• Participants: Evan Leibovitch (EL), Rinalia Abdul Rahim (RAR), Tijani Ben Jemaa (TBJ), Julie Hammer (JH), Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO), Olivier Crépin-Leblond (OCL), Alan Greenberg (AG)
  • Apologies: Carlton Samuels (CS)
  • Staff: Heidi Ullrich (HU), Silvia Vivanco (SV), Matt Ashtiani (MA), Gisella Gruber (GG), Nathalie Peregrine (NP)

1.  Roll call and apologies – Staff (2 minutes)

  • Roll call was taken and apologies were noted

2. Review of AIs from Prague Meeting - Olivier (10 minutes)

  • The ALAC and At-Large Action Items 24-29 June Prague Meeting were reviewed and updated as necessary - https://community.icann.org/x/z67bAQ
  • RAR: Do we know when we could finalize the budget for activities in Baku? We have a few activities planned but they will depend on the budget? Without getting this information ahead of time any meeting we have may be unproductive.
  • EL: I suggest that we have a separate meeting for the groups. Taking some of the policy time and splitting it up into multiple tracks might prove beneficial. The idea is to have a portion of ALAC policy time spent on multiple streams, based on WGs, that can then assemble and propose things to the wider ALAC
  • OCL: We are constantly running behind schedule so I think the extension is a good idea. I also support Evan's idea as well. My only concern is if one is a member of more than one WG.
  • RAR: Regarding WGs, I agree that we need more time for their activities. Perhaps we can schedule them in blocks so they do not overlap.
  • EL: The challenge is coming up with five or so small meeting areas for each of the streams. It could be as simple as four corners of the ALAC room, provided the layout allowed (or was considered in advance)
  • EL: I am thinking that this would be either Monday and/or the last hour or so of Sunday.

3.  Policy Advice Development Page -- Tijani, Olivier (30 minutes) 

a. Recently approved ALAC Statements, Documents or Groups:

iii.  DRAFT Statement of ICANN's Role and Remit in Security, Stability and Resiliency of the Internet's Unique Identifier Systems

  • JH: Now that we are in the reply period, Mikey O'Connor has posted some useful comments that we may wish to support in the reply period. I am happy to draft a supporting reply for your consideration.
  • CLO: I agree. It is important that file a reply.
  • RAR: I agree.
  • OCL: I fully support Julie's suggestion as well.

b. Statements currently being voted on or reviewed by the ALAC

  • IDN Prioritization in the New gTLD Program Targeted at the ICANN Board
  • RAR: At the IDN WG Meeting in Prague it was determined that we should draft a Statement based on the discussions that took place in Prague. The key issue is if variants should be discussed in the Statement. There is a link between this Statement and the comment made by Carlton and Evan during the Public Session in Prague. Essentially, should variants be addressed?
  • OCL: Regarding timing, I think the end of the month is a good benchmark.
  • AG: If you go to the Board Agenda, it says that the next Board Meeting is in October. There are meetings scheduled before Toronto, the Board should be transparent and actually tell the community when it will meet.
  • AI: Staff are to check if the Board Meeting page is up to date. If it is not, Staff are to determine why. If so, Olivier will write to Steve Crocker noting that this lack of transparency is not appropriate.
  • Request for Community Input on SAC054 - Domain Name Registration Data Model
  • JH: There is not a traditional comment period for this report, but the committee has asked for community feedback. I have written a document with some proposed text that is now on the wiki. Once comments have been received, I am happy to draft a Statement.
  • AG: I don’t think the Liaisons should necessarily draft the Statements.
  • JH: There is a formal closing time even though it is not an official PC.
  • OCL: Would a webinar be helpful?
  • AI: A webinar on the Request for Community Input on SAC054 - Domain Name Registration Data Model is to be held. Staff are to liaise with Julie Hammer and the Chair of the SSAC

c. Current open policy forums:

  • Preliminary GNSO Issue Report on the Protection of International Organization Names in New gTLDs - Statement has been drafted - PC Comment Period closes 25 June; Reply Period closes 16 July
  • AI: Staff are to liaise with the Staff Contacts for the Preliminary GNSO Issue Report on the Protection of International Organization Names in New gTLDs and see if the comment period can be extended for 10 days (26 July 2012)
  • EL: My preference would have been for a more generic comment.   This is in response to an ALAC Comment; it is a more of a fine-tuning of our original Statement.
  • Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part C Policy Development Process Initial Report - Statement has been drafted - PC Comment Period closes 4 July; Reply Period closes 25 July
  • CLO: Reply Comments are to be replies to comments made and not new comments. Perhaps a way forward would be to have the reply period start earlier.
  • OCL: We can still send this out as a delayed comment.
  • AI: Staff are to send a note to Marika letting her know that the ALAC will soon submit a Statement on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Part C Policy Development Process Initial Report.
  • Request for Community Input on Formulation of 2013-2016 Strategic Plan - No Statement is to be submitted - PC Comment Period closes 4 July; Reply Period closes 30 July
  • RAR: There is no information on who put it together and who participated in the discussions during the creation of this document.
  • OCL: Should we have a Beginner's Guide on this?
  • HU: I can look into the development of a Beginner's Guide for this.
  • ICANN Board Conflicts of Interest Review - Independent Expert Report - No Statement to be submitted - PC Comment Period closes 6 July; Reply Period closes 28 July
  • Security, Stability and Resiliency of the DNS Review Team (SSR RT) Final Report - No Statement to be submitted - PC Comment Period closes 30 July; Reply Period closes 29 August
  • Proposed Modifications to GNSO Operating Procedures - No Statement to be submitted - PC Comment Period closes 30 July; Reply Period closes 20 August
  • .name Registry Agreement Renewal - Alan to determine if a Statement is necessary - PC Comment Period closes 2 August; Reply Period closes 23 August

 

Items for Discussion

4. Follow-up to the comment to the Board on the .COM renewal - Olivier (10 minutes)

  • AG: I think the IPC needs to name note of this. I will submit a note on a personal basis, not an official one
  • OCL: Once we see the letter that Steve Mettalis sends his letter, we will need to have a vote to determine if the ALAC officially supports it.
  • EL: This will be a litmus test of ICANN on how they are perceived in the outside world. Essentially, are they benefiting and representing the public interest or the registry interest.
  • AG: This is a negotiated agreement. ICANN could always come back and say that we attempted to negotiate this but were unable to do so. This would be a fair answer.
  • OCL: Once the letter is drafted, we can have an official vote by the ALAC. It is key that we ensure the process is followed and that everyone is able to voice his or her comments.
  • AG: No, this is not something the ExCom can decide. As such, I agree, and I would not have the ExCom unilaterally decide if it endorses the letter.
  • AI: A copy of the text will be sent to the ALAC for a vote.

5. Review of Prague Meeting - Olivier (15 minutes)

  • At-Large Prague Meeting Workspace
  • ALAC Chair's Report from the Prague Meeting - Draft
  • OCL: The Chair report has been put together by Staff, I must thank Staff for their work.
  • OCL: Should we expand the report and have it include what our WGs are doing? Should we do a PowerPoint instead of the PDF?
  • EL: Either one would be acceptable.
  • OCL: Perhaps, for the next report, as we will have more WG activity, that we have a small section on WG activity.

6. Initial Discussion of Toronto ALAC Meeting Agendas - Olivier and Staff (15 minutes)

  • HU: The Toronto Workspace has been created - https://community.icann.org/x/MxAQAg
  • HU: The Policy Discussions have been extended to two hours. There will be a NARALO Event, which may include an anniversary event. Meetings are being scheduled with other groups (GAC, Board, WGs) as appropriate.
  • OCL: Let's not be too detailed for the time being.
  • AG: It would be best if the ROP WG not meet on Wednesday.
  • HU: Due to room availability, the ALSes will most likely be in a different hotel.
  • RAR: Is it possible to say no to invitees?
  • OCL: Sure, but the consequences may differ depending upon who it is. But, yes, we can say no.
  • EL: We do have a precedent with certain individuals talking to us. Perhaps we could just say that we are too swamped.
  • OCL: it would be useful to have a meeting with the Registrars. It would also be helpful to have the Compliance/Legal meeting again.

7. Any other Business - Olivier (5 minutes)

  • EL: Should we officially submit the public comments made during the public forum?
  • AI: Staff to send out a call for comments and the begin the statement process on these topics

 

 

  • No labels