ALAC ExCom Friday 02 March 2012
Participants: Olivier Crépin-Leblond,  Evan Leibovitch, Tijani Ben Jemaa,  Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Carlton Samuels, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Alan Greenberg
Apologies: 
Staff: Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, and Gisella Gruber
Summary Notes and Action Items:
1.  Roll call and apologies 
2.  Review of AIs from Executive Committee meeting of ALAC meeting of 24 January 2012 and ExCom Meeting of 26 January 2012
-The various AIs were reviewed and updated as necessary
3.  Policy Advice Development Calendar -- Tijani, Olivier (20 min)
-The various status of the Public Comments were discussed and confirmed. 
- The status of each Statement can be found here - https://community.icann.org/x/bwFO
4. Discussion of whether the ALAC should add the topics suggested by Evan to the ALAC Board meeting agenda (10 min)
a. Red Cros/Olympics: Alan Greenberg gave an update on this topic. It was decided, after discussion amongst the ExCom, that the topic would not be on the official ICANN Board-ALAC Agenda.
b. Scope out the Board's taste for an Internet Users' Bill of Rights embedded into ICANN practise. (including its contracts such as RAAs going forward) 
- OCL: We should build something up so we can ask this question in Prague.
5. Discussion of what Subjects to ask Steve Crocker to Raise (5 min)/6. Discussion of what Subjects the ALAC Chair should take to the CEO-SO/AC Chairs meeting (10 min)/7. Discussion on what subjects the ALAC Chair should take to the proposed meeting with the Board Chair (5 min)
"Various topics were discussed. OCL presented teh following questions:
ICANN Academy and its benefit to get ICANN volunteers to work smarter.- How is ICANN changing, given the new Board Chair and CEO changes?- Now that the big challenge of getting the gTLD program on track is out of the way, what are ICANN's next big challenges? What are the ICANN Chair's priorities going to be now?- Following up on the Applicant Support Program -- what are its outcomes?- Talking about accountability & transparency is not enough. How will the ICANN Chair instil the multi-stakeholder model and more openness into ICANN's processes?- Opening the door to work on user rights (an expansion of "consumer choice") would be welcome too, bearing in mind the ALAC has an issue with the Board's definition of "consumer" since our community strives to bring the voice of the end user into ICANN, whether they are consumers or non consumers of domain names; they are Internet users."
8. San Jose, Costa Rica - Agenda Development (5 min) - Olivier
9. Review of the 28 February ALAC Meeting (10 min)
10. Any other Business -- Olivier (5 min)
-Current ALS application were disucssed, particularly those where the regional advice was to NOT accredit the applicant. 
24 January ALAC meeting
Staff to support Beau with the RR page
OCL - to put Sandra H. and Hofericther in touch - COMPLETED
Staff to contact Sala to discus the issue of capacity building issues on the Feb ALAC meeting. 
CS: DiploFoundation has interesting information on capacity building. May be a good point to ask for their collaboration. 
OCL: I believe Sala completed the Diplo  course. 
CLO: Confirmed.
OCL: One of the first tasks for this group will be to select information for distance learning. Make it readily available. 
OCL: Tijani has offered his assistance with LACRALO events in CR. Silvia will remind LACRALO leaders that Tijani is ready to help them.
OCL: Will ask Steve Crocker regarding ALAC Report's format. He will see if there is a preferable template/style.
CLO: We need to be aware of bandwidth issues.
OCL: There is quite a bit of work being produced by our WGs, but I believe we can continue this drive of quality work. 
CLO: It would be a good idea to put a little training session together for Chairs and liaisons.
AI: Gisella to prepare a document showing ALAC members' current membership in WGs by the next ALAC meeting.
TBJ: I appreciate CLO's idea, but I do not think it should be included in the ICANN Academy. 
OCL: We are to move forward on the SOI and COI webpage. 
MA: I will try to have something concrete by the end of the week. 
EL: I believe it is important to make the ICANN community aware of activties going on (not just in the US through SOP but also internatioanlly). We need to let people know that these things could go through we the implications if they are in fact passed. 
CS: I find it appalling that they in the GNSO did not see the SOPA/PIPA issue as relevant to ICANN's remit. That is exactly what they do. The second point is that there is this the contracted parties that fund ICANN. We represent users..from elements in the contracted parties house. We should at least try to put it on the agenda. 
CLO: On that last point that CS was raising, it is important to note that it is not just a CP view, but a Board view as stated in San Francisco. So perhaps not to 
CLO: We need to stay focused on the main topics that will be discussed at the ICANN Meeting. Perhaps it is best to have this discussion in Prague or Toronto. 
OCL: Should we place SOPA on our agenda as the "hot item?"
EL: As At-Large we have the mandated ability to give advice. We need to give the necessary advice to ensure the stability of the DNS, even if that advice comes from a WG. 
OCL: Are you suggesting a Statement.
EL: Yes, we should give out formal advice. 
AG: I agree with Evan, we need to discuss the issue face-to-face in San Jose. 
OCL: We should discuss this briefly in CR, with the intent of establishign a WG to draft a Statement before Prague. 
AI: ALAC to iscuss this briefly in CR, with the intent of establishign a WG to draft a Statement before Prague. 
AI: OCL to rsuggest issue of SOPA as a discussion item with AC/SO Chairs meeting with Rod Beckstrom on Friday in CR. 
EL: In advance of CR, could we call for expertise on this issue? 
OCL: Will meet with Mark Carvell this week and will test the waters as to what he, as UK GAC members, thinks of this. I will report back to you this. 
Open Policy Issues: 
Initial Report on Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs- statement about to be voted on
Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Policy Development Process - Recommendation 9, Part 2 Concerning a New Provision to Lock and Unlock Domain Names - No Statement
Framework for the FY 13 Budget - Tijani is preparing a draft
WHOIS Policy Review Team Draft Report - Carlton has prepared a draft
Initial Report on Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs - vote to begin shortly
Interim Report on Support Significantly Interested Parties for ccTLD Delegation or Redelegation Requests - 
Further Bylaw Changes Following Adoption of Revised Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Policy Development Process (PDP) - Alan to prepare a statement to the ExCom saying whether we need to submit a comment on the PDP Bylaw Comment Period.
AI: Staff to send a reminder of how to subscribe to the ICANN Policy list.
CLO: Public Comment period requires from all SOs/ACs early intervention we we do not recieve 11th hour input. 
EL: Some ALSes feel marginalized due to the limited comment period. They feel that there is not enough time for them to accurately voice their opinions. We need to stop chasing out tails and have more time to respond to comments. 
 AI: This transcript is to be saved for the RoP WG for when they begin their work. 
4. San Jose, Costa Rica - Agenda Development (20 min) - Olivier
AI: Evan to liaise with the NCSG and attempt to reduce the current agenda into a more managable one. 
5. Agenda Items for ALAC Meetng of 28 February 2012  
a. On-line capacity building - Sala
b. At-Large/ALAC Objection Process - update and next steps (Avri)
c. ALAC Members' participation in WGs (Gisella) - This topic can be punted to the San Jose meeting if there is not enough time. Perhpaps the ExCom could recieve the information in an email. 
6. - Any Other Business 
a. Establishing procedures for the posting of ALAC statements and letters to the Board Correspondence page

  • No labels