Roll Call:
ALAC Participants: Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Gareth Shearman, Sylvia Herlein Leite, Alan Greenberg, Sébastien Bachollet, Carlos
Aguirre, Dave Kisoondoyal, Carlton Samuels,
Guests: Siva Muthusamy, Olivier Crépin-LeBlond, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Vanda Scartezini
Apologies: Adam Peake, Patrick Vande Walle, Mohammed El Bashir, Fatimata Seye Sylla, Ron Sherwood (possibly), Rudi Vansnick, Hawa Diakite, Vivek Anand
Absent: Beau Brendler, James Seng
Staff: Heidi Ullrich, Gisella Gruber-White, Matthias Langenegger, Seth Greene
CLO stated that the action item on outreach is on going and is being discussed by the RALOs, with regards to ATRT Issues: there is also a wiki page for community comments.
ALS Applications:
There are currently four ALS applications pending (three of which are currently being discussed).
- IPAC - would become apart of APRALO if accredited. Sebastien suggested having someone speak with the IPAC applicants.
- Binary Egypt - The Middle East Regional Liaison informed Matthias that he did not know enough about Binary Egypt to carry out the DD. Staff contacted Binary Egypt and noted that there was some indication that they do have some free activities.
- Fundacion - Andres contacted the applicant to get more information.
Cheryl suggest we still keep this application on hold until additional information Matthias requested comes in.
Agreed: Binary Egypt to remain on hold until staff receive the information they requested.
Reports:
Vanda noted that there is a working group which coordinates the AOC reports.
Tijani asked whether the final decision on the budget been made and if so, do the request made by the RALOs have been addressed?
Vanda clarified that she was referring to the budget allocated to the AOC reviews not ICANN's annual budget for FY11.
Sebastien inquired about the Board retreat, new gTLDs and whether there will be another Board retreat
Vanda stated that the Board will meet on September 24 and 26 to approve the new nTLD process. There will probably be another meeting later on.
Items for Decision:
ALAC Report to the SIC on the At-Large Director Selection Process:
Sebastien formally noted that he will not participate in the deliberations on the At-Large Board Selection Process.
Cheryl asked if it is the will of the ALAC that we formally endorse the ALAC Final Recommendations on the At-Large Director Selection Process be considered as the final version?
Yes: CLO, Alan Green, Carlton, Sylvia, Gareth
Abstention: Sebastien Bachollet, Carlos Aguirre
Motion Passed.
Tijani would like to note that we should express our opinion on the suggested bylaw modifications.
Cheryl stated that the public comment will remain open until the end of the month and we will discuss this later during this meeting.
PEDNR:
Alan stated that all of the suggestions noted in the document, exept number 4 on Whois, are in fact the general practice of most registrars. However, a few registrars and many resellers do not. There was some concern about whether email can be taken down after expiration was hotly debated and there is no easy solution to this. Another contentious issue was Whois, especially thick Whois. When a domain expires and Whois has updated registrar information but not from registrants. So it could appear as if an expired domain was resold, when in fact, it was not. It was generally felt that this needed to be changed and even the registrars agreed.
Carlos - this is a very complex issue, how do you think we should proceed?
Alan - we are not trying to protect big corporations. The current terms make it very difficult for registrants to understand what they sign up to. Jacqueline suggested that email can be turned down but that an alternative email need to be provided. The ICANN website needs a tutorial for new registrars. The terms need to be understandable for people with no legal degree.
Carlton noted that some of the issues raised are also part of the registrants rights and responsibilities charter, which he and Evan are still working on.
Alan agrees that there is some overlap in some areas but other areas have deliberately been left off to ensure that the two WG's are not working.
Cheryl suggested the following motion:
Does the ALAC agree that the ALAC Statement on the PEDNR WG Initial Report should be submitted as the ALAC Statement on this report?
No abstentions
No votes against the motion
Votes in favor of the motion: Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Alan, Carlton, Dave, GAreth, Sebastien, Sylvia
Motion Passed.
Alan asked those involved to add personal comments in your role as ALAC members or as representatives of your regions to make additional comments. This is a user issue and more than half of the WG participants are registrars.
Vanda also suggested the possibility of submitting a minority report to report.
Alan made note of the fact that we are the minority in the WG does not necessarily make it necessary for us to use this option but we will keep this option open.
There was a discussion on whether owners of expired domains should be contacted via phone or fax if they do not respond to emails.
Carlos - congratulations to Alan, now we need to make a strong outreach because this is an important user issue. We need to translate this in several languages.
Siva: the practice of the domain industry needs to be changed on several levels. Many feel that the end user view are not fully represented by At-Large in the various working groups.
Cheryl acknowledged the need to discuss this issue further and suggested taking this up on mailing lists and future calls.
Alan - With regards to pages auctioned by registrars and pay-per-clicks, I agree that this is not an acceptable practice. However, this is not in the scope of this PDP. Siva is of course free to initiate a new PDP.
- c. Initial Report on Proposals for Improvements to the RAA:
Carlton- there have always been questions whether a registrar needs to expect a registrant to renew their domains. Also, i want to stress that we have been very strong in keeping a close watch on the discussions and made sure our interests were represented.
Cheryl noted that this issue will be discussed further at the ExCom meeting. There will be text for us to look at before the 31st of July on Initial Report on Proposals for Improvements to the RAA and I ask you all to react swiftly and comment to ensure we can submit the document in the deadline provided.
- d. The New GNSO Policy Development Process - the PDP-WT Initial Report:
Alan shared his concern about the amount of work put in this report and it is disappointing to see that there no comments were received so far.
- 1. Concept of fast-track: for things predominantly urgent, an example for this could be slamming which is a practice which is generally hated by everybody. A PDP to ban slamming would be easy one to get through.
- 2. We would like to have the ACSO-approach be formally included, up until now we have been part of the process thanks to the their good will but there was nothing formal.
- 3. The overall concept of WG needs to be looked at before we make it an Bylaw requirement for future policy discussions.
Over half of the recommendations have not been addressed yet and need further decisions to be made.
Cheryl - Motion: Does the ALAC agree that the ALAC comment on the PDP-WT Interim Report should be submitted as the ALAC Statement on this report?
No abstentions
No votes against the motion
Votes in favor: Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Sylvia Herlein Leite, Alan Greenberg, Carlton Samuels, Dave Kisoondoyal, Gareth Shearman, Sebastien Bachollet, Carlos Aguirre
Motion Passed
7. At-Large Travel Support (10 mins)
Cheryl: There is a draft document on ICANN's travel policy and we will have a vote to endorse this document.
Alan prepared an intial Statement but withdrew it to allow a broader Statement and after it has been adopted, I will send it to Kevin as an official Statement. However, to be successful, we will need support from other constituencies which I am confident we will get.
Cheryl- Does the ALAC agree that this note be endorsed as an ALAC Statement on this issue?
Olivier stated that he has read a lot of negative comments about travel policy and the travel company and just would like to point out that when I had to leave early, they did a stellar job.
Cheryl- thank you Olivier, unfortunately, your experience contrasts with some of the experiences we had.
Alan noted that there is a fairly senior position for volunteer travel posted on the ICANN job page, so they must be taking this issue seriously.
Alan pointed out things that were mentioned but not noted in the Statement: the Board should apply the same procedures and volunteers should be able to make their own travel arrangements as well.
Cheryl- Does the ALAC agree that this note be endorsed as an ALAC Statement on this issue?
No abstentions
No votes against
The motion carried unanimously
General Assemblies:
Heidi noted that the FY11 Budget text appears to indicate that in 2010-13 there would be funds for RALO general assemblies (G.A.s). David Olive in favor of these GAs and in having them in conjunction with main meetings. However, funding will have to come from existing ICANN travel budget. So, must get clarity from Kevin and Steve on whether this is from the existing FY11 budget or in addition to 25 x 3. Also, clarity of what kind of funding required in FY11 and FY12 – which regions will be having the GAs in these years.
Sebastien noted that it was not like this last year or before. It was clear that we had choice between GA or having all RALO leaders come to Meetings. So, this is a change; it is something new.
Cheryl asked whether it is a move forward.
Alan pointed out that in Policy section 8 and in Community section 10, each with specific dollar amounts stated in each. If they were to overlap and money has to go from one to another, then it’s a matter of deception and would need a strong statement on our part. Hopefully, however, we will find that it is new money, even if David Olive doesn’t realize this yet.
Carlton- As we seek clarity, it would be useful for LACRALO to give budget for GA.
Sebastien- Discussion of organization of GA should take place in Secretariat for all RALOs together.
Cheryl: Sylvia has indicated that LACRALO can come back with specific numbers within a week for discussion.
And we should have a single-purpose call on this.
UPDATE: During the Excom call it was agreed that the travel funding call and cross-Secretariat/LACRALO GA call would be the same call.
Voting Director from At-Large:
Cheryl- Requesting extension of public comment period for proposed bylaw changes to 45 days (based on Tricia Drakes's request).
Rest of today's meeting agenda:
Cheryl noted that there are specific points that still need to be discussed and rather than scheduling another call, group has decided to address some issues online because issue can potentially be resolved sooner. However, some topics such as new gTLD and Morality are important issues that will require a meeting. Regarding the rest of the agenda, Cheryl closed the meeting stating that they will refer back to the online community.
