May 2013 - NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Travel Documents - IMPORTANT
by gbruen＠knujon.com May 29, 2013

May 29, 2013

Dear sponsored NARALO travelers, The CT requested deadline for submitting documents is TOMORROW. If you have not received your docs, please let me and/or staff know. Be sure to review all documents, mine continues to have a passport error on it. Also note the new tax document requirements. Thanks, Garth Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] Indigenous Peoples Fellowship Program
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 29, 2013

May 29, 2013

Gordon, Ever since John Afele and I undertook outreach to Indigenous Populations -- and my focus was the Americas and Oceania -- during the June 2000 Membership Implementation Task Force -- the progenitor of an "At Large", it has been wicked difficult to offer utility in participating in ICANN sufficient to motivate FN/NA/Metis/Indios to engage, and amongst those who do, to remain engaged. A long-winded way of saying that if you know of any FN, Metis, or Allied individuals considering engaging in any part of ICANN, please do pass along my contact information to him/her/them. The criteria used by ICANN for its Fellowship Program is: "Applicants must be citizens of economically eligible countries. We use a combination of the World Bank classification of low, lower-middle, and upper-middle economies, along with two (2) UN groupings of developing and least developed nations: http://www.unohrlls.org/en/sids/44/, http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/25/ which are based on distinctly different criteria which stretch beyond the World Bank's economically deterministic view. " Here is a brief outline of how I currently view how ICANN can, should it decide to, approach the question of extending its existing Fellowship Program to distinct, under-served populations lacking the objective third-party generated identifiers used, e.g., to provide a delegation from the IANA root zome to an applicant for a Memorandum, rather than a Contract, form of operational agreement (the UN Statistical Agency's designation of Palestine as a distinct identifier, leading to the allocation of "PS" in ISO 3166-1), or the criteria published by the UN-OHRLLS*. The current interpretation of the tax authority of the United States is that bonding authority of Federally Recognized Indian Tribes is not capable of issuing tax exempt bonds except for "Government Purposes", unlike the bonding authority of States and their subordinate political jurisdictions -- cities and so forth, which may issue tax exempt bonds for arbitrary purposes, e.g., construction of sports arenas, etc. This IRS enforced relative deficiency (originating from a lone member of the Republican House Caucus elected from a district in Florida and highly critical of Indian Gaming), and the Volume Cap for Tribal Economic Development Bonds**, are object, third-party determinations that "significantly less access to finance capital" exists in "Indian Country" within the country with the highest ranking GDP. I developed all this (a bunch of supporting data and papers on Tribes and their bonding authority and experience) when I thought that the JAS effort might benefit a new gTLD applicant organic to, or at least committed to serving, some Indigenous Peoples, which of course did not occur. I briefly considered the equivalent issue of tax exempt bonds as a means of access to finance capital and the bonding authority of Treaty Bands in Canada. I don't consider my knowledge in this area equivalent to my knowledge of the situation for Federally Recognized Indian Tribes in the United States. What was intended for the new gTLD program can be repurposed to address a long-standing deficiency in the Fellowship Program. If you'd like we can work on this off the na-discuss list. There are Indian Telecoms and Datacoms lists, and some of the content relates to ICANN and network access policy. Again, please pass along my contact info, should you think it useful. Eric * UN Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States, at http://www.unohrlls.org LDC defined at: http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/164/ LLDC defined at: http://www.unohrlls.org/en/lldc/31/ SDC defined at: http://www.unohrlls.org/en/sids/43/ ** http://www.irs.gov/Tax-Exempt-Bonds/Published-Volume-Cap-Limit-for-Tribal-E…

4 6

Fwd: Indigenous Peoples Fellowship Program
by Peter Knight May 29, 2013

May 29, 2013

That's great, Darlene. Makes good sense to me. Helpful if First Nations (is that still the PC nomenclature) in Canada and US native peoples get together in some way within NORALO. There are similar groups in Brazil that are active on the Internet, and no doubt in other countries in LACRALO territory. Your statement could well be applied to them as well. Peter On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Thompson, Darlene <DThompson1(a)gov.nu.ca>wrote: > Hi all, > > Here is a blurb that I did on this issue for consideration by the > Fellowship Program. It has been submitted for their consideration. You > can use any parts of this that may be useful or not as you might wish. > > 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(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gordon Chillcott > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:29 AM > To: ebw(a)abenaki.wabanaki.net > Cc: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Indigenous Peoples Fellowship Program > > Eric: > > Thank you for your note and my apologies for not responding sooner - I've > been under the weather with a bad cold for a week and I'm just > crawling out from under now. And trying to catch up. > > My meeting with my contact was VERY brief - and the result was simply that > we'll get together at the next meeting to talk further. > > I will keep your contact information handy, Eric, with my thanks. I > also plan, with your permission, to bring along a copy of your e-mail, > just in case it proves useful. > > > Gordon > > On Sat, 2013-05-25 at 10:09 -0700, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: > > Gordon, > > > > Ever since John Afele and I undertook outreach to Indigenous > > Populations -- and my focus was the Americas and Oceania -- during the > > June 2000 Membership Implementation Task Force -- the progenitor of an > > "At Large", it has been wicked difficult to offer utility in > > participating in ICANN sufficient to motivate FN/NA/Metis/Indios to > > engage, and amongst those who do, to remain engaged. > > > > A long-winded way of saying that if you know of any FN, Metis, or > > Allied individuals considering engaging in any part of ICANN, please > > do pass along my contact information to him/her/them. > > > > The criteria used by ICANN for its Fellowship Program is: > > > > "Applicants must be citizens of economically eligible countries. We > > use a combination of the World Bank classification of low, > > lower-middle, and upper-middle economies, along with two (2) UN > > groupings of developing and least developed nations: > > http://www.unohrlls.org/en/sids/44/, > > http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/25/ which are based on distinctly > > different criteria which stretch beyond the World Bank's economically > > deterministic view. " > > > > Here is a brief outline of how I currently view how ICANN can, should > > it decide to, approach the question of extending its existing > > Fellowship Program to distinct, under-served populations lacking the > > objective third-party generated identifiers used, e.g., to provide a > > delegation from the IANA root zome to an applicant for a Memorandum, > > rather than a Contract, form of operational agreement (the UN > > Statistical Agency's designation of Palestine as a distinct > > identifier, leading to the allocation of "PS" in ISO 3166-1), or the > > criteria published by the UN-OHRLLS*. > > > > The current interpretation of the tax authority of the United States > > is that bonding authority of Federally Recognized Indian Tribes is not > > capable of issuing tax exempt bonds except for "Government Purposes", > > unlike the bonding authority of States and their subordinate political > > jurisdictions -- cities and so forth, which may issue tax exempt bonds > > for arbitrary purposes, e.g., construction of sports arenas, etc. > > > > This IRS enforced relative deficiency (originating from a lone member > > of the Republican House Caucus elected from a district in Florida and > > highly critical of Indian Gaming), and the Volume Cap for Tribal > > Economic Development Bonds**, are object, third-party determinations > > that "significantly less access to finance capital" exists in "Indian > > Country" within the country with the highest ranking GDP. > > > > I developed all this (a bunch of supporting data and papers on Tribes > > and their bonding authority and experience) when I thought that the > > JAS effort might benefit a new gTLD applicant organic to, or at least > > committed to serving, some Indigenous Peoples, which of course did not > > occur. I briefly considered the equivalent issue of tax exempt bonds > > as a means of access to finance capital and the bonding authority of > > Treaty Bands in Canada. I don't consider my knowledge in this area > > equivalent to my knowledge of the situation for Federally Recognized > > Indian Tribes in the United States. > > > > What was intended for the new gTLD program can be repurposed to > > address a long-standing deficiency in the Fellowship Program. > > > > If you'd like we can work on this off the na-discuss list. There are > > Indian Telecoms and Datacoms lists, and some of the content relates to > > ICANN and network access policy. > > > > Again, please pass along my contact info, should you think it useful. > > > > Eric > > > > * UN Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed > > Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing > > States, at http://www.unohrlls.org > > > > LDC defined at: http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/164/ > > LLDC defined at: http://www.unohrlls.org/en/lldc/31/ > > SDC defined at: http://www.unohrlls.org/en/sids/43/ > > > > ** > > http://www.irs.gov/Tax-Exempt-Bonds/Published-Volume-Cap-Limit-for-Tri > > bal-Economic-Development-Bonds > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > -- Peter T. Knight, Ph.D. Estrategista de e-Transformação +55 (21) 3576-7674 Rio Escritório +55 (21) 2522-9167 Rio Fax, Res. +55 (21) 7519-9033 Rio Celular (capacitado para Viber) +1 (202) 281-4144 US mobile http://br.linkedin.com/in/petertknight Skype: <minhoco2005> -- Peter T. Knight, Ph.D. Estrategista de e-Transformação +55 (21) 3576-7674 Rio Escritório +55 (21) 2522-9167 Rio Fax, Res. +55 (21) 7519-9033 Rio Celular (capacitado para Viber) +1 (202) 281-4144 US mobile http://br.linkedin.com/in/petertknight Skype: <minhoco2005>

1 0

Proposal for NARALO endorsement for the Nominating Committee
by Evan Leibovitch May 28, 2013

May 28, 2013

I wish to advance Murray McKercher, Research Fellow at The Mobile Institute, as the NARALO recommendation for the 2013-2014 Nominating Committee. While Murray's tenure as an ICANN volunteer is not very long, his involvement in Internet and technology issues goes back decades. He is great to work with in collaborative efforts, and has shown both calm under pressure and phenomenal people skills -- qualities that are vital for working effectively within the NomCom. I have spoken to Murray, and he has both the interest and commitment necessary. I have no hesitation recommending and supporting him. -- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

3 2

NOW OPEN: Nominations for At-Large Delegates to the 2014 NomCom
by ICANN At-Large Staff May 28, 2013

May 28, 2013

Dear All, On behalf of the Chair of the ALAC, Olivier Crépin-Leblond, we would like to inform you of the schedule for the process of appointing the regional At-Large Delegates to the 2014 Nominating Committee (NomCom). 1. Nominations Open: 27 May 2013 2. Nominations Close: 7 June 2013 3. Nomination Acceptance Deadline: On or before 14 June 2013 4. RALO nominee prioritization period: Between 14-24 June 2013 (this may include a vote if desired) 5. ALAC Notification: RALOs to transmit all accepted nominations with a recommendation for a preferred candidate if the RALO wishes to provide one by 25 June 2013 6. ALAC Review of RALO Recommendations/Additional List of Nominations Accepted: 25 June - 2 July 2013 7. ALAC selection and endorsement vote: Carried out on-line between 2 July - 8 July 8. Notification to NomCom of Appointees: No later than 12 July 2013 or as arranged with NomCom Secretariat Please note that the ICANN Bylaws (see: XI-2.4.e) <http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm#XI-2.4> state: The ALAC shall, after consultation with each RALO, annually appoint five voting delegates (no two of whom shall be citizens of countries in the same Geographic Region, as defined according to Section 5 of Article VI to the Nominating Committee. Voting members of the 2014 NomCom are appointed for a one year term, starting after the close of the Annual General Meeting 2013 and ending at the close of the Annual General Meeting 2014. An At-Large ALAC and RALO Elections, Selections and Appointments 2013 Workspace<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+ALAC+and+RALO+Election…> has been created for these, and other, positions. Please feel free to add your nominations and comments directly to the workspace or by posting a message on your RALO mailing list. The NomCom's charge is as follows: The NomCom is responsible for the selection of eight ICANN Board Members and for other selections as are set forth in the Bylaws. (See Bylaws Article VII, Section 1<http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VII-1>.) The NomCom is charged with populating a portion of the ICANN Board as noted above, as well as the ALAC, the ccNSO Council and the GNSO Council. The NomCom complements the other means for filling a portion of key ICANN leadership positions achieved within the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees. The Bylaws also state that the NomCom shall adopt such operating procedures as it deems necessary, which shall be published on the ICANN website. The NomCom is designed to function independently from the Board, the Supporting Organizations, and Advisory Committees. NomCom members act only on behalf of the interests of the global Internet community and within the scope of the ICANN mission and responsibilities assigned to it by the ICANN Bylaws. Members contribute to the NomCom both their understanding of the broad interests of the Internet as a whole and their knowledge and experience of the concerns and interests of the Internet stakeholders that have appointed them. The challenge for the NomCom is to integrate these perspectives and derive consensus in its selections. Although appointed by Supporting Organizations and other ICANN bodies, individual NomCom members are not accountable to their appointing constituencies. Members are, of course, accountable for adherence to the Bylaws and for compliance with the rules and procedures established by the NomCom. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of the ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

6 6

NOMCOM Reports
by Glenn McKnight May 28, 2013

May 28, 2013

Hi All Since we are now into a very confidential staff of NOMCOM selection process I will be refraining doing any further reports since we are meeting every Tuesday and we will pair up and do deep diving into the short list of candidates leading up to the Durban interviews We have a sterling list of candidates Thank you all for your applications as candidates and your contribution is invaluable Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight Http://www.globalcatalysts.com http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] NOW OPEN: Nominations for At-Large Delegates to the 2014 NomCom
by Eric Brunner-Williams May 28, 2013

May 28, 2013

On 5/28/13 4:18 AM, Jean Polly wrote: > I second Eric's nomination. Thank you Jean. > (Even though he left me off the nomcom- appointed ALAC list LOL. > But I was appointed to the interim ALAC and that is probably why!) Lack of due diligence on my part. Intellectual sloth. Moral decrepitude. Etc. I found only one of the interim ALAC appointments before a local unmaskable interrupt ... interrupted. Eric

1 0

General message on tone
by gbruen＠knujon.com May 28, 2013

May 28, 2013

Folks, We as a community should observe decorum, avoiding personal attacks. Let's focus as much as possible on policy and performance. Certainly there are going differing expectations, but there are reasonable and effective ways to challenge our colleagues. Thanks, Garth Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Article on CircleID by Chris Grundermann (ISOC CO ALS)
by Michele Neylon :: Blacknight May 27, 2013

May 27, 2013

On 25 May 2013, at 00:00, John R. Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: >> Good stuff. While so much of the ICANN world focuses on TLDs -- because >> there is so much loose money floating around that realm -- every now and >> then we need to be reminded of the other resources under ICANN's >> stewardship, and the fact that in those realms too there are actors who >> would diminish the public interest in the management of such resources. > > While I agree that this policy move seems dubious, it would be really, really BAD if ICANN tried to tell the RIRs what to do. It's not a policy yet - it's just a proposal Unfortunately, as anyone who was in the room when it was presented realised, a number of RIPE members appear to support it and cannot understand why both Chris and I opposed it > > IP addresses are not like domain names, and ICANN has no leverage over the RIRs. (I can explain why, but the details are tedious.) If RIPE is doing something unwise, and it wouldn't be the first time, it has to be fixed within RIPE's processes. Yes - agreed. Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions ♞ Hosting & Domains ICANN Accredited Registrar http://www.blacknight.co http://blog.blacknight.com/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Facebook: http://fb.me/blacknight Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

6 7

Article on CircleID by Chris Grundermann (ISOC CO ALS)
by Garth Bruen May 24, 2013

May 24, 2013

"Removing Need at RIPE" http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130523_removing_need_at_ripe/ Interesting analysis of RIPE policies concerning IPv4 allocations.

4 4