Many thanks to the ALAC and At-Large Team (including staff) who attended the ICANN64 meeting in Kobe. We had packed rooms for our policy and workshop activity sessions, and I think that those who attended the sessions (and they weren’t all just fellowship people) learned a lot from these new activities. Let’s continue with this new session model for a while and see how we can improve incrementally over time, rather than making any dramatic changes.
(photo credit: ICANN photographer)
A reminder that attendance of travellers was recorded at each of the working sessions and those sessions identified as mandatory for ALAC and At-Large, unless staff had been notified.
One observation – perhaps in our efforts to concentrate on policy, we didn’t actually allow enough time for discussions of important issues. Updates weren’t enough. We need to incorporate at least one session for substantive discussion about non-policy issues.
One disappointment – criticism in public by ALAC members of the efforts of ALAC and At-Large colleagues who have been tasked with making some critical recommendations. We encourage a diversity of views, but this also requires us all to be tolerant of others’ views and to work together on solutions. Outbursts in front of observers and important guests, and not turning up to present at joint meetings with key ICANN partners, were not a good reflection on At-Large. I’d like us all to be working together towards enhancing our contributions to the work of the wider ICANN community.
One request - I would welcome a very brief report (before 30 March) from staff and each of the moderators of the ALAC and At-Large working sessions that were held at ICANN64, as well as any comments from the ALT+ for the wikispace record of our ICANN64 activities.
ALAC-SSAC Session (Photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
JOINT ALAC-GAC SESSION
(photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
The ALAC team joined GAC leader Manal Ismail and the members of the Government Advisory Committee to present our contributions to topics of common concern – the EPDP and Subsequent Procedures – as well as a comment on the speech by President Macron at the Paris IGF. We also propose to share ideas on capacity building with their Underserved Regions Group, and have now submitted two joint ALAC-GAC statements to the Board – one, a request for information from ICANN Org that will help our members to better understand new policy issues so that they can contribute more meaningfully to policy discussions which has been supported by the ICANN Board, and a very recent paper stating a joint position on the EDPD.
With my folks from the Cook Islands, Carl and Pua Hunter. Pua leads the GAC Underserved Regions Committee (photo: Glenn McKnight)
JOINT ALAC-ccNSO SESSION
This session was curtailed due to the ALAC and At-Large Leadership Team having to attend a special reception. The ALAC Chair provided the ccNSO participants with a brief overview of the structure of At-Large and provided some insights into what At-Large would be focusing on within its system, as well as our usual policy and outreach and engagement activities. Because of the shortened session, the ccNSO will provide a similar overview at the Montreal meeting. We had already decided that the Policy Forum (the second meeting of the year) would be too short to try to include a joint session. Giovanni Seppia, the Chair of the ccNSO Strategic and Operational Standing Committee, provided an overview of what is on top for the ccNSO this coming year.
(photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
THE RECEPTION OF THE GLOBAL COMMISSION OF STABILITY IN CYBERSPACE.
The ALAC and At-Large Leadership Team were very honoured to be invited to the reception of the Global Commission of Stability in Cyberspace (GCSC) hosted by the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication. The GCSC had earlier made a series of presentations related to their work. The ALAC team was also accompanied by members of the local At-Large Structure, ISOC Japan. The director from the Japanese Ministry and one of the co-Chairs of the GCSC were presented with gifts by the ALAC Chair.
With the former Chair of the GCSC and the representative of the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (photo credit: Olivier Crepin LeBlond)
AT-LARGE PARTNERS MEETING
Sally Costerton introduced the session to the work of the Global Stakeholders Team and the collaborative planning of outreach and engagement that is done with regional leaders to support their on-the-ground efforts with current and potential members in their regions. There was also some indication of proposed activities of the GSE Team and their work with governments and universities which is not normally included in ALS outreach, but they are invaluable stakeholder partnerships for ICANN. This was followed by a breakout session where regional teams met with their regional partners to discuss possible opportunities for regional members to participate in activities which they are running in the regions. The aim of the meeting was to acknowledge the various partners who are already providing and supporting training and capacity building for our ALS members in the regions. RIRs got special mention, some of whom already include RALO Leaders into their regional programmes so that many ALS members have benefitted from ICANN work that is happening in the regions. RALO Leaders then reported their discussion outcomes to the rest of the gathering.
AT-LARGE LEADERSHIP POLICY WORKSHOP 2:
Balancing privacy with security and stability for the Internet end user.
Dear Maureen, Congratulations on your first meeting as ALAC boss. I really enjoyed several of the meetings. GDPR with GNSO people, and IDN were, in my view, very productive, not only in the discussion, but also in the relationship with other silos. Also enjoyed the ALT informal meeting.
(photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
Not a resume of a particular meeting, but have two thoughts about this meeting:
Multi stakeholder model I began to have concerns in the way the multi stake holder model is being questioned. Yes, I agree there must be an improvement over the time. It is a new model, and we all are learning over the time. But, only looking at its imperfections and weakness, tends to put in the mind of the people that the model is not working, that it is "wrong". And it seemed to me, the same discussions we had in several countries, including mine, where we began to question democracy, and just enforce the bad things of it, forgetting the good ones, and with time, people had the idea the system was wrong, and ended up in a authoritarian regime. Yes, it is easier to take decisions unilaterally, they are faster and simpler, but not inclusive. If we, as the weakest(*) part of the table don´t care, we might end up not being part of it, and just get thrown away.
(*) weakest part because we are volunteers, and without the support of ICANN it will be almost impossible for any of us to attend the meetings in person.
Domain Names There was a question from ALAC to the board, concerning the domain names. It included two parts, the domain names not being used because of technologies like Facebook, and the new DNS technologies. The first one was not answered, and my concern, is that there is no awareness of this in the community (at least I haven´t heard anything related to this in any meeting or even an informal discussion). Most small companies, and individuals today instead of registering a domain name, are just setting a Facebook or Instagram page. The cost is 0 (not including the use of you data of course), and it is very, very easy to use, add to this a free email, and you are set. No need for hosting, developing, firewall, etc.. How many domain names are not registered a year because of this?. And yet, what we ended discussing is the new round of gTLD. There are 1200+ gTLD, and 200+ ccTLDs (plus the second level TLDs) to choose the name of a domain. And yes, we hear numbers of over 20 thousand requests for new gTLDs, really?.
Not sure this thought are what you wanted, hope this helps.
Brief round-up of ICANN 64 in Kobe, Japan written for NARALO newsletter.
Marita Moll, NARALO representative on the At- Large Advisory Committee
In Kobe, At-Large held several well-attended sessions dedicated to high-interest policy issues. Panels of invited guests debated their positions on issues like privacy and surveillance in the context of GDPR and the subsequent procedures work which is focussed on refining the ground rules for new gTLD applications. There was also a special presentation by delegates from the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC) which is developing proposals for norms and policies to enhance international security and stability and guide responsible state and non-state behavior in cyberspace. (https://cyberstability.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/GCSC-Singapore-Norm-Package-3MB.pdf ).
Of special interest to all delegates were the sessions dealing with the draft five-year strategic plan which will be a high priority topic around ICANN for the next few months. In our response to the the draft strategic plan we noted that promoting and improving Universal Acceptance, implementing Internationalized Domain Names and encouraging readiness for IPv6 were among the necessary steps toward reaching a larger and more diverse Internet end user base. As a result of discussions with the Universal Acceptance Steering Group, the At-Large community has agreed to a plan to use it’s networks to disseminate information about Universal Acceptance in an effort to help resolve this global problem. Please check out the draft plan here (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/strategic-plan-2021-2025-draft-20dec18-en.pdf ) as well as the At-large response ( https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=102140281).
There was a joint NCUC, NPOC and At-Large outreach session to inform newcomers about the potential areas of involvement as well as an At-large leadership workshop in which the ALAC delegates discussed priorities and workflow issues. There were discussions with the ICANN board, ICANN CEO, and various constituencies. In addition, there was a joint ALAC-GAC statement on common concerns related to the EPDP discussions.
At ICANN64, I chaired a session on ICANN compliance with Jamie Hedlund. On the downside, we were only able to squeeze in a 45-minute session, but those 45 minutes were well spent. Jamie and his team explained the ICANN compliance process and began walking us through their statistics and dashboards. ALAC had many questions and Jamie’s team came well prepared. We came away with a better understanding of compliance in the ICANN-sense, that is when contracted parties violate their contracts with ICANN. Many end user complaints are regrettably out of scope for ICANN. However the conversation opened the door to some potentially useful paths towards a better end user experience such as identifying contracted parties with many complaints. I’m looking forward to another session with Jamie and his team soon so that we can continue our conversation and make compliance work better for end users.
- Mapping names to IP Addresses - Name resolution; Resolvers – send query (find IP address for name); Name Servers - answer the queries; Stub Resolvers (resolvers in, for example, mobile phones) send DNS query to recursive resolvers; Caching – replication of information – to provide redundancy; Name Space – an inverted tree, with IANA at the top – has listing of all type of records; Type of record: A Record – Ipv4 addresses, Quad A record – Ipv6 addressed; 12 organisations operate the authoritative rood servers (with many more root server machines)
Holly in action during an ALAC working session. (photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
Saturday 10.30: ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee
The Committee discussed the draft policy on retirement of a ccTLD from the ISO 3166 list and removal from the root zone – proposing an orderly process of shutdown of the registry for retirement - within 5 years. Suggested elements in a retirement plan include: Date the manager will stop accepting new registrations; Date the Manager will stop accepting renewals; Date the Manager will stop accepting transfers; Date the ccTLD will be removed from the root zone; Date registrants will be informed.
Discussion included the schedule for finalisation (probably 2 years for the whole process), whether there should be an obligation - to at least negotiate in good faith, whether the suggested elements are appropriate for all ccTLD managers and, indeed, if ccTLD managers should be under any obligation to registrants (this was later discussed and largely discounted) Additional elements could include a rationale for the plan, how disputes are handled, etc.
Sunday 1700 – 1745: Joint meeting of ccNSO and ALAC
Review by the ccNSO and ALAC of priorities of the year; For ALAC: Second phase of the work on GDPR (on gated access to personal information) ;And Subsequent procedures issues (arising from if/when there is a further round for new gTLDs)
For ccNSO: on subsequent procedures, workstream 2 – improvement of diversity, standards of conduct and increased SO/AC issues of ccountability, travel funding, and a review of the ccNSO work plan
Sunday 1615: Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace
Reception given by the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications for members of the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace for members of the ALAC executive. Included a presentation by Commission members of their eight ‘Norms’ to enhance international security and stability and ‘guide responsible state and non-state behaviour in cyberspace. The first ‘norm’ is protecting the public core of the Internet, with the Australian Assistance and Access Act cited and their example of legislation contrary to the norm.
Issues raised: Update on subsequent procedures (for further ‘rounds’ of new gTLDs); GDPR – and second phase on access models to the data; ICANN compliance audit; DNS abuse; Development of comments for processes for policy development
APRALO Leadership Team (Kaili, Holly, Justine, Nadira, Maureen, Lianna. Satish & Ali) Photo credt: Glenn McKnight
Tuesday 1315: Emerging Identifiers Technology
Presentations on new types of transports of DNS over Transport Layer Security (TLS) and HTTPs; Data is secured with TLD so privacy protected; However, new transport types raised policy issues; DNS over TLS – DoT; DNS over HTTPS – DoH; Normal DNS transport – is susceptible to monitoring or answering to modification; In both DoT and DoH, packets’ path is not visible so is increased privacy and can’t be modified.
Policy issues raised by emerging identifiers: - In HTTP – Corporations can provide split view so person inside an organisation would be connected directly to an area within the corporation, whereas someone outside the corporation would be directed to the main entry point of the organisation. As well, corporations can monitor the exfiltration of data. Neither split view or exfiltration of data possible with DoT.
-Another issue: With DoT – data will go to chosen resolver. So if are in a place where don’t trust the resolver (e.g., public hot spot) ppackets will go to chosen resolver. Issue – will be fewer trusted resolvers – a centralization of resolvers rather than many thousands – so resolvers could become targets; speaker noted that the latest version of Android is already using DoT.
Decentralized Identifiers and Strong authentication – W3C is working on issue; Is about web authentication; Cryptographic token stored in phone/computer.
One of the outcomes that APRALO expected from the Kobe meeting, from a regional perspective, was closer linkages with our local ALS, ISOC Japan. Early on during the preparatory phase of ICANN64, APRALO had discussions within the Leadership team as well as with ICANN APAC Hub (Jia-Rong and team), and with Jia-Rong's help, we had set up a meeting with ISOC-JP.
Since ICANN64 was being held in Kobe (whereas most of ISOC-JP members were clustered around Tokyo), we wanted to ensure that the ISOC-JP representatives were available at Kobe for the meeting. Further, we also wanted to ensure that the language aspect would not be a barrier. Subsequently, after discussions with ISOC-JP representatives, a meeting was set up between a three-member team from ISOC Japan and the APRALO Leadership team, ICANN APAC Hub team and Staff from ICANN/At-Large side. The representatives from ISOC JP were Ms Kumi MITANI, Atsushi ENDO and Yasuichi KITAMURA. It helped that some of the APRALO LT had worked with Endo-san whereas Mitani-san and Kitamura-san were new to us.
The meeting was scheduled for 15:30 on Sunday, and the ICANN team present consisted of Jia-Rong, Joyce and Ken (from ICANN APAC), Maureen, Satish, Ali and Lianna from the APRALO LT and Heidi and Silvia from Staff.
After self-introductions, the meeting started off by Jia-Rong explaining about the community-facing work being done by the APAC Hub, followed by Satish providing a brief update on the role and activities of APRALO. The focus of both these presentations was how the APAC Hub/APRALO could support policy interventions by ISOC-JP should it decide to focus on this aspect.
Following this, Endo-san provided an update on the history, present status and activities of ISOC-JP. In summary, ISOC-JP had an active technical community, and had several programmes focused on IETF and other technical processes. Most of the members of ISOC-JP had a technical background, and therefore, the technical focus was a logical development.
Subsequently, the meeting discussed several possibilities for closer work, particularly relating to ICANN policy. The meeting also discussed the present status of ISOC-JP members in different ICANN processes including Fellowship, NextGen and APIGA, all of which provided for newcomers–particularly from the younger generation–to come into the At-Large mainstream. The possibility of individual members was also discussed. One of the major barriers to wider dissemination of information on ICANN was identified as the availability of documentation in Japanese.
The meeting concluded with both ISOC-JP and APRALO committing to keep these discussions alive, and to explore further ways to work together in the domains of Outreach & Engagement and participation in ICANN and At-Large activities, particularly the Policy processes.
Summary of the EPDP Team F2F Meetings & the Middle East Space Session
ICANN 64 Meeting, Kobe
By: Hadia Elminiawi
EPDP on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data ICANN 64 F2F Meetings
The EPDP team on gTLD Registration Data had 3 F2F meetings and an informal reception during the ICANN 64 meeting in Kobe. The first meeting was a full day that concluded at 18:30 local time. The meeting began with a "Tour de Table", wherein each stakeholder made an opening statement. I presented the ALAC statement, which addressed our commitments, objectives and expectations for phase 2. Next we discussed the mind map of phase 2. The mind map includes three main strands, the first is the System for Standardized Access to Non-Public Registration Data which includes three main topics: a) Purposes for accessing data, b) Credentialing and c) Terms of access and compliance. The second strand is about Important Issues for Further Community Action which includes topics like natural and legal persons and the third strand is about Issues Deferred from EPDP Phase 1. The mind map includes the charter questions and topics in addition to the items that were deferred from phase 1. Next we went through a brain storming exercise with the objective of identifying inter-dependencies among the issues and creating an order for discussions, in addition to identifying the resource requirements and the working methods. After that we discussed possible approaches, timelines, working methods and a possible target date for the delivery of the report. Lastly we had an implementation status update by the GDD. The second F2F meeting was with the Technical Study Group (TSG) on Access to Non-Public Registration Data, the TSG presented an overview of the draft technical model, draft design schematic, the timelines and plans. The target date for the publishing of the Final Technical Model is the 23rd of April 2019. On the third F2F meeting we agreed that the team will review the mind map and follow up on the questions that relate to the dependencies, priorities, legal guidance and the target date for the publishing of the report, we also agreed that several google docs will be set to identify potential legal questions and any additional required questions that need to be addressed, in addition a question was posed to ICANN org with regard to sharing the TGS report with the EPDP/DPAs.
EPDP Team – Group Photo
ICANN 64 Middle East Space Session
The Middle East Space had a session during the ICANN 64 meeting in Kobe, which I participated in. Cherine Chalaby ICANN Board Chairperson, Ajay Data UASG Chairperson and Ram Mohan former UASG Chairperson attended the session. Present at the session were also some members of the UASG and TF-AIDN and the Middle East Space leaders in addition to some members of the Middle East community and the wider ICANN community. During the session we discussed the charter of the Middle East Space, we agreed that some edits were required and that a final version will be circulated to the community for final approval. After that the Middle East Space Statement was presented and discussed. The statement addressed the topic of UA, highlighting its importance to the region. It included recommendations to ICANN to help support the UA community initiative and said that the suggested recommendations contribute to strategic goal 3.1 of the ICANN 2021-2025 strategic plan. We agreed that a concise version of the statement would be prepared and read during the public forum and that the statement would be finalized later by the drafting team and the community based on the session’s discussion. The Middle East Statement on UA was read during the public forum by Zakir Syed.
I have been sharing this report of the Kobe Meeting with some of our other Canadian attendees (GAC esp.). Some of it was taken from reports above.
Report from ICANN 64 -- Marita Moll
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), the Regional At-Large Organization leaders and liaisons, and individual At-Large members of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) met in Kobe, Japan, from 9 to 14 March 2019. The following is a brief description of some of the 24 sessions that were held there:
Addressing Issues of current concern
At-Large held well-attended sessions dedicated to policy issues.
Balancing Privacy With Security and Stability for the Internet End User -- a panel of invited guests debated their positions with the goal of clarifying issues on both sides of this high priority topic currently being discussed in the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP)
There was a presentation by delegates from the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC) which is developing proposals for norms and policies to enhance international security and stability and guide responsible state and non-state behavior in cyberspace.
At-Large took part in the interactive session discussing ways forward on the Draft Strategic Plan for 2021-2025 . The session addressed strategic objective #2 -- Improve the effectiveness of ICANN's multi-stakeholder model of government.
As a result of discussions with the Universal Acceptance Steering Group, the At-Large community has agreed to a plan to use its networks to disseminate information about universal acceptance in an effort to help resolve this global problem.
At-Large continued discussions on outstanding issues in the Subsequent Procedures Working Groups 1-5 which are focussed on refining the ground rules for new gTLD applications. The need for more community members on the Community Priority Evaluation (CPE) committee was of particular concern. The ALAC is suggesting a cautious approach on the issue of a new gTLD round.
Meetings with the Board & CEO
The Board responded to questions regarding the increase in alternative identities (Facebook, etc.) and its implications on the budget, the need or not for a new round of gTLDs, and liability issues that might result from GDPR decisions.
ICANN CEO Göran Marby and Board Chair Cherine Chalaby responded to various concerns including the budget and strategic plan development.
Leon Sanchez, At-large board director provided an update on finance, FY20, addition budget requests and funded travelor guidelines from ICANN staff.
Inter-constituency activities
Meeting with the Government Advisory Council (GAC)
The ALAC team joined the members of the GAC to present our contributions to topics of common concern – the EPDP and Subsequent Procedures – as well as a comment on the speech by President Macron at the Paris IGF. We also propose to share ideas on capacity building with their Underserved Regions Group.
We have now submitted two joint ALAC-GAC statements to the Board – one, a request for information from ICANN Org that will help our members to better understand new policy issues so that they can contribute more meaningfully to policy discussions which has been supported by the ICANN Board, and a very recent paper stating a joint position on the EDPD.
Meeting with the Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO)
The ALAC Chair provided the ccNSO participants with a brief overview of the structure of At-Large and provided some insights into what At-Large would be focusing on within its system, as well as our usual policy and outreach and engagement activities. Giovanni Seppia, the Chair of the ccNSO Strategic and Operational Standing Committee, provided an overview of what is on top for the ccNSO this coming year.
Meeting with the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO)
New GNSO council chair Keith Drazek joined the group to discuss possibilities for enhanced co-operation between GNSO and ALAC
Working session with Jamie Hedlund of contractual compliance and consumer safeguard. Jamie and his team explained the ICANN compliance process and began walking us through their statistics and dashboards. We came away with a better understanding of compliance in the ICANN-sense, that is when contracted parties violate their contracts with ICANN. Many end user complaints are regrettably out of scope for ICANN.
There were also capacity building meetings with Root Server Advisory Committee (RSSAC), the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), and Rinalia Abdul Rahim, new Internet Society (ISOC) Senior VP.
Outreach and Community Engagement
A set of "talking points" was presented in order to explain At-Large positions on various policy issues.
At-Large outreach and engagement subcommittee presented their new strategy document.
Sally Costerton introduced the work of the Global Stakeholders Engagement Team and the collaborative planning of outreach and engagement that is done with regional leaders to support their on-the-ground efforts with current and potential members in their regions. There was also some indication of proposed activities of the GSE Team and their work with governments and universities. This was followed by a breakout session where regional teams met with their regional partners to discuss possible opportunities for regional members to participate in activities which they are running in the regions. RALO Leaders then reported their discussion outcomes to the rest of the gathering.
Joint At-Large, NCUC, NPOC and At-Large outreach sessions, "Finding your place in ICANN and learning about each other for future mutual support", informed newcomers about the potential areas of involvement
AFRALO-AfriCANN and APRALO members engaged in chapter discussions
At-Large and RALO promotional materials were available at a booth in the main hall which was staffed by volunteers.
Internal Matters
At-large leadership workshop in which the ALAC delegates discussed priorities and workflow issues.
The social media working group met and provided updates on social media strategy
8 Comments
Maureen Hilyard
ALAC Chair
1. My 2 minute evaluation
ALAC-SSAC Session (Photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
JOINT ALAC-GAC SESSION
(photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
The ALAC team joined GAC leader Manal Ismail and the members of the Government Advisory Committee to present our contributions to topics of common concern – the EPDP and Subsequent Procedures – as well as a comment on the speech by President Macron at the Paris IGF. We also propose to share ideas on capacity building with their Underserved Regions Group, and have now submitted two joint ALAC-GAC statements to the Board – one, a request for information from ICANN Org that will help our members to better understand new policy issues so that they can contribute more meaningfully to policy discussions which has been supported by the ICANN Board, and a very recent paper stating a joint position on the EDPD.
With my folks from the Cook Islands, Carl and Pua Hunter. Pua leads the GAC Underserved Regions Committee (photo: Glenn McKnight)
JOINT ALAC-ccNSO SESSION
This session was curtailed due to the ALAC and At-Large Leadership Team having to attend a special reception. The ALAC Chair provided the ccNSO participants with a brief overview of the structure of At-Large and provided some insights into what At-Large would be focusing on within its system, as well as our usual policy and outreach and engagement activities. Because of the shortened session, the ccNSO will provide a similar overview at the Montreal meeting. We had already decided that the Policy Forum (the second meeting of the year) would be too short to try to include a joint session. Giovanni Seppia, the Chair of the ccNSO Strategic and Operational Standing Committee, provided an overview of what is on top for the ccNSO this coming year.
(photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
THE RECEPTION OF THE GLOBAL COMMISSION OF STABILITY IN CYBERSPACE.
The ALAC and At-Large Leadership Team were very honoured to be invited to the reception of the Global Commission of Stability in Cyberspace (GCSC) hosted by the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication. The GCSC had earlier made a series of presentations related to their work. The ALAC team was also accompanied by members of the local At-Large Structure, ISOC Japan. The director from the Japanese Ministry and one of the co-Chairs of the GCSC were presented with gifts by the ALAC Chair.
(photo credit: Olivier Crepin LeBlond)
AT-LARGE PARTNERS MEETING
Sally Costerton introduced the session to the work of the Global Stakeholders Team and the collaborative planning of outreach and engagement that is done with regional leaders to support their on-the-ground efforts with current and potential members in their regions. There was also some indication of proposed activities of the GSE Team and their work with governments and universities which is not normally included in ALS outreach, but they are invaluable stakeholder partnerships for ICANN. This was followed by a breakout session where regional teams met with their regional partners to discuss possible opportunities for regional members to participate in activities which they are running in the regions. The aim of the meeting was to acknowledge the various partners who are already providing and supporting training and capacity building for our ALS members in the regions. RIRs got special mention, some of whom already include RALO Leaders into their regional programmes so that many ALS members have benefitted from ICANN work that is happening in the regions. RALO Leaders then reported their discussion outcomes to the rest of the gathering.
AT-LARGE LEADERSHIP POLICY WORKSHOP 2:
Balancing privacy with security and stability for the Internet end user.
Guest Speakers: Laureen Kapin, Greg Aaron, Kathy Kleiman and Farzaneh Badii
Maureen Hilyard
RICARDO HOLMQUIST
Dear Maureen,
Congratulations on your first meeting as ALAC boss. I really enjoyed several of the meetings. GDPR with GNSO people, and IDN were, in my view, very productive, not only in the discussion, but also in the relationship with other silos. Also enjoyed the ALT informal meeting.
Not a resume of a particular meeting, but have two thoughts about this meeting:
Multi stakeholder model
I began to have concerns in the way the multi stake holder model is being questioned. Yes, I agree there must be an improvement over the time. It is a new model, and we all are learning over the time. But, only looking at its imperfections and weakness, tends to put in the mind of the people that the model is not working, that it is "wrong". And it seemed to me, the same discussions we had in several countries, including mine, where we began to question democracy, and just enforce the bad things of it, forgetting the good ones, and with time, people had the idea the system was wrong, and ended up in a authoritarian regime. Yes, it is easier to take decisions unilaterally, they are faster and simpler, but not inclusive. If we, as the weakest(*) part of the table don´t care, we might end up not being part of it, and just get thrown away.
(*) weakest part because we are volunteers, and without the support of ICANN it will be almost impossible for any of us to attend the meetings in person.
Domain Names
There was a question from ALAC to the board, concerning the domain names. It included two parts, the domain names not being used because of technologies like Facebook, and the new DNS technologies. The first one was not answered, and my concern, is that there is no awareness of this in the community (at least I haven´t heard anything related to this in any meeting or even an informal discussion). Most small companies, and individuals today instead of registering a domain name, are just setting a Facebook or Instagram page. The cost is 0 (not including the use of you data of course), and it is very, very easy to use, add to this a free email, and you are set. No need for hosting, developing, firewall, etc.. How many domain names are not registered a year because of this?. And yet, what we ended discussing is the new round of gTLD. There are 1200+ gTLD, and 200+ ccTLDs (plus the second level TLDs) to choose the name of a domain. And yes, we hear numbers of over 20 thousand requests for new gTLDs, really?.
Not sure this thought are what you wanted, hope this helps.
Best
Ricardo
Marita Moll
Brief round-up of ICANN 64 in Kobe, Japan written for NARALO newsletter.
Marita Moll, NARALO representative on the At- Large Advisory Committee
In Kobe, At-Large held several well-attended sessions dedicated to high-interest policy issues. Panels of invited guests debated their positions on issues like privacy and surveillance in the context of GDPR and the subsequent procedures work which is focussed on refining the ground rules for new gTLD applications. There was also a special presentation by delegates from the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC) which is developing proposals for norms and policies to enhance international security and stability and guide responsible state and non-state behavior in cyberspace. (https://cyberstability.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/GCSC-Singapore-Norm-Package-3MB.pdf ).
Of special interest to all delegates were the sessions dealing with the draft five-year strategic plan which will be a high priority topic around ICANN for the next few months. In our response to the the draft strategic plan we noted that promoting and improving Universal Acceptance, implementing Internationalized Domain Names and encouraging readiness for IPv6 were among the necessary steps toward reaching a larger and more diverse Internet end user base. As a result of discussions with the Universal Acceptance Steering Group, the At-Large community has agreed to a plan to use it’s networks to disseminate information about Universal Acceptance in an effort to help resolve this global problem. Please check out the draft plan here (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/strategic-plan-2021-2025-draft-20dec18-en.pdf ) as well as the At-large response ( https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=102140281).
There was a joint NCUC, NPOC and At-Large outreach session to inform newcomers about the potential areas of involvement as well as an At-large leadership workshop in which the ALAC delegates discussed priorities and workflow issues. There were discussions with the ICANN board, ICANN CEO, and various constituencies. In addition, there was a joint ALAC-GAC statement on common concerns related to the EPDP discussions.
On the cultural side, the opening session featured a 10 minute presentation by a Japanese dance/percussion group Dadadadan Tenko. Check out the video of this impressive performance: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKkovvXbChQ&index=8&list=PLQziMT9GXafXrsmdU-kg833QMKYuL-qu_ )
Maureen Hilyard
COMPLIANCE SESSION WITH JOHN LAPRISE
At ICANN64, I chaired a session on ICANN compliance with Jamie Hedlund. On the downside, we were only able to squeeze in a 45-minute session, but those 45 minutes were well spent. Jamie and his team explained the ICANN compliance process and began walking us through their statistics and dashboards. ALAC had many questions and Jamie’s team came well prepared. We came away with a better understanding of compliance in the ICANN-sense, that is when contracted parties violate their contracts with ICANN. Many end user complaints are regrettably out of scope for ICANN. However the conversation opened the door to some potentially useful paths towards a better end user experience such as identifying contracted parties with many complaints. I’m looking forward to another session with Jamie and his team soon so that we can continue our conversation and make compliance work better for end users.
John
Maureen Hilyard
REPORT ON KOBE, HOLLY RAICHE
Saturday 0845 -1030: DNS Fundamentals
A very good, basic explanation of the DNS system:
- Mapping names to IP Addresses - Name resolution; Resolvers – send query (find IP address for name); Name Servers - answer the queries; Stub Resolvers (resolvers in, for example, mobile phones) send DNS query to recursive resolvers; Caching – replication of information – to provide redundancy; Name Space – an inverted tree, with IANA at the top – has listing of all type of records; Type of record: A Record – Ipv4 addresses, Quad A record – Ipv6 addressed; 12 organisations operate the authoritative rood servers (with many more root server machines)
Holly in action during an ALAC working session. (photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
Saturday 10.30: ccNSO Guidelines Review Committee
The Committee discussed the draft policy on retirement of a ccTLD from the ISO 3166 list and removal from the root zone – proposing an orderly process of shutdown of the registry for retirement - within 5 years. Suggested elements in a retirement plan include: Date the manager will stop accepting new registrations; Date the Manager will stop accepting renewals; Date the Manager will stop accepting transfers; Date the ccTLD will be removed from the root zone; Date registrants will be informed.
Discussion included the schedule for finalisation (probably 2 years for the whole process), whether there should be an obligation - to at least negotiate in good faith, whether the suggested elements are appropriate for all ccTLD managers and, indeed, if ccTLD managers should be under any obligation to registrants (this was later discussed and largely discounted) Additional elements could include a rationale for the plan, how disputes are handled, etc.
Sunday 1700 – 1745: Joint meeting of ccNSO and ALAC
Review by the ccNSO and ALAC of priorities of the year; For ALAC: Second phase of the work on GDPR (on gated access to personal information) ;And Subsequent procedures issues (arising from if/when there is a further round for new gTLDs)
For ccNSO: on subsequent procedures, workstream 2 – improvement of diversity, standards of conduct and increased SO/AC issues of ccountability, travel funding, and a review of the ccNSO work plan
Sunday 1615: Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace
Reception given by the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications for members of the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace for members of the ALAC executive. Included a presentation by Commission members of their eight ‘Norms’ to enhance international security and stability and ‘guide responsible state and non-state behaviour in cyberspace. The first ‘norm’ is protecting the public core of the Internet, with the Australian Assistance and Access Act cited and their example of legislation contrary to the norm.
Olivier Crepin Leblond chairing the GCSC meeting (Photo credit: Glenn McKnight)
Monday 1330 – APAC Space
Issues raised: Update on subsequent procedures (for further ‘rounds’ of new gTLDs); GDPR – and second phase on access models to the data; ICANN compliance audit; DNS abuse; Development of comments for processes for policy development
APRALO Leadership Team (Kaili, Holly, Justine, Nadira, Maureen, Lianna. Satish & Ali) Photo credt: Glenn McKnight
Tuesday 1315: Emerging Identifiers Technology
Presentations on new types of transports of DNS over Transport Layer Security (TLS) and HTTPs; Data is secured with TLD so privacy protected; However, new transport types raised policy issues; DNS over TLS – DoT; DNS over HTTPS – DoH; Normal DNS transport – is susceptible to monitoring or answering to modification; In both DoT and DoH, packets’ path is not visible so is increased privacy and can’t be modified.
Policy issues raised by emerging identifiers:
- In HTTP – Corporations can provide split view so person inside an organisation would be connected directly to an area within the corporation, whereas someone outside the corporation would be directed to the main entry point of the organisation. As well, corporations can monitor the exfiltration of data. Neither split view or exfiltration of data possible with DoT.
-Another issue: With DoT – data will go to chosen resolver. So if are in a place where don’t trust the resolver (e.g., public hot spot) ppackets will go to chosen resolver. Issue – will be fewer trusted resolvers – a centralization of resolvers rather than many thousands – so resolvers could become targets; speaker noted that the latest version of Android is already using DoT.
Decentralized Identifiers and Strong authentication – W3C is working on issue; Is about web authentication; Cryptographic token stored in phone/computer.
Satish Babu
Report on the Joint APRALO-ISOC Japan Meeting
One of the outcomes that APRALO expected from the Kobe meeting, from a regional perspective, was closer linkages with our local ALS, ISOC Japan. Early on during the preparatory phase of ICANN64, APRALO had discussions within the Leadership team as well as with ICANN APAC Hub (Jia-Rong and team), and with Jia-Rong's help, we had set up a meeting with ISOC-JP.
Since ICANN64 was being held in Kobe (whereas most of ISOC-JP members were clustered around Tokyo), we wanted to ensure that the ISOC-JP representatives were available at Kobe for the meeting. Further, we also wanted to ensure that the language aspect would not be a barrier. Subsequently, after discussions with ISOC-JP representatives, a meeting was set up between a three-member team from ISOC Japan and the APRALO Leadership team, ICANN APAC Hub team and Staff from ICANN/At-Large side. The representatives from ISOC JP were Ms Kumi MITANI, Atsushi ENDO and Yasuichi KITAMURA. It helped that some of the APRALO LT had worked with Endo-san whereas Mitani-san and Kitamura-san were new to us.
The meeting was scheduled for 15:30 on Sunday, and the ICANN team present consisted of Jia-Rong, Joyce and Ken (from ICANN APAC), Maureen, Satish, Ali and Lianna from the APRALO LT and Heidi and Silvia from Staff.
After self-introductions, the meeting started off by Jia-Rong explaining about the community-facing work being done by the APAC Hub, followed by Satish providing a brief update on the role and activities of APRALO. The focus of both these presentations was how the APAC Hub/APRALO could support policy interventions by ISOC-JP should it decide to focus on this aspect.
Following this, Endo-san provided an update on the history, present status and activities of ISOC-JP. In summary, ISOC-JP had an active technical community, and had several programmes focused on IETF and other technical processes. Most of the members of ISOC-JP had a technical background, and therefore, the technical focus was a logical development.
Subsequently, the meeting discussed several possibilities for closer work, particularly relating to ICANN policy. The meeting also discussed the present status of ISOC-JP members in different ICANN processes including Fellowship, NextGen and APIGA, all of which provided for newcomers–particularly from the younger generation–to come into the At-Large mainstream. The possibility of individual members was also discussed. One of the major barriers to wider dissemination of information on ICANN was identified as the availability of documentation in Japanese.
The meeting concluded with both ISOC-JP and APRALO committing to keep these discussions alive, and to explore further ways to work together in the domains of Outreach & Engagement and participation in ICANN and At-Large activities, particularly the Policy processes.
[Pictures to be uploaded later]
Hadia Elminiawi
Summary of the EPDP Team F2F Meetings & the Middle East Space Session
ICANN 64 Meeting, Kobe
By: Hadia Elminiawi
EPDP on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data ICANN 64 F2F Meetings
The EPDP team on gTLD Registration Data had 3 F2F meetings and an informal reception during the ICANN 64 meeting in Kobe. The first meeting was a full day that concluded at 18:30 local time. The meeting began with a "Tour de Table", wherein each stakeholder made an opening statement. I presented the ALAC statement, which addressed our commitments, objectives and expectations for phase 2. Next we discussed the mind map of phase 2. The mind map includes three main strands, the first is the System for Standardized Access to Non-Public Registration Data which includes three main topics: a) Purposes for accessing data, b) Credentialing and c) Terms of access and compliance. The second strand is about Important Issues for Further Community Action which includes topics like natural and legal persons and the third strand is about Issues Deferred from EPDP Phase 1. The mind map includes the charter questions and topics in addition to the items that were deferred from phase 1. Next we went through a brain storming exercise with the objective of identifying inter-dependencies among the issues and creating an order for discussions, in addition to identifying the resource requirements and the working methods. After that we discussed possible approaches, timelines, working methods and a possible target date for the delivery of the report. Lastly we had an implementation status update by the GDD. The second F2F meeting was with the Technical Study Group (TSG) on Access to Non-Public Registration Data, the TSG presented an overview of the draft technical model, draft design schematic, the timelines and plans. The target date for the publishing of the Final Technical Model is the 23rd of April 2019. On the third F2F meeting we agreed that the team will review the mind map and follow up on the questions that relate to the dependencies, priorities, legal guidance and the target date for the publishing of the report, we also agreed that several google docs will be set to identify potential legal questions and any additional required questions that need to be addressed, in addition a question was posed to ICANN org with regard to sharing the TGS report with the EPDP/DPAs.
EPDP Team – Group Photo
ICANN 64 Middle East Space Session
The Middle East Space had a session during the ICANN 64 meeting in Kobe, which I participated in. Cherine Chalaby ICANN Board Chairperson, Ajay Data UASG Chairperson and Ram Mohan former UASG Chairperson attended the session. Present at the session were also some members of the UASG and TF-AIDN and the Middle East Space leaders in addition to some members of the Middle East community and the wider ICANN community. During the session we discussed the charter of the Middle East Space, we agreed that some edits were required and that a final version will be circulated to the community for final approval. After that the Middle East Space Statement was presented and discussed. The statement addressed the topic of UA, highlighting its importance to the region. It included recommendations to ICANN to help support the UA community initiative and said that the suggested recommendations contribute to strategic goal 3.1 of the ICANN 2021-2025 strategic plan. We agreed that a concise version of the statement would be prepared and read during the public forum and that the statement would be finalized later by the drafting team and the community based on the session’s discussion. The Middle East Statement on UA was read during the public forum by Zakir Syed.
Marita Moll
I have been sharing this report of the Kobe Meeting with some of our other Canadian attendees (GAC esp.). Some of it was taken from reports above.
Report from ICANN 64 -- Marita Moll
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), the Regional At-Large Organization leaders and liaisons, and individual At-Large members of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) met in Kobe, Japan, from 9 to 14 March 2019. The following is a brief description of some of the 24 sessions that were held there:
Addressing Issues of current concern
At-Large held well-attended sessions dedicated to policy issues.
Balancing Privacy With Security and Stability for the Internet End User -- a panel of invited guests debated their positions with the goal of clarifying issues on both sides of this high priority topic currently being discussed in the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP)
There was a presentation by delegates from the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC) which is developing proposals for norms and policies to enhance international security and stability and guide responsible state and non-state behavior in cyberspace.
At-Large took part in the interactive session discussing ways forward on the Draft Strategic Plan for 2021-2025 . The session addressed strategic objective #2 -- Improve the effectiveness of ICANN's multi-stakeholder model of government.
As a result of discussions with the Universal Acceptance Steering Group, the At-Large community has agreed to a plan to use its networks to disseminate information about universal acceptance in an effort to help resolve this global problem.
At-Large continued discussions on outstanding issues in the Subsequent Procedures Working Groups 1-5 which are focussed on refining the ground rules for new gTLD applications. The need for more community members on the Community Priority Evaluation (CPE) committee was of particular concern. The ALAC is suggesting a cautious approach on the issue of a new gTLD round.
Meetings with the Board & CEO
The Board responded to questions regarding the increase in alternative identities (Facebook, etc.) and its implications on the budget, the need or not for a new round of gTLDs, and liability issues that might result from GDPR decisions.
ICANN CEO Göran Marby and Board Chair Cherine Chalaby responded to various concerns including the budget and strategic plan development.
Leon Sanchez, At-large board director provided an update on finance, FY20, addition budget requests and funded travelor guidelines from ICANN staff.
Inter-constituency activities
Meeting with the Government Advisory Council (GAC)
The ALAC team joined the members of the GAC to present our contributions to topics of common concern – the EPDP and Subsequent Procedures – as well as a comment on the speech by President Macron at the Paris IGF. We also propose to share ideas on capacity building with their Underserved Regions Group.
We have now submitted two joint ALAC-GAC statements to the Board – one, a request for information from ICANN Org that will help our members to better understand new policy issues so that they can contribute more meaningfully to policy discussions which has been supported by the ICANN Board, and a very recent paper stating a joint position on the EDPD.
Meeting with the Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO)
The ALAC Chair provided the ccNSO participants with a brief overview of the structure of At-Large and provided some insights into what At-Large would be focusing on within its system, as well as our usual policy and outreach and engagement activities. Giovanni Seppia, the Chair of the ccNSO Strategic and Operational Standing Committee, provided an overview of what is on top for the ccNSO this coming year.
Meeting with the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO)
New GNSO council chair Keith Drazek joined the group to discuss possibilities for enhanced co-operation between GNSO and ALAC
Working session with Jamie Hedlund of contractual compliance and consumer safeguard. Jamie and his team explained the ICANN compliance process and began walking us through their statistics and dashboards. We came away with a better understanding of compliance in the ICANN-sense, that is when contracted parties violate their contracts with ICANN. Many end user complaints are regrettably out of scope for ICANN.
There were also capacity building meetings with Root Server Advisory Committee (RSSAC), the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), and Rinalia Abdul Rahim, new Internet Society (ISOC) Senior VP.
Outreach and Community Engagement
A set of "talking points" was presented in order to explain At-Large positions on various policy issues.
At-Large outreach and engagement subcommittee presented their new strategy document.
Sally Costerton introduced the work of the Global Stakeholders Engagement Team and the collaborative planning of outreach and engagement that is done with regional leaders to support their on-the-ground efforts with current and potential members in their regions. There was also some indication of proposed activities of the GSE Team and their work with governments and universities. This was followed by a breakout session where regional teams met with their regional partners to discuss possible opportunities for regional members to participate in activities which they are running in the regions. RALO Leaders then reported their discussion outcomes to the rest of the gathering.
Joint At-Large, NCUC, NPOC and At-Large outreach sessions, "Finding your place in ICANN and learning about each other for future mutual support", informed newcomers about the potential areas of involvement
AFRALO-AfriCANN and APRALO members engaged in chapter discussions
At-Large and RALO promotional materials were available at a booth in the main hall which was staffed by volunteers.
Internal Matters
At-large leadership workshop in which the ALAC delegates discussed priorities and workflow issues.
The social media working group met and provided updates on social media strategy