With the adoption of the ICANN Bylaw changes to incorporate a voting At-Large Board Director, the Board Liaison position was no longer maintained.
Vanda Scartezini (vanda@uol.com.br) served as the liaison for ALAC to the ICANN Board of Directors until the end of the AGM 2010.
- October 2010 - Board Liaison Report
- August 2010 - Board Liaison Report
- July 2010 - Board Liaison Report
- April and May 2010 - Board Liaison Report
- March 2010 - Board Liaison Report
- February 2010 - Board Liaison Report
Board Liaison Report – January 2010 - Vanda Scartezini
ALAC has finished its white paper about the election process for ALAC’s voted Director to the ICANN Board.
After some meetings and exchange of ideas with ALAC chair and other members, I sent the white paper to seven board members asking for their previous and personal view on the content. We already got feedback from two members with important comments to ALAC to consider. Both information were sent to ALAC ExComm.
Meetings in January:
As a member of PPC – Public Participation Committee --we had a meeting on Jan 13 and Board had an extraordinary meeting to decide about Nairobi Meeting on Jan 22nd.
We also attended ALAC meetings during the month.
Next meetings:
PPC meeting will take place on Jan 27 18UTC (1.5 hour meeting) and the next Board meeting will take place on FEB 4 3 UTC (3 hours meeting).
PPC had important decisions related to the questionnaire to be delivery to a broader community, including IGF, ISOC, technical groups and the whole ICANN community, related to the participation on ICANN’s meetings; other issues were new tools to facilitate remote participation on Nairobi and standardization of tools. We had the participation of members plus Rod Beckstrom, Nick Ashton Hart, Samantha Eisner, Diane Schroeder, Amy Stathos and Nick Tomasso.
Next meeting this week we will work with the final version of the questionnaire, debate the guidance of General Counsel’s on requested protection of personal data points identified for collection and will also debate the proposal high-Level principles to underly the holistic outreach and recruitment programme.
The extraordinaire Board meeting was set in order to receive information about security and voted yes or no for the Nairobi meeting next March. Before the meeting I sent the ALAC position to all board members informing I would support that position during our meeting. After staff presented full detailed information on security and finance, the board had debated and voted unanimously in favor to keep the meeting as organized in Nairobi.
The discussion about security demanded most of the discussions during January among board members; other issues were related to risk committee work and technical issues related to Internet structure.
December 2009
Board Liaison Report – December 2009 - Vanda Scartezini
Board had its meeting on December 9
Board Agenda had important issues as the voting of the redelegation of .co, which we, from LACRALO, knew was a difficult process but with a satisfactory end.
Other issues debated during the 3 hours call was the approval of .POST Sponsorship Agreement, the organization of DC Office, New gTLD evolution / Expression of Interest in Public consultation, draft of strategic plan, new constituencies under GNSO and AoC demands for 2010 among others less relevant.
ALAC’s position related to Board Review, NomComm Review and STI, was at each time informed to the board.
I understand ALAC shall pay attention on AoC demand for working group review. My point of view related to "independent experts" was that we should not interpret these words as to have the review group as an outside group. Nobody can analyze the issues better than members of the ICANN community.
My suggestion to ALAC would be RALOS to have the review demanded by AoC for 2010, as the most important task from now on, in order to address to the WG, timely, (it will depend on how long the groups will work, but I guess less than 3 months from the set up.) each region’s views, which will be very important considering diversity of cultural aspects. Since I also suggested to GAC that ASIA’s region may present more than one view, I may suggest the same to APPRALO, may get the views of the Arabic world, the Indian group, the Oriental ASIA’s and the Pacific Region if necessary.
As member of the Public Participation Committee, we also had a meeting on Dec 16. With much less price, at-large community could be contracted to translate doc for each language, and I believe the result will be better, since people are used with the issues and term of ICANN. I have suggested some process to do so, but it was a suggestion I believe will help also to engage more and more people from at large community. As a matter of information, I also mentioned the plans for Nairobi the Women for DNS group are working for, since this is part of information and capacity building in each region.
OSC – GNSO WG has review the work of CCT final report, sending it for consideration of the WG.
Board are also reviewing agenda for 2010, as soon as I get the agenda defined I will inform ALAC.
The PPC was quite well conduct by Subrenat hence, we could debate the long list of issues during the call. As we all know Nick is working with our committee – a real pleasure to me to have him there – and important suggestion was made for accelerate public consultation before Nairobi. So we will see in a week or so a post from the Committee to circulate among all communities. I will send an email to have ALAC/At-Large attention on that. We debated and address to Staff to come out with: document standardization ideas to start this move, open software and translations. About translation I make the suggestion the at-large community has been suggesting from some time:*
November 2009
Board Liaison Report – November 2009 - Vanda Scartezini
During Seoul meeting I shared with Wendy some meetings, and from October 30
Board will have its next meeting on December 9
Let me use the opportunity to raise a point related to our agenda: Board agenda will be available 7 days before the meeting, and to enter with new item we would like to have into the agenda, we will have two weeks before the due date to release the agenda to do so. This time the last day was Nov 19
So far several board members are attending IGF meeting at Sharm El Sheik and some comments are interesting to share with you. I believe the main point was the acceptance of ICANN legitimacy. Looks like it is no longer the main issue at IGF – this is really important since reduce the amount of work trying to keep the understanding of ICANN’s role in several minds around the world, but also allows us to following our path to become an international recognized entity with much less fights.
There are real important issues to IGF to deal with as law enforcement, telecom costs and availability etc. ICANN shall continue to participate but not being the central issue of the debate.
Another important point was the acceptance of the continuation of IGF. I personally have said in other forum that I would like to see regional IGF formally organized and focusing more on implementable issues related to each region, leaving to the "worldwide IGF " the eventual acceptance of these proposals and , if accepted, the formal address to regional governments, as a suggestion to be implemented. At regional level I can see things can be more effective, but due the huge differences around the world, would be almost impossible to reach common priorities at worldwide IGF. Let’s see what we will see next.
Echoes from Seoul told us that the way the meetings are running, with some important exceptions as the debate about registrar registry verticalization and some other public participation, deserves our attention not only to improve in a way people feels more participant, but also build sessions more meaningful for attendants. I understand this is an issue we should debate among us to get some ideas, and may be address some of them in order to have better meetings.
I have sent to board members the vote process we have used in our liaison vote as an example of a very balanced way to deal with a several groups vote, since we have been debating about vote alternative. I do believe our model may be of value to GNSO for instance.
Finally, for your acknowledge the ALAC statement on Public Consultation Process was addressed to board members on the very day ALAC sent it to the secretariat.
th I became the new liaison. th, though the agenda is not yet defined I believe the main focus will be on the new gTLD posted for public comment and the WG independent report, both relate to Expression of Interest I will send information about other relevant issue when Agenda be distributed. th. We will have our meeting at Nov 24th – if we had something we would like to debate as part of the agenda we will need to wait till the next meeting. We can think about: whether we want to be more in line with the board meetings or it is not relevant to us to wait one more month.
July 2009:
Board Liaison Board Report from Wendy Seltzer
Hi At-Large,
I hope you've all recovered well, whether from travelling to and from
the Sydney meeting or from trying to follow its action remotely. I can
confirm that there's little public Internet access on the Daintree Coast.
I'd like to share notes on a few of the subjects I saw discussed in Sydney:
- Welcome to Rod Beckstrom, Thanks to Paul Twomey.
ICANN's new President and CEO was welcomed on Friday, and officially
began the job July 1.
<http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-26jun09-en.htm>
Paul Twomey was recognized with a gala and a place on the Special People
Numbers Registry.
- IRT Report. The Trademark Implementation Recommendations Team (IRT),
was given a huge amount of time to discuss their final report on
proposed trademark protections for new gTLDs. The Board asked them to
produce this report in Mexico City, and thanked the team for its work --
but has not made any decisions about responses. ALAC and NCUC's joint
statement at the Public Forum was among many strong expressions of
opposition to elements of the IRT report.
At this point, the IRT is conducting a "road-show" in New York, July 12,
and London, July 15.
<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/consultation-outreach-en.htm>
If you are able to participate, pre-register by July 10.
Please continue to help the Board hear that the IRT report is not
acceptable to the entire ICANN community.
- Board Meeting:
Adopted resolutions,
<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-26jun09.htm>
Transcript,
<http://syd.icann.org/files/meetings/sydney2009/transcript-board-meeting-26jun09-en.txt>
- ALAC Review. The Board accepted the report of the ALAC Review Working
Group and requested that the At-Large community begin planning
implementation of its recommendations -- "the Board directs ICANN Staff
to assist the At-Large community in developing a proposed implementation
plan and timeline for the recommendations in the report (except for the
recommendation to provide At-Large with voting seats, which will be
discussed by the Board at its next meeting)."
Regarding Board seats, the initially proposed resolution contained
further reference to Board seats, but the Board struck this during
discussion, saying that the question was too deeply intertwined with
those of other reviews (particularly the BCG Board Review's
recommendation that the Board be reduced in size). This deferral is not
necessarily a negative, it simply reflects great uncertainty. The Board
is far from uniform in its thinking on this subject -- members differ on
whether ALAC should have any seats, whether ALAC or the At-Large
Community should be responsible for the selection if there is one, and
how ALAC seats would be met by other ACs.
The resolution specifically sets the matter for the next Board meeting,
which will be July 30. I understand that the ALAC strongly supports
voting board seats, and have made that point in these and prior
discussions. For the July meeting, I will gather the prior ALAC comments
on Board seats, and will gladly include any further points you'd like to
add, having heard or read the current state of discussion.
- Synthesized DNS responses. The Board accepted a SSAC report and
resolved that new gTLDs should not adopt Sitefinder-like wildcard
services. "New TLDs, including ASCII and IDN gTLDs and IDN ccTLDs,
should not use DNS redirection and synthesized DNS responses." It found
this practice harms Internet security and stability and recommended
against its use in existing TLDs as well.
- GNSO Improvements. Revised draft charters for stakeholder groups are
now public. Applications for recognition of new constituencies are
under consideration at the conclusion of public comment.
As always, please let me know if you have questions.
April 2009:
The Board held a long meeting April 23,http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/agenda-23apr09.htm (with several of the items moved to the discussion agenda, including RAA). Minutes have not yet been posted. As Bruce Tonkin reported on the Council list and Alan forwarded here:
Based upon the board discussion, it was determined that staff should prepare a letter to the DOC, confirming the benefits of the new RAA, prior to the Board's final approval.
The board expects to act on the RAA amendments during its next board meeting in May 2009.
The Board will hold a two-day strategic retreat mid-May. I expect major items are will include strategic discussions including security and stability functions and the conclusion of the JPA; new gTLDs; and organizational reviews (particularly the GNSO structure and stakeholder and constituency structures within it).
No decision on the location of the Africa meeting (after Seoul in Oct. 2009) has been announced.
March 2009:
The Board met at the conclusion of the Mexico ICANN meeting, http://mex.icann.org/node/2689
At that meeting, the Board approved the global policy proposal for the allocation of the remaining IPv4 address space, chartered the IPC to convene an implementation recommendation team on IP protection in new gTLDs, and approved new Board Committees. The Board congratulated participants for a successful At-Large Summit. They opened several comment periods, including on Registrar Accreditation Agreement and the Ombudsman Framework, and noted that comment is ongoing on constituency charter renewals and new constituency proposals.
April: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2009/000554.html and
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2009/000571.html
