- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

At-Large Global Summit
by Danny Younger Sept. 28, 2007

Sept. 28, 2007

Just spotted the At-Large Global Summit Page at http://icannwiki.org/ICANN_Ensemble We should talk some more about this. Has a WG list been set up to accommodate focused discussion yet? Sorry if I missed any earlier notices... ____________________________________________________________________________________ Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7

1 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] Results of the Voting for ALAC NominatingCommittee 2008 Appointments
by Danny Younger Sept. 28, 2007

Sept. 28, 2007

Vittorio, Re: "appointing to the Nomcom a key employee of one of the biggest registrars" It looks like the ALAC has also seen fit to appoint to the Noncom a key employee of one the biggest registries -- Afilias. The last time that I checked, Desiree Miloshevic served as the International Affairs and Policy Advisor for Afilias, the registry operator for .info as well as being a back-end provider for other registries. Has her employment status changed? Did these candidates provide Statements of Interest that revealed their employment history? and why exactly is the ALAC electing supplier-side representatives to the NonCom? Out of the billions of users out there, couldn't they find a sufficient number of suitable "user" candidates? The issue is bigger than possible malfeasance in an election process; it makes me wonder if "popularity contests" have replaced suitable due diligence in what should have been a very serious process. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/

2 2

Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] Results of the Voting for ALAC NominatingCommittee 2008 Appointments
by Danny Younger Sept. 28, 2007

Sept. 28, 2007

Siavash, I appreciate your comments about the wiki (with its editing possibilities) being an improper tool. When the ALAC Nominations page was first put up it was showing four possible North American Regional candidates: Hugh Dierker, Evan Leibovich, Michael Geist and Wendy Seltzer, and that indeed matched the correspondence on the NARALO discussion list. It appears that the ALAC nominations page text was edited by Robert Guerra on September 18, resulting in a duly nominated and confirmed candidate (the only candidate from the United States) being removed from the roster. While I am sure that an explanation will be forthcoming, I would recommend to the ALAC and its respective Secretariats to take heed of the suggestion put forth by Elisabeth Porteneuve who in her capacity as Secretariat for the DNSO has successfully managed numerous election processes. regards, Danny --- Siavash Shahshahani <shahshah(a)irnic.ir> wrote: > I, too, as a person who voted on NomComm > appointments, am disturbed by > what I'm hearing. I missed the last telephone > conference so I assumed that > the process for drawing up the final list of > candidates had been clearly > agreed upon and duly executed. It seems to me that > the wiki, with its > editing possibilities, is not the proper tool for > carrying out a formal > process such as finalizing an election list. The > final authoritative list, > whether it conformed to RALO wishes or not, must > have been properly > announced by the Chair(or the proper responsible > substitute) before voting > took place. > Siavash > > > Hi, > > Following is my "personal" comments as an ALAC > member who voted on this. > > > > I think that Danny's and Darlene's question about > the process is > > valid and requires good explanation. I thought the > candidates > > on the voting website were the valid ones - I > should have > > examined more carefully in the end. If I may, I > was on the road > > and just voted on the fly, but was convinved the > candidates were > > all qualified persons. I did not have time to > check the NARALO > > wiki, and I did not think it was necesarry for me > to do so. > > This is not saying that I am not responsible for > the result, though. > > > > I was charing the ALAC meeting on Sep 11, and > handed over > > my responsibility to the Chair/Vice Chair after > that. But I still > > feel responsible to implement what we agreed. > > > > Now, I urge the persons in charge who setup the > voting > > to come up with a reasonable explanation, and if > failing so, I think > > we should hold the final decision to NomCom. > > > > I personally have little problem having registrar > or other consitiuency > > person to be nomiated to NomCom from ALAC, if he > or she meets > > the criteria we set and selected through a > legitimate way. > > > > But, until a good explanation is made, our > accoutability is at stake > > and therefore we should not conclude this. > > > > izumi (still on the road in Europe with limited > connection time) > > > > 2007/9/28, Thompson, Darlene > <DThompson(a)gov.nu.ca>: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I have just researched Danny's comments below and > can confirm what he is > >> saying. I have just listened to the transcript > of our telephone > >> conference of Sept. 10 and there was no mention > of Ross Rader, just > >> Evan, Eric (is it Eric or Hugh?) and Michael (as > per Danny's list). > >> There has been absolutely no on-list activity > mentioning Ross > >> whatsoever. > >> > >> I, personally, have no problem with having Ross > in this position. On > >> the other hand I, too, have serious reservations > about the opacity of > >> the process. We had three names put forward, two > of which were > >> confirmed. I would definitely like to know how > this happened with > >> complete disregard for input from the NARALO. If > processes are put in > >> place, they should be followed or else what is > the point of us putting > >> our time and effort into this at all? > >> > >> Darlene > >> > >> Darlene A. Thompson > >> Community Access Program Administrator > >> Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP > >> c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > >> Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > >> Phone: (867) 975-6531 > >> Fax: (867) 979-8870 > >> 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: Thursday, September 27, 2007 2:24 PM > >> To: NA Discuss; At-Large Worldwide > >> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Results of the Voting > for ALAC > >> NominatingCommittee 2008 Appointments > >> > >> Dear Members, > >> > >> The North American community is entitled to an > >> explanation of the voting results for our region > that > >> saw a supplier-side registrar representative > elected > >> whose name was never once introduced for > candidacy on > >> the NARALO discussion list. > >> > >> The minutes of the last ALAC meeting state: > >> "It was decided that the RALOs would provide > their > >> advice and recommendations by the end of this > week > >> (NLT 16st September). There would then be a vote > >> online using instant runoff for the candidates of > each > >> region wherever there is more than one candidate > >> proposed from a region." > >> > >> The North American region advanced three names: > Eric > >> Dierker (confirmed), Michael Geist (at last > report was > >> "pending confirmation", and Evan Leibovitch > >> (confirmed). > >> > >> The current NARALO Wiki contains only two names: > >> > >> Hugh Dierker [USA] > >> current chair of the GNSO's General Assembly > >> Proposed by Danny Younger > >> Confirmed > >> > >> Evan Leibovich [Canada] > >> ALS Representative, CLUE (Canada) > >> Proposed by Beau & Robert > >> Confirmed > >> > >> > https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi?na_nominating_committee_candidates > >> _2007 > >> > >> You will note that Ross Rader's name is not > mentioned > >> therein, yet suddenly he has been elected without > >> member ALSs and North American individual > participants > >> in the RALO even being aware of his candidacy. > >> > >> Further, voting results show that Eric Dierker's > name > >> was never even voted upon, notwithstanding the > fact > >> that his bio/credentials were submitted for > review. > >> > >> I find: > >> (1) the opaqueness of this process outrageously > >> disturbing, > >> (2) the voting process that saw candidates having > >> their names not included as perverse in the > extreme, > >> (3) the result (the election of registry and > registrar > >> representatives instead of user representatives) > as a > >> vile and deplorable abuse of trust > >> > >> I, and likely the Ombudsman as well, await an > >> explanation. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ________________________________________________________________________ > >> ____________ > >> Need a vacation? Get great deals > === message truncated === ____________________________________________________________________________________ Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting

1 0

Outreach, et al
by Thompson, Darlene Sept. 27, 2007

Sept. 27, 2007

Well, no worries. I'm discouraged by this whole process enough that I won't be complaining on this front again. It will be interesting to see when the next "outreach" happens again in the NARALO as I'm sure that now it WON'T happen and I am no longer willing to put myself forward for all of the sniping. Good luck, D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-6531 Fax: (867) 979-8870 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:49 AM To: Thompson, Darlene Cc: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Schedule Posted for ICANN's 30th InternationalPublicMeeting Hopefully the email I sent between this one below and the present one will help to answer some of these points. Since the NARALO met only in June, it has of course met in the last three years. I presume you are excepting this meeting from consideration for whatever reason. NARALO had opportunities to meet before forming up - most recently earlier in the year, only a couple of months before the San Juan meeting, and declined the opportunity to do so. Further, and this is particularly important: ICANN's model is not that work gets done at F2F meetings - but the opposite; every other community does the vast majority of its work between F2F meetings. It isn't sustainable for At-Large to do the reverse of what all other communities are in the habit of doing. Civil society groups in ICANN, in particular in the NCUC, do a considerable amount of work between ICANN meetings and without any travel support at all. My strong suggestion to everyone is to look for ways to work without requiring face-to-face meetings to the extent that is practicable. On 19 Sep 2007, at 15:52, Thompson, Darlene wrote: > Nick, > > Maybe because now the NARALO will now be going 3 years without a > meeting, which the other regions would not be put through, either. > > NARALO didn't meet before forming up (although LAC got to meet twice); > therefore, saving ICANN money. Now that we did what ICANN wanted and > rushed about getting formed up, we are being denied the opportunity > and > means to do outreach for the next three years (which we asked to be > able > to do), thereby stagnating. > > This isn't very encouraging. > > Darlene > > -----Original Message----- > From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Nick > Ashton-Hart > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 2:13 AM > To: RJGlass | America@Large; Evan Leibovitch > Cc: Thompson, Darlene; At-Large Worldwide > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Schedule Posted for ICANN's 30th > InternationalPublic Meeting > > RJ, why would this surprise you? Why would you expect to be hosted > for a > NARALO meeting at two ICANN meetings in a row? No other region would > receive such treatment; the budget simply doesn't make that possible. > > > -- > Regards, > > Nick Ashton-Hart > Director, At-Large > ICANN > Office Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 > Office Fax: +41 (22) 594 8544 > Mobile: +41 (79) 595 5468 > USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 > email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org > Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / > Skype: nashtonhart > Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > > > > ----- Original message ----- > From: "RJGlass | America@Large" <jipshida(a)gmail.com> > To: "Evan Leibovitch" <evan(a)telly.org> > Cc: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson(a)gov.nu.ca>, "At-Large Worldwide" > <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:51:35 -0400 > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Schedule Posted for ICANN's 30th International > Public Meeting > > First, I'm not surprised but I am disturbed that ICANN failed to > host a > NARALO meeting. > > Anyway, I presume we'll try to be brief yet functional on these > matters. > > I think when you announce the idea, you should solicit input on > what the > ALSs want to get out of the summit. One session on opening day > would be > good, and one more later in the week, possibly 3 brief meetings > would be > better than one. > > aloha, > RJ > > On 9/18/07, Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> wrote: >> >> Thompson, Darlene wrote: >> >>> I'm thinking that the sooner the better for the first one so that we > can >>> all get on the same page and do further planning throughout. >>> >>> I'm thinking more than one session will be needed. >>> >>> Anybody else have thoughts on this? >> >> My suggestion is for at least three things: >> >> 1) Specific inclusion of a Summit status report and discussion on the >> ALAC meeting agenda (whenever that takes place) >> >> 2) A public meeting to introduce the concept to all ICANN > constituencies >> (early in the week) >> >> 3) at least eight hours of planning, of which at least one has Nick > (or >> someone else from ICANN staff) present. Some of this will probably be > a >> small enough group that it can meet in a hotel room rather than >> requiring the expense of a formal meeting room. >> >> - Evan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- > lists.icann > .org >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org >> ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org >> > > > > -- > ------------------------- > AmericaAtLarge.org > RJPacific.com > DDMF.org > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- > lists.icann > .org > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

4 5

ICANN to Issue Advisory Regarding Transferring Domains Between Registrars, Asks for Public Comment
by Nick Ashton-Hart Sept. 27, 2007

Sept. 27, 2007

Notice of Intent to Issue Advisory Regarding the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy 19 September 2007 ICANN has observed that there is confusion within the registrar community concerning the circumstances under which registrars may validly deny transfer requests pursuant to the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (“Transfer Policy”). The purpose of this Notice of Intent to Issue an Advisory regarding the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy is to allow interested parties 30 days to comment on the proposed advisory (which can be viewed at: http://www.icann.org/ announcements/proposed-advisory-19sep07.htm). ICANN will consider all comments received at the close of the 30-day comment period. Interested parties have until 19 October 2007 to submit comments at retransfers-comments(a)icann.org. Posted comments can be viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/retransfers-comments/. The purpose of the proposed advisory is to assist ICANN-accredited registrars in understanding that under the Transfer Policy: Registrars are prohibited from denying a domain name transfer request based on non-payment of fees for pending or future registration periods during the Auto-Renew Grace Period; and A registrant change to Whois information is not a valid basis for denying a transfer request. Developed through ICANN’s consensus policy process, the Transfer Policy was approved unanimously by ICANN’s Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) and its Board of Directors. After consultation with several interested parties, the Transfer Policy was adopted in 2004. The Transfer Policy provides domain name holders with a standardized process for transferring their domain names from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another upon request. All ICANN- accredited registrars and unsponsored gTLD registry operators are required to comply with the Transfer Policy pursuant to their agreements with ICANN. With over 900 ICANN-accredited registrars operating in the marketplace, offering a myriad of services, consumers have a diversity of options for the provision of registration services, from full service registration packages with web-hosting options, to bargain registration packages providing minimal customer service. However, this diversity of options cannot be fully appreciated by consumers if the provisions of the Transfer Policy are interpreted and applied inconsistently by registrars, thereby preventing consumers from freely transferring their domain names when they choose to do so. The Transfer Policy allows domain name holders to transfer their domain names from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another, except under nine limited circumstances. Registrar transfer denials that are not based on the nine reasons enumerated in the Transfer Policy discourage competition, create confusion, encourage abuse and violate the Transfer policy. The purpose of the proposed advisory is to provide clarity and promote consistent handling of transfer requests. The Transfer Policy has proven to be a valuable resource for consumers enabling them to exercise freedom of choice in the domain name registration marketplace. For the benefit of consumers, registrars, registries and other interested parties, ICANN issued today’s proposed advisory to clarify the limited circumstances under which the Transfer Policy allows registrars to deny transfer requests. Comments regarding the proposed advisory are encouraged. ICANN is aware that the GNSO’s Transfers Working Group is currently studying several issues related to the Transfer Policy with the intention of recommending language modifications to the GNSO Council. However, the purpose of ICANN’s proposed advisory is to clarify existing policy. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

ICANN Posts Communication from the Universal Postal Union (UPU) Regarding its Sponsorship of the .POST Top-Level Domain
by Nick Ashton-Hart Sept. 27, 2007

Sept. 27, 2007

ICANN Posts Communication from the Universal Postal Union (UPU) Regarding its Sponsorship of the .POST Top-Level Domain ICANN Continues Negotiations with UPU for .POST sTLD 6 September 2007 (Update 7 September with Public Comment Closing Date) The attached communication from the UPU (http://www.icann.org/ correspondence/donohoe-to-pritz-05sep07.pdf) [PDF, 193K] describes aspects of its intended sponsorship of the .POST sponsored top-level domain. ICANN and the UPU have entered into negotiations intended to result in the delegation of the .POST registry. This outreach by the UPU is intended to inform the community about proposed aspects of the UPU’s business model and requested contractual agreement. These proposals are based upon the UPU’s vision for adding significant value to: the DNS, its member states and their designated operators 1 of postal services, and the recipients of postal services. Certain aspects of these terms relate to the UPU’s status as an intergovernmental organization (IGO) comprised of member states and as specialized agency of the United Nations. Significantly, this outreach invites public examination and comment at an early stage of the negotiation. Negotiations will continue and comments made regarding this material will be taken into account as they are received. Comments on the UPU communication may be posted to stld-rfp- post(a)icann.org and viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/stld-rfp- post. Comments on this aspect of the negotiations with the UPU will close on 6 October 2007. [1] Designated Operator (DO): any governmental or non-governmental entity officially designated by the member country to operate postal services and to fulfill the obligations arising out of the Acts of the Union on its territory. For example in the UK it is Royal Mail , in the USA it is US Postal Service (USPS), in Brazil it is Empresa Brasileira de Correios e Telégrafos, in Kazakhstan it’s Kazpost, in Malaysia it’s Pos Malaysia Bhd, in Botswana it’s Botswana Post, and in Ghana it is Ghana Postal Services Corporation. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Request for Comments — ICANN Board Review Draft Terms of Reference
by Nick Ashton-Hart Sept. 27, 2007

Sept. 27, 2007

Request for Comments — ICANN Board Review Draft Terms of Reference 20 September 2007 As part of the 2002-03 Evolution and Reform process, the ICANN community and Board established a principle of ongoing review of ICANN's structures to ensure their continuing relevance and effectiveness. This principle was embedded in the ICANN bylaws — making it a rare example in an international entity of constitutionally-required ongoing reform. In accordance with this requirement, and as part of ICANNs ongoing commitment to evolution and improvement, the Board approved at ICANN's December 2006 meeting in Sao Paulo a comprehensive schedule for independent review of ICANNs structures. The Board, on the recommendation of the Board Governance Committee, subsequently expanded this list to include the Board itself. The schedule is as follows: Nominating Committee estimated launch — December 2006 At-Large Advisory Committee estimated launch — February 2007 DNS Root Server System Advisory Committee estimated launch — July 2007 Board estimated launch — October 2007 Security and Stability Advisory Committee estimated launch — January 2008 ccNSO Supporting Organisation estimated launch — July 2008 Address Supporting Organisation (ASO) estimated launch — December 2008 The reviews are intended to ensure an independent examination of the role and operation of key elements of ICANN. As with the first two independent reviews, which were completed for the GNSO Council and the GNSO , these reviews will be conducted in an objective manner by independent reviewers, under guidance from the Board on each reviews terms of reference, and with the opportunity for public comment on the results of the reviews. As specified in Article IV, Section 4 of ICANNs Bylaws, the goal of the review, to be undertaken pursuant to such criteria and standards as the Board shall direct, shall be to determine (i) whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, and (ii) if so, whether any change in structure or operations is desirable to improve its effectiveness. The results of these reviews shall be posted for public review and comment, and shall be considered by the Board not later than its second scheduled meeting after being posted for 30 days. Consideration by the Board includes the ability to revise the structure or operation of the Nominating Committee by a two-thirds vote of all members. The Draft Terms of Reference for a review of the Board is to be found at http://www.icann.org/reviews/icann-board-review-20sep07.pdf [PDF, 17K]. They are open for public comment until October 11, 2007. Public comments should be made at board-review-tor(a)icann.org and can be reviewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/board-review-tor/. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Welcome New NomCom Appointees to the At-Large Advisory Committee
by Nick Ashton-Hart Sept. 27, 2007

Sept. 27, 2007

On behalf of the Staff, please welcome the 2008 Nominating Committee appointments to the At-Large Advisory Committee: Hue Nguyen (Vietnam - Asia) Vanda Scartezini (Brazil - Latin America and the Caribbean) Fatimata Sylla (Senegal - Africa) They replace Siavash Shahshahani (Iran - Asia), Jacqueline Morris (Trinidad & Tobago - Latin America and the Caribbean Islands), and Alice Wanjira-Munyua (Kenya - Africa) respectively. I hope you will all give them a good welcome - and extend your thanks for the service of those who are departing from the ALAC. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ICANN regional meetings -- good or bad?
by Thompson, Darlene Sept. 26, 2007

Sept. 26, 2007

Interesting message, Wendy, on several fronts. In San Juan, the NA region came up with a plan for outreach and education in LA and submitted it (but NOT on the proper ICANN form) and then were never consulted about it at all for the LA meeting. I am definitely seeing a bit of a disconnect with ICANN. First we are told that the ALSs are supposed to be doing outreach, we attempt to, and then are completely ignored. This is also why a core group of us were attempting to push forward the idea of the "Summit" as a way of bringing the regions together so that we can understand the cultural differences in how we inter-relate and, in so doing, be able to work more harmoniously together. This, however, is simply my "take" on the situation. I look forward to seeing what others think. D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-6531 Fax: (867) 979-8870 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Wendy Seltzer Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 10:34 AM To: At-Large writ small Subject: [At-Large] ICANN regional meetings -- good or bad? In recent minutes, the Board approved a "regional meeting" in Taipei, announced at <http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-20sep07.htm> Some ALAC participants from the Asia-Pacific have raised concerns that none of the ALAC, AP RALO, or At-Large Structures were consulted, even though the ALAC and its structures are tasked with representing user interests in ICANN. I'm also concerned that ICANN not follow the strategy of other organizations, such as WIPO, in using regional meetings to divide and conquer, pitting regions against one another rather than helping them to realize and coordinate their common interests. I hope we can push ICANN away from that mode. Thoughts? --Wendy -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org Visiting Professor, Northeastern University School of Law Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ http://www.torproject.org/ _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

1 0

NARALO Meeting in Los Angeles, 10 October, 1000-1300 PDT
by Nick Ashton-Hart Sept. 26, 2007

Sept. 26, 2007

Dear NARALO Members: There is a meeting slot proposed for the above period during the LA meeting. I am happy to ensure that remote participation options are available for those not physically present - is that desirable for any of you who will not be in LA? Full LA At-Large schedule on https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi? los_angeles_meeting -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0