September 2012 - NA-Discuss

yellow scarves for event
by Glenn McKnight Sept. 10, 2012

Sept. 10, 2012

Here is an example of yellow scarves I thought perhaps we could have the awardees have these scarves http://www.scarves.net/products/nicole-cotton-scarf.html?on=Yellow More style than a tshirt $14 per scarve and a nice gift as well G -- Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight Http://www.globalcatalysts.com http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

3 2

Re: [NA-Discuss] [lac-discuss-en] [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Webinar on the WCIT with Global Partnership Regional Vice Presidents
by Carlton Samuels Sept. 5, 2012

Sept. 5, 2012

Thanks for this Christopher. A nice one-stop shop place for these details. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Christopher Wilkinson < cw(a)christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote: > Good morning: > > I regret that I am unable to take the call tonight (4am in China). > > A check-list of articles in the draft TCRs relevant to the Internet > can be found at > > http://www.anuntul.eu/wiki/WCIT-12 > > Regards > > CW > > > > > On 05 Sep 2012, at 01:14, At-Large Staff wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > Further to the Doodle poll, the Webinar to discuss the World > > Conference on > > International Telecommunications (WCIT) > > <https://community.icann.org/x/iQMQAg> with Global Partnership > > Regional > > Vice-Presidents is scheduled on Wednesday 05 September 2012 at 2100 > > UTC. > > > > For other times: > > http://tinyurl.com/bqocl9z > > > > The draft agenda and participation instructions are available at: > > https://community.icann.org/x/-4MoAg > > > > Adobe Connect with English audio: > > http://icann.adobeconnect.com/wcit/ > > This call will have Spanish and French interpretation. > > > > If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff > > at:staff@atlarge.icann.org. > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and > > Nathalie > > Peregrine > > ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > From: At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> > > Date: Monday, 3 September 2012 10:10 > > To: ALAC Announce <alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, APAC- > > Discuss > > <apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, Afri-Discuss > > <afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, Discussion for At-Large Europe > > <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, > > "lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" > > <lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, NA-Discuss > > <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Cc: At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> > > Subject: DOODLE / Webinar on the WCIT with Global Partnership > > Regional > > Vice Presidents > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > At-Large staff have been requested to organise a Webinar to discuss > > the > > World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) > > <https://community.icann.org/x/iQMQAg> with Global Partnership > > Regional > > Vice-Presidents. > > > > Please complete the attached Doodle poll to schedule this Webinar. > > http://doodle.com/acvqbsrfcmxm5y3y > > > > If you require interpretation for this call, please note the > > language next > > to your name on the Doodle poll - example: ³name² + (ES) or (FR). > > Interpretation will only be provided if there is sufficient demand. > > > > This Doodle poll will close on Tuesday 04 September 2012 at 1900 UTC > > the > > date and time will be confirmed shortly thereafter. > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and > > Nathalie > > Peregrine > > ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ALAC-Announce mailing list > > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en mailing list > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >

1 0

DOODLE / Webinar on the WCIT with Global Partnership Regional Vice Presidents
by At-Large Staff Sept. 5, 2012

Sept. 5, 2012

Dear All, At-Large staff have been requested to organise a Webinar to discuss the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) <https://community.icann.org/x/iQMQAg> with Global Partnership Regional Vice-Presidents. Please complete the attached Doodle poll to schedule this Webinar. http://doodle.com/acvqbsrfcmxm5y3y If you require interpretation for this call, please note the language next to your name on the Doodle poll - example: ³name² + (ES) or (FR). Interpretation will only be provided if there is sufficient demand. This Doodle poll will close on Tuesday 04 September 2012 at 1900 UTC the date and time will be confirmed shortly thereafter. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and Nathalie Peregrine ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 2

An agenda subject suggestion and some rational
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net Sept. 3, 2012

Sept. 3, 2012

Chair, All, I've been asked by an acquaintance who's first langugae is written in the Arabic Script to comment on the applications by the .COM zone contractor which may replicate many of the existing features of the Latin Script .COM zone in one or more Non-Latin Script zones. I think the question is "should the business model associated with most of the Latin Script namespaces be imposed upon the Non-Latin Script namespaces?" This is somewhat abstract from how the question was posed to me, and some explination may be useful. The current .COM contractor has applied for about a dozen strings in scripts other than Latin which when sounded out are similar to the sound usually associated with the string "COM". My acquaintance pointed out that users of Arabic (and Farsi) domain names written in Arabic Script, will not know which namespace is the intended namespace when fully qualified domain names are communicated orally. He observed that this intentional similarity will (a) force existing .COM registrations to be replicaed in the Verisign Arabic Script zone, and where this replicated registration is not made by the original .COM registrant, will (b) facilitate abusive registrations by third parties. I assume that his observations are likely to prove correct, that duplicate, or abusive, registrations will be the prevelant initial form of registrations in the "sounds-like-COM" namespaces. How I infer that this will have the more general effect of repeating the registration practices and patterns of registrations of the .COM market in each of the Non-Latin Script domain name markets is by observing that with a market share of 90,000,000 domains in the COM zone, if only 1% of the COM registrants (and their abusers) replicate their Latin Script registrations in the Non-Latin Script namespaces Verisign has applied for, each Non-Latin "one percent of COM" will have nearly a million registrations, in scripts which currently have no registrations other than a few restricted IDN ccTLD equivalents created under the ccTLD IDN Fast Track Program. Having walked thus far out on a pier of unknown length with a murky crystal ball, I would like to suggest that there are some public interest issues. 1. "Confusingly Similar" namespaces may benefit registrants and end users if the two (or more) registries offer the substantively similar resolution outcomes. An example is the Simplified Chinese / Traditional Chinese (SC/TC) equivalence, where a substantial portion of the Han Script users associate substantively similar meaning to equivalent characters (bi-literacy). 2. "Confusingly Similar" namespaces will not benefit registrants or end users if the two (or more) registries do not offer the substantively similar resolution outcomes. 3. The registration practices and patterns of registrations of the .COM market are problematic and as a matter of public policy should not be replicated. 4. The market share of the current .COM incumbent contractor meets the test to trigger competition policy restrictions on the maintenance and expansion of that entities market share. 5. The development of mappings from persistent identifiers to transient identifiers (names of resources to addresses of resources) in scripts other than Latin must arise from public practice, not the promotion of private interest. I suggest that a North American At-Large position on a region-local vendor's exploit of its Latin Script market share that, if allowed, may determine the development of the DNS for scripts other than Latin, is appropriate subject matter for the Toronto meeting. I therefore suggest that a few minutes be allocated to the subject during the September 10th monthly call time. Eric Brunner-Williams, Unaffiliated Eugene, Oregon

1 0

The .NAME contract expiry: Competition Policy and Agency Capture
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net Sept. 1, 2012

Sept. 1, 2012

Collegues, In my Statement of Interest for the (elected) North American Representative to the At-Large Advisory Committee I mentioned the NAME contract renewal. The period for public comments on the proposed changes to the .NAME registry contract has concluded. I made the comment I suggested earlier in my SOI -- briefly that the public interest (competition policy) is clear, that competent alternatives to the incumbent contract holder exist, and a change of contract operator while meeting stability and security goals is feasible. In this note I wish to suggest that while the size of the .NAME registry is modest, and a great deal of attention is focused on the nearly two thousand applications awaiting evaluation, that the .NAME contract expiry does present an issue of the first importance. The DoC/NTIA RFI for the IANA Function and the follow-on RFP instructions for bidders addressed metrics for the contractor performance of the IANA Function. I pointed out in a note to this list on 8/14 that the addition of performance metrics makes repetition of the abuse of administrative delays to requested changes in the IANA root zone file for the purpose of compelling obligations from foreign governments to the current contractor unlikely. [Thanks to John Levine for asking "what the point of the exercise was", and to Brett Fausett for his comment.] The DoC/NTIA RFI proposed a separation of the operational and policy making roles. The follow-on RFP instruction for bidders required the separation of the operational (IANA) role from the policy making (ICANN) role of the contractor. The import of this is that the separation of policy development from root zone change management is no longer limited to entries corresponding to ISO 3166 code point assignments. IANA root zone change management is an operational role, distinct from the policy role of access control and generic policy development and compliance. It is an IANA Function to make changes to existing records in the IANA root zone. The operational nature of this role is now unrestricted as to origin of any particular delegation and code point or string assignment. The proposed changes to the .NAME contract, the proper subject of the policy making and compliance role (ICANN), is independent of the selection of the contractor to execute the terms of the original, or modified contract, which is the proper subject of the (IANA Function) operational role. The selection of the contractor manifests in a change to existing records in the IANA root zone. The present expiry of the .NAME contract is the first gTLD contract to be subject to re-policing by the policy making and compliance role (ICANN), and subject to contractor selection, manifested by a change to existing records in the IANA root zone, under the specific terms of the new IANA Function contract, recently awarded for a three year period to the Corporation. Public comment may, or may not, inform the Corporation's Board on any of the specific changes proposed to the existing .NAME contract, and the terms and conditions of the final contract are properly policy and compliance considerations. However, the selection of the party with which to contract is not Verisign by default, as other operational equivalent vendors exist, and the means of selection of a contractor among several operationally equivalent vendors by an agency of government or an entity exercising delegated authority by government is via the competitive award process, as the government did when soliciting vendors to provide the IANA Function earlier this year. In sum, the separation of policy from operations allows for the terms of the .NAME contract to be modified by the Corporation, if it follows a transparent and accountable process. However, it does not allow the Corporation to arbitrarily select the party to perform the .NAME contract, nor to arbitrarily select the parties to perform registry fail-over in the near future, as some, perhaps most, of the 2012 new gTLD round speculations fail to meet their investor goals and are abandoned. The public interest is thus more fundamental than the policy goal of advancing competition, originating in the Green and White Papers of the late 1990s. It is the independence of the public entity from the private interests it regulates or coordinates, originating in the various historic corruption reforms and modernly standardized in the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946. Eric Brunner-Williams Former Candidate, NARALO ALAC Rep. election 2012

1 0