1. Roll Call Participants: Darlene Thompson (DT), Monique Chartrand (MC), Evan Leibovitch (EL), Gareth Shearman (GS), Myles Braithwaite (MB), Eduardo Diaz (ED), Gordon Chillcott (GC), Louis Houle (LH), Danny Younger (DY), Wendy Seltzer (WS), Seth Reiss (SH), Alan Greenburg (AG), Glenn McKnight (GB)
Regrets: Beau Brendler
Staff: Heidi Ullrich (HU)
2. Review of the Summary Minutes of 19 October 2009
3. Review of the Action Items of 19 October 2009
We discussed whether we want to reschedule our normal conference call to the third Monday of the month rather than the second as it will always conflict with Canadian Thanksgiving in October and will have to be shifted each October. It was suggested that we want to make sure our conference call is before the ALAC conference call rather than after. It was decided to keep the status quo so as not to add confusion.
It was also noted that the UTC time for our conference calls has changed due to Daylight Savings Time.
NARALO members to discuss the At-Large selection process and discuss options. EL asked NARALO to finalize their preference on options through a discussion on the NA-Discuss mailing list. This is to be discussed further on-line.
EL is the NARALO representative on the WHOIS/IP working group. This drafting committee may not have a full consensus statement to take to the board. If not, ALAC will have their own submission.
HU to keep NARALO updated on meeting with the proposed Consumers Constituency and the SIC scheduled to take place in Seoul. (HU to add details).
4. Open Public Comment Periods
Which items listed above do people from NARALO want to get involved in?
a. At-Large Policy Development Schedule
Proposed Agenda Items
1. Feedback from the Seoul Meeting
NomCom Review– In Seoul, they wanted to reduce ALAC participation in that group to three rather than five. There was strong push-back on that. It seemed to be a budget issue rather than anything else – attempting to reduce the size of the entire group. WS will put together a draft letter on this. Also, if they are looking to reduce the size of the NomCom, then they can reduce the size of the business constituency from two seats to one so that they don’t have double representation.
a. Key At-Large outputs and action items - click here for the At-Large list of meetings
i. gTLD issues – intellectual property (UDRP, URS)
Rapid Suspension- There was a comment made in the URS meeting the other day that 14 days was insufficient for response in case of a default. The registrant actually has 44 days in which to respond because they can ask for a review. This sounds quite reasonable.
ii. gTLD issues – Expressions of Interest
Expressions of Interest for New gTLDs– Jonathan Frakes mentioned this in Seoul and suggested that people are running through all kinds of costs without being able to keep a place-holder on names. It was suggested that people be able to put in an expression of interest for a TLD (at a cost). From the point of view of root-scaling we need to be careful of the number of new gTLDs accepted per year. We may need a set of allocation principles if there are a greater number of new gTLDs than a stated limit (like 100). It was decided to allow the working group to work through the process and not have direct NARALO input.
iii. gTLD issues – Morality and Public Order objections
The New gTLD Applicant Guidebook has a section on morality and public order. It was surprising how many of the GAC at the Seoul meeting also didn’t agree with it. Most thought that there had to be something there instead, though. DY suggested having the section removed completely with nothing put in its place. However, it was felt that the GAC would not approve an action like this without putting something else in instead. Also, it was felt that it isn’t just a GAC or ALAC matter but, rather, a GNSO matter. Alan stated that it is too late to bring it to the GNSO but rather to staff or the board. EL asked if it is worthwhile to put a couple of ALAC people and a couple of GAC people together to come up with some kind of alternative wording. DY is going to find out what his GAC representative thinks on all of this.
iv. Registrant Rights declarations
b. Process to select the At-Large Voting Board Director
2. At-Large Implementation Outline- next steps
3. Recent and Upcoming Activities of ALAC (Alan, Beau, and Gareth)
Recall Procedures for ALAC Members (Performance Measures)– If the RALO chooses not to take any action and the ALAC rep is causing enough of a problem, we need to have recall procedures. AG will be redrafting the recall procedures and will send it out to the group. They are much more benevolent than just “dismissal” as it also contains all kinds of ways to assist someone who just may be struggling.
4. Outreach – what can be done? What needs to be done?
This will be taken up on-line. We need to find out what kind of budget is available to us for outreach.
For Information see:
Tri-fold EURALO Flyer (Revised 11-2009) IC_Euralo_Brochure_1.pdf
At-Large Brochure (Updated 11-2009) IC_At_Large_Brochure_High.pdfIC_At_Large_Brochure_High.pdf
5. Other Business
ED brought up the point that soon the Nominating Committee will be looking for new people. If anybody is interested, please send in your name.
DY filed a complaint with the Ombudsman to review the process at which ALAC arrives at its statements. He feels that there is an issue of lack of process.
