January 2009 - NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

ALS application from Papergate
by At-Large Staff March 31, 2009

March 31, 2009

Dear all, This is to inform you that we received an At-Large Structure application from Papergate, an organization based in Shade Gap, Pennsylvania. Please find it attached to this email. Papergate would be a member of the North American Regional At-Large Organisation if accepted. We are currently conducting due diligence on the applicant and will send you further information in due course. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Heidi Ullrich, Gisella Gruber-White, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

6 7

FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details
by Thompson, Darlene Feb. 10, 2009

Feb. 10, 2009

Hi all, Please see below. We have THREE HOURS to discuss/do whatever we want to and ICANN is offering briefings. Please reply to this e-mail TODAY (to me) so that we can get everybody's ideas/desires looked after. If you don't ask for it, ya can't complain if we don't provide it! So, ANY ideas are good (I'll let you know if they are way out there). I need this TODAY, please... please, please, please. :-) D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca <mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca> ________________________________ From: Heidi Ullrich [mailto:Staff@alac.icann.org] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:41 PM To: Thompson, Darlene; Evan Leibovitch Cc: Atlarge Staff Subject: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details Dear Darlene and Evan, With just under one month to go before the start of the Summit, we would like to work with you to ensure the smooth operation of your GA. As a reminder, GA meetings will take place on Tuesday, 3 March between 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. The purpose of this message is to: - Request you to send us your GA agenda (Deadline: 31 January) - Ask whether you would like any Staff Briefings during your GA - Highlight relevant text from your RALO's Operating Principles and MOU - Establish your document needs for your GA (Additional Document Deadline: 13 February) AGENDA Could you please send us your draft GA agenda by 31 January? Given that the Summit will provide considerable discussion on policy issues, we request that the GA agenda focus on organizational issues. However, the agenda is of course ultimately to be decided by you in conjunction with your ALS representatives. Agenda items suggested during the NARALO meeting of January 12: - Ideas - better information sharing strategies - issue mapping (Dharma) - Operating procedures - flag those that have not worked well in the past (Darlene) STAFF BRIEFINGS ALAC has requested that RALO chairs/secretariats consider holding a short briefing by ICANN Services Staff to discuss registrar/registry RAA non-compliance during their GA. Can this item be added to your GA agenda? We will arrange for appropriate ICANN Staff to attend your GA for this purpose. At-Large staff are very interested to have the opportunity to speak with your ALS participants about how we can help them with engaging with At-Large activities to a greater degree. For example, what are their specific policy interests? What can be done to facilitate NARALO's engagement? What tools would you like to see developed? Would you like to include such a discussion during your GA or during an informal session? Are there any regionally specific policy issues that may be of interest to your ALS participants? RELEVENT TEXT FROM YOUR OPERATING PRINCIPLES/MOU For your convenience, NARALO's MOU and Rules of Procedure may be viewed here: https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi?ralo_organizing_documents DOCUMENTS NEEDS At-Large staff will prepare documents for your ALS representatives including the NARALO MOU and Rules of Procedure. We will need to be informed of any other documents you will require by 13 February. Please let us know if you have any questions on organizing your GA. We very much look forward to assisting you to ensure a very successful NARALO GA. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White, Marie-Helene Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

5 8

Introduction (Garth Bruen at Knujon.com)
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn Jan. 30, 2009

Jan. 30, 2009

Hello, I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself, some of you already know me. Our organization was recently accepted as an ICANN At-Large Structure and I am looking forward to working with all of you and participating in positive way. I would like to acknowledge Danny, Beau, Suzanne, Heidi, Rudi, Darlene, Dave, Nick, Evan, and everyone else who helped in this process or encouraged us to do it. Hopefully, I will get a chance to thank you in person in Mexico. Our goals are to advocate for our consumer clients, help the ordinary Internet user navigate the bureaucracy, mitigate online abuse, and help develop common sense policy. We want to see the global network expand in ways that benefits everyone it touches but also protects their interests and rights. It’s a tall order, but this why we want to be a part of the discussion. To that end we extend an invitation for anyone in the community to talk to us even if they disagree with us, are frustrated by KnujOn’s work, or simply don’t like us. We welcome the debate and spirited discussion. Thanks, Garth Bruen

3 2

Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn Jan. 30, 2009

Jan. 30, 2009

Not sure of the merits, but would certainly listen to Danny'sw argument. > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational > Details > From: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> > Date: Fri, January 30, 2009 4:05 pm > To: <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com>, <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Interesting! > > Does anybody else who will be attending this session in Mexico wish to > discuss this matter? > > D > > Darlene A. Thompson > Community Access Program Administrator > Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP > P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > Phone: (867) 975-5631 > Fax: (867) 975-5610 > E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > > -----Original Message----- > From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny > Younger > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 4:01 PM > To: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; Thompson, Darlene > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational > Details > > Hi Darlene, > > Perhaps the NARALO could discuss withdrawing from the ALAC and > re-forming as a GNSO constituency. Such a move would allow us to bring > user concerns and policy solutions directly to the table. > > Best regards, > Danny > > > --- On Fri, 1/30/09, Thompson, Darlene <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> wrote: > > > From: Thompson, Darlene <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> > > Subject: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details > > To: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > Date: Friday, January 30, 2009, 2:00 PM > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Please see below. We have THREE HOURS to discuss/do > > whatever we want to > > and ICANN is offering briefings. Please reply to this > > e-mail TODAY (to > > me) so that we can get everybody's ideas/desires looked > > after. If you > > don't ask for it, ya can't complain if we don't > > provide it! So, ANY > > ideas are good (I'll let you know if they are way out > > there). > > > > > > > > I need this TODAY, please... please, please, please. :-) > > > > > > > > D > > > > > > > > Darlene A. Thompson > > > > Community Access Program Administrator > > > > Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP > > > > P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > > > > Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > > > > Phone: (867) 975-5631 > > > > Fax: (867) 975-5610 > > > > E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > <mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca> > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Heidi Ullrich [mailto:Staff@alac.icann.org] > > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:41 PM > > To: Thompson, Darlene; Evan Leibovitch > > Cc: Atlarge Staff > > Subject: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details > > > > > > > > Dear Darlene and Evan, > > > > > > > > With just under one month to go before the start of the > > Summit, we would > > like to work with you to ensure the smooth operation of > > your GA. As a > > reminder, GA meetings will take place on Tuesday, 3 March > > between 9 > > a.m. and 1 p.m. > > > > > > > > The purpose of this message is to: > > > > > > > > - Request you to send us your GA agenda > > (Deadline: 31 January) > > > > - Ask whether you would like any Staff Briefings > > during your GA > > > > > > - Highlight relevant text from your RALO's > > Operating Principles > > and MOU > > > > - Establish your document needs for your GA > > (Additional > > Document Deadline: 13 February) > > > > > > > > AGENDA > > > > > > > > Could you please send us your draft GA agenda by 31 > > January? Given that > > the Summit will provide considerable discussion on policy > > issues, we > > request that the GA agenda focus on organizational issues. > > However, the > > agenda is of course ultimately to be decided by you in > > conjunction with > > your ALS representatives. > > > > > > > > Agenda items suggested during the NARALO meeting of January > > 12: > > > > - Ideas - better information sharing strategies - > > issue mapping > > (Dharma) > > > > - Operating procedures - flag those that have not > > worked well > > in the past (Darlene) > > > > > > > > STAFF BRIEFINGS > > > > ALAC has requested that RALO chairs/secretariats consider > > holding a > > short briefing by ICANN Services Staff to discuss > > registrar/registry RAA > > non-compliance during their GA. Can this item be added to > > your GA > > agenda? We will arrange for appropriate ICANN Staff to > > attend your GA > > for this purpose. > > > > > > > > At-Large staff are very interested to have the opportunity > > to speak with > > your ALS participants about how we can help them with > > engaging with > > At-Large activities to a greater degree. For example, what > > are their > > specific policy interests? What can be done to facilitate > > NARALO's > > engagement? What tools would you like to see developed? > > Would you like > > to include such a discussion during your GA or during an > > informal > > session? > > > > > > > > Are there any regionally specific policy issues that may be > > of interest > > to your ALS participants? > > > > > > > > > > > > RELEVENT TEXT FROM YOUR OPERATING PRINCIPLES/MOU > > > > > > > > For your convenience, NARALO's MOU and Rules of > > Procedure may be viewed > > here: > > https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi?ralo_organizing_documents > > > > > > > > > > > > DOCUMENTS NEEDS > > > > > > > > At-Large staff will prepare documents for your ALS > > representatives > > including the NARALO MOU and Rules of Procedure. > > > > > > > > We will need to be informed of any other documents you will > > require by > > 13 February. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let us know if you have any questions on organizing > > your GA. We > > very much look forward to assisting you to ensure a very > > successful > > NARALO GA. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, > > Gisella > > Gruber-White, Marie-Helene Bouchoms > > ICANN At-Large Staff > > email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------ > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists > .icann.org > > > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > > ------ > > > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists > .icann.org > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------

2 1

Still more folk complaining about GoDaddy Transfer Policy Violations
by Danny Younger Jan. 30, 2009

Jan. 30, 2009

http://www.oxadox.com/article/healthfood/2009-01-29/51115.html The issue of GoDaddy's ongoing violation of Inter-Registrar Transfer Consensus Policy has been brought to the attention of the ICANN Compliance Department -- but what action has been taken? ICANN Senior Management is aware of the issue -- but what action has been taken? The ALAC has been notified of the issue -- but what action have they taken? Question: What's the point in working hard to come up with appropriate consensus-based policies if ICANN routinely turns a blind eye to policy violations? ... and what's the point in working with the ALAC if they fail to bring these oft-repeated user concerns to the attention of the Board?

2 1

Rudi Vansnick in NYC
by WWWhatsup Jan. 29, 2009

Jan. 29, 2009

Rudi Vansnick, chair of ISOC Belgium, and a board member of EURALO, is visiting NYC later this week, I've set up a tentative meeting for 7pm Friday 1/30 (midtown) and invited Danny Younger. Anyone else interested? j Joly MacFie 212 608 1334 http://wwwhatsup.com http://punkcast.com http://pinstand.com

1 0

FW: WHOIS study analysis
by Brendler, Beau Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

________________________________ From: Brendler, Beau Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:06 PM To: 'At-Large Staff'; Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Alan Greenberg; Danny Younger; Gareth Shearman; seth.reis(a)lex-ip.com; sylvia.caras(a)gmail.com Cc: NA Discuss Subject: WHOIS study analysis Per our call last week: Here are my suggested re-scored priorities for all studies. However, I will start first with the re-groupings assigned letters. In each case, I established the priority score for each letter grouping, using original scoring from the list of all studies (in other words, the scores for the letter groupings make sense when compared to the entire chart of proposed studies, I did not score them separately.) A word on feasibility: Since I come from a research/investigative organization, my bias is towards the conclusion that just about anything can be studied. I did not assign a feasibility score to the letter groupings of studies. However, I did include a "yes" or "no" feasibility assessment for the individual study scores. 5=Highest 1=Lowest LETTER GROUPINGS: A: Studies 1, 14, 21 & GAC data set 2: 2 B: Studies 13, 17, GAC 1 and GAC 11: 5 C: GAC Studies 5 & 6: 4 D: Studies 18, 19, GAC 9 & GAC 10: 4 E: Studies 3 & 20: 3 The top grouping priority that emerges is: B: Studies 13, 17, GAC 1 and GAC 11: Outside these letter groups, the top-priority study grouping I would suggest for ALAC is: GAC 3, 16, GAC 12-15,24, GAC 7, 17, 6, GAC 1, 13 & GAC 11, 8. Note that GAC 3, 16, 24, GAC 7, GAC 1, and 8 do not appear in the letter groupings. Why were these studies, which I encourage ALAC to recommend as high priorities, not included? Study Table: Study Priority Score Feasible? 1 2 N 14 2 Y (SSAC has already studied) 15 3 Y 21 & GAC 2 2 N GAC 3 5 Premise needs development 16 5 Y 22 4 Y 23 2 Y GAC 12-15 5 Y 24 5 Y 2 1 Y 5 1 Y GAC 7 5 Y GAC 8 4 Y 17 5 Y 18, 19, GAC 9 & 10 4 Y 6 5 Y GAC 1 5 Y 13 & GAC 11 5 Y GAC 2 2 N 3 4 Y Metalitz 1 4 Y 20 3 Y 12 4 Y 8 5 Y 11 4 Technical analysis GAC 4 3 N GAC 5 4 Y GAC 6 4 Y ________________________________ From: At-Large Staff [mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 2:18 PM To: Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Alan Greenberg; Brendler, Beau; Danny Younger; Gareth Shearman; seth.reis(a)lex-ip.com; sylvia.caras(a)gmail.com Subject: Doodle: WHOIS Briefing - follow up call / UTC timing Dear All, Apologies - timings on Doodle are in UTC for this call. Thank you Kind regards Gisella On 23/01/2009 11:11, "At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> wrote: Dear All, Further to the WHOIS Briefing call by Liz Gasster yesterday, it was decided to have a follow up call to review the revised document Beau is in the process of developing. Please find attached the link to the doodle pole. It would be much appreciated if you could respond at your earliest convenience. http://doodle.com/fwixwace6fqu88cg Thank you Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White, Marie-Helene Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org *** Scanned ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.

1 0

WHOIS study analysis
by Brendler, Beau Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

Per our call last week: Here are my suggested re-scored priorities for all studies. However, I will start first with the re-groupings assigned letters. In each case, I established the priority score for each letter grouping, using original scoring from the list of all studies (in other words, the scores for the letter groupings make sense when compared to the entire chart of proposed studies, I did not score them separately.) A word on feasibility: Since I come from a research/investigative organization, my bias is towards the conclusion that just about anything can be studied. I did not assign a feasibility score to the letter groupings of studies. However, I did include a "yes" or "no" feasibility assessment for the individual study scores. 5=Highest 1=Lowest LETTER GROUPINGS: A: Studies 1, 14, 21 & GAC data set 2: 2 B: Studies 13, 17, GAC 1 and GAC 11: 5 C: GAC Studies 5 & 6: 4 D: Studies 18, 19, GAC 9 & GAC 10: 4 E: Studies 3 & 20: 3 The top grouping priority that emerges is: B: Studies 13, 17, GAC 1 and GAC 11: Outside these letter groups, the top-priority study grouping I would suggest for ALAC is: GAC 3, 16, GAC 12-15,24, GAC 7, 17, 6, GAC 1, 13 & GAC 11, 8. Note that GAC 3, 16, 24, GAC 7, GAC 1, and 8 do not appear in the letter groupings. Why were these studies, which I encourage ALAC to recommend as high priorities, not included? Study Table: Study Priority Score Feasible? 1 2 N 14 2 Y (SSAC has already studied) 15 3 Y 21 & GAC 2 2 N GAC 3 5 Premise needs development 16 5 Y 22 4 Y 23 2 Y GAC 12-15 5 Y 24 5 Y 2 1 Y 5 1 Y GAC 7 5 Y GAC 8 4 Y 17 5 Y 18, 19, GAC 9 & 10 4 Y 6 5 Y GAC 1 5 Y 13 & GAC 11 5 Y GAC 2 2 N 3 4 Y Metalitz 1 4 Y 20 3 Y 12 4 Y 8 5 Y 11 4 Technical analysis GAC 4 3 N GAC 5 4 Y GAC 6 4 Y ________________________________ From: At-Large Staff [mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 2:18 PM To: Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Alan Greenberg; Brendler, Beau; Danny Younger; Gareth Shearman; seth.reis(a)lex-ip.com; sylvia.caras(a)gmail.com Subject: Doodle: WHOIS Briefing - follow up call / UTC timing Dear All, Apologies - timings on Doodle are in UTC for this call. Thank you Kind regards Gisella On 23/01/2009 11:11, "At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> wrote: Dear All, Further to the WHOIS Briefing call by Liz Gasster yesterday, it was decided to have a follow up call to review the revised document Beau is in the process of developing. Please find attached the link to the doodle pole. It would be much appreciated if you could respond at your earliest convenience. http://doodle.com/fwixwace6fqu88cg Thank you Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White, Marie-Helene Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org *** Scanned ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.

1 0

Fast Flux report
by Brendler, Beau Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

http://gnso.icann.org/issues/fast-flux-hosting/fast-flux-initial-report-26j… ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.

1 0

FW: Draft New gTLD statement
by Brendler, Beau Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

Note that I am speaking rather strongly on behalf of NA-RALO here, on the basis of this position as we discussed in our most recent NA conference call. BB -----Original Message----- From: Brendler, Beau Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 10:25 AM To: 'Patrick Vande Walle'; Cheryl Langdon-Orr Subject: RE: Draft New gTLD statement Thanks, Patrick. You wrote: "The Euralo statement includes a sentence that says "ICANN should launch the process with no further delay." I leave it up to the chair to decide how to move forward with this now. This statement is in direct opposition to the NA-RALO position and we will not support it. Further, we do not believe consistency with past ALAC statements is a particularly important criteria. Thanks for sending this. BB -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Vande Walle [mailto:patrick@vande-walle.eu] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 7:32 AM To: Brendler, Beau; Cheryl Langdon-Orr Subject: Re: Draft New gTLD statement [Taken Nick out of the discussion] --Patrick I did not hear strong oppositions from the Euralo community to the draft gTLD statement that we received yesterday. The Euralo community will forward to the ALAC a series of comments that it would like to see included as an appendix to main ALAC comments. I guess the other RALOs may want to do this, too. The Euralo statement includes a sentence that says "ICANN should launch the process with no further delay" and would like to see this statement included in the main ALAC statement. I am aware some people think the whole process should be stopped, or at least suspended. On the other hand, advising ICANN to go forward with the process would certainly be in continuity of all previous ALAC statements. Best, Patrick *** Scanned ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.

3 3