no other complaints about not having enough time to make arrangements – on the contrary, everyone else was done in good time – in spite of the fact that as previously mentioned, many had far more complex itineraries than yours would have been. The reality of having so many people travel with support from ICANN from this community is that there must be some reasonable rules regarding travel support – otherwise fewer people will get to attend meetings. It would be entirely reasonable for us to stand by our previous decision and uphold the rules as they were written – rules that everyone else managed to follow. However, upon reflection and taking particularly into account the wish of a number of your ALAC colleagues that the rules be bent in your favour, what we are prepared to do, on a one-time basis, is to reimburse you for an amount up to what the ticket could have been purchased for on the 8th on the airline of your choice and flight time windows, both of which you indicated as your preferences to American Express. If you choose to attend the San Juan meeting, please provide your airfare receipt with an expense claim and you will be reimbursed for up to US$883.00. Please let us know within 48 hours if you are intending to avail yourself of this offer and provide a copy of your itinerary so we can make the requisite hotel arrangements. To remind you, if you do attend, per-diems will cover a period of not longer than 23 – 29 June inclusive (meaning departure from San Juan on the 30th). I hope very much that this will be the end of this episode – and that you will address any remaining concerns to me and eschew opportunities for further public airing of matters related to your travel arrangements. ---- Chronology of W Seltzer’s Contacts with American Express Travel Desk. · May 31 - Original email sent to traveller · June 1 616 a - Ms Seltzer responds that she is out of the office until the 4th . She does add her phone number, but does not specifically request a verbal phone call and since this is an international reservation, our agents responded via email. · June 1-11:45a - agent response with email that she looks forward to her response on Monday. · June 4 3 :58p- agent does not hear back from traveller and sends a courtesy reminder, requesting verification of carrier and flights · June 4 4: 28p - Ms Seltzer responds that she is not ready to ticket. June 8 11:45a- Received request for alternate flights- we did not have the opportunity to get back to her on Friday. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

5 5

Update to the ALAC page at http://www.icann.org/committees/alac/
by Nick Ashton-Hart June 20, 2007

June 20, 2007

I have updated a lot of the above page - there are now pages for the past members in an organised way (hopefully nobody is missing; if they are they can be added if they send a bio and note to me). The photos sent recently haven't yet been included - if current members wish to send a photo for their bio page, please feel free. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Draft document on GNSO review posted
by Vittorio Bertola June 19, 2007

June 19, 2007

The GNSO Review Working Group of the ICANN Board, of which I am a member, has posted an initial working document about possible changes in the structure and procedures of the GNSO: http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19jun07.htm The document is the result of several weeks of discussion among the working group members, drawing on the external review of the GNSO released last year by the London School of Economics, and on other inputs and considerations. It is not a draft report, but rather a document that examines some of the rationales and possible consequences for implementing the LSE recommendations. One of the main threads of thoughts emerging from this work is the desire to reduce the internal controversies in the GNSO, by moving from policy discussions that are shaped by the constituency structure and focused on attempts to outvote each other on competing proposals to a consensus-based online working group model much similar to the ones adopted by the IETF or the W3C. Personally, I think that the GNSO Council should keep a role of oversight and strategizing, but policy should be discussed in open working groups that aim at promoting and reaching rough consensus, if not full consensus, among all participants. The document also raises again the long-standing issue of a possible new Individual Registrants Constituency in the GNSO, which would in my opinion be a good addition, even if of course its relationship with the ALAC should be studied. Generally speaking, the membership and internal rules of all constituencies should become more transparent and accountable. Moreover, the document discusses the possibility of collapsing the constituencies into four broad groupings - registries, registrars, business users and non-commercial users - that would then be sub-divided in the individual constituencies. This is just a first step to foster the discussion online and in person, at a workshop that will be held in San Juan. I encourage people to read the full document and submit comments. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0

FW: [NA-Discuss] GNSO Recommendations on New TLDs
by Jacqueline A. Morris June 19, 2007

June 19, 2007

The GNSO Committee investigating the requirements associated with the roll-out of new gTLDs has published its recommendations (in two parts). http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/pdp-dec05-fr-a-18jun07.pdf http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/pdp-dec05-fr-b-18jun07.pdf No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.0/853 - Release Date: 6/18/2007 3:02 PM

1 0

Briefing on the time commitment for Board Liaison
by Nick Ashton-Hart June 18, 2007

June 18, 2007

Dear All: Since the board liaison is to be elected as you know after this ICANN meeting, I thought it might be useful to provide some detail on the very considerable commitment which the successful candidate would be committing to fulfilling. ---- At-Large Advisory Committee Liaison to the Board of Directors of ICANN Summary of Time Commitment From the perspective of the time commitment required, the ALAC Liaison to the ICANN Board requires the greatest commitment of any At- Large community position. This note is meant to provide an indicator of the requirements for those interested in serving in this challenging and interesting post. It is important to note that unlike or other positions within the At- Large community where the amount of time spent on At-Large commitments is entirely voluntary and even ALAC members are not required to spend a certain amount of time "working" each week or month, board members are expected to remain engaged and work on a consistent basis - if you fail to "keep up" you will get persistent lobbying to work harder / more. In addition to the time commitments with respect to the Board itself, the Liaison will also need to participate in the mailing lists of the community, providing reports on board activities and soliciting advice from the community for input to the Board. MONTHLY COMMITMENTS: Teleconferences: Main Board: 1 monthly for 2 hours ALAC: 1 monthly for 2 hours Preparing written submissions: 1-2 hours TOTAL MONTHLY COMMITMENTS: 5 - 6 Hours WEEKLY COMMITMENTS: Teleconferences: Board WGs: 1 weekly for 2 hours Mailing list reading/correspondence: Board: 3 hours/week ALAC: 2 hours/week Reading Reports / Responding to Reports or non-email communications: for Board: 5 hours per week for ALAC: 2 hours per week TOTAL HOURS PER WEEK: 14 hours TOTAL HOURS PER MONTH: (WEEK*4+MONTH): 56 - 57 hours FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS: 3x ICANN meetings: 7-8 days away incl. travel 3 times per year = 21 - 24 days / year 2x Board retreats: 3-5 days away incl travel 2 times per year = 6 - 10 days / year TOTAL DAYS FACE-TO-FACE: 27 - 34 days / year -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0