ALAC Participants: Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Gareth Shearman, Sylvia Herlein Leite, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Jean-Jacques Subrenat, Marc Rotenberg,
Sandra Hoferichter, Evan Leibovitch, Edmon Chung,

Liaisons/Guests: Sebastien Bachollet, Alan Greenberg, Ron Sherwood, Hong Xue, Dev Anand Teelucksingh

Apologies: Dave Kissoondoyal, Sergio Salinas Porto, James Seng, Fatimata Seye Sylla (non ALAC)

Absent: Mohamed El Bashir, Carlton Samuels

Staff: Heidi Ullrich, Seth Greene, Matthias Langenegger

Review of the Action Items from the ALAC Meeting of 22 January 2011

Staff to send minutes of BCEC/ABSdt call to all members for further comments.

Staff to add Alan to joint BCEC/ABSdt mailing list and to send Alan minutes of last meeting.-

Heidi to follow up with IT re Confluence editing user's guide. -

Heidi: I am still waiting for feedback from IT.

James to write draft of ALAC comment on Interim Report of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group.

Heidi: James has not responded so far. I will follow up with him.

Staff to organize a Community call on the Interim Report of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group. Steve Sheng is to be invited as Guest Speaker. -COMPLETED
Evan to be Chair AGAT WG.-


Carlton to lead on drafting of unionized JAS Charter.
CANCELED - It was decided that Alan will draft the document

Olivier to inform GNSO that ALAC going ahead with unionized JAS charter.

AI: Staff to send draft ALAC unionized JAS Charter to ALAC-Announce mailing list with a courtesy comment to the GNSO.

Olivier to check DSSA WG Charter regarding positions that the ALAC needs to fill (re. alternate Liaison). Will follow up with Chair of SSAC. -
ONGOING - waiting for a reply

Staff to send announcement of At-Large DSSA WG members and their roles to the DSSA WG support staff. -

Staff to send announcement to RALOs on ALAC decision to expand the ALAC Sub-Committee on Budget and Finance to one non-ALAC regional representative per region.

Olivier to draft Preparation of At-Large Requests to ICANN's FY12 Budget working with the ExCom. The draft text is to be posted on the At-Large FY12 Budget Workspace.

Staff, in consultation with CLO, to prepare brief ALAC response to the ATRT Report Recommendations. Staff to send to ExCom for review. -

Staff to include on the proposed agenda to the next ALAC meeting reports from Improvements WTs. (They are to be put early in the ALAC agenda and allocated sufficient time for presentation, feedback, etc.)

Review of Current ALS Applications

Staff summarised the current status of the current ALS applications:
Cook Island Internet Action Group: ALAC vote ongoing
Binary Egypt: ALAC vote ongoing
Forum des Cadres Scientifiques pour le Développement (FORCAS): put on hold, application form incomplete
European Media Platform: waiting for due diligence statement


CLO: Please note that my report has just been updated.

OCL: Do we still need to list the reports for .mobi

Staff: Yes, Andres Piazza is the current .mobi liaison.

Review and Revise Timelines on the Policy Advice Development Calendar

The following currently open public consultations have been scheduled for comment by the ALAC:

Proposed Process for Recognition of New GNSO Constituencies

Alan: The timelines are ridiculous, no one has the stamina to go through it.

Interim Report of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group

AI: OCL will review whether James will draft a Statement on the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group

The following currently open public consultations have not yet been discussed whether or not the ALAC wishes to prepare a statement on them:

ccNSO Delegation and Redelegation WG Final Report

CLO: I don't think it is necessary for us to write a statement on that. Ron, what are your views?

Ron: I agree

Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part B Working Group Proposed Final Report

Alan: I have not spent a lot of time on this.

OCL: Is this something we need to comment on?

CLO: It does affect end users but given our limited resources, I am not sure we need to comment on this.

AI: Alan and Sylvia will investigate whether it is necessary for the ALAC to send a comment.

Jean-Jacques: I wanted to make a comment on Delegation and Redelegation. ICANN's method is not very effective and our RALOs need to be alert to this.

Proposed New GNSO Policy Development Process

Alan: I am one of the authors of this document. It is important. It advises that the Advisory Committees should be able to start PDPs. I am happy to talk to everybody interested in writing the ALAC advice but I should not be the author of the ALAC comment.

AI: Dev and Dave to follow up with advise from Alan, Cheryl and everybody involved with the Proposed New GNSO Policy Development Process from At-Large.

Proposed Framework for the Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) Operating Plan and Budget

AI: The Finance Subcommittee will draft an ALAC comment on the Proposed Framework for the Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) Operating Plan and Budget

Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Working Group Proposed Final Report (ends 7 April 11)

Alan: This looks at registrants rights post expiration. There are none at this point. The report does not come close to what we would want. There were too many registrars in the WG and they teamed up against our interests. We can still make changes based on comments but we need to make them. Otherwise the registrars will make their comments and push in a certain comments.

OCL: Personally, I was a bit disappointed by the bullying of the registrars.

Alan: We need to have as many comments as possible from the At-Large community.

AI: Alan will summarise the difficult aspects of the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Working Group Proposed Final Report and present it to the At-Large community in SFO.

CLO: We need to follow up with the public consultation committee with regards to cultural sensibility issues, in particular with respect to the holiday calendar.

Heidi: We have informed communication of a cross-cultural calendar but given the current resource constraints it is unclear when this calendar will be set up.

Jean-Jacques: ICANN's meeting team already has a quite extensive list of cultural holidays it takes into account for their meeting planning.

AI: Staff will ask the RALOs to review the suggested meeting dates for 2014 - 2016 (see

Hong: Even the UN has meetings right after Chinese New Year. It is very difficult to coordinate international meetings.

The Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team Set of Issues (ends 6 April 2011)

AI: SSAC liaison to draft an ALAC statement on the The Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team Set of Issues.

AI: Staff will add this consultation to the SFO meeting agendas.

Proposed Bylaw Amendments as requested by At-Large Improvements WT A

Some ALAC members had submitted suggested changes to the Bylaws amendments to Article XI, Section 2.4.a as proposed by WT A.  These suggested changes can be found at  Olivier read each of the suggested changes aloud to the group.

Samantha: The ICANN Bylaws are maintained by the Legal Department. And I will need to take the changes suggested here back to the department.  Here and now, I can not comment generally and on behalf of myself, however.  Let me explain to the ALAC, as I explained to WT A, that the purpose of the preamble that we've written is to quickly summarize the role of the ALAC without making someone read through every specific point.

Olivier's suggested change is to replace

"The ALAC considers and provides advice on all aspects of work within ICANN" with "The ALAC considers and provides advice on all aspects of activity within ICANN." 

Olivier explained in the comments:  My reason for this suggestion is that the ALAC is also able to provide advice on matters not directly tagged as work, such as, but not limited to the location of a meeting, personnel changes, opening/closing of ICANN offices, etc.  The text it replaces used to mention: "provide advice on the activities of ICANN" and this was wide-ranging.  I am aware that the rest of the "new" sentence is: "as well as the many other issues for which community input and advice is sought."  and I gather that this was included to expand the first part which restricted its input to "work". However, this also constrains the ALAC's mission.
The ALAC is able to comment on issues for which community input and advice is *NOT* sought too.

The ALAC decided to accept Olivier's suggested change.

Jean-Jacques's suggested change is to replace sentences 1 and 3 with the following:  "The ALAC, as the primary organizational home within ICANN for individual Internet users, has a responsibility in enhancing ICANN's accountability mechanisms, as called for by the Affirmation of Commitments. It also coordinates some of ICANN's outreach to individual Internet users."  The rationale is to use already standardized language and to add the important element of the AoC to the text.

The ALAC decided to accepted Jean-Jacques's change.

Olivier, buidling on Jean-Jacques's above change, further suggested on the list the following:  "At-Large (ALSes, RALOs, and the ALAC), as the primary organizational home within ICANN for individual Internet users, has a responsibility to enhance ICANN's accountability mechanisms, as called for by the Affirmation of Commitments. It also coordinates some of ICANN's outreach to individual Internet users."

The ALAC rejected this change suggested by Olivier.

Alan:  The point that our community includes registrants is not obvious to everyone, hence my suggested change in the commnets.  Therefore, I have suggested (in the comments) the following addition after the first sentence of XI.2.4.a:  "Individual Internet users may include, but are not limited to, domain name registrants in both gTLDs and ccTLDs."  This change would not change who At-Large includes.  However, if we do not make the inclusion of registrants explicit here, we will have to fight battles later, which will waste time.

Evan: The term "end user" already includes everyone.  I am not in favor of this change, because "registrant" is too narrow a term.  

Samantha: As we review these suggested comments, we shold turn to the ALAC Review WG Final Report.  If the wording is in there, it goes a long way in supporting the suggested change.

Alan:  It is not in the report because it was considered a given to the people who wrote it. This is not true for everybody.

Marc: I don't think the fact that something is not consistent with the Bylaws or in the Final Report should stop us from doing what is right.

The ALAC decided to reject Alan's change.

Evan moved that the ALAC approve (a) WT A's revision of Bylaws XI.2.4.a., with Olivier's first change and Jean-Jacques's change incorporated (but not with Olivier's second change or Alan's change incorporated) and (b) WT A's revision, as proposed, to XI.2.4.j. -- and propose propose both to the ICANN's General Counsel's Office.  Jean-Jacques seconded the motion.

The wording of XI.2.4.a,, as it was approved by the ALAC, follows:

The ALAC, as the primary organizational home within ICANN for individual Internet users, has a responsibility to enhance ICANN's accountability mechanisms, as called for in the Affirmation of Commitments.  It also coordinates some of ICANN's outreach to individual Internet users.  The ALAC considers and provides advice on all aspects of activity within ICANN, including policies created through ICANN's Supporting Organizations, as well as the many other issues for which community input and advice are sought.  
The specific elements of how ALAC fulfills this mandate are set forth below.

The wording of XI.2.4.j., as it was proposed by WT A and approved by the ALAC, follows:

The ALAC is also responsible, working in conjunction with the RALOs, for coordinating the following activities:

7. Participating in the ICANN policy development processes and providing input and advice that accurately reflects the views of individual Internet users;

In agreement:

The motion passed unanimously.

Brief Reports from At-Large Improvements Work Teams

The WG Chairs gave a brief presentation of the work of the Improvement WTs. All the presentations are available on the agenda page for this meeting.

GAC-Board Meeting - Discussion of ALAC positions

OCL: We will talk to the AGAT WG in Brussels. I imagine we could start with the first topic on the summary page for the Board GAC meeting:

T1: The objection procedures including the requirements for governments to pay fees;

Evan: Our position on this is evolving. We have room to move. There might be some fearmongering about a possible GVT veto, I don't think it is substantial.

OCL: I agree with Evan. I think our position has evolved since we submitted these statements. I suggest that we discuss this during the AGAT call.

Evan: AGAT has a specific task ahead. We need to propose specific wording. We are compressed.

T2: Procedures for the review of sensitive strings;

CLO: I encourage all of you to subscribe to the ATRT Skype list to discuss this further.

Tijani: I suggest that during the next 2 days we will comment on this and then we will compile the comments in the following two days. We do not currently have a position on all of those points.

OCL: Does anybody disagree with this?

AI: Heidi will email the ALAC and ask for comments on the At-Large position on the gTLD guidebook:

There was general agreement that Skype is better suited to follow the meeting than Adobe Connect.

CLO: I don't see a downside with having both an AC and Skype chat open.

AI: Staff will set up an AC room for the coming GAC-Board meeting in Brussels

Defining Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation - Next Steps

Olivier: There is progress but it is very slow.

Heidi: There are several consumer-related meetings in San Francisco. Unfortunately, the most prominent meeting hosted by Beau and Alex is during the ALAC policy meetings on Tuesday.

OCL: Should ALAC take the lead on this?

CLO: Not the lead but a leadership role.

JJS: ALAC has an advantage. We can ask the RALOs to come up with examples why certain issues should be defended. Not all AC/SO can come up with such a worldwide representative view. I concur with CLO that we should participate but not be leading the process.

Evan: We have already extended in Registrant's rights and this is also an area where we can expand.

Alan: I agree with Cheryl. ICANN only really controls gTLDs. ICANN has only little influence on ccTLDs. We have an interest in ccTLD but ICANN has not a prominent role.

AI: OCL will continue following up with Rosmary Sinclair and the other members involved in a possible Consumer Constituency.

Heidi: There have been some changes. We are waiting to hear from Heather. We will have a formal meeting with the Chairs of the ccNSO and the GNSO. Vint Cerf confirmed his participation in the NARALO showcase.

CLO: We need to look at non-At Large meetings we will cover in SFO.

Evan: It is imperative that we have a formal meeting with the GAC. I understand that the GAC is occupied with Bruseels but still,  this should not be forgotten.

Tentative Stanford Town Hall

Heidi: We started a mailing list. We have no resources so it would need to be self-organised. If we do move ahead, I suggest that we have a preparatory call in the next few days. The bus would cost USD 900.

Marc: There is a lot of interest but the key person has not responded to my emails. We are still looking at possible meeting venues. Do we reach out do a university environment or do we want to have it closer to the ICANN meeting? We need to determine in the next few days whether the local host will go ahead with this. If we don't have their consensus we can't go ahead. We should know by the end of the week.

Any Other Business

The ccNSO seeks 4 ALAC volunteers for new Study Group on the use of names for countries and territories

AI: The Staff will ask the RALO to put forward volunteers for the ccNSO study group on the use of names for countries and territories

AI: OCL and Staff will work together to look at ways to shorten the next conference call.

The meeting was then adjourned.

  • No labels