September 2009 - lac-discuss-en

Re: [lac-discuss-en] Warning: Teleconferencing the 17 of LACRALO of September in the 21:00 UTC
by salgueiro.jo＠gmail.com Sept. 15, 2009

Sept. 15, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Warning: Teleconferencing the 17 of LACRALO of September in the 21:00 UTC From: salgueiro.jo(a)gmail.com I am of vacations outside pais asi that podre not to be in teleconferencing. Them request excuses to me Jose Ovid Salgueiro The 15 of September of 2009 17:28, <Staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> it wrote: > > [ [ - - Translated text (in - > is)--]] > > > Subject: Warning: Teleconferencing the 17 of LACRALO of September in the UTC of > 21:00 > Of: Staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > Wanted All, > > > > Quisie'ramos to remember to him that it will be the following teleconferencing of LACRALO > carried out Thursday, the 17 of September in the 21:00 UTC. > > > > the agenda and the instructions propose to participate in > llamadapueden to be > found in: https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi?17_september_2009. > > > > If you require a dial-out and its name is not in the list, please > amiably > report to theEn-Grande personnel in: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > Respect, > > Ashton-Ciervo Of Mella, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger,Gisella > Gruber-Blanco > Personal En-Grande of ICANN > email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > [ [ - - Original text (in) > http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/9b79e95485.html > --! ]] > > > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-is mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es_atlarge-list… > > http://www.lacralo.org > -- Jose Ovid Salgueiro A. salgueiro.jo(a)gmail.com _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/67f8ef6066.html --]]

1 0

Announcement: LACRALO teleconferencing 17 of September to the21:00 UTC
by Staff＠atlarge.icann.org Sept. 15, 2009

Sept. 15, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Announcement: LACRALO teleconferencing 17 of September to the21:00 UTC From: Staff(a)atlarge.icann.org Wanted all, We would like to remember to them that next teleconferencing LACRALO will be celebrated Thursday, 17 of September to the 21:00 UTC. The project of program and the instructions to participate in call can be found in: https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi?17_september_2009. If it needs a dial-out and its name is not in the list, please, amiability to inform AT-Large to us in the personnel: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org. Memories, Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, GisellaGruber-White ICANN AT-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/ce3db8c266.html --]]

1 0

=?iso-8859-1?q?Alimentar_la_discusi=F3n_en_LACNI = =?iso-8859-1?q?C =
by andrespiazzagpj＠hotmail.com Sept. 15, 2009

Sept. 15, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Alimentar_la_discusi=F3n_en_LACNI = =?iso-8859-1?q?C = From: andrespiazzagpj(a)hotmail.com There is a discussion in the forum of policy of LACNIC in whichI would like that pudieramos to participate from LACRALO. It has to do with an IANA policy: For Policy Allocation of ASN Blocks (ASNs) to Regional Internet Registries http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-07.html RIPE requests commentaries before the day of morning, in this direction: address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net The Forum of Policies of LACNIC (in 3 languages, politicas(a)lacnic.net) demonstrated in several electronic mails, voicesthat decide with the same proposal. We can think here? Warm Greetings, Andrés Piazza President of LACRALO _________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/0945871493.html --]]

1 0

Alimentar la discusión en LACNIC
by Andres Piazza Sept. 15, 2009

Sept. 15, 2009

Hay una discusión en el foro de policy de LACNIC en la que me gustaría que pudieramos participar desde LACRALO. Tiene que ver con una política de IANA: Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks (ASNs) to Regional Internet Registries http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-07.html RIPE pide comentarios antes del día de mañana, en esta dirección: address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net El Foro de Políticas de LACNIC (en 3 idiomas, politicas(a)lacnic.net) demostró en varios correos electrónicos, voces que acuerdan con la propuesta misma. Podemos opinar aquí? Saludos Cordiales, Andrés Piazza Presidente de LACRALO _________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] RESULTS VOTES: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment Balloting
by salgueiro.jo＠gmail.com Sept. 15, 2009

Sept. 15, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: RESULTS VOTES: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment Balloting From: salgueiro.jo(a)gmail.com Very been thankful to all again by its support Jose Ovid The 15 of September of 2009 08:21, Antonio Medina Go'mez < amedinagomez(a)gmail.com > wrote: > Congratulations to Jose Ovid nuevamente.A Andrés thank you very much by his > explanation. Very diligente! > Antonio Medina Go'mez > President > Colombian Association of Users of Internet > > 2009/9/15 Andres Piazza <andrespiazzagpj(a)hotmail.com> > > > > > > > Congratulations Jose Ovid! > > > > By the way, I believe that an explanation in Spanish for this is pertinent > > list on the operation of the selections. > > > > Votaron 12 of the 15 members of ALAC. > > > > When there are 2 candidates, as in the case of the representative > Latin American, > > expresses preferences. > > > > Each member of ALAC puts a 2 number a 1 to that it prefersand number a > > that puts in second order. > > > > That obtains less puntaje at the end of the selection, is the one who is > > winning. > > > > In any case, I consider of extreme importance that has been respected > > recommendation generated in LACRALO. > > > > Warm Greet! ings, > > Andrés Piazza > > President of LACRALO > > > > > > -----Message d'origine > > > > Of: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [ mailto:alac- > > > > announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org ] Of part of AT-Large > Staff > > > > Envoyé: mardi 15 septembre 2009 12:40 > > > > À: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > Objet: [ ALAC-Announce ] VOTES RESULTS: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment > > > > Balloting > > > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > With 12 out of 15 ALAC Members having voted in the recent NomCom > > > > 2009/2010 > > > > Appointment Balloting we dog confirm that the results plows quorate. > The > > > > balloting was anonymous. > > > > > > > > ******************** > > > > 1. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Africa > > > > > > > > Would you like to nominate Yaovi ! Atohoun ace the African AT-Large > > > > Delegate to ! > > & gt; > the NomCom? > > > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > > > > > ******************* > > > > > > > > 2. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from the Asia-Pacific > > > > Would you like to nominate Hong Xue ace the Asian-Pacific AT-Large > > > > Delegate > > > > to the NomCom? > > > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > > > > > ****************** > > > >! > > > > 3. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Europe > > > > Would you like to nominate Olivier M.J. Crépin-Leblond ace the > European > > > > AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom? > > > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > > > > > ****************** > > > > > > > > 4. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Latin-Americaand the > Caribbean > > > > Who should be the AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Latin-America > > > > and the > > > > Caribbean? Please votes for candidates in order of preference with 1 > > > > (the > > > > first click made) being your first choice and 2 your second. > > > > > ! > > > LACRALO recommended Jose regional ace NomCom De! legate > > > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > > > Ranked by smallest sum of you vote > > > > > > > > Jose Ovid Salgueiro 15 (41.67%) > > > > Sooknanan Arch: 21 (58.33%) > > > > > > > > > > > > ******************* > > > > > > > > 5. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from North America > > > > Who should be the AT-Large delegate to the NomCom from North America? > > > > Please > > > > votes for candidates in order of preference with 1 (the first click > > > > made) > > > > being your first choice and 2 your second. > > > > > > > > NARALO recommended Eduardo regional ace NomCom Delegate > > > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > &gt! ; > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > > > Ranked by smallest sum of you vote > > > > > > > > Eduardo Diaz: 12 (33.33%) > > > > Glenn McKnight: 24 (66.67%) > > > > > > > > ******************** > > > > You may verify the results independently to under: > > > > https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=NF4ds3MPxWjeI9EedhpZ > > > > > > > > When announcing the results of voting, we have been requested by the > > > > Chair > > > > to provide to listing of those who have not voted. Accordingly, we dog > > > > confirm that the following ALAC members did not participate in the > > > > balloting: > > > > > > > > Mohamed The Bashir > > > > Thu Hue Nguyen > > > > Beau Brendler > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > &! gt; Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gis! ella > G ruber- > > > > White > > > > ICANN AT-Large Staff > > > > email: staff AT atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > ALAC-Announce mailing list > > > > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce_atlarge- > > > > lists.icann.org > > > > > > > > AT-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > AT-Large mailing list > > > AT-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > > > > > > AT-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > _______________________________________________ > &! gt; lac-discuss-is mailing list > > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es_atlarge-list… > > > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-is mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es_atlarge-list… > > http://www.lacralo.org > -- Jose Ovid Salgueiro A. salgueiro.jo(a)gmail.com _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/bb1ec98a42.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] RESULTS VOTES: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment Balloting
by amedinagomez＠gmail.com Sept. 15, 2009

Sept. 15, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: RESULTS VOTES: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment Balloting From: amedinagomez(a)gmail.com Congratulations to Jose Ovid nuevamente.A Andrés thank you very much by his explanation. Very diligente! Antonio Medina Go'mez President Colombian association of Users of Internet 2009/9/15 Andres Piazza <andrespiazzagpj(a)hotmail.com> > > > Congratulations Jose Ovid! > > By the way, I believe that an explanation in Spanish for this is pertinent > list on the operation of the selections. > > Votaron 12 of the 15 members of ALAC. > > When there are 2 candidates, as in the case of the Latin American representative, > preferences are expressed. > > Each member of ALAC puts a 2 number a 1 to that it prefers and number a > that puts in second order. > > That obtains less puntaje at the end of the selection, is the one who is > winning. > > In any case, I consider of extreme importance that has been respected > recommendation generated in LACRALO. > > Warm Greetings, > Andrés Piazza > President of LACRALO > > > > -----Message d'origine > > > Of: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [ mailto:alac- > > > announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org ] Of part of AT-Large Staff > > > Envoyé: mardi 15 septembre 2009 12:40 > > > À: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > Ob! jet: [ ALAC-Announce ] VOTES RESULTS: NomCom 2009/2010Appointment > > > Balloting > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > With 12 out of 15 ALAC Members having voted in the recent NomCom > > > 2009/2010 > > > Appointment Balloting we dog confirm that the results plows quorate. The > > > balloting was anonymous. > > > > > > ******************** > > > 1. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Africa > > > > > > Would you like to nominate Yaovi Atohoun ace the AfricanAT-Large > > > Delegate to > > > the NomCom? > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > > > ******************* > > > > > > 2. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from the Asia-Paci! fic > > > Would you like to nominate Hong Xue ace the As! ian-Paci fic AT-Large > > > Delegate > > > to the NomCom? > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > > > ****************** > > > > > > 3. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Europe > > > Would you like to nominate Olivier M.J. Crépin-Leblond ace the European > > > AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom? > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > > > ****************** > > > > > > 4. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Latin-America and the Caribbean > &g! t; > Who should be the AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Latin-America > > > and the > > > Caribbean? Please votes for candidates in order of preference with 1 > > > (the > > > first click made) being your first choice and 2 your second. > > > > > > LACRALO recommended Jose regional ace NomCom Delegate > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > Ranked by smallest sum of you vote > > > > > > Jose Ovid Salgueiro 15 (41.67%) > > > Sooknanan Arch: 21 (58.33%) > > > > > > > > > ******************* > > > > > > 5. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from North America > > > Who should be the AT-Large delegate to the NomCom from North America? > > > Please > > > votes for candidates in order of preference with 1 (thefirst click! > > > made) > > > being your first choice and 2 y! our seco nd. > > > > > > NARALO recommended Eduardo regional ace NomCom Delegate > > > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > > > Ranked by smallest sum of you vote > > > > > > Eduardo Diaz: 12 (33.33%) > > > Glenn McKnight: 24 (66.67%) > > > > > > ******************** > > > You may verify the results independently to under: > > > https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=NF4ds3MPxWjeI9EedhpZ > > > > > > When announcing the results of voting, we have been requested by the > > > Chair > > > to provide to listing of those who have not voted. Accordingly, we dog > > > confirm that the following ALAC members did not participate in the > > > balloting: > > > > > > Mohamed The Bashir > > > Thu Hue Nguyen > > > Beau Brendler > > ! > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber- > > > White > > > ICANN AT-Large Staff > > > email: staff AT atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > ALAC-Announce mailing list > > > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce_atlarge- > > > lists.icann.org > > > > > > AT-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > AT-Large mailing list > > AT-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > > > > AT-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > _________________________________________________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discus! s-is mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >! http:// atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es_atlarge-lists.icann… > > http://www.lacralo.org > _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/a9f48a0fc5.html --]]

1 0

RESULTS VOTES: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment Balloting
by andrespiazzagpj＠hotmail.com Sept. 15, 2009

Sept. 15, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: RESULTS VOTES: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment Balloting From: andrespiazzagpj(a)hotmail.com Congratulations Jose Ovid! By the way, I believe that an explanation in Spanish for this list is pertinent on the operation of the selections. 12 of the 15 members of ALAC voted. When there are 2 candidates, as in the case of the Latin American representative, preferences are expressed. Each member of ALAC puts a number a 1 to that it prefers and number 2 to that puts in second order. Who obtains less puntaje at the end of the selection, she is the one who is winning. In any case, I consider of extreme importance that has been respected the recommendation generated in LACRALO. Warm Greetings, Andrés Piazza President of LACRALO > > -----Message d'origine > > Of: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [ mailto:alac- > > announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org ] Of part of AT-Large Staff > > Envoyé: mardi 15 septembre 2009 12:40 > > À: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > Objet: [ ALAC-Announce ] VOTES RESULTS: NomCom 2009/2010 Appointment > > Balloting > > > > Dear all, > > > > With 12 out of 15 ALAC Members having voted in the recent NomCom > > 2009/2010 > > Appointment Balloting we dog confirm that the results plows quorate. The > > balloting was anonymous. > > > > ******************** > > 1. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Africa > > > > Would you like to nominate Yaovi Atohoun ace the African AT-Large > > Delegate to > > the NomCom? > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > Yes: 12! (100%) > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > ******************* > > > > 2. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from the Asia-Pacific > > Would you like to nominate Hong Xue ace the Asian-Pacific AT-Large > > Delegate > > to the NomCom? > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > ****************** > > > > 3. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Europe > > Would you like to nominate Olivier M.J. Crépin-Leblond ace the European > > AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom? > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > Yes: 12 (100%) > > Not: 0 (0.00%) > > Abstain: 0 (0.00%) > > > > *******! *********** > > > > 4. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom ! from Lat in-America and the Caribbean > > Who should be the AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from Latin-America > > and the > > Caribbean? Please votes for candidates in order of preference with 1 > > (the > > first click made) being your first choice and 2 your second. > > > > LACRALO recommended Jose regional ace NomCom Delegate > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > Ranked by smallest sum of you vote > > > > Jose Ovid Salgueiro 15 (41.67%) > > Sooknanan Arch: 21 (58.33%) > > > > > > ******************* > > > > 5. AT-Large Delegate to the NomCom from North America > > Who should be the AT-Large delegate to the NomCom from North America? > > Please > > votes for candidates in order of preference with 1 (the first click > > made) > > being your first choice and 2 your second. > > > &! gt; NARALO recommended Eduardo regional ace NomCom Delegate > > > > Ace AT Poll close: Monday 14 September 2009 23:59 UTC > > Number of voters: 12 · Electorate size: 15 · Percentage voted: 80.00 > > > > Ranked by smallest sum of you vote > > > > Eduardo Diaz: 12 (33.33%) > > Glenn McKnight: 24 (66.67%) > > > > ******************** > > You may verify the results independently to under: > > https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=NF4ds3MPxWjeI9EedhpZ > > > > When announcing the results of voting, we have been requested by the > > Chair > > to provide to listing of those who have not voted. Accordingly, we dog > > confirm that the following ALAC members did not participate in the > > balloting: > > > > Mohamed The Bashir > > Thu Hue Nguyen > > Beau Brendler > > > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber- > > White > > ICAN! N AT-Large Staff > > email: staff AT atlarge.icann.org > &g! t; > &g t; _______________________________________________ > > ALAC-Announce mailing list > > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce_atlarge- > > lists.icann.org > > > > AT-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > _______________________________________________ > AT-Large mailing list > AT-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.ican… > > AT-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/2255ebc869.html --]]

1 0

Recuperación de nombres de dominio después del vencimiento !!!
by jose arce Sept. 10, 2009

Sept. 10, 2009

*Re**mito el mail anterior que llego traducido por error!!! Este mail deberia ser la respuesta al que mando José Barzallo-* Muchas gracias José Barzallo por este aporte que nos sirve a todos los miembros de la lista para entender un poco más sobre el tema y entusiasmarnos por los mismos. Ahora, por cuestiones de falta de tiempo, venimos a aportar unos pocos comentarios sumándonos a lo expresado por José, que pensamos que nos pueden servir a todos, especialmente a los usuarios de Internet y a quienes tienen que velar por sus intereses. Van los comentarios interlineados. 2009/9/9 José Luis Barzallo <joseluis(a)barzallo.com> > Estimados compañeros ALS y ALAC > > Revisé los documentos relacionados con la recuperación de nombres de > dominio en un plazo adicional o especial. Le remito este resumen para > facilitar su participación. > > Las preguntas esenciales giran alrededor de > > - si es factible hacer estos cambios? > - Si son necesarios? > - Cuales deben ser los cambios a implementarse? > - Como deben implementarse los cambios? > > > Para los usuarios la recuperación de los nombres de dominio resulta > conveniente en tanto en cuanto vaya en su beneficio y la participación del > GNSO en el análisis en válida y necesaria. > Hay que recordar que hay un pedido de ALAC para que el GNSO se pronuncie. Los representantes de los usuarios son los que deben estar pendientes de que esto se cumpla. > > Es decir, las recomendaciones deberían ir hacia lograr una total > transparencia en la notificación a los registrantes respecto de la fecha de > terminación del periodo de registro para evitar posibles fraudes o > manipulación del aviso. > En esto es en donde no hay una política de consenso y por lo tanto no vinculante para todos los Registradores. Cada uno se maneja por los acuerdos que haya firmado con ICANN y no hay una solución uniforme que aplique para todos iguales. Algunos notifican a través de la página web (se insiste en que sea en un lugar visible; otros a través de un mail (la duda surge respecto de aquellos que hayan transferido el nombre de dominio con anterioridad y por lo tanto el mail que está registrado es el del anterior titular, y por lo tanto el actual, no se estaría notificando, o al menos no con fehaciencia y certidumbre). No hay una forma “transparente” , fehaciente y segura que se esté utilizando de notificación. En este punto se debería lograr un consenso y por lo tanto vinculante, para todos los Registradores. > > Es fundamental que la carga de la prueba siempre la tenga el Registrador y > que este deba justificar el aviso oportuno que se dio, de esta manera se > tendrá una mayor seguridad respecto de lo que sucede con el dominio del > usuario. > > La retención durante un periodo especial debe ser obligatoria para todos > los registradores y siempre deben contar con políticas claras y muy > públicas para conocimiento de los usuarios. Un aviso específico respecto del > funcionamiento sería apropiado. > Se han ensayado opciones sobre esto, como prohibir la transferencia del nombre de dominio mientras esté en período de retención (que de paso, cada registrador establece el plazo de Redención que quiere, ya que respecto a ello tampoco hay una política uniforme), pero dicha opción fue criticada y dejó de ser “obligatoria” para pasar a manejarlo voluntariamente cada Registrador. > > El costo no debe ser superior o bajo ningún concepto duplicar el original > pagado por el usuario. El registrador puede retener el dominio durante un > periodo adicional limitado, luego del cual podrá ponerle un valor superior > por no ser parte de su responsabilidad. > El Registrador *debería *retener el dominio durante un período limitado, pero que sea un plazo uniforme, de público conocimiento y vinculante para todos los Registradores. Con respecto al costo, luego de vencido dicho período y no recuperado por su titular original (o en cuestión) debería manejarse como un dominio nuevo y con el mismo costo de adquirir un dominio nuevo, sin ningún valor original. Esto permitiría una igualdad de trato para todos los registrantes y/o usuarios. > > No se deben aceptar las transferencias entre empresas u organizaciones > relacionadas porque entrarían en situaciones dudosas respecto de su origen. > Si existiera una política de consenso para todos los Registradores por igual, con plazos uniformes, no existiría ningún conflicto en las transferencias entre empresas u organizaciones relacionadas o no, se eliminarían muchas posibilidades de fraude o en perjuicio de terceros ajenos. > La visión que tiene la asociación de los usuarios finales de Internet, que >> son consumidores de Dominios, y en especial con respecto a la recuperación >> de los dominios expirados, empieza con la preocupación de la falta de >> información de los usuarios de cómo es la cadena de distribución de los >> Dominios; es decir, existen los registradores y luego de ellos hay una serie >> de empresas que revenden los mismos, y estas empresas abundan y se crea >> lo que se llama “*El mercado secundario de dominios” o aftermarket*, esto >> produce en los usuarios una verdadera confusión; sumado a que muchos de >> ellos administran varios dominios y no pueden recordar el vencimiento de >> todas, si bien existen algunas herramientas para lograrlo. Esto sumado a que >> a la hora de querer transferir algún dominio el registrador debe, en algunos >> casos otorgarle al Usuario Final un código, el cual varias empresas son >> reacias a hacerlo. Se agrava el asunto a la hora de tratar con dominios >> que tratan de venderse en 1.4 millones de dólares, en donde los intereses en >> juego no permiten equivocaciones , ni dobles interpretaciones. >> > Creemos que es necesario debatir estas cuestiones y ayudar a los usuarios a entender cual son las alternativas de los caminos que recorre un gTLD desde ICANN hasta que el usuario adquiere el mismo. Nuestro trabajo aquí se bifurca en dos. Uno para con ALAC informándole la visión del usuario final de la Región y otro para con los usuarios finales en darles las herramientas e información básica para que pueda desenvolverse en libertad. Desde la asociación, con Fátima Cambronero, ambos de Ageia Densi Argentina, estamos en proceso de elaboración de un documento más extenso para difundir estos conocimientos a los distintos usuarios y para que tengan la información en un solo documento y en varios idiomas, y no tengan que divagar en páginas y foros en busca de una respuesta. El mismo favorecerá a los actores de la región para animarse a tocar estos temas y debatir en profundidad los mismos a los fines de poder subirle a ALAC un conocimiento cierto de las necesidades de los temas en debate e ideas y aportes que vayan dirigidos a favorecer al usuario. Saludos a Todos José F. Arce Fátima Cambronero http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ http://ar.ageiadensi.org/

2 1

Re: [lac-discuss-en] Fwd: Recovery of dominions
by amedinagomez＠gmail.com Sept. 10, 2009

Sept. 10, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Fwd: Recovery of dominions From: amedinagomez(a)gmail.com Jose Luis I want to emphasize your work in relation to these subjects that are of general interest and which they turn out to be in some very sensible cases stops Users, Industralists and Citizens in general.La Colombian Association of Users of Internet offer their mediation to participate in this group of work, in the intention to obtain results that benefit to users. I want to make emphasis in the necessity and urgency to inform a opportunely the community on the actors and factors that are part of these processes of registry and that must be of ample knowledge. Who wishes toregister dominion must have precise information on a that to go of a way reliable and that offers precise information him at the momentthat therefore require. And very important that the intermediation is avoidedor that who ask for the registry of a dominion, in this process is clear to name of who becomes. The third a those that in some cases are gone to the moment to ask for a registry, they stay as "proprietors" of a dominion name that he is not his, that belongs to the applicant and is indeed in this point in where problems can be presented/displayed on the rights of a name registered. I want to insist on that contracts or agreements must exist on commercialization, which must be known and that is published in sites Web this information. This must be a serious process, is transparent and reliable for the users. Finally it is the point of the information of the related drug dealer with its data of contact like Name of the organization, direction, city, telephone, electronic mails. A data base is due to have publishes on the quality of these companies and the time of activity. I am kind to its commentaries Antonio Medina The 10 of September of 2009 00:22, Fatima Cambronero < fatimacambronero(a)gmail.com > wrote: > In name of Jose Francisco Arce and Fátima Cambronero: > > Thank you very much Jose Barzallo by this contribution that serves us to all > members of the list to understand a little more on the subject and > to excite to us by such. > > Now, by questions of lack of time, we come to contribute few > commentaries adding us to the expressed thing by Jose, that we thought that they can to us > to serve all, specially to the users of Internet and to those who > has > that to guard by its interests. > > Van the interlineados commentaries. > > > > 2009/9/9 Jose Luis Barzallo <joseluis(a)barzallo.com> > > > Dear companions ALS and ALAC > > > > Revise' the documents related to the recovery of names of > > dominion in an additional or special term. I send east summary to him stops > > to facilitate its participation. > > > > the essential questions turns around > > > > - if he is feasible to make these changes? > > - If they are necessary? > > - As must ! be the changes to implement itself? > > - As the changes must be implemented? > > > > > > For the users the recovery of the dominion names is > > advisable in as much as soon as goes in its benefit and the participation > of > > GNSO in the valid and necessary analysis in. > > > > > > Hay to remember that there is a ALAC order so that the GNSO is pronounced ( > > http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/issues/post-expiration-recovery/report-05d… >). > the representatives of the users are those that must be pending of > that > this is fulfilled. > > > > > That is to say, the recommendations would have to go towards obtaining a total > > transparency in the notification to registrantes the respect to the date > of > > completion of the period of registry to avoid possible frauds or > > manipulation of the warning. > > > > > > In this is in where there is no a consensus policy and therefore no > binding for all the Recorders. Each one ! is handled by > agreements > that has signed with ICANN and is! no a so lution uniforms that it applies stops > all equal ones. Some notify through the page Web (is insisted on > that is in a visible place; others through a mail (the doubtarises > respect to which has transferred the name of dominion with > anteriority and therefore the mail that is registered is theone of the previous one > to title, and therefore the present one, would not be being been notifying, or at least no > with fehaciencia and certainty). There is no a form "is transparent", > fehaciente > and safe that it is being used of notification. In this point it would have > to obtain a binding consensus and therefore, for all > Recording. > > > > > Is fundamental that the burden of proof always has the Recorder > and > > that this must justify the opportune warning that occurred, this way > > will have a greater security respect to which happens to the dominion of > > usuary. > > > > the retention during a special period must be obligatory for all > > t! he recorders and always must count very on clear policies and > > public for knowledge of the users. A specific warning respect > of > > operation would be appropriate. > > > > > > options have been tried on this, like prohibiting the transference of > dominion name while it is in period of retention (that of step, each > recording establishes the term of.redemption that wants, since with respect to > it is no a political uniform either), but this option was criticized and > stopped being "obligatory" to happen to handle it each voluntarily > Recording. > > > > > > the cost does not have to be superior or low no concept to duplicate the original one > > paid by the user. The recorder can retain the dominion during > > limited additional period, soon of which it will be able to put a value to him > superior > > not being part of its responsibility. > > > > > > the Recorder * would have * to retain the dominion during alimited period, > but that is ! a uniform term, of public binding knowledge andstops > all the! Recorde rs. With respect to the cost, after won said > period and not recovered by its holder original (or at issue) would have > to handle itself like a new dominion and with the same costof acquiring a dominion > new, without no original value. This would allow a treatment equality > stops > all the registrantes and/or users. > > > > > > > is not due to accept the transferences between companies or organizations > > related because they would enter doubtful situations respect to his > origin. > > > > > If a policy of consensus for all the Recorders existed by > equal, with uniform terms, would not exist any conflict in > transferences between related companies or organizations orno, > would eliminate many possibilities of fraud or in damage ofthird > other people's. > > > > the vision that has the association of the end users of Internet, that > is consuming of Dominions, and in special with respect to the recovery > of the expired dominions, begins with the preoccupat! ion of the lack of > information of the users of how it is the chain of distribution of > Dominions; that is to say, the recorders exist and after them there is one > series > of companies that they resell such, and these companies abound and it is created > > that is called "* the secondary market of dominions" or aftermarket *, this > produces in the users a true confusion; added to that many of > they administer several dominions and they cannot remember the victory of > all, although exists some tools to obtain it. This added a > that > at the time of wanting to transfer some dominion the recorder must, in > some > cases of granting to the End user a code to him, which several companies are > obstinate to do it. The subject at the time of dealing withdominions worsens that > tries to be sold in 1.4 million dollars, in where the interests in > game does not allow mistakes, nor double interpretations. > > Creemos that is necessary to debate these questions and to help use! rs a > to understand as is the alternatives of the ways that g! TLD cros ses from > ICANN until the user acquires the same one. > > Our work is branched off here in two. One towards ALAC informing to him > vision of the end user of the Region and another one towards the end users > in giving them to the tools and basic information so that it can > to develop > in freedom. > > From the association, with Fátima Cambronero, both of Ageia Densi Argentina, > we are in process of processing of a more extensive document to spread > these knowledge to the different users and so that they have > information in a single document and several languages, anddoes not have > to digress in pages and forums in search of an answer. The same one will favor a > the actors of the region to animate itself to touch these subjects and to debate in > depth such to the aims of being able to raise ALAC a knowledge to him > certain of the necessities of the subjects in debate and ideas and contributions that > goes > directed to favor the user. > > Greetings to All > > > > ! Jose F. Arce Fátima Cambronero > > http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ > http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-is mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es_atlarge-list… > > http://www.lacralo.org > _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/310e477d27.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] Fwd: Recovery of dominions
by andrespiazzagpj＠hotmail.com Sept. 10, 2009

Sept. 10, 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Fwd: Recovery of dominions From: andrespiazzagpj(a)hotmail.com Excellent work Jose Luis, and very interesting contributions Fátima and Jose. The Public Períódo of Commentaries wins today, 10 of September. But late I will emit an uprising from LACRALO with the content of the contributions of Jose Luis, Fátima and Jose (it will be in Spanish, because the work was done in this language). It would be good that whowishes, it comments out to this. For the Next Periods Public of Commentaries, this modality to arm "small groups ad hoc" can be successful whenever we have this class ofcontributions with more time in the list. But the one of today is a step advanced. Or several together steps! And for that they cannot to contribute commentaries, it serves like anaverage one to know more on the world the Registries and Registrars and the implicancias for the end users. Warm Greetings Andrés Piazza President of LACRALO > Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 02:22:00 -0300 > From: fatimacambronero(a)gmail.com > To: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: [ lac-discuss-is ] Fwd: Recovery of dominions > > In name of Jose Francisco Arce and Fátima Cambronero: > > Thank you very much Jose Barzallo by this contribution that serves us to all > members of the list to understand a little more on the subject and > to excite to us by such. > > Now, by questions of lack of time, we come to contribute few > commentaries adding us to the expressed thing by Jose, that we thought that they can to us > to serve all, specially to the users of Internet and to those who they have > that to guard by its interests. > > Van the interlineados commentaries. > > > > 2009/9/9 Jose Luis Barzallo <joseluis(a)barzallo.com> > > > Dear companions ALS and ALAC > > > > Revise' the documents related to the recovery of names of > > dominion in an additional or special term. I send east summary to him stops > >! to facilitate its participation. > > > > the essential questions turns around > > > > - if he is feasible to make these changes? > > - If they are necessary? > > - As must be the changes to implement itself? > > - As the changes must be implemented? > > > > > > For the users the recovery of the dominion names is > > advisable in as much as soon as goes in its benefit and the participation of > > GNSO in the valid and necessary analysis in. > > > > > > Hay to remember that there is a ALAC order so that the GNSO is pronounced ( > http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/issues/post-expiration-recovery/report-05d…) > the representatives of the users are those that must be pending of which > this is fulfilled. > > > > > That is to say, the recommendations would have to go towards obtaining a total > > transparency in the notification to registrantes the respect to the date of > > completion of the period of registry to ! avoid possible frauds or > > manipulation of the warning. >! > > > > > In this is in where there is no a consensus policy and therefore no > binding for all the Recorders. Each one is handled by the agreements > that has signed with ICANN and is no a solution uniforms that it applies stops > all equal ones. Some notify through the page Web (is insisted on > that is in a visible place; others through a mail (the doubtarises > respect to which has transferred the name of dominion with > anteriority and therefore the mail that is registered is theone of the previous one > to title, and therefore the present one, would not be being been notifying, or at least no > with fehaciencia and certainty). There is no a form "is transparent", fehaciente > and safe that it is being used of notification. In this point it would have > to obtain a binding consensus and therefore, for all the Recorders. > > > > > Is fundamental that the burden of proof always has the Recorder and > > that this must justify the opportune warning that occurred, t! his way > > will have a greater security respect to which happens to the dominion of > > usuary. > > > > the retention during a special period must be obligatory for all > > the recorders and always must count very on clear policiesand > > public for knowledge of the users. A specific warning respect to > > operation would be appropriate. > > > > > > options have been tried on this, like prohibiting the transference of > dominion name while it is in period of retention (that of step, each > recording establishes the term of.redemption that wants, since with respect to > it is no a political uniform either), but this option was criticized and > stopped being "obligatory" to happen to handle it each voluntarily > Recording. > > > > > > the cost does not have to be superior or low no concept to duplicate the original one > > paid by the user. The recorder can retain the dominion during > > limited additional period, soon of which it wil! l be able to put to him a value superior > > not being part! of its responsibility. > > > > > > the Recorder * would have * to retain the dominion during alimited period, > but that is a uniform term, of public binding knowledge andstops > all the Recorders. With respect to the cost, after won said > period and not recovered by its holder original (or at issue) would have > to handle itself like a new dominion and with the same costof acquiring a dominion > new, without no original value. This would allow a treatment equality stops > all the registrantes and/or users. > > > > > > > is not due to accept the transferences between companies or organizations > > related because they would enter doubtful situations respect to its origin. > > > > > If a policy of consensus for all the Recorders existed by > equal, with uniform terms, would not exist any conflict in > transferences between related companies or organizations orno, > would eliminate many possibilities of fraud or in damage ofthird > other people's. > > > > t! he vision that has the association of the end users of Internet, that > is consuming of Dominions, and in special with respect to the recovery > of the expired dominions, begins with the preoccupation of the lack of > information of the users of how it is the chain of distribution of > Dominions; that is to say, the recorders exist and after them there is a series > of companies that they resell such, and these companies abound and it is created > that is called "* the secondary market of dominions" or aftermarket *, this > produces in the users a true confusion; added to that many of > they administer several dominions and they cannot remember the victory of > all, although exists some tools to obtain it. This added tothat > at the time of wanting to transfer some dominion the recorder must, in some > cases of granting to the End user a code to him, which several companies are > obstinate to do it. The subject at the time of dealing withdominions worsens that > tries to be! sold in 1.4 million dollars, in where the interests in > game! does no t allow mistakes, nor double interpretations. > > Creemos that is necessary to debate these questions and to help users a > to understand as is the alternatives of the ways that gTLD crosses from > ICANN until the user acquires the same one. > > Our work is branched off here in two. One towards ALAC informing to him > vision of the end user of the Region and another one towards the end users > in giving them to the tools and basic information so that it can develop > in freedom. > > From the association, with Fátima Cambronero, both of Ageia Densi Argentina, > we are in process of processing of a more extensive document to spread > these knowledge to the different users and so that they have > information in a single document and several languages, anddoes not have > to digress in pages and forums in search of an answer. The same one will favor a > the actors of the region to animate itself to touch these subjects and to debate in > depth such to the aims of being able to! raise ALAC a knowledge to him > certain of the necessities of the subjects in debate and ideas and contributions that go > directed to favor the user. > > Greetings to All > > > > Jose F. Arce Fátima Cambronero > > http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-is mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es_atlarge-list… > > http://www.lacralo.org _________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/8d9158797b.html --]]

1 0