The issues I put on the agenda on the Wiki follow, along with my thoughts
on them.
1. Status of ALAC Review.
- My recollection is that the review was scheduled to start just after
the review of the NomCom. The report on the NomCom has now been issued
but still no word on our review. What is happening?
2. ALAC/At-Large and the Board Governance Committee proposed GNSO
Improvements.
- There are three issues related to this new document.
- 1. There is a discussion on whether At Large should be represented on
the GNSO which ends with the statement that users could participate in
the commercial or non-commercial groups "depending on how they
viewed their registration". Surely the BGC understands that not all
users have there own registrations. Something over 1 billion of then are
just "users".
- 2. The argument is made that since the ALAC/At-Large exists to advise
the Board, they do not need a presence on the GNSO. This presumes that it
is adequate to be reactive to GNSO policy drafts. In reality, inputs
received during comment periods do not have a good record of making it
into next revisions unless there are strong advocates for it. The move to
working groups which can include individuals may help this, but a vote on
the GNSO council will still be an effective mechanism for helping to
ensure that end user needs are addressed during the policy creation
process instead of after.
-
- 3. The new Board Governance Committee proposal does not mention
Liaisons, apparently because the BGC did not see any reason to change
things. But the report does explicitly say that there should be regular
contact between the various SO and the ALAC and
mentions telephone conference calls between the Chairs. If such calls
make sense, certainly the corresponding Liaison should also be included.
3. New gTLD concerns. Recent comments and others.
- We need to say something regarding whether the ALAC is
endorsing the document submitted by Danny. Either yes we will, or no we
won't, or we will be meeting later in the week to decide whether to
endorse some or all of the comments.
4. Board perception of way forward on gTLD proposal.
- I would like to hear the Board thoughts on how they think this
process will proceed.
Alan
At 28/10/2007 07:45 PM, Brendler, Beau wrote:
FOR TUESDAY'S ICANN BOARD
MEETING
Please send to this list at your earliest convenience the position you
believe ALAC should take on the following topics:
gTLDS
WHOIS
IDNs (we will make reference to the existing documentation)
IPV4 and IPV6
Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAAs)
domain tasting
geoTLDs
Izumi and I will coordinate these so that we can give the board advice on
each topic.
It's OK if you don't have a particular opinion on a topic. Just send us
the ones you believe ALAC should advocate for on behalf of users.
We will send out a draft final document to you once we have a chance to
coordinate them.
_______________________________________________
ALAC-Internal mailing list
ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal_atlarge-lists.icann.org
ALAC Wiki:
http://st.icann.org/alac
ALAC Official:
http://alac.icann.org
ALAC Independent:
http://www.icannalac.org