AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
...
English Conference ID = 1638
...
Dial Out Participants: Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Okasana Prykhodko, Maureen Hilyard, Yrjo Lansipuro, Natalia Filina, Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Sebastien Bachollet, Lianna Galstyan, Matthias Hudobnik, Glenn McKnight, Lousewies van der Laan, Wale Bakare, Annette Muhlberg, Salve Nilsen, Jean-Jacques Subrenat, Christopher Wilkinson
Apologies: AnneApologies: Annette Mühlberg, Anne-Marie Joly-Bachollet, Sandra Hoferichter, Erich Schweighofer, Roberto Gaetano, León Felipe Sánchez
Staff: Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Andrea Glandon
Call Management: Andrea Andrea Glandon
...
Action Items: EN
Recording: EN EN
Transcript: ENEN
AC Chat: EN
...
AGENDA
...
EURALO
Roll call - Staff
- Adoption of the Agenda - Olivier Crépin-Leblond
Review of pending Actions Items (5 minutes)
Review of pending
Action Items: 2018-
1112-
2018 EURALO Monthly Teleconference
Action Items 2018-24-10 EURALO General Assembly(5 minutes)
Review of ALAC Public consultations – Olivier Crépin-Leblond (15 minutes)
See: 2019 ALAC Policy Comments & Advice (new)
See: 2018 ALAC Policy Comments & Advice
See: At-Large Policy Summary
See: At-Large Executive Summary page (new)
See: Multistakeholder Advice Development graphic
Proposed Consensus Policy on Protections for Certain Red Cross and Red Crescent Names in All Generic Top-Level Domains
The ALAC continues to take the position that as a humanitarian organization, and one that has been regularly the target of those seeking to fraudulently attract donations, the Red Cross should be afforded the courtesy of having its various identifiers protected at the second level in gTLD domain names. The ALAC cited its June 2018 statement of support for the Initial Report on the Protections for Certain Red Cross Names in all gTLDs – Policy Amendment Process, and affirmed support for the Reconvened WG's recommendations on proposed amendments.
Follow-Up to the Joint Statement by ALAC and GAC: Enabling Inclusive, Informed and Meaningful Participation at ICANN (Note: submitted to ICANN Board as ALAC Advice)
In its follow up to the joint statement, the ALAC and GAC agreed in the context of the Information Transparency Initiative (ITI) that clear and up-to-date information (from ICANN) to facilitate quick understanding of relevant issues and high interest topics is key for inclusive, informed and meaningful participation by all stakeholders, including non-experts – as, in the context of the IANA transition process – ICANN was able to offer timely and comprehensible information by breaking down complex issues into understandable components, which allowed interaction within the entire community. The ALAC and the GAC ask from ICANN that the same level of effort be made and the same service be provided to the community concerning information on all other relevant issues.
Draft PTI and IANA FY20 Operating Plan and Budgets
After consultations with the ICANN Finance Department and ALAC Finance and Budget Subcommittee (FBSC), the ALAC submitted comment on (4) sections of the Draft PTI and IANA FY20 Operating Plan and Budgets, including the Executive Summary, PTI Services Financial Overview, PTI Services Overview and PTI Services and Operating Plan.
Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice Review Team (CCT) Final Report & Recommendations
As the principal voice of Internet end users within the ICANN community, the ALAC were interested in the findings and recommendations from the CCT Review, particularly in the areas of Choice and Trust. The ALAC is supportive of all of the recommendations in the Report, including the new ones relating to DNS abuse in New gTLDs. The ALAC reiterated they do not share a sense of urgency when it comes to subsequent procedures, but instead believe the community should address all of the deficiencies in the 2012 program before accepting additional applications. The ALAC commented on additional sections of the Report and Recommendations, including Recommendations 1, 8-10, 11-13, 14-25, 29-31, 32, 33 and 34-35.
Initial Report of the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group
The ALAC have been following this issue closely, and discussed the issues internally prior to the issuance of the Initial Report. The ALAC discussed each of these mechanisms among the participants and members of the working group, and in their statement commented on Recommendations 1-10, noting it believes strongly that At-Large Structures (ALSes) and Individual members should be able to apply for funds; the proceeds from past auctions were intended for use in capacity building activities enhancing the mission of ICANN and consistent with one of its core principles for an “open and interoperable Internet”, for the benefit of the Internet community.
Draft Final Report of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee Review (SSAC2)
The ALAC is in support of the SSAC’s continued role in the ICANN community as an Advisory Committee. It commented specifically on Recommendations 1-5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16-17, 21-22, 24 and 25 in the Report, noting that the SSAC should, in addition to revising its advice to the Board, also simultaneously attempt to write advice in such a way that non-technical experts in the ICANN community more easily understand them.
Application for New Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) Dispute-Resolution Service Provider
The ALAC strongly supports the proposal for a new UDRP Dispute Resolution Provider, viewing it beneficial to the interests of all Internet end users, particularly to domain name registrants.
Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team
The ALAC submitted a Word Doc form mirroring the new Google Form requested by the EPDP Team for collection of this public comment. In its statement, the ALAC provided its answers on the questions posed by the EPDP Team. In particular, the ALAC made recommendations on additional purposes for processing registration data, including the Accuracy Reporting System (ARS) and research and threats analysis/prevention from the Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO). Regarding data elements, the ALAC noted Registrant provided data must not be unilaterally removed without due consultation with the data provider, and the registrant must declare whether it is a natural or legal person. The ALAC noted the technical contact fields must be mandatory, and the Organization field should not be redacted. The ALAC also noted in its conclusion the SSAC revised version of SAC101, a paper previously supported by ALAC, drawing particular attention to the statement, "RDDS access must comply with the law, but access should not be less timely, more restricted and less public than law requires."
Supplemental Initial Report on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process (Overarching Issues & Work Tracks 1-4)
The ALAC put on record their responses, suggestions and in some cases, advocacy, to the preliminary recommendations, options and questions in the Report. In particular, the ALAC strongly opposes the retention of the regular highest-bid auction process which was used in the 2012 round (“regular auctions”) as the mechanism of last resort for resolution of contention sets within the Program, proposing instead that the ICANN Community explore the introduction of a multiplier-enhanced Vickrey auction, while supporting ways to increase avenues for voluntary resolutions of contention sets in order to avoid auctions. The ALAC also notably does not support a total ban of all forms of private resolutions, but are strongly in favor of disallowing forms of private resolutions which result in a ‘losing’ applicant gaining or being promised a financial benefit in return for withdrawing their application in a contention set, including and especially private auctions.
Current Statements (ALAC Advice, Comment or Correspondence)
Public Comment Name | Public Comment Close | Status | Penholder(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
ICANN Draft FY20 Operating Plan and Budget and Five-Year Operating Plan Update |
| DRAFTING | |
| ICANN Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2021 – 2025 |
|
|
|
|
| Updated Operating Standards for Specific Reviews |
|
|
| First Consultation on a 2-Year Planning Process |
| DRAFTING |
4. Updating EURALO Hot Topics 2018 (will this be renamed Hot topics 2019?) (10 minutes)
...
6. Financial Year (FY20) Additional Budget Requests (Bastiaan Goslings, Wale Bakare -
...
5 minutes)
- At-Large FY19 Additional FY20 Budget Request Development Workspace
7. ATLAS III update (5 minutes)
- At-Large FY20 Budget Development Workspace
...
8. AOB (
...
10 minutes)
- Request for Pop-Up Banner/Table top signs
- Sebastien Bachollet Trip to Bordeaux (CENTR) - request for discretionary funding
AF CDG-BOD 50€
Radisson Blu Hotel 182X2 = 364€
SNCF BOD-Nantes 21,50€
Total = roughly 450€
