Page History

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: About a quarter past the hour we will begin our business of our meeting, making sure that we avoid any matters that require a quorum. In other words, anything to do with vote or decision.

So let's begin with adoption of the agenda and call for any other business. Do we have any additional items? Any other business or changes to the agenda requests?

Spanish Interpreter: Nothing from Spanish.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you. In which case, the chair wishes to add a matter to the agenda. I will be tabling the – formally tabling the draft letter that was sent to the internal list today. And asking for the mood of the meeting to instruct me to sign or otherwise the letter to the chairman and CEO of ICANN, with regard to two of the – for public comment periods requesting an extension for resilience and security instability at DNS-CERT. Yes, Alan? Microphone is yours.

Alan Greenberg: Given the importance of that and the time constraints on it, I would suggest we do that earlier rather than later, given that our meetings often roll over.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'm happy to put that to the meeting as soon as we have quorate then. Anyone object to that? Okay, excellent. We'll move along that line.

We've finished roll call and apologies. And we will note that we are expecting Adam in a few minutes to join us, and Hawa in about 10 minutes. She has a dial-back at half past the hour requested.

Alan Greenberg: And Cheryl, the vertical integration working group is having its first meeting, which is scheduled to start immediately after this one, if it ends on time.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Um-hmm. Oh, it has to end on time, because we lose our translation.

Alan Greenberg: Okay. Then that won't impact this meeting.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, it won't impact this meeting, but with our apologies I'm highly suspicious that the executive committee meeting will need to be postponed if you need to go to the vertical integration. Because as delightful as it would be to talk to Dave and Carlton, I'm really not sure that that's going to be terribly productive and that we'd probably be better to reconvene.

Okay. In that case, let's look at that action items from our 23rd of February and the At-Large meeting in Nairobi. Is there anything in those action items that we need to pick up on and deal with or discuss at tonight's meeting? We have votes, we've got the strategic plan, which is being discussed later, we've got the AoC review team, which I have not heard results on. Was it my memory in Nairobi that they were talking about making their selections known on or about the 17th when all of the endorsements were to be in?

Alan Greenberg: I actually thought the date that was tossed around was no later than the end of the month. I don't remember where I heard that though.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well, if you've heard that, that's a good thing. It just means that they're still ruminating over that. That's fine. And I would like to, at this point in our meeting, thank the ALAC and the additional At-Large regional leaders who spent so much of their valuable time and energy in Nairobi going through the endorsement process. I think it's a credit to the maturity of our organization when we take those sorts of responsibilities to the level that I saw you do while I was in the room and I'm assured you continued to do after I left. So thank you each and every one of you for those efforts. Yes, Carlton, go ahead.

Carlton Samuels: Chair, in keeping with what you've just said, I would like to thank Alan for leading this effort and doing so much to keep the thing on track. Alan did a magnificent job, and I want to record it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed. It's a pleasure to work with the quality of vice chairs that we have in the team at the moment, and yes, specifically the work Alan did in Nairobi on this matter was very good, including all the follow-up emails and everything to all the candidates. It was excellent. Thank you very much, Alan. So a vote of thanks goes to you.

Alan Greenberg: Thank you.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The ABSC matter is still not quite closed off, but I would like to inform the meeting of the ALAC and all those on the call that with the white paper reference to an At-Large board selection committee, that name has now been formally changed. You will see all future references to ABSC changed to something, which is as follows. And that is the At-Large Board Candidate Evaluation Committee. So it is the At-Large BCEC.

And the design team for the At-Large board member selection will be completing their work on the operating principles and other paperwork involved in getting that BCEC up and running during the rest of this week. And I'd like to thank them for what is turning out to be heroic but very, very professional amounts of work going into that.

I would like to think that if all of the applicant nomination processes and selections for all of the people that parts of ICANN put on the board were are rigorous and as professional as that we would have a very, very good board indeed. So perhaps we're setting a benchmark. Thank you one and all.

The ABSC members were, of course, all approved of in Nairobi. And moving to the action items that came out of our Nairobi meeting, we have nothing outstanding as far as I can see. The regional leader workshop is noted. The completion with the review team candidates is noted and we've picked up on already. The intention is still by the end of the week of the – not the 15th of March, but in fact the week of the 22nd of March. The ABSTD will be sending its text to the At-Large community and the ICANN legal staff, so if we can change that to now read the – by the end of the week of the 22nd of March that would be appreciated.

And I've covered all those other things. So do we have Adam back on the call? Or has Adam joined us yet? No? Adam, are you on the call yet?

Alan Greenberg: I haven't heard him.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, well we don't – we're not quite quorate yet, but we will be soon. Moving then to the review of current ALS applications, and I'm delighted to note not only the one that was mentioned at the Nairobi meeting, the Nurses Across Borders with Humanitarian Initiative, but a new applicant, Wikimedia Switzerland, is beginning their process. I'll ask staff to discuss with us now the review of current ALS applications.

How are we tracking with the El Salvador?

Matthias Langenegger: Sorry, I was muted.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You were muted. I was just filling in dead air. Go on.

Matthias Langenegger: Yes, we got two new applications. One was during the meeting in Nairobi and we asked our regional liaison for a due diligence statement, which we expect within the next two weeks. And then we got a new application from Wikimedia Switzerland, which is from my hometown, Zurich, so I'm very excited about that. And we also asked our regional liaison to submit it's due diligence statement by I believe it is the 14th of March – of April. Sorry.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I was going to say, if the 14th of March, we're moving very quickly indeed. So we should – how likely are we to have all of those feedbacks coming in so we can run all three votes during the week running up to our April meeting?

Matthias Langenegger: Well it depends how quickly you get the regional advice. We usually have another two weeks allocated for regional advice to come in. So it might be a bit short to have it before the next ALAC meeting. But perhaps we could have it during the meeting or right after the meeting.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: All right then. Well let's try and aim for that and as you work directly with the regions, obviously it would be good to sort of encourage them to come back with their advice at the earliest possible convenience.

All right. Any other items or questions to be raised by anyone on the ALS applications tracking?

Spanish Interpreter: Something from Spanish.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Please, go ahead.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: (Interpreted) I did want to tell you a bit about the connection in El Salvador. That is my region. And (inaudible) have not still requested information on the list for anybody who's familiar with them or to give reference. So I'd like authorization to do that. I've not known them for too long, but I've been dealing with them for a while. Not for a while, but I've been dealing with them for a short time and I've gotten to know Gilberto Lara who is the president. And I can assert that they are carrying out very important activities in El Salvador.

But not only in El Salvador, but also in the region, especially the countries close to El Salvador. Very important activities of digital inclusion. And it's funny, because we in Entrenada (ph), Brazil, we actually do the same thing and we're trying to collaborate in activities El Salvador, and we're trying to organize the day of the Internet, the Latin American level with the participation of all the organizations. So if nobody knows them or if you have any questions on the integrity of this ALS, I can tell you that it is very serious people, very hard working, and they're very interested in participating within ICANN policy. So I definitely advise everybody fervently to support them and to vote so they are able to join our region. Thank you.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, thank you, Sylvia. I feel inspired to run a vote now, but I'm – in fact we do have to go through due process. And Matthias, Sylvia of course was asking can she put the call out for the regional advice at this stage. I'll leave that to you to answer.

Carlton Samuels: Can I --?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, sorry, Carlton. I didn't see your hand up. Go ahead, Carlton.

Carlton Samuels: Thank you, Chair. I was about to say that from the day it went on the list to say that we have received an application, any member on the list can make a statement of endorsement. It is not required for the chair of LACRALO to ask the question. In this instance, the chair of LACRALO is merely another member. So any ALS in the region can make a statement with a list of their support for the application.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thanks, Carlton. And of course it's often the practice in the Asia Pacific region that our endorsements go to the list when we are in fact in the (inaudible) of processing those applications because we tend to do our homework and have gone out and attracted and solicited new applicants from well-known and organized communities. So I think that's something that is very important.

However, there does need to be a formal call for regional advice, which is initiated by staff. So I'm going back now to Matthias to ask when that is formally going to go out to LACRALO on the El Salvador group.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: And another question from Sylvia. (Interpreted) Am I still on the timeframe period in order to do the statement of approval within my region?

Carlton Samuels: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, you are but again I'm just waiting for Matthias to answer her first question and he can answer the second as well. Matthias, go ahead.

Matthias Langenegger: Well, we asked the regional leaders I believe three weeks ago for regional advice and we haven't heard back. We followed up last week and during the meeting in Nairobi. So according to the process, we do need to have regional (inaudible) statements by the regional leaders, so we couldn't just go on the list and see what sort of comments we get on the list. So we do need to have something in written by the regional leaders, including responses.

And I think I forwarded the message to all the ALAC members of the region two or three days ago, so I would encourage them to get in contact with the regional secretary and the chair, and ask them for – to submit a regional statement to the staff.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: So (inaudible). Is that clear for you, Sylvia, or perhaps Carlton, you could encourage (inaudible).

Sylvia Herlein Leite: Sylvia would like to say something.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Please go ahead, Sylvia.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: (Interpreted) Yes, and very well. So following Matthias' instruction, this is why I had mentioned that there have not been any requests issued on this ALS and this is why I had not done it. Now this has already been sent to the list three days ago. I do apologize. I had not been connected. In that case, I will make sure that the leaders in LACRALO, but also the other associations who have contact with connection to support this organization at this time. Thank you.

Matthias Langenegger: Sylvia, this is Matthias. Just a correction. It hasn't been sent to the list. It has been sent to the regional leaders, I think including you. So it hasn't been officially announced on the list (inaudible) usually done.

Carlton Samuels: Can I qualify that?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead, Carlton. And then to Alan.

Carlton Samuels: It was actually sent to the list, Matthias, by Dev Teelucksingh. So it was on the discuss list. The original one three weeks ago you sent to the regional leadership. That was then forwarded to the list and your update three or four days ago was also on the list. The point I was making is that any member can make an endorsement on the list. They don't have to wait for the advice, for the request from the regional leadership. It is the regional leadership's – especially the chair's prerogative to collect the data on advice and then proffer it as the regional advice.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: And just confirming, the – this is from Sylvia. (Interpreted) And the endorsement that you're talking about, Carlton, this can be done in which list? The ALAC internal list, which because there are several lists, I just want to make sure that I know which list.

Carlton Samuels: No, the ALAC RALO discuss list.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Two things and then I'm giving it – the microphone to Alan. How the region organizes its input into its regional advice is its business. However, we need to get back from the regional leaders the advice.

Carlton Samuels: Right.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Go ahead, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: Yes, a question then a comment. First a question for Matthias. When did we have due diligence from staff on this one?

Matthias Langenegger: Now the due diligence –

Alan Greenberg: Approximately.

Matthias Langenegger: It should be on the ALS –

Alan Greenberg: No, I'm just wondering was it a few days ago, or weeks ago, or what?

Matthias Langenegger: No, it was weeks ago. It was longer. It was –

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It seemed to be the 12th of February.

Alan Greenberg: Okay, so we're talking about well over a month ago.

Carlton Samuels: It was a long time, yes.

Alan Greenberg: Those of us who have been around long enough recall an interminable number of hours and pain that we went through in the ombudsmen because the ALAC was not approving ALS applications in the timely manner that they had committed to.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.

Alan Greenberg: Some of – one person already resigned the ALAC many years ago over the waste of time on this. I do not want to be the next one to resign because we can't handle these things on time. Once due diligence is available, the region must act quickly to say yes or no through whatever mechanism it wants to use. And we really need to make sure that we – that staff and ALAC leaders run – use a whip to make sure that gets done. We just can't go back to the world we were in when we had to defend ourselves continually because we couldn't do our own paperwork properly. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but some of our scars still are rather deep and sensitive.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well of course, that's the reason that we actually have the ALS process tracking and that it's part of our monthly meeting. I will note, however, that the deadline for the ALAC decision is the 5th of April and the ALAC will be making its decision on time on the 5th of April because I will be expecting at no later than the meeting of LACRALO this week that we will have the regional advice.

Carlton Samuels: And that may be –

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That was – might even be sooner, but let's hope that that is very, very clear to the regional people from LACRALO on this call.

Spanish Interpreter: And I'm sorry, Cheryl. Sylvia was telling me something at the same time you said that, so I did not get that. If you could please repeat that, I will highly apologize. Appreciate that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: What I'm saying is that the deadline for ALAC decisions on this application for us to track to our own time requirements is the 5th of April. So as LACRALO has its meeting this week, if we have not received the regional advice before, I would expect to be receiving the regional advice no later than the close of this week's LARALO meeting or the next LACRALO meeting that's held. And we will be making our decision with regional advice on or about the 5th of April. Carlton, all yours.

Carlton Samuels: Thank you, Chair. I was able to – just a heads up. There's actually talk that the LACRALO meeting may be postponed for this week, maybe postponed because of the SSIG (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well if that's the case, it's even more important that the regional leadership get the feedback to us or to staff so we can action it as soon as possible. So.

Spanish Interpreter: And question from Sylvia.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, go ahead, Sylvia.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: (Interpreted) And just – this is to respond to Carlton, make sure that between today and tomorrow I will be sending my statement of support in regards to connection and taking advantage of the fact that we're talking about the subject. I've not been able to find the mail that you sent on the 12th, so if Matthias could please, or if somebody in staff could send it to me once again. But so talking about that email, when you send an email to the list, and I'm talking about the general list where you're mentioning that there's a new organization that wants to become part of ALAC, is this done so that all the ALSs give their approval? Or is that mail just directed to the regional representatives?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Matthias, back to you.

Matthias Langenegger: Yes, well I'm not sure if you would want to spend time talking about the ALS application process. So just really quickly, when we get a new application, we announce it on the regional list and the ALAC internal list. When we get then the due diligence statement by the regional liaisons, we forward this information to the regional leaders and ask them for. How they get up – come up with the regional advice is up to the region. We just expect them to send it to staff. So it was –

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And so it shall be. Matthias, so it shall be.

Carlton Samuels: Done.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Alan, go ahead.

Alan Greenberg: Matthias said what I was going to say. It's up to the region to decide how to run their own business.

Carlton Samuels: Done.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And someone needs to make it happen, don't care who makes it happen, as long as it does. But we will not fall behind in our processes. Okay, thank you very much. Now we move now through the pro forma reports. I note that the board liaison report has – I don't believe, correct me if I'm wrong, been updated, but we note Vanda's apologies for tonight and we certainly expect her report on matters not only more generally from what happened in Nairobi, which all of us should be painfully aware of, but also for anything that is going to be coming up for the upcoming board meeting.

We are now quorate with Mohamed having joined us. So if I can move to through Part A and B of the reports, and then we should come back to the matter we wish to deal with the additional item on the letter that I've sent to the internal list after we finish that before we move to the joint GNSO and ALAC working group, because that is in fact new business. There is some new business, sorry, in that. Yes, Alan?

Alan Greenberg: One quick question. You said Vanda hadn't submitted her report, but we're all painfully aware of what happened. I would like to say pleasantly aware from my perspective of what happened in the board in Nairobi. Their actions on many counts were very, very positive.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed, okay. Thank you very much. And I suppose my painful was because some of us had barely recovered from it all.

Alan Greenberg: Indeed. That I'll go along with.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh dear, and now Alan is cough, hack, wheezing. He's bought back enough (inaudible), so I do hope he gets to see the doctor very, very soon.

Alan Greenberg: Tomorrow morning.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, right. So in the absence of any other report, I note with concern that we have had a couple of ALAC meetings without the IDN liaison either present or forwarding a report. There are matters, which are absolutely pivotal going on in the IDN world with the ccTLD Fast Track and now the course synchronization. I would like staff to take a moment in the next 24 hours to contact our IDN liaison and ascertain when he and I or he and the executive and staff can have a discussion on how we can perhaps more productively and efficiently proceed with the roll of IDN liaison at this very, very busy time for matters of IDNs within ICANN.

Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, go ahead.

Heidi Ullrich: Staff has been in contact with him over the last week and a few times. And he has responded today to our follow-up request for the IDN – the various IDN public consultations that are currently open. And he has responded that he will prepare a collective statement because they are very important to respond (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, I'm delighted to hear that, Heidi. But I would like on the record that I'd like to know how an individual is going to formulate a collective statement without conversing with the collective. And so to that end, the APRALO meeting today has specifically requested that I bring up to the ALAC for formal approval that on the matter of the IDN synchronization, which is out for public comment as of the 22nd of March with a very short closing date of the 13th of April. That the IDN liaison organize on behalf of the ALAC a doodle for a briefing call and discussion so that those members within Asia Pacific and indeed all regions can contribute to the input into at least the IDN synchronization public comment document.

And that we propose that it is put out in a doodle that includes dates and times that cover in the week of the 5th of April a Friday, including 18:00 and 19:00 hours UTC. So that is a very, very specific request to the IDN liaison and the ALAC from APRALO. Do I have any discussion on that matter from other members of the ALAC? Clearly while IDN variance and synchronization therein is something that those of us in Asia Pacific get quite passionate about. We would strongly encourage and deeply appreciate wide ALAC involvement and regional lead involvement in such a call. Go ahead, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: I was just going to say that as important as it is to Asia Pacific, some other people, and I'm one of those, would like to participate. So we try to schedule a time that's not too abominable for others who actively say they want to participate. And I say that knowing that it's the middle of your night right now.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, yes, but no. That's in fact why we looked at somewhere between – on Fridays in time zones that include around 18:00 and 19:00 hours UTC. Because we felt that was probably the most humane time for the majority of the globe. We can go as early as 17:00 and 16:00 UTC, but certainly as long as it covers those periods.

Alan Greenberg: I was just reaffirming that there are some people in other parts of the world who care even though we don't need IDNs ourselves.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And we appreciate that. Thank you very much on behalf of Asia Pacific. Okay.

Now, with – as we're quorate (inaudible) joined us yet? And has Hawa joined us?

Carlton Samuels: Yes, and Adam.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hi, Adam. You should have made a noise when you arrived. I now note joining in a minute, but it doesn't have a time stamp.

Spanish Interpreter: And Hawa is now here.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Fantastic. Thank you.

Spanish Interpreter: Great.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I just wanted to make sure that we have everyone marked off because with a very late quorum, we need to make sure that everyone who has joined us in fact recognized as being on the call.

I'm now going to move and to those who've joined later, as our review of the agenda, we agreed that once we had become quorate, we would move to the additional business item put by the chair with regards to conversation and discussion, and indeed endorsement or approval for me as chair of the ALAC to sign the letter that was sent to the ALAC internal list today from the chairs of the GNSO, the CCNSO, and the ALAC regarding an at least 15-day extension for two of the matters that are out for public comment at the moment. We recognize that they were 45-day in the first place.

We also believe that there was so much going on over the period of 45 days, including the Nairobi meeting, that matters as important as security, stability, and resilience, and indeed the DNS-CERT in our view need to have a little bit more detail and certainly better community discussion. And that we're formally asking for a few things, one of which is a 15-day extension on the public comment period. If that is approved, it is also my proposal to the ALAC that we organize a community briefing call with perhaps – I've just had a mental blank on – what's the fellow's name? The staff man who is involved in all this? Sorry. It'll come back to me.

Alan Greenberg: Are you talking about Dave?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sorry?

Alan Greenberg: Are you talking about Dave?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, Glasnic (ph), Resnic (ph). Doesn't matter. It'll come to me eventually. It's also fairly important because there is huge budget implications in both these issues. We note that there is significant increase in the budget framework for matters of DNS security and other very important aspects. And that's subject to a different set of public comments. But both of these documents indicate that expenditure, and in the case of the DNS-CERT we're talking a fixed figure of at least $4.2 million as seed capital for at least one, if not more, years. That's going to be a fairly significant influencer in all things ICANN and we would like to have greater granularity and more detail on those costs as well.

You've all had a few hours to look at the letter, so I'm now going to ask for any discussion and conversation. Not so much endorsing or approving the words of the letter, because it's been subject to edits by not just ALAC input via me, but obviously the CCNSO and the GNSO chair is also – we've to'd and fro'd on the words of it over the last few days. But I do put it to the meeting now that I should sign this letter, not only as a chair of the ALAC but with the endorsement of this meeting. Yes, Alan, go ahead.

Alan Greenberg: I support that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you very much, Alan. Does anyone wish to speak against?

Carlton Samuels: This is Carlton.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Carlton, go ahead

Carlton Samuels: I support the letter.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you very much. Mohamed, go ahead.

Mohamed El Bashir: Yes, I (inaudible). I guess we need to (inaudible) closely with other ICANN constituencies, especially in this proposal because there is mega concerns about the proposal really. And so we need to be part of that collective comments or – (inaudible) comments, yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, thank you. I see approval ticks from Alan and Dave. So to that end, I'm going to put a motion now while we're quorate for formal endorsement of the ALAC meeting of the 23rd of February for the chair of the ALAC to sign the previously circulated letter. And there is a reason why I am not reading it to the record, because we do in fact want it to go to the recipients before it goes public. So to attach it as a draft to the Wiki would make it very public, so I do appreciate your reading it in the internal list. It was not because we want to keep it away from our community; it's just that certainly the CCNSO is very keen to have it get to recipients before it went public.

I'm going to put – ask – I have plenty of green ticks, which probably would make yes with Garreth's now a majority, but I will ask for anyone indicate either in the Adobe room or by voice if they wish to have their name recorded either against this signing of the letter? Or if they wish to abstain? I see nothing in the Adobe room. Is there anything from any of the language channels?

Spanish Interpreter: Unfortunately I have missed Sylvia. I – oh, I'm sorry. She's back.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Just ask if Sylvia is in agreement with the signing of the letter sent to the ALAC internal list earlier today.

Spanish Interpreter: And from the Spanish channel, Sylvia does approve that this letter is signed.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you very much. In which case it would appear to me that that is endorsed by the ALAC meeting of the 23rd, so I will now sign that letter and also ensure that the preamble to that letter notes that it is an ALAC meeting endorsed signature. Thank you very much, one and all. I appreciate that and I hope that this is one of now foundational opportunities for ALAC to work very closely with other parts of ICANN. And I think for us to be seen in partnership and in consult in these important matters to the whole of the ICANN community with the two support organizations who are clearly major pillars of, of all things, PDP based is a very good thing indeed. So thank you, one and all for that.

Getting back now to the agenda, if we – we'd like now to – I don't believe there's any feedback we need to discuss from the joint ALAC GNSO working groups listed here as the RAA groups A and B. Their business is just continuing. Yes, go ahead, Alan.

Alan Greenberg: Yes, I just wanted to make one comment on the previous action. And I want to reiterate, or state, that from my perspective, what that letter says is not that this is not a good idea.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh, no.

Alan Greenberg: No, I – but I think it's important. I think ICANN has taken a rather lackadaisical attitude to some of the security issues that have been important and will continue to be important. It's just a matter of doing it with reasonable process and reasonable involvement.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed. And it's certainly something that I think would benefit, if we do get our wish list, by a cross constituency work group. And I think that has to involve the community charged with those particular areas of expertise. And we were most concerned that we didn't seem to see that import and we'd like the opportunity to talk to SSAC and the experts. We have plenty of experts, we would just like the opportunity to hear from those experts meaningful and detailed discussions, and indeed a great deal of granularity is hugely important. No one's denying that. We just want the process to be as transparent and as accountable as is humanly possible in something like ICANN, especially when we're talking about security.

If I may, I would like to as we are in work group discussion, address Item 7 of our agenda, and that is a proposal to form a joint ALAC GNSO workgroup. Yes, another joint ALAC and GNSO workgroup. I actually think this is a very good thing that we do more and more of these because it saves us working in silos. And the more we can bridge those silos, the better.

You have on the agenda a copy of the Board Resolution 20 adopted on the 12th of March, requesting stakeholders in the ICANN community to work through their Sos and ACs to for – and form a working group to develop a sustainable approach to assist – sorry – to the provision to provide support to applicants' requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs. This of course goes to the heart of many of the issues we've raised time and time again in the new gTLD process.

I have provided copy to you all in the agenda of communication between myself and the chair of the GNSO. And the ALAC has gone so far – sorry, the ALAC staff, At-Large staff has gone so far as to already form a Wiki space in preparation for such a joint workgroup. And I would now like to ask for discussion and feedback on this initiative from the ALAC understanding that this will be on the agenda of the GNSO in their meeting on the 1st of April.

I first of all see Alan; I then see Carlton, and then Tijani. Go ahead.

Alan Greenberg: I'll just note that almost unusually there's been a lot of discussion of this on the GNSO list. And people who are interested might want to go to the GNSO archives and take a look at some of them. A lot of it was confusion over exactly what this is, why is there a need to do this. And looking at some of the email may give both an understanding of what the real issue is and the perceptions of many people, which are I think, are at very, very many different levels. So those who are interested in this subject may want to take the time of looking at some of the emails over the last few days.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And certainly it's something that the new gTLD workgroup will need to get themselves geared up to be represented in, I think, and to be quite active in a support role as well as a direct role in that workgroup.

Okay. Thank you, Alan. And I think it was Carlton next, followed by Tijani.

Carlton Samuels: Thank you, Chair. I want to support very strongly the formation of this joint workgroup. There has been, as Alan pointed out, a lot of traffic that have brought up concerns, problems, issues in the new gTLD space, and that might disadvantage small and other less than – how do you say – robust communities. And I believe that if we work with other SOs and ACs in forwarding this agenda it will be a good thing. So it has my full support and I intend to volunteer.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excellent. Good to hear. Thank you very much. I see Alan, Tijani, then Adam. Go ahead.

Alan Greenberg: Yes, something I should have said earlier that there's been a lot of disappointment in some circles that the board did not say we're lowering the price or things like that for community or developing country new TLDs.

I think the important part we can't miss is that for three plus years, every time the issue came up, staff simply said, "Next round. We understand, tough luck, wait." That's always been interpreted as ICANN doesn't care, ICANN doesn't understand. This is a message from the board saying, "We understand and it's important." And I think the change in message and the message coming from the board, not staff, is absolutely critical. And it's really a change in direction for ICANN on this type of thing.

Yes, it doesn't address the initial problems. In some ways it's a better solution in that it's going to force people who want this kind of support to justify it and build the case why theirs is important. And I think it's an unbelievably positive move, albeit not what some people were expecting or want. But it sends a message so different from what we've been getting from staff up until now that we just can't ignore it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, I know. And I think the joint – an initiative for a joint workgroup from clearly two of the key parts of ICANN to get this going is very important indeed. Tijani, then Adam.

Tijani Ben Jemaa: (Interpreted) Yes, so I also support the creation of these GNSO workgroups. I think it's great to have these – the board meetings. These joint meetings. We need to work with other parts of ICANN as far as the categories that have been created at the Nairobi meeting. And therefore ALAC At-Large wants to participate (speaks in French). Bertrand de La Chapelle's group that was formed with respect to ICANN, the At-Large representatives (ph) are also part of that, and therefore we're working with that group also and the GNSO groups.

And I would like to remind you (speaks in French) the workgroups on the new At-Large gTLDs have decided or – to work with ALAC and GAC – with the GAC in order to try to resolve problems (speaks in French) – on resolving all kinds of problems to do with morality. So the work At-Large must work with all the groups and all the constituents of ICANN so that everybody is heard and that they are able to respond. That's it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Thank you¸ Tijani. And yes, it's particularly important that we recognize the ongoing and increasing participation of ALAC and At-Large in a number of these initiatives. And certainly I'm – we're not reporting on it tonight, but I'm personally very, very pleased with the steps forward within the subsets of the new gTLD workgroup in things like working with the GAC in morality and public order issue, and of course in the classifications area.

Adam, microphone's all yours.

Adam Peake: Hello. Apologies for being late.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hello.

Adam Peake: Hello. Can you hear?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, we can.

Adam Peake: Thank you. Again I just wanted to (inaudible) the creation of this joint working group. I think it's a great idea. And I was going to mention something about Bertrand with his categories or whatever it is that he mentioned I think (inaudible) between the public comment. But I do think that that's something that ALAC has been supporting and we need some answer on that. It's not just about money, but also virtues that (inaudible).

And (inaudible) in particular I know has been –

Spanish Interpreter: Sorry, I missed that. Could you just repeat the last bit?

Adam Peake: The application fees (inaudible) we've asked for reductions in costs but it's not just about (inaudible) costs, we actually need to think about the categories and small (inaudible) or different types of applications as ALAC has been saying many times.

And I wanted to mention particularly that Izumi has been working in Japan trying to encourage local communities, local governments to get involved, and that makes me think that we're going to need briefing documents, simple SAQs, and translation that probably goes beyond our usual six UN languages or at least with the ability to do so because this is a global effort. It's nothing to do with who won the war in 1945 and the creation of the United Nations and so on. So it's a very large effort and one that I think we should fully support.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Absolutely. I think we're all in rampant agreement here. And I think the other thing that's worthwhile noting is it would appear that whilst we have not been the only voice in this particular area of focus, we have been a consistent voice in it. And I would like to think that it's in no small way to the efforts of At-Large and indeed the ALAC that some of the changes we're seeing in attitude and indeed the recent Board Resolution Number 20 has gone ahead.

Now, I've seen nothing negative raised by anybody in terms of this joint ALAC GNSO workgroup, which will make the third one that we would be concurrently running and considering we've only ever run, I think one before, I think this is a very good thing. So I'm going to ask for formal endorsement of the meeting tonight on the 23rd of February – sorry. Today on the 23rd of February for the ALAC support of this joint ALAC and GNSO workgroup. Those of you who want to put up little green ticks, please do so, but anyone who wishes to have their name recorded against or as an abstention, please put up a red X if you're asking to be recorded as voting against or make (inaudible) heard either by the language channels or the telephone network.

Spanish Interpreter: Cheryl, was it 23rd of March?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: 23rd of February. (Inaudible) meeting date. Sorry.

Spanish Interpreter: Okay, 23rd of February. And approval from Sylvia.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you very much. In which case (inaudible) seven, eight. That's quorate, that's passed. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. And we will now revert to the next normal item on our agenda, having finished all things to do with workgroups, unless someone wishes to raise any other matter. I don't see anybody, in which case we are now going for our new business, having already done item seven, we now have some 25 minutes left in the call for those of you who joined later, we have a hard stop at 15 – sorry. At 30 minutes past the hour so at 15:30 we lose our Spanish translation so we will be stopping the meeting at our advertised time today.

The At-Large policy advice development schedule recognizing that we have one new one that we haven't added, but I'm sure Carlton will raise that. But I did mention earlier in terms of IDN synchronization and that two of them listed the strategic initiative for stability, security, and resilience, the SSR and indeed the DNS-CERT business case have been subject to other discussion and we're actively involved in asking for an extension on that.

Over to you then, Carlton.

Carlton Samuels: Thank you, Chair. I'll just start by saying that there – I have in fact seen the synchronized idea and open for comment on March 22nd. It closes on April 13. I have not officially put it to the pad because I thought we'd use this time to note that we need to put it to the pad, so have everybody's agreement on that. It's short notice that it's short time.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And it's also subject to that other raised directly by APRALO for the ALAC as well, so.

Carlton Samuels: That's right. And that is also a coincident. It might be important for ALAC to take the note that we had this as a part of that general issue of IDNs and advice, and seek to get our IDN liaison directly involved in this.

The – if you look at the schedule, there are some comments that I think are in order and require our input. And the ones that we think are important there as the budget framework – operating plan budget. The Whois accuracy report. And the proposed initiative for DNS security, stability, and resiliency.

Notice that we – the letter that was – the joint letter from GNSO, and CCNSO, and which we just endorsed would certainly push back the global DNS-CERT business case we hope. We feel that that is important enough to have some further consideration for that board (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, thank you, Carlton. I would like to ask the members of the ALAC and specifically the members of the budget and finance subcommittee as we have got the regional input into the FY operating plan and budget listed on the agenda, if it's possible for the budget and finance subcommittee to convene in the next seven days. And that that obviously be a meeting that's open to ALAC and other regional and At-Large interested parties, to scope out and to put some additional words and comments that we can then have as our draft for the community on the proposed framework for the fiscal year.

Some of the things we heard in the Nairobi meetings were we need more details, we need more granularity, we would like to have more information on. And obviously what we discussed in the Nairobi meeting on budget and finance, and the proposed framework will be incorporated into that. But I do think it's worthwhile convening and ensuring that we have broad regional input by not just what we have linked from the regional leads but also from the budget and finance committee to put something together for public comment. Do I have anyone wishing to speak or discuss with that? Or will we just get the doodle sent out?

Carlton Samuels: Can I just make one final --?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Please.

Carlton Samuels: – to this? Just to note that there are at least nine policy comment periods that end on around the 1st and 2nd of April. And I don't think we are going to make all of them. The IDN one certainly we should – I think we should make every effort to get our comments and who with. But I think we have to just prioritize those and make comments on the ones that we think we should.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed. And I think with the IDNs and the hopeful extension for the CERT and the SSR, we'll just have to go for the ones that are seen as – deemed as most important to us.

Can I ask, because of the conversation on the list with certainly Patrick on the call if there are any comments? We've seen from Carlton as the current chair of the Whois working group he's put out a draft response to the report on Whois accuracy. We do have to the 15th of April on that, but I was wondering, Patrick and any others who are involved in that workgroup, did your workgroup want to convene a meeting or a teleconference to wordsmith that? Or how do you want to proceed?

Patrick Vanderwal: Well are you asking me?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, because I've got you and Carlton and –

Patrick Vanderwal: Well actually I'm not sure I'm part of this working group. I didn't even – I was not even aware we were working on a reply to that report. So I've only reacted two days ago when I saw Carlton's draft.

So I think it would be useful, yes? And also to have the same document on the Wiki page so we can have maybe a larger community discussion.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, I think that's a good way forward. And we do have the time to do that. The other thing though I think is we need to link to that Wiki page for the use of the workgroup any transcript and recordings because Patrick, this was discussed in session in Nairobi. And it's from that face-to-face part of the meeting that I believe Carlton has drawn the majority of what he's written in the draft report from. So I think we need to marry that up.

Carlton, is – have I captured that correctly?

Carlton Samuels: Yes, thank you, Chair. Yes indeed, that's exactly what. We were responding to what we heard in the meeting and some comments. And we looked at it. But I just – we have to let members know that I have attached the document to the Wiki page for the working group. It's there. I'm going to put it in line also so that people can look at it in line on the Wiki page.

I just need to say that we need to be reminded the context of this. We were responding to two documents that spoke mostly to accuracy of Whois data. And if you notice the way I opened the discussion because that's how it was framed in my recollection as a requirement of the RAA and therefore if we believe that contract enforcement is important, then it requires accurate data. And we should say that is the context.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Um-hmm. I think the other thing would be in the Wiki space, obviously we'll need to get this from staff if the MP3s and transcripts were available, because they should be in multiple languages of what happened in Nairobi on the discussion, specifically on this report. That needs to be linked. But also I think it would be appropriate and perhaps because I've been to'ing and fro'ing with staff through today or through my today.

There are some seed ins that I think need to be linked to the Whois working group Wiki space, which are outcomes and outputs from the At-Large summit. We did have the discussion in the thematic session and we certainly had mention on page 25 and I think on page 24, if not 23, of the summit declaration with reference to Whois and the outcomes of our deliberations some 12 months ago now. And I don't think they were linked to that Wiki workgroup space. So if they're not, they need to be. And I'm pretty sure that staff are sort of tracking down the relevant references to make sure that happens as well. But I'll toss that back to you, Carlton, because you're chairing that workgroup.

Okay. Any further discussion on item six of our agenda? If not, with your permission I would like to raise a question under item six, part C, current PAD items not on target. We've carried over the version three of the new gTLD applicant guidebook certainly since its public comment period ended in December 2009. I'm a little loathe to continue carrying that over when we know that we will have a version four of the new gTLD applicant guidebook out pre-Brussels.

What is the wish of the ALAC as to how we handle that? We've looked at sectional input out of version three. We have various workgroup activities, specific now to several of the things we feel important, including the new GNSO and ALAC joint workgroup proposal, the categorization and theme workgroup, which is an ad hoc workgroup that many of us are involved with. And of course, the ongoing work now with the topic of morality and public order being discussed between the GAC and the ALAC. And that again will be looking at focusing some major work to come to fruition for Brussels.

Do we wish to drop version three of the new gTLD applicant guidebook and just put our teeth into version four? What's the feeling of the meeting? Absolute silence. Okay, Alan's raised his hand. Go ahead, Alan. Alan, are you muted?

Alan Greenberg: Sorry, I was muted. If we're not actively doing any work on it, why keep it there?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.

Alan Greenberg: If we're doing specific targeted work, let's identify it so we know what it is.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well we certainly have done some specific at targets and I think perhaps we need to revision how we're handling it. Carlton? Mic's yours.

Carlton Samuels: I was about to say we have done some specific and targeted work, but I would say we take it off the agenda and wait until version four comes, Chair.

Alan Greenberg: Yes, if we're doing targeted work, then we can put an item there that doesn't map exactly to an ICANN comment period to track it. But it should tell people what it is, not be a term that we don't – no one understands.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay, fair point. And Carlton, I think that's something we can carry over into the ExCom meeting to wordsmith. But I’m all for tracking work that's done. I think tracking work that is done is very important. Adam, go ahead. Oh, I just turned your microphone off. Let me give it back to you. My error.

Adam Peake: Thank you so much. I was going to basically agree with what's just been said. So I'll disagree with what's being said. It would be a good idea to make sure that what we have been, or what has been worked on and agreed on in the version three is noted so that we can carry on arguing for it when version four comes out and it's not reflected as we can probably expect. Sorry, that's cynical. And if it's not. And – but so that would be very helpful. Other than that, yes. Let's get it off the agenda because it's not relevant.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Sounds like we've got agreement and a plan. Excellent.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: I'm sorry. This is a comment from Sylvia. (Interpreted) We could move to item 10 since we will be losing the interpreter soon and I want to make sure that I have enough time to deal with that since it directly concerns me.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Tell Sylvia she's clearly psychic, because that was exactly going to be the next words out of my mouth. With the 10 minutes we have remaining with the Spanish interpretation, with the permission of the meeting I was going to jump over eight and nine and leave those for the final part of the meeting where we won't necessarily have Spanish interpretation.

Sylvia, I'm unsure whether you're going to need the full five minutes, but I do note that – and thank you for the update you sent from – during Nairobi from what was presented. And that we have linked those updated presentations from both you and Siva. And that there's also now a few minutes for you to speak to this matter. But as we agreed in Nairobi, this would be a highly appropriate set of documents to ensure that the new – Barbara, the new director of outreach advertising participation. I forget her title. Someone will correct it to the record.

Alan Greenberg: Communications I think.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Communications. Thank you very much. Should be putting in touch with this information because it's very much her bailiwick. Go ahead, Sylvia.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: (Interpreted) And thank you, Cheryl. And what I did want to tell you is that stemming from my Nairobi presentation and the input that I have gotten during not only my presentation but the comments that I have had from many of the ALAC members after the presentation. And also other comments and other ideas that I have been collecting also during the luncheon that we had during Nairobi with the board. I would like to get in contact with Siva and therefore give all this information and post office information, including the comments, which I've not been able to do because I barely got back yesterday from Amsterdam. There ae many things that we will need to be changing.

It was very important to do that presentation, so I do promise you with other updates. But I will need to get together with Siva. But I think that we will be able to really develop a very important outreach program with ICANN on the more general overview. I can't give you any new updates at this moment, but I can tell you that I've collected a lot of new information that will be very useful. So in a week or two I'll be able to send other updates into the list. And of course give more feedback on the next meeting. Thank you, that was all.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you, Sylvia. And I think what's very important is that we realize whilst it's not our task within At-Large to drive this in its form as an ICANN activity, it's Barbara's task to do that. What I'd like to do is when Barbara starts her role on the 1st of April, if we can ask Heidi as director of At-Large to at the earliest possible convenience for Barbara invite her to a briefing, sharing, conversation call with the At-Large community and the ALAC where the work that both you and Siva have done and that has been discussed in Nairobi can be shared in a webinar situation. I think that's probably the best way forward.

Now it may not be in 24 hours after she joins us on the 1st of April, but if we can charge Heidi with ensuring that it happens in our schedule as soon as is possible once Barbara joins us. Would that be a good way forward from your perspective?

Sylvia Herlein Leite: (Interpreted) That – it will be a pleasure. It will be a great pleasure to share with Barbara. I know that she has very good references and she has a lot of knowledge about marketing.

I do have one small request. This briefing session I do want to make sure that is actually scheduled more in the middle of one of our meetings and not so much towards the end of the meeting, because I just got five minutes today. So I want to make sure that for something like that I do have a bit more time.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, Sylvia, let me be very clear. When I talk about a webinar or a briefing call, it is a single purpose dedicated topic call. It's not shared with anything else. Okay?

Carlton Samuels: That's the truth.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: (Interpreted) Thank you. And that is a relief. And I’m actually smiling at the thought of that.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Glad to make you smile, Sylvia. Now in the final five minutes of Spanish translation, I'm going to work back by coming to the At-Large improvements, which Seth, if there's anything you need to make sure goes into Spanish, deal with it in your first five minutes. (Inaudible) right into discussion.

Seth Green: Certainly.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The floor's yours, Seth.

Seth Green: Thank you very much, Cheryl. I just have three quick points. Towards revitalization of the working groups, I'm sending an email today to their chairs, vice chairs, and focal point personnel asking for them to send in whatever the most current working group membership lists are as well as to confirm the identities of those working group officers. This is in line with your suggestion, Cheryl, that a good place to start, of course, would be to at least know as well as we can at this point who's in the working groups. And thank you for that suggestion.

This email will – it'll also alert them to the upcoming working group conference call regarding their revitalization, which will cover topics such as seeking new members and the allocation by the working groups of the improvement implementation tasks among themselves. That's the first thing.

Second and related to the allocation of the improvements tasks to the working groups, I've gone through the improvement recommendations and at least as a first approximation I've assigned the obvious suggestions of which working groups and subcommittees would be suited to the task, at least to the extent of my knowledge at this point.

Those can be – there's actually a link in the agenda if anyone was interested and wanted to click on that link it will show you under a column for each recommendation what that suggestion on my part is. I think they're fairly standard. But let me just point out to everyone that what becomes obvious is that – and I imagine you all knew this before I did – what becomes obvious is that in this first approximation, assuming I'm somewhat on target, the bulk of the implementation work will fall to two working groups. The At-Large engagement in ICANN group and future structure accountability and transparency of ICANN with the budget and finance subcommittee also doing perhaps more than its fair share.

So I certainly would be happy for any input or discussion regarding the allocation of the improvement recommendations to the working groups at this point or any point leading up to the conference call, especially in light of, as I say, the bulk of the working looking as though it's going to fall to those two or three groups.

The third improvements item on the agenda is in fact that single or perhaps at most double purpose conference call that I've mentioned for the working group chairs, vice chairs, and focal point personnel. The thinking now is that it will include those officers of all of the working groups and that it will cover general working group revitalization and recruitment for new members.

Then the second half of the call will be specifically about the use of the working groups to tackle the improvements and as I say their allocation of the improvement task. So that part of the call will focus on mainly should focus on the working groups that we'll significantly be involved in the implementation.

And that part of the call will also, I would imagine, take the form obviously of either the working groups approving my suggested allocation of tasks or coming up with an alternative set of assignments.

That's actually about it. Well, I should add actually that while I say the group email that's going to kick all of this off will go out today, it actually, Cheryl, it's waiting in your inbox, if you don't mind, just for any input. So considering how long you've been on the phone already today, I'm not sure it will go out today. But it'll go out –

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well of course it will go out today. Don't you worry about that.

Seth Green: Okay. Thank you, Cheryl. And that's everything from my end. Appreciate it.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you, Seth. And I suppose the only issue I would like to raise is that there is a number of areas which I would like to (inaudible) other businesses of the ALAC as a committee of the whole and we haven't really identified those. Now it may be that it's the workgroups and significant parts of the ALAC need to be involved if they're not specifically in those workgroups. But certainly the regional leads will populating those workgroups, but we do need to make sure that there's a keeping of the finger on the pulse of all of this quite closely.

Any questions for Seth? And at this point in time, while I'm waiting for any questions to come through, I'd like to thank Spanish interpretation. Thank you very much and I do appreciate that there is a hard stop now and that Sylvia will need to leave us or join the English channel.

Sylvia Herlein Leite: I'm here, Cheryl. Can you hear me?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I can hear you.

Alan Greenberg: And Cheryl, it's Alan. I'm off to the vertical integration meeting.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And you're off to vertical integration. Okay. Thanks very much for that, Alan. And thanks Sylvia. We've only got a couple of minute's worth of things to do. Any questions for Seth?

Heidi Ullrich: Cheryl, just a quick comment, if I may?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, please.

Heidi Ullrich: Just again, thanks very much for this, Seth, and both Seth and I will be working on updating all of the working group Wikis in the next day or so. Matthias and I did do a quick start on that last week, but we'll now go that into depth in the next few days.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Excellent. Okay. Seth, you've either got absolute compliance or a totally stunned crowd. I'll let you work out which it is.

Seth Green: I fear I know.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Oh dear. Sorry. I couldn't help myself. Okay. We'll now just for information only cover off the – very quickly the At-Large director selection process. There's no way we're going to need 10 minutes for it. It's a continuing work in progress. We've had the white paper out for public comment and we should note formally to this meeting that there was a single piece of public comment received. It was received from a constituency of the GNSO, the intellectual property constituency. It in no way addresses issues of the white paper other than to say that it's an in principally agreed concepts that the At-Large select a board member.

They make no comments on any of the particulars raised in our white paper, but they did raise matters unfortunately not with necessarily accurate facts about NomCom of the At-Large, or more specifically ALAC role in NomCom and how the NomCom process perhaps needs to be reviewed or reconsidered in the light of At-Large selecting a board member.

Our response to that is going to be twofold. We will and the executive will prepare and send out to the ALAC lists a specific response showing our understanding of how the relationship with ALAC and the NomCom actually works in terms of numbers, and ratios, and percentages compared to the GNSO. And also we've written to the chairman of the nominating committee and asked Wolfgang if as chairman of the nominating committee he would like to perhaps rectify some of the assumptions that have been made in that single piece of public comment. So that's one of those things that will be happening in the next fortnight.

The At-Large board selection design team has met earlier today and will be meeting in the next 24 hours. And every 24 hours after that until the end of the week until its work is done. And we will be formalizing the board candidate evaluation committee, remembering that that used to be called ADSC and it is now the At-Large BCEC. And we will change references and make notations around white papers to match that as well. With it's operational procedures, it's code of ethics, and of course the call for SOIs will be going out in short order after ICANN legal sign off on all of that paperwork.

With regards to that paperwork, I'm disappointed to hear from staff during this meeting that the mailing list for that workgroup has not been activated, so things like the doodle that should have already gone out to get a first meeting date set up for the BCEC and some introductory information has not been able to be promulgated. But that will be being fixed in short order as well.

And I now open for any questions on item nine of the agenda. I see nothing in the Adobe room in which case considering we had a 15-minute after start time start, I will call for any other business.

Adam Peake: It's Adam. If I can just (inaudible).

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, please go ahead, Adam.

Adam Peake: I just wondered if anybody knew or perhaps staff in particular knows when we will – the location of the December annual general meeting will be known? If at all, because it seems to be.

Heidi Ullrich: Heidi. I have not heard anything more than what was said in Nairobi that the board and the meeting staff will be working on that.

Adam Peake: Okay.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Perhaps we could ask Vanda to get back to us on that at the earliest possible time?

Adam Peake: It would be nice to know when it's scheduled for – which is where it's going because I know there's quite a lot of people concerned about this and it should be important to our LACRALO colleagues who probably want to start thinking about outreach and all the rest.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed.

Carlton Samuels: Yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed. Well other than asking Vanda to follow up and to make it clear to the board the concerns of the community and that we would actually like to have some prior planning to prevent any piss poor performance, what else can we do at this stage? We certainly need to have our Brussels travelers' list done in short order.

Heidi Ullrich: Actually, Cheryl, yes. Meetings – the constituency travel is requesting the list by the 15th of April, which is prior to the next ALAC call.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Thanks for that. I just want to finish. Adam, is there anything else you'd like us to do on the December meeting then?

Adam Peake: No, I think asking Vanda would be extremely helpful. And just to – I think making known that the community actually cares about these things and wants them up early as possible not only for our own benefit, but for the benefit of those who kindly volunteer to host these meetings. It must be extremely stressful for anybody who's involved to be left hanging like this. Whatever the reason.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I can't agree with you more, Adam. I can't agree with you more. It's absolutely – well, I mean it's – how things can then be effectively done is just beyond me with the amount of time it takes to run those meetings properly. And indeed at the best costs. I just think we're missing the boat again, and again, and again by this bizarre and peculiar mechanism that we seem to operate in.

Back to the matter raised, which was going to be my piece of any other business that we do need to concern our travelers for Brussels. Is it the wish of the ALAC that we put out a call – an internal call for all those At-Large regional representatives and ALAC members who are going to be in a position to travel to Brussels to the internal list as soon as possible? No one's disagreeing with me, but then no one's agreeing with me either. That's a bit of a worry. Oh, good. Carlton's agreeing with me. It's good to know that some people are actually out there and not doing their banking and checking their emails. Thank you, Patrick. I appreciate that as well.

Heidi, is that your preferred way forward?

Heidi Ullrich: That's perfect, thank you. That's perfect, yes.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well that sounds like an action item on staff to get it to our internal list. I also would like to ensure that the – any regional plans that EURALO might have that any support they need from us, if they let us know at the earliest possible time, that would be something that we would like to try and work on sooner rather than later.

I know at the Nairobi meeting it was indicated that there would be a regional showcase set up somewhat similar to what was done with AFRALO. And as Adam pointed out, that's obviously something that LACRALO will want to be organizing for December as well. So the sooner that any assistance we can give, be it printing materials, establishing with meeting's space and time for these things to happen, the sooner we get onto that the better. So if EURALO is forming any form of subcommittee for this I'd like to make sure that the representatives from EURALO on the ALAC keep us well and truly informed so that we can give whatever help to the region we can.

All right. In which case, I'm now going to call this meeting to a close. Thank each and every one of you for the time and energy you've put into today's call. And note that in fact we've finished slightly ahead of time, even though we did have a hard stop at the 15:30 of translation, we didn't start our meeting until 15 minutes past the hour. So it's with pleasure to say we actually got through a very big agenda with all your assistance and put in a few additional items. Thank you one and all.

Ron Sherwood: Cheryl, this is Ron. Can I ask a question?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Ron, of course you may. Why aren't you in waving your hand? You're in my Adobe room. Just wave at me and the floor will be yours. Go ahead, Ron.

Ron Sherwood: It's a simple one. I had to leave the wrap-up meeting in Nairobi because I had to make a presentation to the – to CCNSO council meeting. But was any decision made or any action taken on the creation of the poll that was discussed for the ALSs?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The regional leaders all thought it was a very good idea.

Ron Sherwood: Okay, I haven't heard from Rudy. Who is supposed to be doing this? And what's the next move?

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Matthias, you're the interface with the regional leads and we did discuss that it would be most appropriate to be operated through those regional outreaches because they're the nexus with the ALSs.

Matthias Langenegger: Yes, I have been in contact with Rudy before the meeting in Nairobi. And he said that he would be working on an outreach strategy, including a draft template for a survey. But I haven't –

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes, well we discussed that – we discussed all of that in Nairobi. This is what did we – what output other than it needs to go work hand-in-glove with the regional leads so it gets out to their ALSs? And indeed, the ALSs may have additional questions posed to them in survey form at the same time by some of the regions. There wasn't anything other than that as far as I could remember, just so Ron knows.

Matthias Langenegger: Oh, no. No there wasn't. (Inaudible)

Ron Sherwood: All right. I'll try and get hold of Rudy again and see if it's going to make something happen because I know that you said that we should take it slowly, but on the other hand I don't want to see it stalled.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: No, Ron the other thing is you need to make sure that you and Rudy work directly with Matthias on this because he's the liaison. So well, by liaison, that's the wrong word in the world of ICANN. He's the staff nexus with all of the regions and then of the agendas. And so one of the things, one of the ways forward might be to ensure that the draft survey gets on the next set of agendas that are coming through.

Ron Sherwood: Okay, thank you.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay? Sorry if that wasn't terribly clear first time around. But Matthias, can I ask that we pop into that wrap-up session and formally extract what our final discussion points and action item be created from that for transmission to our CCNSO liaison, Rudy, to ensure that we're all working off the same page and that the regional leads are aware what the plans are and how we can best move forward.

Matthias Langenegger: Sure, yes. I'll follow-up with Rudy.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thanks very much.

Ron Sherwood: Would you copy me on that, please?

Matthias Langenegger: Sure.

Ron Sherwood: Thank you so much.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I can't imagine why we would copy one without the other. As far as I'm concerned, if it involves CCNSO and it just goes copy Ron, copy Rudy. So if that could happen, that would be good. But let's extract from our record exactly what the agreements were, because I don't think there's any time courses put into it. But we certainly would like to perhaps see it in the next month's round of meetings.

Ron Sherwood: Great. Thank you, Cheryl.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Not a problem. Any final calls before we say good morning, good day, good evening, or good night depending on where you are in the world? In which case, I'd like to thank you finally one and all, and thank as usual our hard working interpreters. It must quite demanding with putting up with all of our to'ing and fro'ing and not making what we say terribly (inaudible).

French Interpreter: It's fascinating. This is Tisha speaking. And I think Tijani has something to say. Tijani, no? No.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well thank you, Tijani.

Tijani Ben Jemaa: (Interpreted) I just want to thank you, says Tijani. And thank you.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well, thank you all. And we'll now ask people to disconnect. But if I can just have Carlton and Dave stay on the call. I don't care who else stays on; I just wanted to have a small word to the objective. But this is the hard cut to the meeting on the 23rd of February for the At-Large Advisory Committee.

Okay. With apologies from Sebastien and from Vanda, and Alan because he's at the vertical integration meeting, I'm now asking Carlton and Dave do they see any merit at all in us trying to have an ExCom meeting now? My personal view is I think not and that we should convene in the next couple of days.

Dave Kissoondoyal: Yes, I think so, Cheryl. I think because before this call we already had the call on the ABSDT. So it's better that we convene either tomorrow or the day after.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay. Well we might – things are getting a bit hectic in the world of doodle, so I might leave the doodling to Gisela to set up. Carlton, what's your view on that? Carlton? He may have left the call. That sounds like agreement. Okay, I'll get Gisela to put up a doodle. And the only other thing is for the record I notice James has – towards the end of our meeting joined, so I suppose we should make sure that his name is recorded as attending the meeting towards the end. And note that his apologies state that he got stuck in a discussion that he was unable to escape from and could only just get back online.

Okay, thank you all.

Heidi Ullrich: Thank you.

Dave Kissoondoyal: Okay, thank you very much, Cheryl.

Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Bye.

Dave Kissoondoyal: And thank you for the ICANN staff as well.

Heidi Ullrich: Thank you.