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.
Hong
On 5/8/07, Hong Xue <hongxueipr@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@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@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@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@irnic.ir,
shahshah@nic.ir
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
>
ALAC@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@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@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com /
Skype: nashtonhart
Online Bio:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
www.alac.icann.org
www.icannalac.org