Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay I think we can start and so good morning, good afternoon and good evening everybody. This is the ALAC ExCom conference call on the 26 July 2011. The time is half past the hour, so it's supposed to be 1630 UTC. And the first thing we’re going to have is a quick roll call. Gisella would you like to do the roll call please?
Gisella Gruber-White: Yes sorry I've just been joined back in. I'm not sure who is on the line if you could just give me a second.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Or maybe. Yes go ahead.
Gisella Gruber-White: I'm just trying to get who is on the line. I haven’t been on the line. I have had trouble getting back in.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay we have Evan Leibovitch, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Tijani Ben Jemaa, and Sebastian Bachollet; on staff we have Gisella Gruber-White, Seth Green and Matt Ashtiani. Have I missed anyone? I understand Cintra has asked for a dial out.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: She is in Asia time. As we have kept her up while she is in India she may as well stay up I guess.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay. And I have heard another voice that I very rudely cut off, who was this? Maybe it was Evan that tried to say something.
Evan Leibovitch: I was just going to mention Cintra’s dialup.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay, thank you and we have apologies from Carlton Samuels, who had to leave the call a bit earlier.
Evan Leibovitch: I may also have to leave on short notice but I will be here as long as I can.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Evan. Now review of the action items from the ExCom 11 July and the ALAC 26 July meetings. Let’s first look at the ExCom 11 July meeting. It's a long list again but many of these had been completed and let's go through it right away. The first one [inaudible 00:02:36] protocol for new members of the WHOIS Review Team. That has been completed. And as I mentioned in the previous call we have a list of people and it appears to have been punted to the ExCom to - well actually as been punted to staff to set up a poll to be able to list and vote for those SOIs and put them in a certain order. Tijani you have your hand up.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes do you hear me?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes we do.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay very good. May I propose that since everyone on this call was on the call of ALAC a few minutes ago, may I ask that all those action items that were treated in the previous call will not be treated now?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I would be happy with that as long as there is nothing in addition that we need to do because there might be a follow up action item from what was discussed on the ALAC call.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: [Inaudible 00:04:04].
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: That’s sometimes the case unfortunately. What I would suggest is maybe reading through those because it is something that goes on the record but maybe not adding to it. When it's completed we will just say it's completed. Evan to follow up with the GAC regarding joint communiqué on applicant support and to send a joint communiqué to ALAC internal, that has been completed. Olivier to contact Heather Chair to Chair, that’s been completed.
ALAC to formally assign the following two Danny Younger comments to the gTLD Working Group, that has been completed and done on the ALAC call. That has been punted over to the gTLD Working Group. LACRALO to put the questions it has up on the onto ALAC registrar Wiki, ideas for future ALAC registrar meetings, that is marked as completed. Is that actually completed because I didn’t see it this morning? I'm not sure who was supposed to do this. Was it Matt?
Matt Ashtiani: Sorry can you repeat it?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: The LACRALO was supposed to produce some questions for future ALAC registrars meetings. And there is a link over to a Wiki page which has been set up. But I don’t see anything from LACRALO there.
Seth Greene: Olivier -
Matt Ashtiani: [Inaudible 00:05:35] I'm sorry go ahead Seth.
Seth Greene: Sorry Matt, yes Seth here. Olivier that actually has not been done yet, LACRALO thought they would have it done by the meetings this morning. But it will be done later today they tell me.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay so Matt you cannot get this as completed until it actually does get completed just in case it doesn’t.
Seth Greene: Right.
Matt Ashtiani: I think we actually just talked about the same item in the last meeting and said it had not been completed but it will be completed soon.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes, so let's mark this as not completed and have it ongoing because I do want to make sure that we do move on this. This is something which we've been asking the RALOs for awhile. And I know it has been discussed in the RALO calls but it doesn’t seem to have yielded anything. And whatever - this is something that is particularly important because it really directly relates to the users and it goes in the direction of the next piece of work which will be to develop a website or develop some legitimate information that will nonvendor specific and that helps the internet user. I think that’s a direct - something very directly helping the user and helping potential registrants.
Next, staff to send a call for volunteers on the WHOIS Service Requirements Survey, done and as we heard earlier there has been no reply. That, I guess, is not going to yield any volunteers. Next, staff to arrange with IT support editing rights for ExCom members for the Wiki pages, and all of this IT stuff has been dealt with. The next one, asking the IT support if there is a way to close a Wiki p age, this has been discussed in the ALAC call as well. That is transcritped.
ExCom to ask the RALOs to come to Dakar with specific long term strategic plan for outreach with the aim of getting funded, and this is something which is a long term along with the next few lines including metrics, etc. We have discussed this on the ALAC call. Do we want to discuss this in further detail here at this moment in time?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Not unless there is something we need to action which I don’t think we need to do at this point in time.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: There is no immediate action but we do, at some in point time with Dakar approaching, we do need to spend some time on this. And I'm not quite sure whether first we need formulate what we really want out of that. And then take it forward or maybe this is not so important knowing the workload that we have on our hands at the moment.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Olivier if I may?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you, perhaps what we should do right now as an action item is put a scratch page up for the agenda for the Dakar meeting and have a great lump of it devoted as a space where we dump all this that needs to be picked up and we make sure that we look at that page as the general bucket of things at each of our meetings. It might just help us not miss anything but also organize them properly.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: In preparation for the Dakar meeting, very good idea and I would be happy that we do that. Matt do you have this action item.
Matt Ashtiani: Yes, can you hear me now. Yes I'm going to keep it as is and keep it for the action item?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes but this should be put on a special Wiki page for several things that we need to do ahead of the Dakar meeting that will relate specifically to the Dakar meeting.
Matt Ashtiani: Okay.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And of course every meeting that we have prior to the conference calls prior to that will point to this as well, so we do check was has been added on there. And of course -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And if I may?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think they’ll need to be in association with whatever scratch page as in planning pages come out of the AFRALO GA or whatever other allied activities and plans, we do need to make sure they get integrated and watched soon rather than later because of the various logistics issues that we don’t want to come too late in the program.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay thank you. The next one is the Secretariats to decide the best ways to develop specific long term strategic plan for outreach with the aim of getting funded. Is this something for the ALAC and ALAC ExCom to deal with? Or is really to be punted to the Secretariats now as they - something that the RALOs need to deal with?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I don’t think it needs to belong to us until such times as they respond to our call for their proposals and then we start doing vetting and sorting.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: May I ask Matt to put this on an action item for the Secretariats to be taken up at the next Secretariats call please.
Matt Ashtiani: Yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you. The next action item is the one with the proposed letter to Akram that was done. The one after that is setting up an AFRALO GA Working Group, that has been done as well. The one after that is staff to set up a Wiki page for development of ideas regarding AFRALO GA, that is also done. The one after that is Cheryl to set up a Wiki page for development of ALAC statement on IANA Final Notice of Inquiry, the FNOI and to post on it the first NOI statement.
That has been done as well as we heard in the previous ALAC call. And are we going to discuss this now - or well I guess there is not really very much - we can discuss this a little later this call. The last action item was Seth to distribute improvements working team tables and instructions and that has been completed. Seth do you have a status update on this please? And what can we do to make this go further.
Seth Greene: Thank you Olivier. As I noted there Work Team C has submitted their materials and I'm going through them now. We still need the materials from A, B and D. I've been in touch with Evan who is going to be working on A and Dev who will be working on B. I think at this point it's, as we've discussed just moving ahead with B.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay thank you and I have spoken to Wolf Ludwig who I understand has been asked by you to help Dev in taking over for Work Team B. Wolf was sitting two chairs away from me for most of the ALAC call and he has gone to get me food. But before leaving he has said he is ready to move on that and to work with Dev on Work Team B as soon as possible.
Seth Greene: I will be in touch with him then Olivier, thanks very much.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you and so we still have Work Team D that remains unknown, what's the plan for them?
Seth Greene: Dev is going to be working on that this week.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Oh Dev is on D as well, okay.
Seth Greene: Yes Dev is actually the Co-Chair of D.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay alright well we have flown trough the AIs for the first meeting -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Can I -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And of course there are today's action items.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Whoa.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Whoa can I ask a logistics question?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes please Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And it's fairly important. Everything I say is fairly important but this is specifically for you Seth, is there a shift now in any of our dates and timing or milestones to run what we had planned on running when with the ALAC improvements reporting and getting it to the SIC et cetera because you're now going to also be focusing on the JAS. You have two very demanding tasks. Do we have anything we need to know about or discuss or shuffle or shift up a forte night or back a forte night or is it too soon to have the answers to those questions.
Seth Greene: Thank you Cheryl, actually Olivier and I were just discussing that this morning. It's probably a bit too soon but I will keep you well informed of how that is going. And of course the improvements report deadline is self imposed by the ALAC, so I suppose there is room there that it could be moved if necessary. Hopefully it won't be needed but I will, as you suspect, will know more in a week or two.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay.
Seth Greene: Thank you though yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Seth. Certainly the official line as I understand at the moment is that work team - the ALAC improvements process takes precedence over everything else. However, and I think I can say this for the record that because the work of the JAS Working Group is particularly important and is certainly something which the ALAC has put its full weight behind, we might at some point, have to look seriously at having to perhaps provide you with more time to work on the JAS issue, which of course 24 hours being the maximum number of hours in the day, might need to be taken away from something else, from some other activity.
And short of you being able to extend 24 hours to 28 hours in a day, I guess you other main report is the improvements report. I just wonder how we all feel here with regards to moving any dates back for the improvements. As tough as it is for us to do, I guess because this is such a long process and [inaudible 00:17:28] important a choice between a rock and a hard place, any comments from Cheryl or Tijani or Evan?
Evan Leibovitch: I think I've said more than I needed to already.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Evan.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'll let everyone else speak first but I will take an opportunity.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes, Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay if there are no others, specific to the At-Large improvements I would very much like to see it in the hands of the SIC in a manner that allows it to have finalization status appointed to it in the Dakar meeting. Now anything that interferes with that will be disappointment from my personal perspective.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Cheryl and that is noted as well. In case - because I know that Sebastian is on the call and may not be aware - we have been advised that Seth Greene will be holding the pen for the final report of the JAS Working Group. And that in effect reprioritizes some of his work including his direct support for ALAC. That’s why we’re all in this current situation of having to choose. By anyway, oh Sebastian you have your hand up.
Sebastian Bachollet: Yes thank you for the information. I think it must be very difficult to handle by you. But I want to ask one question, is it because some others staff is coming back or is joining the team? And if not I guess you have no where to send and I have no word to say as a Board member on how the staff is allocated but it seems to be a little bit trends that when you are [inaudible 00:19:58].
And a shortage of staff time that you have to give some time for very important subject, that it's not just an ALAC or At-Large project, it's a project for ICANN with the end of GNSO and ALAC. But it's important for the Board too, then I am wondering if you - if we can have a review process on the decision because it seems to me that it may be questionable at least not to say something else.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sebastian, Tijani?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes thank you. I think that the new workload that Seth has now will be taken from his support to ALAC not from his work on the improvements. And this is a pity because we are really in need of his support - all the staff is exhausted now. They are working a lot as you know. I think that we can at lease mention our concern about this new work elevation for Seth.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you very much Tijani. May I just ask how you would suggest this concern be made known? Are you talking about an email? Or are you talking about a public posting on our lists?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: An email or a statement, why not?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: How do the others feel about this?
Evan Leibovitch: Olivier -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: What we have here - either we are all totally exhausted.
Evan Leibovitch: Well Olivier I privately said to Cheryl in a chat earlier that had there been more time on the ALAC I was angry enough to actually consider putting out a motion that ALAC should send some advice to the Board that it actually needs to re-resource the JAS group better than it has been. At the very least it needs somebody fulltime on it between now and the coming deadlines. What they have now is a joke. And Seth you're going to be stretched so many ways from here to Sunday that it's going to be difficult to totally give any of these very major things the focus they need. The JAS group needs somebody fulltime on it, anything short is almost a deliberate starvation.
Without me going - I'm not going to get into conspiracies and is it deliberate or not? I don’t really care about motivations. The end result though is the JAS group is starved to resources. It isn’t going to get done what it needs to get done. I really don’t care why anymore but this is the situation we have in front of us. I had my druthers ALAC would be sending some direct advice to the Board saying could you please actually direct staff resources at this initiative that you, the Board, said was critically important.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Evan, Sebastian your hand is still up. Tijani and then you're next.
Sebastian Bachollet: I would like to support what Evan said. I think it's not the best way to say - the Board says that support staff must be delivered to the JAS group and what is important today is even if you have part time, Seth is not enough. And you don’t enter into a discussion of which staff you are as people allocated for you but you - the JAS or the ALAC must say that we need one fulltime to Dakar. And that must be done quite quickly. You can do that to the Board but you can send that directly to Kurt and copy to Rod because he was in charge of dealing with that at the Staff senior level support for the JAS group.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sebastian, what I was going to suggest that obviously the JAS group has not been officially told about this yet, but it will be as soon as we finish this meeting. And Stephan Von Gelder will also be told about this. And what I was going to suggest is perhaps leave it for a week for both us and for Seth to really gauge the amount of work that is there and for him to see if he can cope with having to deal with those two things at the same time. That said, I'm not saying that it's impossible to do. I know that Seth is extremely resourceful.
And certainly if there is going to be something that will be reduced, it will probably be his support for more mundane matters in ALAC. And he will be able to spend much time both on the JAS Working Group but also on the ALAC improvements. And that of course then brings more pressure onto Matt and on to Gisella to hold and that is of course the next question, we cannot predict. We know that there will be more work. I don’t think we can predict right now whether this is something that is totally un[inaudible 00:26:22].
Sebastian Bachollet: May I just one point?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Sebastian.
Sebastian Bachollet: Yes it's - I would like to be very cautious with all this because I will not - you know already that there is big trouble between At-Large and the GNSO. From my point of view, from my visibility it's quite complicated to give another power even if it's not the power. But somebody coming from the ALAC staff it's a little bit strange in this situation. And I will bring all that to the next Board meeting on Thursday. And I will try to figure out what I can do as well, thank you.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sebastian. I just wanted to say one thing though from what you just said that there is a lot of trouble between the GNSO and the ALAC. I don’t think there is such a thing. I have spoken to Stephan on very regular occasions and we have discussed what was going on with the JAS Working Group and he has assured me on numerous occasions that the GNSO is fully behind it.
There might have been in the early days some suspicion from some GNSO council members that the JAS Working Group was going to come up with some things that were not going in their favor. But I have definitely seen a shift in opinion. And have been told both by him and also by his Vice- Chair that they are fully behind the work of the JAS. Now I have no reason not to believe them. Evan?
Evan Leibovitch: I've got a question for Sebastian, you said you're actually going to be bringing this up at the next Board meeting, if you are does this perhaps mean that we don’t necessarily have to go through the arduous process of creating an ALAC statement on this? That you could much more speedily raise this as an issue to the Board in saying that there are concerns that exist in the At-Large community about the ability of the JAS group to fulfill its Board assigned mission given its level of resources. Is this something you can take to the Board directly? Or is this something that you need a direct advice or direction from ALAC?
Sebastian Bachollet: It's quite completed because you know as a Board member I am not supposed to follow Working Group. And at the same time I follow it. And I am not the liaison from the ALAC and my suggestion is that even if it's not an ALAC statement it could be some from the Chair or from the ExCom to say something just to - I am not pushing something without your agreement. I will be your voice even if I am not your liaison. It may be better if - the ExCom for example will be okay. You don’t need to have all the mechanics to have an ALAC statement today. Just to remind the Board that the request was for more staff than there is today and that it's important to be done as soon as possible because the deadline is the end of August.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Sebastian I was going to say one thing. Procedurally speaking the JAS Working Group has asked for additional staff, would it be for the JAS Working Group Co-Chairs to ask for more or to say that they were looking to having someone fulltime rather than someone part time, I'm concerned about on one side the fact that ALAC is acting unilaterally on matters of the JAS Working Group. Our take on this is more of a case of having [inaudible 00:31:11] from an ALAC staff that are being taken away from direct ALAC business.
Sebastian Bachollet: May I just one point on that?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Sebastian.
Sebastian Bachollet: You are already taking a lot of time on [inaudible 00:31:24] as the ALAC and ExCom level. My suggestion is not to put that back to the Working Group because it's - as a body you may [inaudible 00:31:41] you. Maybe in discussion with the GNSO but they have to fulfill one task and that is to deliver a report at the end of this, if you bring that back to them it will take time and I'm not sure that’s the best way, to take their time.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well if the JAS Working Group Chairs they can use either paths, either via the GNSO or the ALAC. Certainly if the JAS Working Group Chairs told me they were under resourced, I think that the ALAC would have absolutely no qualms on passing this on to the authorities that will need to know about this.
Evan Leibovitch: Olivier this is Evan.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Evan please.
Evan Leibovitch: But look at the time delay going on right now. Rather than having staff tell the JAS group directly, here is what you're being allocated and giving the JAS Chairs the ability to respond, there is this indirect method of telling and talking about the staffing by going through the chartering organizations which didn’t happen when Carla was originally assigned. This wasn’t something that had to go through the chartering organizations.
You basically tell the JAS group, here are the resources allocated to you. This isn’t something that requires chartering organization approval and yet we’re going through this extremely roundabout and absolutely time consuming [inaudible 00:33:09] that we shouldn’t have to be doing just to - anyway - as Cheryl was saying in the chat that the second charter changed that. Even staffing requests have to come from the chartering organizations?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Communication is communication.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Cheryl is right I'm afraid. Communication is indeed communication, so any communication will go through.
Evan Leibovitch: Let me get this straight, so now staff tells the chartering organizations what the staffing allocation is. The chartering organizations tell the JAS group what the staffing allocation is. JAS group goes back the chartering organizations and tells them that it's insufficient and then expects the chartering organization in their own due time to go back to staff saying this is insufficient. Is there something wrong with this picture?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: That’s the charter we agreed to.
Evan Leibovitch: Okay, alright then I stand by my rant in the ALAC call, this is set up to fail.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: We have Tijani wanting to speak as well.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes there is a whole list at the moment. And think that Eric might wish to speak at some point because he is a part of the Working Group. But first we will have Tijani, Cheryl and then Eric as a guest. Hello Tijani?
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Gisella?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Oh now we can hear you Tijani, go ahead.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Do you hear me?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes we do please go ahead.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay thank you. I think that as ExCom our concern today is to have less stuff than we have more load on our staff and it is a problem for us. We have to complain about it as ExCom and as ALAC. But as JAS Working Group we can through Carlton and through Rafik it's very fast. We can send an email immediately and tell them that if they want ALAC to complain about the time allocated for Seth to work with them we can do. And then we can complain as ALAC as chattering organization about the part time. But now our main concern is overloading our staff as ALAC.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And I agree with you, the concern of ALAC is this but also as a co-chartering organization if the JAS Working Group says that it needs fulltime staff rather than someone part time, the ALAC has the duty to inform as well.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: I agree as a second step but the first step now, our first concern now is this problem. The other is another step. It needs the agreement of the leaders of the JAS Working Group.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Tijani, Cheryl you are next.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Thank you now I think we need to look at what might be the most effective and the most rewarding way forward on all of this. I would assume that all of us would agree that a least a complete FTE in addition to the support JAS work group has is the minimum that it needed from Singapore on that that didn’t happen to make its workload at least vaguely possible.
But we are where we are. I'm not keen to suggest that when we have asked for allocation and we have been given a less than fulltime equivalent, in addition to Carla who we've had and that allocation does bite out of time and energy that obviously some of us would like to see go to original tasks as well. I don’t want that to be either wasted or unutilized in very little time we have.
I think that we need to recognize that there are particular scribing and crafting and wordsmithing skill sets that Seth clearly brings to the party and the more he can do to assist without stretching him far too thin for sanity’s sake or for his other words to be [inaudible 00:38:35] the better good will come for JAS Working Group and indeed the chartering organizations as well. However, as Eric who was Chairman at one point, one of the things we were very clear about was very particular expertise was also needed. Evan raised that in the first call before Singapore for additional assistance.
Whilst we would like to aim for what I would call a minimum of an additional FTE, full time equivalent, it may be that that fulltime equivalent be made up from several sets of people and their expertise, if that’s how it is well then so be it. But we need to work with [inaudible 00:39:21] parts effectively as we get them. But it is up to the chartering organizations to bring the voice and concerns from the co-chairs and liaison to that discussion.
It's perfectly reasonable for Stephan and Olivier to pick up the phone, say to Kurt, Rod or the cleaner, I really don’t care, maybe all of them, look you know you really have to realize what is needed here. We have our co-chairs from the work group on this call. We can ask them questions. But this is what blah, blah and blah. And at least that wouldn’t be risking the dead space that I fear if we keep vacillating on about what we would like to have versus what we have, thank you.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Cheryl and next in the queue is Eric Brunner Williams who has written several statements and several things in the chat. But of course for the record I would ask him to paraphrase or summarize, Eric?
Eric Brunner Williams: Thank you Olivier. I have entered in to the chat approximately four paragraphs addressing the subject at hand and I will summarize them. I identify four skill areas that are required for the JAS Working Group staffing to be met. The first requirement is the document publication skill set similar to that of the production of the draft applicant guidebook to produce a smaller document which relates to the specific issues raised by the JAS work product such as Milestone Report 2. That is a skill set. Then there is an eligibility skill set or an eligibility requirement of the JAS as identified in staffing support. And this is to identify the applicant’s eligibility or the criteria of eligibility for applicants.
A third and similar but not identical corporate law staffing requirement is the requirement for a stand alone or a separate institutional entity which manages funds and does funding outreach which therefore includes also donor development as well as fund management. Finally a fourth issue that arises simply because there is a [inaudible 00:42:07] seed fund is if any portion of that seed fund is devoted to specific project and a project manager for those projects is required as well, thank you very much for the time to speak.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thanks very much Eric. It's certainly very helpful to have it all categorized. And I think it works in the same direction as what Cheryl has suggested. Certainly I am in total agreement. I think that the request which was sent by the JAS Working Group did include some of these specific requirements. And so far the requirement for drafting reports haven’t fulfilled - these other requirements don’t appear to have been fulfilled. There definitely is room for moving in this direction.
What I was going to suggest is that I get in touch the moment I get back home, which should be the day after tomorrow, Thursday - first right after this call I write immediately to Stephan Von Gelder Chair of the GNSO council. We inform the JAS of the allocation. The JAS would then respond to us and the moment I get back home on Thursday I will call Stephan. We will discuss things and after that I will call Kurt of whoever needs to be called at that point. I gather that the - I'm not quite sure -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes telephone is a good way of getting things done in a more timely manner at this point. Playing the email round robin game is too wasteful of time.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well certainly email round robin game with senior policy staff. But we do need to have our trail [inaudible 00:44:22] up with regards to advising the JAS -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Sure, sure and I -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: So that’s -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think Olivier we raised an AI on you out of the ALAC meeting that you were going to be CCing the Co-Chairs anyway.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Correct yes. They will know right away.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Excellent. I wonder if because Seth is the person we are speaking about on this call and I wondered whether Seth had any observations he might wish to make on the matter, Seth?
Seth Greene: Nothing really to add that you haven’t said Olivier at this time. But yes, no not at this time but I will think about it and get back to you okay?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay Seth thank you. And in the meantime of course -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Olivier?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Just if I may, particularly unless we have this mythical beast that is carrying all answers to all questions from all skill sets in the one package, you still need someone to weave all those threads together into a simple enough text which is a readable document, translatable into multilingual form for the uninitiated in the wonderful world of ICANN to read and understand. And they're exactly the skill set that Seth has. I think I said to you in a chat earlier that there is a lot of good that can come from these allocations as well. We just need to make sure that expectations and outcomes are properly matched.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Cheryl and of course the second part of that action item I was describing was the fact that we are in the meantime getting Seth to work. He has been allocated and so I would gather that as soon as the JAS learns about Seth’s allocation then Seth would start work already with the JAS Working Group. Certainly every day counts these days. And well - as much as it doesn’t fill me with joy to lose some of Seth's valuable cycles I guess we will just have to do without him for some of the work. I understand that some of his tasks are being taken over by Matt. Some of them are being taken over by Gisella.
And in the meantime we just have to get on with it. And if there is no more to discuss on this matter I suggest that perhaps we can move on then to the next matters in our call. Are there any other questions, comments or I don’t see anyone. I think everyone has been pretty much beaten down on this one. The next one is - we finished with the action items from the - oh god we still have another one.
We have the next action items which are today's ALAC monthly call action items and there are quite a few of them. is this correct? It's correct actually. Matt has sent me a list of the ALAC action items for today's call and I see there is a list - Matt can you take me through this? Are these all action items? Or is that an actual minutes of the meeting?
Matt Ashtiani: Sure no these are action items that we didn’t complete fully. There is something left to be done on each one. Let me just get the file out right now -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I just wonder whether we have to go through all that because we’re here for an hour and half.
Matt Ashtiani: Exactly, what I did is if it was a previous action item, I left it as is. If it was a new action item that arose out of it, then I put new AI and underlined it. It was just the easiest way for me to get everything. The first one, there was one new AI that came out, this is from the ALAC and regional leadership, subscribe to page change notifications. It's completed but you haven’t received any notifications so you wanted to double check and make sure that the AI has in fact been completed. The next one was -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Hang on can we deal with them as you go through them Matt. I wonder Olivier because it's linked to you being logged in, I wonder if as Dev put into the chat during the ALAC meeting that whoever - if you're being proxied for that to happen, they would need to log in as you. And then you will be allocated - your email address would be notified of the space changes. It might be that it was done but it was done and it's not going to you because you are not the person who was logged in when it was done. Does that make sense?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: It does yes, absolutely and this is something to check.
Matt Ashtiani: You know I actually looked at all of the ExCom’s permissions yesterday and you all had full ability to delete any comment - also to be aware of any page change notification.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Matt you don’t have to go in to the space to the highest level page of the space you want to watch - [inaudible 00:50:22] it's smarter to go [inaudible 00:50:25] you still have to select the additions or the extras or options menu and then you have to tell it watch this space when you're logged in. It will then generate the email messages on changes. And I think it's that bit that Olivier hasn’t got.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well Cheryl I've actually got the - I have received notifications of other page changes but I'm not quite sure that I've received anything on the ALAC monthly reports. I will have to cross check either my emails or maybe when someone files a report and see if it comes up. I do know that the IDN liaison report was sent in via email by Edmond and that this needs to be copied and put into the LEN page. Perhaps we can use this as a test and I will be able to tell you if I have received a notification. Otherwise if I have received notification then maybe I'm just not being attentive enough to my emails.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: But remember Olivier you have to be subscribed to watch either each page you're interested in or the section the page resides in by going to the highest level page above it.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I understand that. Matt has subscribed all of us to that, to the highest page.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: He can't. He cannot make one of those pages my watch page. Only I can do that when I'm logged in as me. He can log in as me and watch it for me and then it still comes to my profile. But it's not a matter of permissions it's about [inaudible 00:52:17].
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay I will check that maybe that’s what's missing. Okay Matt, next.
Matt Ashtiani: Sure I'm just going to start posting them into the chat as well so everybody can see it. This was [inaudible 00:52:36] draft and post ALAC statement on proposed ICANN process for handling requests for removal of cross ownership restrictions for existing gTLDs. That has not been completed. The new AI was to investigate what happened with this AI because no one was actually sure what happened. You asked me to figure out why it was not completed.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I guess this is something for staff to investigate because I'm not aware of the location where this was. I don’t know it might have been I dropped the ball somewhere along the way or -
Matt Ashtiani: Hello?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Are we sure this was not sent out or I don’t know. This has to be investigated to find exactly what happened to it.
Matt Ashtiani: Sure. The next new AI was Olivier to put out a call for new members of WHOIS which you did. The new AI was to make sure that a poll to put the names in order of preference once the poll is completed.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Correct, yes, so this is an AI for staff to create the poll and I guess it's for you - will you be dealing with this? Or Gisella will be running this?
Matt Ashtiani: I believe I will be dealing with this.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay so you will have to make a poll taking the names of all the people that have applied and then have it sent to everyone. I believe - is it something that is done in Big Pulse?
Matt Ashtiani: I believe so.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay so that should be done as soon as possible because they have been waiting on the WHOIS RT for our answer. And the more we wait the more work passes.
Matt Ashtiani: Yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Next?
Matt Ashtiani: [Inaudible 00:54:37] follow up with the GAC regarding joint communiqué on the applicant support and send joint communiqué around to the ALAC internal list. The new action item was the communiqué has been sent but the GAC has not yet replied. And Olivier Crepin-Leblond is to follow up. Any comments?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I'm lost on this one, I don’t know where that is.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That came out of our last ExCom. It may have been that you were going to follow up with his or was it that you were going to ask Adam what was going on as a method to find out what [inaudible 00:55:30] new. If that’s the case, then you did do that because you got a reply back from Adam, for what it's worth, that said yes [inaudible 00:55:42].
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay I say I'm a bit lost in the document I have in front of me now.
Matt Ashtiani: It's on Page 2, the third bullet down, I don’t know if that will help you.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay right it wasn’t underlined so I wasn’t quite sure.
Matt Ashtiani: Oh sorry, the next one - let me just post this. Carlton Samuels to write the first draft of At-Large statement regarding WHOIS policy review team discussion paper. The comments are open 23 July. The new AIs for staff to see if the vote has reached quorum.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Just a note regarding the previous point, I'm catching up. I have received an email from Alice, vice chair of the GAC that we should be hearing from them after the 27th so a couple of more days. Sorry back to Carlton Samuels to write a first draft of the statement regarding WHOIS policy review team discussion paper, staff to see if vote has reached quorum. I did check this morning it had reached quorum. We need just a couple of more people to vote or everyone who had not voted yet.
Matt Ashtiani: Would you like a reminder to be sent out rather than -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: There is usually a reminder that gets sent out. I'm not quite sure whether it gets sent out automatically or whether it has to be done manually. But always have a reminder sent out to those people who have not voted yet.
Matt Ashtiani: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: If I may, Olivier it would be appropriate for Matt to contact all those who have not casted their vote and say the vote will be closing by (insert time and date). If you have not voted online in Big Pulse by then you may contact me to cast ‘paper ballot’ if not you will be listed as not having voted in this.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And then they will receive a nasty email from me which is the procedure.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes and then the affirmation of the vote can go through because as I understand it the statement has gone through pending affirmation endorsement.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: That is correct yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The sooner we get that the better. [Inaudible 00:58:26] stick and poke it at them.
Matt Ashtiani: The next AI I think Seth actually finished while we were in the last call, this is Eric Brunner Williams to write first draft of ALAC statement on the preliminary issue report on the current state of the UDRP comments open until 15 July. The action item was to let you know if the vote has begun or when it will begin. I think I saw an email from Seth saying the vote has in fact begun.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I thought I saw a note from him saying it was due to begin today.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: That’s what I thought.
Matt Ashtiani: Okay.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Which is different from it has begun.
Matt Ashtiani: Exactly.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It might be [inaudible 00:59:18] but I can still be pleasant.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I would have found it difficult for it to have begun because it was only filed yesterday. And we filed it and I want to put this for the record, we did file it after the closing time because yes I dropped the ball on this one and I'm sorry. But thankfully due to the very kindness of ICANN staff namely Ordoff Nortenling who is in charge of this, the comment was accepted because they had not started the work on analyzing the comments. It was accepted and it also made it onto the actual forum as well. And thank you also to Seth for having acted very quickly on this.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: [Inaudible 01:00:08] Tijani's hand is up.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Oh Tijani, please.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Yes thank you Olivier. I would like to tell you that I have to leave now. For the update on the preparation of [inaudible 01:00:22] general assembly I did it in the previous call. I don’t think it is necessary to it again. I apologize because I have to leave now.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay thank you very much Tijani. May I just ask one thing from you, is it possible for you to provide us with a quick few lines in writing as to what stage you have reached with the preparations for the AFRALO GA. Although I know you mentioned it very quickly in the previous call, it was particularly rushed as well. If you do have the time I think it would be great.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: I will do after the call of Thursday.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Super.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: The call of the organizing committee will be on Thursday. After this call I will write some lines, yes.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay thank you Tijani that’s great. That will certainly keep us up to date with things.
Tijani Ben Jemaa: Okay thank you bye.
Matt Ashtiani: Olivier the next AI is on Page 3. It's pretty long so I just want to let you know [inaudible 01:01:33] document on Page 3, it's the second bullet point down, this was considering the comment from Danny Younger regarding the guidebook. The new AI was staff was to draft and send a note to regional At-Large organizations asking for expressions of interest into joining the gTLD group led by Evan which will deal specifically to the objections process called for by the guidebook.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Perfect, any comments on this?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I assume it is Matt that is going to doing that then?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Sounds all great.
Matt Ashtiani: Okay so the next one, ALAC to formally assign the above Danny Younger comment to the gTLD Working Group chaired by Evan during its 26 July meeting as recommended by the ExCom. It was in progress. The new AI was staff was to put the additional piece of work on the Wiki as a sanction or chartered objective for the new gTLD work group. Any comments?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Only that I know there is the other one which I maintain as a subset coming up later. Can we agree now that we will just roll that one in as a subset part when we get to it?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Sure, happy with that Cheryl yes. Okay Matt you can continue.
Matt Ashtiani: The LACRALO is to put the questions it has developed on to the first ALAC registrar Wiki above - I know this is [inaudible 01:03:20] - but the LACRALO didn’t complete it. But I Seth said the LACRALO was going to try to finish it today.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Right yes and it's great to have LACRALO doing things. I would like to see the other RALOs also doing things. I think one AI would be to have a call on each one of the RALO calls for this to happen. One concern that I do have is that the question might be a little unclear because if the question is unclear we are very unlikely to get a response or an answer. So a possible AI is to clean the question up. What I - I will volunteer for that, how is that?
Matt Ashtiani: Perfect.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Olivier if I may?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You do appearing in the regional calls you may wish to speak briefly to the matter and that would allow a little bit of Q&A and for you to make it really clear to why it's kind of important.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes thank you Cheryl. Actually LACRALO submitted something after I spoke on the LACRALO call. Unfortunately this morning I was unable to speak to on the APRALO call. It was a little late and I missed breakfast as well.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: There will be another one next month.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And thanks to this call I have now missed dinner as well, so that’s great. But certainly yes the next APRALO call, good point I will say this also in the EURALO and then the NARALO calls and at the same time I will also clean up the question itself on the Wiki. Next please Matt?
Matt Ashtiani: Okay there are only two more. This was regarding Liz Gaster and the technology evolution of WHOIS services. The new AI was you wanted staff to cross check with Liz to see if there is still time for people to join.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay that is for staff to check.
Matt Ashtiani: The next one -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'm sorry -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: No it's the other way around.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I thought it was discussed that in fact when we looked at the call had gone out and nobody had volunteered. That in fact because nobody would volunteer or had volunteered there was little purpose in asking this to see if there is still time to join.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Cheryl if I remember correctly it was actually that we would first ask one last time whether there would be any volunteers and if there were we would ask Liz. If on the other hand there were not then we would drop that and we would not ask Liz.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Okay I just remember Seth reporting that the call had been resoundingly responded to by absolutely nobody.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: He did say that yes, but sometimes messages get - I don’t know we have the ability to choose whether we want to follow one path or another. Do we feel around here that this is trying to extract blood out of a stone or beating a dead donkey or eating a dog’s breakfast?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep I do.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: So one person does.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: If we we’re going to get appropriate talent for this work group would actually be coming from our technology and technology issues expertise work group and at the moment I'm not seeing their bandwidth being very available because half the main suspects and usual players in that are involved in little things like, gee let me think, oh yeah the WHOIS Review Team or drowning not waving in their own workspace. We’re not even getting reports from them.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay point taken and perhaps we don’t need to send anything out.
Matt Ashtiani: Remove the action items completely?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes.
Matt Ashtiani: Okay and the last action item ExCom members [inaudible 01:08:48] observers in various meetings, basically you wanted to remind all RALOs that - actually [inaudible 01:08:57] everyone to remind all the RALOs that meetings are open to all ALS members.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I'm sorry I didn’t understand anything there. All I heard was garbled.
Matt Ashtiani: I'm looking at what's posted and I don’t even think it posted correctly. ExCom members during their RALO meetings are to encourage ALS observers in the various meetings.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: That’s correct, yes.
Matt Ashtiani: The AI is for Olivier is the ExCom to remind all RALOs that they should mention this in their meetings.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I think it's just a call for participants for the fact that all of our meetings are public and that we absolutely welcome observers as we have a couple of observers on the current meeting. And just to remind them that none of the meetings are closed and they are very welcome to attend as observer and certainly the nonusual participants like members of At-Large structures can also attend.
There was also a question that was asked by some members of an At-Large structure and said well is only one member of At-Large structure allowed to listen in on a meeting? Or as we - if there are three or four from the same At-Large structure are we allowed to listen in? And I said well you are absolutely welcome to listen in. There is no restriction on this. The voting involves just one vote per At-Large structure. The list name on the calls and participation on the calls doesn’t have a limit as such.
Matt Ashtiani: Okay and that’s the last new action items from the call today.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you very much Matt. We can move to the next items and that’s the items for discussion and of course we have the open policy issues, the NFOI and the AFRALO GA is already dealt with and Tijani has left for that. but the open policy issues -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: FNOI has been dealt with?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: As well FNOI is on the way so we only have three statements which Alan mentioned - no sorry which Carlton mentioned were worthy of having comments or putting a comment in. They have a very short closing date.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Who is going to own which one?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well if I can actually go on the darn page, just a note to - I'm not sure who did the agenda today but you do have to be aware of this problem I'm having Office Outlook Web Access. Some links sometimes end up with owa.icann.org prior to the actual real web address. And that makes it totally impossible for us non-ICANN staff to access.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yep.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And the first three links in there, ICANN Open Common Issues, At-Large Policy Development Page and At-Large Patch Schedule, all three of these are sending me to the wrong place. Now the WHOIS policy development team discussion paper, that is closed. Expanding developing economies participation in the new gTLD program, no because that is the JAS and we've worked on that. Report from Board/GAC joint Working Group and the answer on this is yes, it would be a good idea to comment. The closing date is 6 August which gives us about what 10 days or 11 days. We need to assign someone or have someone to volunteer to start work on this.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I don’t think it needs to be too onerous. So when we call for someone to do that, and it won't be me, I think we need to see it as a fairly light motherhood type statement rather than something deep and meaningful.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I must say I'm actually baffled about having to comment on something like this. I know that it's important to see how the Board and GAC work but short of being very partisan about this.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It can be as simple as in which case we, the ExCom could own and pen it. Matt perhaps in all his spare time could have a go at drafting something for us. He includes a desire to do more policy drafting this can be a small test, something along the lines of well we’re delighted that there is in fact a clear intention for the objectives of clarification of what constitutes GAC advice now has a process which is fully understood and accessible to both the GAC and the Board of Directors.
And that there is a shared understanding of terminology such as what constitutes formal advice, what is the meaning of consensus, where the GAC principles on various dates do or don’t come into play, how board notifications will go to the GAC, the intention of GAC members to have an ability to work severally as opposed to only jointly as an organ member in policy development process that there is a clarity in how GAC advice will be reviewed by the board and responded and there the half a dozen or so recommendations under the first objective and the six or so recommendations under the second objective which is all about how liaisons will work to the board and the NomCom, how a [inaudible 01:16:18] will [inaudible 01:16:16] that stuff.
From memory when I read it it's also opening up an opportunity which we would be silly not to exploit which is the option and an objective to get liaisons with other support organizations an advisory committee which did come out of the ATRT report. Gee, I wonder who might have been pushing that, which certainly endorse or support that. And I think that’s about it other than some administrative stuff that basically would bring the logistics and support for the GAC as an advisory committee more in line with the types of things that ALAC get and expect, translation, interpretation, travel support, et cetera.
There is also the very important issue coming out of the ATRT review where we were encouraging them to find better ways for governments not just the GAC rep who in some cases could be a part time person that’s very tangentially involved in government and in other cases could be administrative advisor themselves that goes from [inaudible 01:17:52] to the ridiculous. I think it was 13 or 14 or something, anyway in the middle of the ATRT reports but there is some progress on that. And as an advisory committee we fell warm and fuzzy about that.
And the other big one of course is looking forward to the opportunities such as we are beginning to see for GAC interacting with the community more meaningfully as well as the board. Matt you can transcribe what I've said and turn it into English as a first draft if you would like?
Matt Ashtiani: Sure.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Thank you Cheryl.
Matt Ashtiani: Can you guys excuse my naivety here? What specific policy statement are you referring to?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The Board/GAC joint Working Group which -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Report for Board/GAC joint Working Group yes.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes which closes on the 6 August, thank you.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Matt what I would recommend is you listen to the transcript. I think Cheryl has pretty much written most of the statement there. I thought that when she said it was going to be short, it was actually going to be short. But we will -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That is short for me.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well yes Cheryl.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Have you looked at the SNOI draft already?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I have of course. I have looked at it. I have ogled one paragraph.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well what I was -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: [Inaudible 01:19:32] short. Yes, okay thank you well so that’s one. The next one is the Inter-registrar transfer policy IRTP Part B Policy Development Process recommendations for board considerations and on my list it says yes please comment on that. Now I'm afraid I haven’t followed that process at all. That's something which I know that Alan has been following quite closely. He has made it publically known that he is not willing to be the person holding the pen on this. Did we have anyone on this?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Who said we should do it? I think I remained silent on it.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Me too. Evan any view on this or - I know what the answer is going to be.
Evan Leibovitch: Okay then and you do.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: It's a top one because we are stretched already on resources and on things and this is something which is complicated. It has to do with registrars and it's - yes it effects the end user - let me just ask some of our guests here. Eric and we have Cintra. What do you think Eric?
Eric Brunner Williams: I haven’t actually looked at the Part B portion of this. If you would - if requested to address this issue I will within a few business days and make a response. I have not however yet looked at the IRTPA Part B.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay so we will keep that in mind in case we run into heavy difficulties and I do appreciate that you are ready to pick up something which I think we’re all baffled about or at least I am somehow, having not followed it so closely. Cintra you have any view on this?
Matt Ashtiani: She may have dropped off. I know she was having a lot of connectivity issues, let me trying Skypeing her. No she is there, she is typing.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: She is here.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: You have to love [inaudible 01:23:08] telecommunication system.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: She is ready to support a [inaudible 01:23:22] on this. Okay so that’s good. We do have two people in case - what I do suggest and let's put out a call on the ALAC list for a volunteer on this because Eric and Cintra you guys are the usual suspects. You are part of the clan now as well and I would like to see if we could get some new people to come into this. But I guess if we do not get an answer in the next few days then just [inaudible 01:23:58] on notice then I guess than we can punt this in your direction.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It is only a few days though we’re talking early August again.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: It's the 8 of August, so yes, two more days - 10 days we can do that. Action Item 2 send this immediately to the ALAC list. If staff could please send a note to the ALAC list asking for volunteers to write a statement on this, answer by the 28 of July. If we don’t get an answer or movement then at that point it would be great if Eric and Cintra can look at it.
The next one is proposed revisions to Chapter 3 and 4 of the GNSO council operating procedures relating to proxy voting. And on this one we have a no, Alan didn’t feel that it was something - again it's another procedural GNSO thing. And the next one [inaudible 01:25:15] issue a report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy IRTP Part C. That goes a little further. I know as much about Part C as I know about Part B. I'm looking for help here, anyone?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Right it's alright okay it has a lot to do with issues of lockout and some of the issues that happens with why someone would be denied the ability to move -
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: This is very legal and requires much skill and I think some of it is -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Well we've all - it's at the point where the GNSO has passed it to the Board and it is bylaw mandated that before the Board takes action it has to go for an ICANN public commentary period which is what Part A, B and C - A has been done, B is about to close and C is just opening - so to some extent we perhaps could bundle the B and C responsibilities together and see whether a short form response can come out to B and perhaps not all that much longer form response can be created in advance for C.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: That might be a plan actually Cheryl. I would - not knowing either of them I'm not going to say yes or no but - let's get on with - yes I know Cintra is saying our legal - I know you're well qualified for this. Maybe we should dump it all on Cintra. That’s what you get for being a smart alec. Okay listen I think is just lasting a bit long and we are all tired and so on. Take this one into touch while looking at Part B; give it a couple of days. In a couple of days if there is no movement on Part B, then Cintra and Eric will be looking at Part B and I will also be reading both and perhaps know a little more about what these two things are all about.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I'm just putting the links into the chat for you all.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay, thank you.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Aren’t I a good girl.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: And the last one, oh we've done all of them, so there are none left. And so the next part of our call if we are going to soon reach the end the next part is we've done the FNOI. We have gone through the update on preparations for AFRALO GA so you will be glad to hear at 1 minute before the next hour, if any other business.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I would like to just follow up if I may Olivier, on the less than adequate time and energy I put into the AOB on the ALAC call on this matter. The Distribute IT debacle is one of those potential considerable concerns for registrants. We won't know what did or didn’t happen during the dead space while transfers were happening between what was going to be a failed registry.
And the people who then took it up, sorry registrar and the people who then took up the mantle and that happened at the 11th hour. And suffice it to say with no offsite backup, with no backup or ability to backup information because of the sophistication of the hack. All opportunity to very much back into systems was hacked and the ability to recreate the data files were badly damaged and compromised. It is a story that hypothetically could happen again.
But the real issue when I was talking to Pam Little in ICANN Compliance from their point of view is the lack of an ability for under the current RAA them to have even seen that this had occurred in the ccTLD situation, certainly in the .au space who have many hundreds of thousands of names through resellers of Distribute IT and Distribute IT directly. They were an accredited registrar of ours and its part of our agreement that if you have a compromise to your security and that includes any incident albeit minor or hacking, you're contractually bound to notify us with the complete details which is what they did because they're contractually bound to do it.
We had this bizarre situation where as an AUDA Board member, AUDA Board and staff were sitting at the Singapore ICANN meeting effectively working to resolve and we did and protect our registrants and we did at a time where there was no requirement for ICANN to be in possession of the same knowledge and information.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Well two points, the first one being I understand this is a one off case. I gather this is something that is not happening for the first time. Has this happened before to knowledge anywhere else?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Registry Fly has been the only other failure I'm aware of in recent times and that was a failure for entirely different reasons. This is the first hack, certainly at this level which literally destroyed the data files.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: A hack like this I find this as being extremely poor data backup.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's uncontentionable conduct. But there is in fact no reason for ICANN to have ever known until post failure they weren’t getting the WHOIS records because they are contractually complied. That is a compliance issue they can do something about. Now as it is Net Registry came in and picked up the mantle at 1 minute to midnight hour and it's a nonissue to some extent. But the hypothetical for the potentials, ICANN compliance will be very pleased to try to apply for this as future hole. I don’t want someone driving [inaudible 01:33:59] through.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Is this something - and I'm just asking everyone here - is this something that should be taken up by the ALAC or is this really something that is a matter of compliance?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: There is no ability for ICANN to enforce compliance because there was nothing for them to comply to.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: So it is - I noticed that Eric Brunner Williams writes in the chat that this is the - there is notice of failure and the registrar is not in the current RAA.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Yes escrow requirements are grayish at the most common entry.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Certainly this is interesting because it's something that we’re learning through and incident rather than something that we might have thought about before hand or forecasted. But I think that ultimately -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: In fact ICANN Compliance has forecasted it. They have written a white paper about it. They did in fact present a case for a more robust compliance model. And it did not unfortunately get to the tables that it needed to get to. In fact, there is no hesitation from ICANN Compliance should ALAC wish to start rattling the chains on this one. They believe it would probably be a very good thing for us all which is why there needs to be a short term knowledge and accuracy of information dissemination approach simply to deal with fear and ICANN reputation. And then a meeting in the long term how do we risk analyze, risk minimize and future proof?
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay well then it -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: And Eric is absolutely correct, everything he is saying is correct. It's just [inaudible 01:36:21] belief I'm walking around a Singapore ICANN meeting with people and staff actively working on a solution, getting moment by moment updates on an extremely serious issue at the same time and at the same place where ICANN literally had no knowledge of it, no formal knowledge at least.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay fine I understand that. Rattling the cradle would mean creating a statement, writing something to the Board.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I think where it needs to be discussed with ICANN Compliance in a full, frank and fearless manner. We certainly have people in our APRALO region who are concerned and confused about this and what it may have meant. They are asking for information, reassurance and accuracy of details. If ALAC wishes to do that rather than just the region, which I personally think is probably a very good thing, then it may indeed end up with a request for at least this part of the RAA to be revisited.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: I'm all for having a statement and rattling the cradle. I understand the problem and it's effecting users. The problem is that at the moment there is no RAA review going on. We have absolutely no - we do not know if the board is even going to look at our statements or read them. I know that - I noticed that the last one which we sent to the Board has been put on hold for the time being or in a vault somewhere.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I believe this is medium to long term. I see this as getting somewhere meaningful about this time next year. And that’s okay.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Yes and you know there's no doubt judging with our previous meetings with compliance hat compliance is one of the things which ICANN is currently heavily failing at. And you will have noticed my little temporal wait in trying to choose the right word. Failing is actually the words I wanted to use and is actually the correct word for it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It appears they didn’t even have the ability to deal with it because it wasn’t even a compliance issue.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Because they didn’t know about it.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Because they didn’t have to know about it because it wasn’t contractually required. [Inaudible 01:39:15] like a security breech is not needing to be reported.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Listen Cheryl I know it's the middle of your night and it's soon going to be the middle of my night at some point, may be it will become the middle of your day. But what I would suggest is that we just take this up by -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It gets put on our “To-Do” list. It's something we will have a couple of conversations with and probably a more meaningful discussion, let's do an analysis of it in Dakar. It will be something that compliance will be happy to get their teeth into. I would suggest that the number of At-Large structures, at least in Asia Pacific but probably elsewhere should they have a local internet community that is effected or potentially affected by this and many of us will have, might make some local internet community outreach and inreach in mileage by saying here is some briefing materials that ICANN has prepared on this issue. We are here to help. This is the sort of thing if you get involved with us, that you can get involved with, those types of things.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Are we likely to see a note from APRALO about this?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The meeting from APRALO formally requested that we take it to the ALAC. If the ALAC does not wish to take it up as an issue, APRALO will taking it up as an issue and working directly with ICANN Compliance. ICANN Compliance is delighted to do so. But they would be even more delighted to work with it ALAC wide.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay so we will wait for hat note from APRALO and I can give you my -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: It's not a note. I brought it to the meeting formally in AOB.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Oh now, okay so that’s basically taken as the action item.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: The action item is for the transcript from the APRALO meeting to not only go to Pam but also to come to ExCom and to the working list so that we can look at the case and then move it to the next step.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Okay, well then that has been decided already so let's move on with that.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Good.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Any other business or anyone else wishes to comment on this. I know Evan has dropped off this. I gather pretty much everyone is about to drop off. Okay any other business?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I only need to report from a personal perspective that after the FNOI goes in at the end of the week, I really will be in no fit condition to interact with man or beast next week while I have my radiation treatment that I have been prepping for for the next month. I will beg your general indulgence on lack of performance.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Cheryl thank you for letting us do this and all the best and all the strength and I know you can be strong. And you are so all the best for this and -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr: That’s not a problem it's just if you wonder why I get shitty livid with you next week it will be because I really do have a shitty liver. I will be getting rid of all this radiated iodine.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond: Great, okay, any other business apart from this? Alright and it is with happiness after five hours of conference calls, but I can say this meeting is going to be adjourned. But before I do that I want to thank Gisella, Matt and Seth for having stuck by us also. And thank Eric and Cintra for having [inaudible 01:43:56] to listen to our ExCom discussion and also being able to contribute to them also. Great thank you very much all of you and thanks Sebastian for passing by as well and this meeting is now adjourned.
-End of Recorded Material-
