AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
...
Newly Certified (0) | None | Jaewon SonNone |
Pending ALAC Vote (0) | None | None |
Awaiting RALO Feedback (0) | None | None |
Processing Due Diligence (1) | #315 Cyber Jagrithi and Safety Foundation (awaiting feedback from applicant) | None |
On Hold (3) | #299/308 China Internet Development Foundation - APRALO (Withdrawn and reapplied under new structure) #267 Surabhi Softwares #112 Arab Regional ISPs & DSPs Association (ARISPA) - APRALO | None |
...
Recently Ratified by the ALAC (since last APRALO Monthly meeting)
Reference Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs)
...
for the Second Level
The ALAC addressed four areas of concern with regards to LGRs: 1) The ALAC believes that the particular registries whose practices were used (with regards to cross-script variants in the Root Zone) should be specified; 2) Missing code points that were not considered for possible variants need to be evaluated; 3) The definition of variants for SLDs needs to be substantially expanded - otherwise the level of potential confusion, and DNS Abuse, is simply too large; and 4) As something that is critical for security and the avoidance of DNS Abuse, blocking variant names should not be optional. The ALAC made a suggested revision to the text accordingly.
GNSO New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Draft Final Report
The At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) held several single-issue teleconferences about the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) PDP earlier in 2020 in preparation for the Public Comment proceeding. A small team, led by ALAC Member Justine Chew, organized these sessions and gave weekly presentations to the CPWG on the topic. In September 2020, the ALAC submitted a statement on the GNSO New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Draft Final Report, the culmination of months of volunteer work in developing At-Large scorecards on SubPro topics, creating a survey on geographic names, and analyzing feedback from the community of Internet end usersAddendum to the ALAC Statement on EPDP (August 2020)
Although the ALAC and the BC, IPC, GAC and the SSAC each took a somewhat different approach to addressing their positions in respect to the report, the ALAC is in general agreement with the positions taken in the GAC, SSAC and BC/IPC statements. In particular, the ALAC appreciates the in-depth and insightful analysis provided by the GAC, SSAC and BC/IPC.
Upcoming Public Comment Proceedings
Deck of Cards | ||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
...
Public Comment Name | Public Comment Close | Status | Assigned Working Group | Penholder(s) | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Request for extension granted to 18 November |
|
| Drafting team member(s) | |||||||||||||||||
30 Sep |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
Preliminary Issue Report on a Policy Development Process to Review the Transfer Policy See Google Doc of ALAC Statement (comment only) | 15 Oct |
|
|
4. ALAC and ICANN69 Updates (Maureen, 15 min)
...