March 2007 - EURO-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Agrrement to to MoU between ICANN and Euralo
by Patrick Vande Walle March 24, 2007

March 24, 2007

For what it is worth, I hereby confirm that the Internet Society Luxembourg agrees to sign the MoU between ICANN and the European At-large Structures. Patrick Vande Walle Chairman Internet Society Luxembourg

3 2

comments on draft of MOU
by Annette Muehlberg March 23, 2007

March 23, 2007

Hi all, as you already know, unfortunately I am not able to attend our important Lisbon Meeting. I wish you all good luck, so that we get our new european organisation started. Together with Oliver Passek, I put our comments on the draft of the MOU in the Wiki (see text below). https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?draft_mou What do you think of signing this very sunday - when the EU celebrates 50 years of Roman contract - the document of the European Internet Users Forum in the course of incorporation? Would love to join you. Try to do it virtually. All the best to all of you Annette MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, Incorporated ("ICANN") and The Organizations in the European Region Accredited as 'At-Large Structures that are Signatories ("Signing Organizations") Done this __ Day of ____ 2007 1. Purpose and Scope 1.1 This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") defines an agreement between the Signing Organizations and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. Its intent is to establish, and define activities to be carried out by, the EURALO, and supported by ICANN. 1.2 The EURALO shall have the following objectives: 1.2.1 To provide a forum and promote and encourage European Internet users' participation and involvement in ICANN in an open, accountable and transparent manner; 1.2.2 To promote, understand and advocate for individual Internet users and to provide a forum for outreach, co-ordination and exchange of information and knowledge for persons who live in the European region as defined by ICANN. 1.2.3 To act as an interface between individual Internet users and ICANN and to promote skills development and information exchange related to the Internet amongst Members; 1.2.4 To breach the digital divide and encourage users in developing countries to participate in EURALO. * Do we have developing countries in the Region? This seems superfluous to me. --vb. 1.2.5 To select two Members of EURALO to represent them on the At-Large Advisory Committee * What about "To select representatives of EURALO in the At-Large Advisory Committee and in other bodies as appropriate"? The specific positions could change in the future. --vb. --Agree am. *2. Definition of Terms and Abbreviations:* 2.1 ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. 2.2 ALAC -- ICANN At-Large Advisory Committee. 2.3 Signing Organisations -- Organizations in the European region accredited by the ALAC as "At-Large Structures" that are signatories to this MOU. * Shouldn't be the EURALO (European Internet Users Forum) the signing organisation? To make it possible to sign at the ICANN Meeting in Lisbon could it be possible to sign as organisation in the course of incorporation with the signitures of the founding ALS representatives? --am/op 2.4 EURALO -- European Regional At-Large Organization. 2.5 At-Large Structure (ALS) -- An organization accredited by the ALAC according to published criteria and standards. 2.6 Region -- European Geographic Region as defined by ICANN 2.7 Member - A member of the EURALO 3. Composition of EURALO 3.1 All ALSes in the European region shall be Members of the EURALO. 3.2 To help ensure participation by any interested individual in the European Region, the EURALO will encourage the formation and accreditation of additional At-Large Structures and their participation in the EURALO. 3.3 The EURALO recognizes that ICANN has established criteria and standards for the accreditation of ALSes. The EURALO will encourage organizations to apply for certification and assist with certification, including by: a. Reviewing ALS applications from organizations in European upon submission to ICANN and recommending whether or not the organization should be accredited as an ALS: b. Providing European ALS applicants with EURALO information and, if recommended by the EURALO for accreditation, provisional membership in the EURALO whilst the ALS application is under consideration by the ALAC; * EURALO/EUIF has up to now no rules for a provisional membership. -- am/op c. When ALS certification is verified by the ALAC for European applicants, these applicants will be granted membership in the EURALO. 3.4 There shall be no limit as to the number of Members of the EURALO. 3.5 All Members shall be entitled to attend and participate at all Meetings and be entitled to access information via a publicly accessed World Wide Web site maintained by EURALO. 3.6 All Members shall be entitled to participate in EURALO mailing lists. *4. Agreed Responsibilities of ICANN* ICANN agrees that during the term of this MOU it will work in conjunction with the EURALO to support At-Large activities within the European Region, including: 4.1. Helping to inform individual Internet users in the Region about ICANN news, meetings, policy development activities, and opportunities for ICANN participation; 4.2 Helping to promote outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users in the Region to advance understanding of, and participation in, issues addressed by ICANN that affect individual Internet users; 4.3 Offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions among members of At-Large structures in the Region and with those involved in ICANN decision-making, and encourage interested individuals to share their views on pending ICANN issues. 4.4 Providing the necessary resources to help support EURALO activities subject to ICANN's annual operational and budgetary plans and processes. * Can we add at least one more specific commitment, such as "Covering the expenses to allow attendance to ICANN's official meetings to the individuals selected by the EURALO as its representatives in the At-Large Advisory Committee"? --vb. 4.5 Accrediting, through the ALAC, and taking full account of Clause 3.3 of this MOU, groups of individual Internet users in the Region as At-Large Structures using the minimum criteria and accreditation process as provided in the ICANN Bylaws. 5. Agreed Responsibilities of the EURALO The Signing Organizations agree that during the term of this MOU they will work in conjunction with ICANN to support At-Large activities within the Region, including: * see comment 2.3 -- am/op 5.1. Helping to inform individual Internet users in the Region about ICANN news, meetings, policy development activities, and opportunities for ICANN participation; 5.2 Helping to promote outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users in the Region to advance understanding of, and participation in, issues addressed by ICANN that affect individual Internet users; 5.3 Offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions among members of At-Large structures in the Region and with those involved in ICANN decision-making, and encourage interested individuals to share their views on pending ICANN issues. 5.4 Selecting two members to serve on the ALAC * see comment 1.2.5 by vb -- am/op 5.4.1 The EURALO will choose two (2) individuals to serve as representatives to the At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), in the terms specified in the ICANN Bylaws. To the extent possible, the ALAC representatives shall be selected by consensus; if a consensus cannot be reached then a vote shall be held. Only those ALSes, and, to the extent voting rights are extended to individual members of EURALO as determined by the General Assembly of EURALO under rules as it shall determine, those individuals, who have been accredited prior to the election will be able to vote. Each accredited ALS will have one (1) vote. The selected representatives must be members of different ALSes, must have their principal residence in different countries of the region and their nationalities must be different. Selected representatives will have the responsibilities described in the ICANN Bylaws. * We should have an earlier term for participation, such as "30 days before the election", to prevent last minute rushes to enrollment. Also, I think we had agreed (in Athens) on more precise diversity conditions, namely that the three ALAC members representing Europe would have to be from three different sub-regions of Europe as defined in the EURALO Bylaws. --vb. * Proposal: We should rewrite second and third sentence - as voting rights and minimum term of membership are defined by EURALO/EIUF bylaws: "The voting rights of ALSes and individual members shall be determined by the EURALO/EIUF. am/op. 5.5 Periodically reviewing the results of their the Parties' cooperation under the MOU and, when appropriate, recommending improvements in the MOU. *6. General Provisions* 6.1 This Agreement requires the ratification of the ICANN Board of Directors. 6.2 This Agreement will become effective when signed by all Parties. The Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual agreement of the parties in writing. Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing one hundred twenty (120) days written notice to the other party. In the event this Agreement is terminated, each party shall be solely responsible for the payment of any expenses it has incurred in relation to the termination of this Agreement. 6.3.1 Amendments to this Agreement must be approved by the EURALO General Assembly, who which will designate the representative, or representatives, to sign the amendments on behalf of the EURALO. 6.4 The EURALO General Assembly shall determine the extent to which ALSes in the Region not a party to this Memorandum of Understanding must consent to be bound by its terms in order to participate in the governance and activities of the EURALO, and any the procedure to be used to signify the same, as well as the procedure by which an ALS may revoke its consent once given. * I think that, if this is an agreement to be signed directly between ALSes and ICANN (as opposite to, between EURALO and ICANN), then new ALSes should be required to sign it after accreditation, to obtain membership of EURALO. Perhaps 3.1 should contain clauses to that effect, for example "All ALSes in the European region shall be Members of the EURALO. They will gain their effective membership in EURALO upon receiving accreditation as an ALS by ICANN and signing this MoU." --vb. * Compare 2.3 and otherwise - support of Vittorio's proposal. -- am/op. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Memorandum of Understanding is executed this number <https://st.icann.org/static/2.2.0.0/html/index.cgi?number> day of month <https://st.icann.org/static/2.2.0.0/html/index.cgi?month> 2007 by the Parties, acting through their duly authorised representatives. Execution shall be upon signature for the Signing Organisations. For ICANN, execution shall be contingent upon final approval by the ICANN Board following completion of the public comment period. FOR AND ON BEHALF OF: THE SIGNING ORGANIZATIONS ICANN NAME OF ORGANISATION 1 Name: Name: __________________ Title: Title: ____________________ NAME OF ORGANISATION 2 Name: Title: END OF DOCUMENT*

1 0

Remote Participation in the At-Large Lisbon meetings (and the main ICANN Sessions too)!
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 22, 2007

March 22, 2007

Evening At-Large worldwide! I wanted to make sure everyone knows that those of you who are not attending Lisbon directly, but who would like to listen in / participate especially in the At-Large Tuesday and Thursday policy discussions are encouraged to do so! Teleconference access has been arranged for all these meetings. If a local free access number does not exist, and you would like to attend, please send an email to staff(a)alac.icann.org with: Your name Meeting you wish to attend Time you want to be called (and your timezone) 2 numbers which will work for you (1 is the alternate in case there's a problem with the first one). Note that the schedules, and documents, can all be reached off of: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?lisbon_icann_meeting Remote participation details can be found on each meeting page. For the main ICANN Meeting, many sessions will be webcast - in particular the public forums and workshops - and the new Public Participation website is also trying out a number of new ways for remote participation to be richer and more robust - including lots of 2-way interfaces between the site and the meetings themselves, allowing you to contribute directly via the internet in the discussions, ask questions, make comments. The link to the main Lisbon meeting is: http://www.icann.org/meetings/ lisbon The new public participation site can be found at: http:// public.icann.org/ -- 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

Lisbon Documents - in French, English, Spanish, and Brazilian Portuguese!
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 22, 2007

March 22, 2007

Dear All: The consolidated documents page for Lisbon - including now also links to URLs with further information - has been updated and the translations of these documents are in the process of being posted - so look overnight and tomorrow for documents in French, Spanish, and Brazilian Portuguese for many documents. That URL again is: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?lisbon_documents -- 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

EURALO at Lisbon - PLEASE READ
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 22, 2007

March 22, 2007

Dear Community: Since the Lisbon ICANN Meeting is almost upon us, I thought I would recap events and provide links for all of you. Firstly, everything about the EURALO meetings - agendas, preparatory documents, etc - can be found from the www.euralo.org site. The quick link is to https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?lisbon_icann_meeting. Note that all EURALO meetings - indeed all At-Large meetings - allow for remote participation. This is especially important for all of you as the objective of this meeting is to finish and agree: The Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN - which forms the RALO; The Bylaws of the EURALO The meeting will also nominate those willing to serve for the two elected ALAC seats, one of which is currently vacant, and the other filled by Vittorio Bertola of Italy. In order to allow all European ALSes to participate in the vote, I anticipate that the meeting will decide to use our online election tool to hold the election over a few days period. Should the ALSes present and participating agree at least an MoU, there will be a signing ceremony in front of the entire ICANN meeting on Thursday, at the public forum, where all ALSes present will physically sign the MoU alongside Paul Twomey the President and CEO of ICANN and in front of the entire ICANN Board and community present. The African groups will be signing their MoU at the same time, and the Asia-Pacific ALS community will announce that their MoU is complete. Those ALSes who are not present will be able to digitally sign, or adhere, to the MoU via a procedure which will be determined as part of the European meetings. All ALSes will be able to vote for ALAC and other regional leadership positions, whether they are in Lisbon or not. These two points are important: the process is deliberately designed to include every ALS and respect all points of view and the remote participation possibilities help to ensure that this is the case. Note that there is a nominations page for you to nominate (either self nominate or nominate others) for the two ALAC seats: it is at: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?nominations_2007 The draft Bylaws are also available online for comments, as is the draft MoU. They are at: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?draft_mou https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?draft_bylaws -- 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

Fwd: [At-Large] Public Forum on GNSO Improvements, Monday 16:00 Lisbon
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 21, 2007

March 21, 2007

Dear All: I thought this note from Denise might be of interest. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Denise Michel <denise.michel(a)icann.org> Date: 21-Mar-2007 22:13 Subject: [At-Large] Public Forum on GNSO Improvements, Monday 16:00 Lisbon To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Dear At-Large Advisory Committee members and At-Large community members: Your participation in the 'Public Forum on GNSO Improvements' scheduled for Monday, 26 March, 16:00 - 18:00, in Lisbon is encouraged. <http://icann.org/meetings/lisbon/agenda-public2-26mar07.htm> The Board Governance Committee (BGC) is hosting this forum to encourage additional public input and discussion on the LSE review and improvements to the GNSO's structures and processes. While input on all elements of the GNSO and the LSE review report are open for comment at the forum, the Committee is particularly interested in hearing your views on the GNSO review recommendations listed below. (Note that questions raised about the recommendations listed below are included to prompt thought and discussion, and are not intended to represent the views of the BGC or its members). *Individuals and stakeholder groups are encouraged to submit views on these and other recommendations in advance of the forum to <gnso-improvements(a)icann.org>. Authors of emailed input will be given an opportunity to present their views prior to opening the forum to comments from the floor.* o Structural Changes to GNSO Constituencies -- LSE recommendation 19. Simplify the GNSO constituency structure in order to respond to rapid changes in the Internet, including by substituting 3 larger constituency groups representing Registration interests, Business, and Civil Society; LSE recommendation 18. Create a category of 'Associate Stakeholder' to establish a pool of available external expertise. - Which entities and individuals should participate in the GNSO process, and what will motivate them to want to join? The six current groups are the natural point to begin discussion. Do they represent the right groups? Are they over or under inclusive? The Bylaws acknowledge that the optimal groupings may be different than the ones that now exist, and that there is no "magic number." The LSE points out several problems with the current structure and suggests the substitution of three larger constituencies — is this the right answer? - Is it feasible to create a roster of readily available experts who can assist with task forces and other aspects of the PDP? - What other questions and approaches should the BGC explore regarding these two LSE recommendations? o Changes to the Policy Development Process -- LSE recommendation 17. Make greater use of task forces [in policy development processes]; LSE recommendation 23. Revise and move PDP operational provisions from Bylaws to more flexible GNSO 'Rules of Procedures.' - Could greater use of task forces, particularly proposals to attract more expertise and geographical diversity, help the policy development process? Would limiting the number of Councilors on any task force enable the Council to focus more on the task of managing PDPs, rather than the substantive aspects of formulating specific policies? Would this change increase the number of people willing to serve on the Council? - There seems to be widespread agreement that the Bylaws are overly prescriptive, and the prescribed PDP steps and timelines have not captured the requirements of a policy development process. Should the PDP principles be preserved in the Bylaws while placing more procedural elements in GNSO 'rules of procedure'? Do you have specific suggestions for how the PDP should be revised? - What other questions and approaches should the BGC explore regarding these two LSE recommendations? o Changes to Voting and Representation -- LSE recommendation 21. Increase the threshold for establishing consensus to 75% and abolish weighted voting; LSE recommendation 20. Make the Council smaller (16 members suggested). - How would raising the consensus threshold and abolishing weighted voting advance the role of the GNSO? The Bylaws task the GNSO with both "developing and recommending" gTLD policies to the Board. - Weighted voting, in particular, was instituted as part of ICANN's Evolution and Reform Process to address the different effect policies have on contracted versus non-contracted constituencies. Has this approach contributed to, or hampered, effective policy development? - What other questions and approaches should the BGC explore regarding these two LSE recommendations? (Please share this announcement with community members and other interested parties.) Regards, Denise Michel Vice President, Policy Development ICANN denise.michel(a)icann.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 -- -- 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

ICANN Announcement: Registrar Accreditation Policy and Process Must Be Reviewed
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 21, 2007

March 21, 2007

The announcement below should be of interest in the context of the resolution being discussed by the community. The link to this item is at http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-21mar07.htm. The list of questions may incorporate some questions which would be worthy of cross-incorporation into the resolution of the community - just a thought. --- Registrar Accreditation Policy and Process Must be Reviewed 21 March 2007 President and CEO of ICANN, Dr Paul Twomey today called for major review of ICANN’s Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAA) and the Accreditation process. “What has happened to registrants with RegisterFly.com has made it clear there must be comprehensive review of the registrar accreditation process and the content of the RAA” he said. “This is going to be a key debate at our Lisbon meeting scheduled for 26 - 30 March 2007. There must be clear decisions made on changes. As a community we cannot put this off.” “ICANN introduced competition to the domain name market in 1998. Back then there was one registrar. There are now over 865. That’s a good thing because it has made domain names cheaper and offered more choice. But the RAA was designed and signed when the domain name market was much smaller. The market now supports about 70 million generic TLD names and is growing.” Dr Twomey said. “Registrants suffer most from weaknesses in the RAA and I want to make sure that ICANN’s accreditation process and our agreement gives us the ability to respond more strongly and flexibly in the future” he said. “What is presently happening with RegisterFly makes it clear that there are also some problems with proxy registrations. Specifically, proxy registrations are available as a choice, but people who have them have great difficulties getting access to their data and having their domain name transferred where a registrar is uncooperative or has other problems with transfer. ICANN has had difficulty accessing this data too,” Dr Twomey said. “We need to expedite data escrow. There has been a long and detailed discussion and much interaction between ICANN staff and registrars on this issue. But we need to reach a conclusion. Recent events and the Lisbon meeting present that opportunity. There are resource implications and useage rules that need to be discussed among the ICANN community. I look forward to the continuing efforts and collaboration of registrars with ICANN in that regard ” he said. “Registrants clearly want ICANN to have more capacity to access data on their behalf if there are significant problems with their registrar. There is a need for better enforcement mechanisms and an ability for ICANN to intervene more quickly if a registrar fails or is engaged in damaging business practice” he added. “There’s also no way that registrants can measure the performance of registrars in any independent comparative way. That should be encouraged” Dr Twomey said. “The vast majority of ICANN’s accredited registrars offer high levels of service and integrity. But as we have seen, there is the risk that poorly performing registrars can hurt registrants very significantly. If the domain name industry wants to remain community self – regulating as it has been until now we need to put in place further sensible and practical measures to protect registrants” he noted. Dr Twomey said he would like to see the following issues included in any discussion: Purpose of Register Accreditation Policy and Agreement What is the primary purpose of the Registration Accreditation Agreement? Is it a compliance tool? If so how can it be strengthened to protect registrants? Rating of Registrars How should ICANN and/or the registrar constituency encourage a system that rates registrars according to customer service and performance and should this be available to registrants? Affiliated Registrars / Group ownership Affiliated registrars have common ownership or control. What is the best mechanism for ICANN to hold affiliated registrars accountable for an affiliate’s actions? Additional compliance enforcement tools Stronger compliance tools need to be included in any reform to the RAA. What are those tools? Do they encompass liquidated damages? Should registrars be able to be suspended more readily? Are there other options? What are the mechanisms that allow such options to be enforced quickly? Transfer policy What elements of the transfer policy need to be reformed? Should registrants have an alternative to their current registrar for the issuing of authcodes and the unlocking of them? Should ICANN or another entity be able to do this? Registrar operator skill testing How is it possible to assess registrar skills and to train registrars to a common standard of performance upon which registrants can rely? Accreditation by purchase It is possible for companies to ‘avoid’ accreditation application process by buying a registrar. How can abuse of this loophole be stopped? Proxy registrations There needs to be an examination of proxy registrations in light of difficulties faced in registrar data recovery. What is the balance between privacy and disclosure? Reseller liability under RAA What tools are needed to ensure better accountability by resellers to registrants? Registrar data escrow What data needs to be escrowed? If implementation needs to move faster, greater resource allocation is required. What level of resourcing is necessary? Clarification of ICANN's responsibilities and the options available to registrants ICANN recently posted a guide for registrants on its website but additional consumer options (outside ICANN) should be identified for and provided to registrants. Is there a need for a new entity to assist customers and intervene on behalf of their concerns? “All ICANN stakeholders need to be involved in this debate. But in particular I would like to see registrars and registrants actively engaged in the discussion,” Dr Twomey said. “It is in their interests to make sure that poor practice is driven from the process and that the protection of registrants is increased.”

1 0

Hotel Information for Lisbon
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 20, 2007

March 20, 2007

Dear All: Whilst those attending Lisbon will shortly be receiving individual emails with your hotel details, the travel information page on the Wikis have also been updated with lots of useful information about the travel arrangements. You can view them here: Africa: https://st.icann.org/afralo/index.cgi?travel_information Europe: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?travel_information ALAC: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?travel_information -- 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

Have a great Lisbon Meeting!
by Annette Muehlberg March 19, 2007

March 19, 2007

Dear All, I would like to congratulate those regions who made large steps forward to strengthen the bottom-up structure of ICANN and get individual end-users involved in its decision making processes. I am looking forward to the inauguration of new Regional At-Large Organisations! We all know, this is only the first step and the real hard work just starts as we do not want to create bureaucratic monsters but vivid organisations with a lot of inputs by and in the interest of individual internet users. There is a lot to do and it is great that so many people came together to dedicate their time for this work. Unfortunately I will not be able to take part in the Lisbon meeting and asked the ALAC to elect someone else from our team to carry the responsibilities of ALAC Chair. I hope I have been of help to you and would like to thank you all for your trust, support, and great cooperation. I wish you all the best for this exciting ICANN Meeting in Lisbon. I will try and join you virtually. See you in June in Puerto Rico Annette

2 1

Fwd: ALAC Chair Resigns from Chair Position for Health Reasons
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 18, 2007

March 18, 2007

Dear All: I have the unfortunate duty to forward the news below - which some of you may have already seen - from the Chair of the At-Large Advisory Committee. May I say personally - and I'm sure on behalf of all the ICANN Staff too - that we wish you a speedy recovery Annette - and I'm sure you'll be back in your usual form soon :) Begin forwarded message: > From: Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg(a)web.de> > Date: 18 March 2007 14:58:30 GMT > To: Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton(a)spamcop.net> > Subject: [Fwd: personal news] > > Dear ALAC fellows, > > For weeks and weeks I have been hoping to recover, but my lungs are > still causing trouble. It now became clear that I will not be able to > take part in the Lisbon meeting. > > In view of the uncertainty about how long I will not not be able to > function fully as ALAC Chair, I have come to the conclusion that I > should ask you to elect someone else from our team to carry the > responsibilities of ALAC Chair. This has been a very difficult > decision > for me as I was earnestly trying to discharge the responsibilities you > have entrusted me with. > > Meanwhile, I'm slowly recovering and hope to be back at my regular job > with the new responsibilities that have been kindly assigned to me as > soon as possible. Needless to say, I also look forward to being > back on > the ALAC team and wish you all and ALAC the very best. > > Once again, I would like to thank you all for your trust, support, > cooperation and understanding. > > Annette -- 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