Summary Meeting Minutes
Minutes Taken BY: C Langdon-Orr
Covering the Meeting of the ALAC in San Juan, 28th & 29th June 2007
AGENDA – Meeting Summary (CLO Notes inserted)...
1. Adoption of the Agenda - (with Item on Demonstration of new membership database removed for desired brevity of the meeting (ALAC members to approach the presenter: Robert Guerra out of session for demonstration) and some reordering of issues as now listed below.
Vote Outcome (VO) For: Against 10:0 ~Modified Agenda adopted.
2. Welcome Opening Remarks – see recording / transcript for details
Adoption of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting (Meeting Summary 12 June 2007) – Adoption moved by Izumi, adopted unanimously 10:0
3. GAC/ALAC issues (Guest Speaker - Bertrand de La Chappelle) - recording / transcript for details
Key Points from this talk include: - He is ‘happy to act as an informal GAC liaison with the ALAC’ to raise issues and discussion on mutual points of consensus and interest to both our communities. Such likely topics of mutual interest include:
> 1. IDN’s + ccTLDs with possible dual track processes with a fast track test IDN string likely to be the ccTLDs 1st implemented IDN.
> 2. New gTLD process – also important (and more complex) a far reaching issue that, with IDN’s, is an extremely important issue- the GAC principles (made in Lisbon) were / are taken into account in the new gTLD principles BUT the process still treats everything as a package (which can be criticised as parts may be out of sync) – we could for example explore the pre accreditation of Registries... Also on new gTLD’s there is a sentiment about the process being somewhat of an arms race, with risk aversion tactics during the process where there is a mix of issues piled upon each other... The new process is trying to address all these issues... And dual track approaches to some gTLD’s worth consideration under a GAC/ALAC mutual interest platform... Internet users seem to only be looked at in way of our possible confusion and not in terms of the opportunities that can come out of developments or that can be of benefit to users or where we can value add to the process.
> 3. In different fora there are a lot of review processes going on at the moment but the outcomes of such resultant recommendations have tied and cross over effects... Policy development processes were suggested as a common thread between GAC & ALAC, but we need to be involved EARLY in these processes or else great opportunity will be lost.
There was a closing proposal of a future joint discussion + Open workshop on this matter as a desirable way forward and result in a GAC Communique style of outcome.
Finally more mutual discussion avoids tangentially different decisions being made, without the knowledge or understanding of all parties, leading to LESS surprises and less lack of understanding and a better outcome based on GAC/ALAC cooperation and exploration of mutual interest ... for example all points under our Agenda Item 8 could benefit from GAC input into statement and position development processes.
4. Proposed Revised ALS Application Evaluation Criteria (AL/2007/SD/2.Rev4: (EN) – The following points regarding each criteria are to be read with any hard copy notes made and the latest version of the DRAFT.
NOTE Title to be changed from Guide to Guidelines (VO) For: Against 10:0
Proposal to move red text to * in ‘Requirements’ section - (VO) For: Against 10:0
1st Criteria; words changed to the form in V.5 - (VO) For: Against 8:2
2nd Criteria; (n.b. make spelling of ALS’s consistent) Para 1 additional text removed see V5
2.1 - (VO) For: Against 10:0
2.2 – remove a - (VO) For: Against 10:0
- keep b & c - (VO) For: Against 9:1
2.3 – as per draft V5 - (VO) For: Against 10:0
2.4 – as per draft V5 - (VO) For: Against 10:0
2.5 add shall /may in writing footnote for the meaning of bona fide (VO) For: Against 10:0
Also make footnote to General Guidelines to last 2 paragraphs in V5
3rd Criterion: move to add in due diligence > “can ask for further information” as per notes re this taken by Nick to create a V6 which will also include the following:
- Footnote to be added to explain the meaning of “self funded”
- A separate “how to” Kit / Guide is also to be developed by Nick
- (VO) For: Against 10:0
4th Criterion: As per V5 with change to indicate ‘where an applicant does not have a web presence at the time of the application a declaration to meet this criteria in a timely manner will be sufficient’-(VO) For : Against 10:0
5th Criterion: As per V5 with the deletion of the NOTE (which is to be moved to the “how to Kit”)
General Obligations: - to be moved to the “how to Kit” and add the similar obligation on the RALO to inform ALAC, and the insertion that information needs to be in writing. - (VO) For: Against 10:0
Final Vote on the whole document including Part III subject to minor (non-substantiative) changes and formatting -(VO) For : Against 9:0
5. Proposed Revised ALS Application Evaluation Process (AL/2007/SD/1: (EN) (ES) (FR) (brPT)) – This item was covered in reconvened meeting at 0730 hrs on 29th June.
Version under discussion at this meeting was dated 29/06/07 and tabled in hard copy, changes and errata noted in this review was minuted by Nick as the Hard copy vs. Online version. Final version from ALAC will then go under General Council Review (this item was completed at this reconvened meeting)
ITEMS 7, 8 & 9 to be carried over till next teleconference. (10/07/07)
6. ccNSO/At-Large Coordination Developments - 10 min
7. GNSO issues - Alan Greenberg - 10 min
1. Statement on geoTLDs
2. Statement on Issues report
3. Statement on Keeping the Core Neutral
8. Working Practices of the Committee - Division of Labour/Subcommittees - 15 min
9. Presentation by Nominees for the ALAC Board Liaison – This item to be covered in reconvened meeting c.a. 0730 hrs (over breakfast) on 29th June
10. Any Other Business – Business for Next Meeting (10/07/07) Rules of Procedure DRAFT to be reviewed by a Sub- Committee (CLO, Robert, Veronica) to create a plain language draft and to ensure that such a copy is to be distributed to the LAC Internal List by 05/07/07... This needs to be a ‘changes tracked’ version for discussion during the highly limited meeting time... Alan requested the time of this Agenda item is also distributed ASAP so that he may be able to arrange a dial in time.
