- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

The self-nomination of Eric Brunner-Williams for NARALO Chair
by Eric Brunner-Williams June 18, 2013

June 18, 2013

Colleagues, I think the situation may reasonably be summarized as there exist some At-Large Structures which meet a reasonable interpretation of the 2007 MOU, and some which do not. On issues for which a vote is the means of determining the position of record of the Region there is no distinction between them. I suggest that this situation has come about by ordinary fatigue, enhanced by a correctable, but persistent error. The error has been to waste much of the time any Chair has available on tasks which do not directly contribute to the increase in vitality of existing ALSes, aka "inreach", or the number of new ALSes, aka "outreach". The practice, which began some time ago, before Garth Bruen volunteered, and before Beau Brendler volunteered, with Evan Libovitch who created this "Perq", was to use the _very_ limited travel support to send the Chair and Secretary to general meetings. The error has persisted for _years_. This practice has three consequences -- all adverse. First, the time required by ICANN travel is ten days door-to-door, for each meeting -- 30 days/year. The Chairs and Secretaries of RALOs do not need to spend a month a year reading their status reports to each other and chatting up the ALAC. Electronic mail, podcasts and phones suffice. Second, each year six additional people who actually do make informed contributions to policy could participate first hand in ICANN meetings and bring back to their At-Large Structures their experience and improved judgement. This opportunity is currently wasted on _ineffective_ Officer junkets. Third, the RALO officers could be spending one month of full-time work per year on "inreach" and "outreach", on making the RALO less ... absurdly inconsequential. This opportunity too is currently wasted on _ineffective_ Officer junkets. If elected Chair, and this constitutes self-nomination, I will use the office of regional Chair to ensure that the Chair and Secretary work only to advance Regional Organizational goals, cease the current abuse of travel support as a private right of office, and advance those who are informed and engaged in public policy issues. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon

3 4

Re: [NA-Discuss] Domain hijacking story
by Eric Brunner-Williams June 17, 2013

June 17, 2013

> Not really, but thanks for trying Seth, We appear to differ then on whether absent resolution by, or non-resolution to (as there are marks which are registered as domains for which no resolution is sought by the registrant), any public, a public interest exists. If this is the case, would it be fair to characterize your view as being that every string generated under the old letters-digits-hyphen rule, or the two (newer and newest) valid IDN characters rule, having length less than 63 octets, is of equal public interest upon the act of registration? If so, is this public-interest-upon-registration present in all registrations? Can symbolics.com be distinguished from any of the registrations made while you read this? Can panix.com? Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon

3 3

Domain hijacking story
by Joly MacFie June 17, 2013

June 17, 2013

"There are no specific laws regarding domain hijacking, nor any law that specifically holds the domain name registrar responsible for allowing the registrant information to be modified without the permission of the original registrant. " http://windowssecrets.com/forums/showthread.php/154322-Domain-stolen-while-…! -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

8 11

Re: [NA-Discuss] Domain hijacking story
by Eric Brunner-Williams June 17, 2013

June 17, 2013

On 6/13/13 8:23 PM, Seth M Reiss wrote: > I don't get it. Can you explain Eric? Seth, Assume the assertions offered in the complaint are factual: a domain registered for the maximum allowed period to which no disclosed use was made, and some act by a third-party, and a consequent act by the registrar of record, the eventual loosing registrar, and a consequent act by another registrar of record, the eventual gaining registrar. The second half of the fact pattern existed when the domain panix.com, serving the dial-up and later broadband-independent users of the City of New York was briefly under the control of a third party in 2005 (if memory serves, I acted to notify Marty Hannigan, then of Verisign, and Bruce Tompkin, of Melbourne IT, the morning after I learned from Steven Bellovin that "panix was down"). Where there is substantive public use, the chain of custody of a name to address association is a public interest. Where there is not, as in the instant case, the chain of custody of a name to address association is not a public interest. Are there "more" labels with no address association, or an address association upon which no public reliance exists? Obviously, 63 octets taking on values from {a..z,0..9,-} with only the rule that "-" not begin or end or occur in two adjacent octets, the potential label set with no beneficial resolution properties is vast. So this can "get big", or be "wow", or "prove there is no law", but sharing, without benefit, the compulsion or speculation of registrants of labels with no published use detracts from the existing since the beginning of the shared registry system (to which I also participated) practice of allowing transfers between "competitive registrars" and ensuring that the interests of registrants of labels upon which public reliance is made take precedence over the interests of registrars. It is the existence of reliance which creates an interest in the stability and security of that reliance, not punters slapping $6 down on the outcome of roulette wheel over a generating set of alphanumerics plus a hyphen with conditions. I hope that helps. Eric

2 1

Garth Bruen for Chair
by Thompson, Darlene June 12, 2013

June 12, 2013

I would like to nominate Garth Bruen for Chair of the NARALO. Garth has always worked to the benefit of the group, bringing important topics to us for consideration. He has always worked in a transparent consensus building manner. D ᑕᓕᓐ ᑕᒻᓴᓐ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᖃᕆᓴᐅᔭᕐᕕᒋᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᑐᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑎ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᖅᕕᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᖓᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᓂᐊᕐᕕᖓ 1000, ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖓ 910 ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca ᐅᖄᓚᐅᑎ: 867 975-5631 ᓱᑲᑦᑐᒃᑰᕈᑎ: 867 975-5610 Taliin Taamsan Nunalingni Qaritauyani Atuqtauningitnun Titiraqtia Nunavut Kavamangat Titiraqarvia 1000, Nayugaa 910 Iqaluit, Nunavut dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca Hivayautik : 867 975-5631 Kayumiktuk : 867 975-5610 Darlene Thompson Community Access Program Administrator/N-CAP Corporate Services Division Department of Education Government of Nunavut PO Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, Nunavut, X0A 0H0 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca Ph: 867 975-5631 Fax: 867 975-5610 Darlene Thompson Administratrice du programme d’accès communautaire Division des services ministériels Ministère de l’Éducation Gouvernement du Nunavut Case postale 1000, Succursale 910 Iqaluit Nunavut, X0A 0H0 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca Tél. : 867 975-5631 Téléc. : 867 975-5610

5 4

Verisign whois falsely returning "no match" results
by Garth Bruen June 10, 2013

June 10, 2013

This is very interesting, it's something I've observed from time to time, but it is very difficult to document http://domainnamewire.com/2013/06/02/verisign-whois-falsely-returning-no-mat ch-results/ Don't know if this speific issue is just recent one, or something on-going.

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] REMINDER / NARALO TELECONFERENCE - Monday, 10 June 2013 @ 19:00 UTC
by Eric Brunner-Williams June 10, 2013

June 10, 2013

Dear Colleagues, Please note the meeting conflict below. My contributions to agenda item 5.1.3 (also labeled "3.1.3") "Review of Active and Non-Active ALSes" are the mail sent on 6/13. I regret a spreadsheet capturing all of the salient details is incomplete but will be forthcoming. My contributions to agenda item 5.1.4 (also labels "3.1.4") "Overview of ALS De-accreditation Procedures" is that the criteria used can be met by a votebot (CORE in fact uses a votebot scheme, as do other organizations using email-based balloting systems), or by a single individual, and therefore renders fictional the plain sense of the 2007 MoU creating NARALO out of regional organizations meeting specific criteria and undertaking specific responsibilities and so becoming At-Large Structures comprised of one or more organizations, and Unaffiliated Individual members. A continuous scheme consisting only of the formality of testing for the existence of a "vote" from something other than an organization has the effect of making one individual styled as an At-Large Structure equal in voting to all Unaffiliated Individual members, and equal to all At-Large Structures. As individuals, as members of At-Large Structures or Unaffiliated Individual members have property interests affected by the decisions of the Board, and votes in NARALO give rise to acts which advise the Board, equity and due process issues are present in a correctable, but continuously uncorrected voting scheme. My contributions to agenda item 5.1.5 (also labels "3.1.5") "Disconnect Between "Individual Internet Users" and the reality of ALSe" is to observe that more than one currently certified At-Large Structure" appear to have fewer members than there are Unaffiliated Individual members, though the number of Unaffiliated Individual members I believe on the available information may be as few as six, not including myself as the Secretariat has again, for reasons not yet made clear, that I am not an Unaffiliated Individual member. My suggestion is that the "one vote in four" criteria for continuous certification as an ALS be replaced with a test that is organic to the 2007 MoU responsibilities of the NARALO and organic to the subsequent application and capable of discovery of material misrepresentation. This is not particularly difficult and a responsibility of Officers selected by vote. Such a test could detect persistent failures to inform and enable individual participation, the central purpose of a committee tasked to advise from the perspective of individual internet users, which the current scheme can not. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-dt] REMINDER: FIRST Meeting invitation: Policy & Implementation Drafting Team - Monday 10 June 2013 at 1900 UTC Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 07:06:28 -0700 From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> To: gnso-policyimpl-dt(a)icann.org <gnso-policyimpl-dt(a)icann.org> CC: gnso-secs(a)icann.org <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Dear All, *The first Policy & Implementation Drafting Team teleconference is scheduled for Monday 10 June 2013 at 19:00 UTC for 1 hour.* * * *Please note that we will be using a _different telecom provider_ for this conference, therefore please _refer to the dial in numbers listed_ below and not the ones used on other conference calls. * 12:00 PDT, 15:00 EDT, 20:00 London, 21:00 CET For other places see: *http://tinyurl.com/mgqdjyv * *Adobe Connect_ WITH AUDIO enabled:_* http://icann.adobeconnect.com/policy-implementation/ For those of you using the Adobe Connect audio, you may do so by activating your computer microphone via the Adobe room (Using a headset is preferable here). *Make sure your speakers and microphone are _not_ on mute.* - Select the TELEPHONE ICON at the top of the AC toolbar and choose CONNECT MY AUDIO (only option). - Select USING COMPUTER twice - Select ALLOW access to the ICANN adobe room - the TELEPHONE ICON at the top of the toolbar should then have changed into a MICROPHONE ICON - You may click on this MICROPHONE ICON to mute yourself (Icon will then have a line through it) and to unmute yourself (Line disappears) Participants must ALWAYS have their microphone or telephone on MUTE as default setting. You are requested to RAISE YOUR HAND if you wish to participate to avoid disruption. Dial-in details are below. If you require a dial-out, please let me know. ______________________________________________________________________ Participant passcode: *POLICY IMPLEMENTATION* *COUNTRY* *TOLL * *TOLL FREE* *Argentina * Not available 0800-666-0607 *Australia* 61-2-8524-9410 800-730-035 *Austria* 43-2682-205-6452 0800-102-51537 *Belgium* 32-2-290-1687 0800-50-931 *Bermuda* Not Available 1-800-227-3396 *Brazil* Not Available 0800-891-3799 *Canada* Not Available 1-866-243-1147 *Chile* Not Available 1230-020-2005 *China North* Not Available 108 007 440 044 *China South* Not Available 10800-440-0044 *Columbia* Not Available 01-800-912-5570 *Costa Rica* Not Available 0800-011-0936 *Czech Republic* 420-239-000-551 800-142-637 *Denmark* 45-3271-4919 80-88-54-87 *Dominican Republic* Not Available 1800-975-9790 *Finland* 358-969-379-653 0800-112-831 *France* 33-1-70-993-504 0800-940-235 *Germany* 49-6958-999-0815 0800-101-2077 *Greece* Not available 00800-44146907 *Hong Kong* 852-3002-9738 800-908-530 *Hungary* 36-1777-9005 06800-13519 *Iceland* Not available 800-8337 *India* Not available 000-800-852-1145 *Indonesia* Not available 001-803-448-551 *Ireland* 353-1436-4546 1800-943-558 *Israel* Not available 1809-34-4022 *Italy* 39-06-452-108-266 800-149-039 *Japan* 81-36-404-0422 0066-3344-2168 *Latvia* Not available 8000-3075 *Luxembourg* 352-3420-808-070 800-23924 *Malaysia* 60-3-7712-4428 1800-804-676 *Mexico* Not available 001-866-874-5861 *Netherlands* 31-20-796-5200 0800-265-8593 *New Zealand* 64-9-912-1363 0800-440-246 *Norway* 47-231-626-36 800-14-812 *Oman* Not available 800-70-104 *Panama* Not available 001-866-381-6130 *Peru* Not available 0800-51-726 *Philippines* Not available 1800-1441-0035 *Poland* Not available 00800-121-2715 *Portugal* Not available 800 844 250 *Romania* Not available 0800-894-476 *Russia* Not available 810-8002-2004011 *Saudi Arabia* Not available 8 008 441 271 *Singapore* 65-6823-2045 800-448-1263 *Slovakia* Not available 800 004 949 *South Africa* Not available 0800-99-1278 *South Korea* 82-2-3483-1128 0030-844-0064 *Spain* 34 917 889 578 900 800 593 *Sweden* 46 850 520 200 200 125 739 *Switzerland* 41 225 927 086 800 560 759 *Taiwan* 886-2-2162-6509 00801-444-143 *Thailand* Not available 001800-441-8582 *United Kingdom* 44-207-190-1525 0800-358-3476 *United States* 1-480-293-1745 1-888-576-8499 *Uruguay* Not available 000-4110-083-730 *Venezuela* Not available 0800-1-00-6580 * * Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Peregrine For GNSO Secretariat

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] The status of ALSes (was Ramping up for the election - General Procedures) Intellectual Property Section of the HSBA
by Eric Brunner-Williams June 10, 2013

June 10, 2013

You're welcome Seth. I don't doubt for a second the existence of a healthy IP Section, either of the Bar Assn or at Richardson, and it occurred to me that while the IP Sections are already amply represented in the GNSO, the Cyberlaw Sections, as well as the sundry LSAs are not, and each would be a reasonable ALS candidate organization with purposes reasonably congruent with ICANN's purpose in having a RALO composed in part of organizations meeting the criteria for certification as ALSes. I suggest finding a temporary home on the net, wordpress or something, and asking Staff to update the record in https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+ALSes to reflect the loss of hiip.org a new home on the net. Eric

6 9

Dotless domains
by Evan Leibovitch June 10, 2013

June 10, 2013

In an attempt to getting NARALO back onto discussion of domain name issues that we are mandated to understand (hopefully enough to comment upon in the public interest), I would like to bring your attention to the issue of "dotless domains". Ie, "http://domain" or "http://example" Dotlesss domains were explicitly ruled out of the new gTLD expansion, according to 2.2.3.3 of the Applicant Guidebook. The SSAC has come out strongly against them, in this round or any others, in SSAC-053. Yet Google wants to designate .search as dotless<http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/10/google-wants-to-operate-search-as-a-dotles…>, having applied originally based on the premise that it would not be. Apparently, the issue is still being considered and has not been abruptly rejected as one might have thought. I am still learning about the issue, though at first glance I am puzzled by any move that would seem to retroactively contravene the application rules. I further don't see any great benefit to the public interest that would offset the SSAC's concerns about stability. I would like to know what others know or think on the matter. -- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

5 9

ATRT Letter from Evan
by Garth Bruen June 10, 2013

June 10, 2013

Item 8.2 for today: https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+2013.06.10+Teleconference -----Original Message----- From: Thompson, Darlene [mailto:DThompson1@GOV.NU.CA] Sent: Sunday, June 9, 2013 3:08 PM To: Evan Leibovitch; Garth Bruen Cc: John R. Levine; NA List na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] Cloud Computing a Trapi I would very much like to see the matter of the ATRT letter brought up at the meeting tomorrow as I know that I would be in favour of supporting it as a region. There seem to have been many things thrown up on the list lately that have really taken us away from the main focus of the group, which is discussing policy. I'm not sure how this has happened but I really think that we need to get back on track. I look forward to discussing this on the call tomorrow. D Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator N-CAP/Department of Education P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca ________________________________________ From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Evan Leibovitch [evan(a)telly.org] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 2:18 PM To: Garth Bruen Cc: John R. Levine; NA List na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Cloud Computing a Trapi On 9 June 2013 10:36, <gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: > It's up to the poster to define relevance > And if the poster won't, the Chair must -- or declare the topic out of order. Maybe one of these days something actually to do with ICANN policy -- rather than out-of-scope "hey look at this" postings and inactive participants passing judgement over active ones -- will actually be discussed here. This is not a general purpose Internet Governance list, and never was. Nor is it run by Jerry Springer or Joseph McCarthy. It's easy to bitch an moan about Outreach. But this is not just about resources, it's about what we ourselves do to lead by example, to show how welcoming and effective the existing participants are. An outsider's quick perusal of this list of late offers no incentive for someone to join, just a cacophony of irrelevancy and McCarthyism. All the fancy brochures in the world can't mask a record of inaction related to the actual reason we're supposed to be here. Now... to try to get things even partially on back on track, I recall NARALO attention to a letter, signed by myself and a number of other At-Large members, including Garth, that has been submitted to the ATRT2<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-atrt2-02apr13/pdfDPSDz7WTEO.pdf> . At the last NARALO face to face letter it was suggested that perhaps NARALO as a body may want to endorse it. I would like to raised the issue again, with perhaps a vote or consensus on the matter at the next meeting. - Evan PS: Please come back, John. It's not all dysfunctional. ------ 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 ------

1 0