ALAC Tuesday 25 September 2012 at 1400 UTC

Summary Minutes & Action Items

1.  Adoption of agenda; call for Any Other Business or other amendments – Olivier (2 minutes)

• The agenda was adopted.

2.  Roll call and apologies – Staff (2 min)

• The roll call was held.

3.  Review of the Action Items from the 28 August 2012 Meeting  - Olivier (10 minutes)

• The AIs were reviewed and updated as necessary.

4.  Review of current ALS applications – Olivier, Staff (5 minutes)

a. Recently Accredited ALSes

• (169) Internet Society - Malaysian Chapter

b. Organizations that are Currently undergoing the Accreditation Process

• (158) ASOCIACIÓN DE ESCRIBANOS DEL URUGUAY\ - Regional Advice from LACRALO expected imminently
• (159) National Association for Digital Inclusion (Associação Nacional para Inclusão Digital) - Regional Advice from LACRALO expected imminently.
• (166) Association Tchadienne pour la Promotion et de Développement de l'Internet au Tchad (ATPDIT) - AFRALO has asked staff to follow up with some additional questions.
• (167) Ray Services - Sierra Leone - Additional information being researched.
• (168) Computer Society of India - ALAC currently voting.

5.  Reports – Olivier (2 minutes)

a. RALOs and Liaisons wiki page

• AG: There is nothing to report at this time.
• CLO: The liaison page for the ccNSO has not been updated in the past 25 minutes, which is the last time the ccNSO met, but it will be done soon There is an application that is in good standing and is being processed by the ccNSO: ccTLD for Rwanda. There is also a furthering of renewed and reviewed ccNSO Statements that are being developed.
• b. ALAC Monthly Reports wiki page
• OCL: Please be sure to regularly check this page and read the reports. RALOs please make sure you submit your monthly reports too
• Items for Decision

6.  Policy Advice Development Workspace -- Tijani, Olivier (20 minutes)

a. Recently approved ALAC Statements, Documents or Groups:

• SSAC Report on Dotless Domains - Adopted
• ALAC Statement on the URS Status - Status to be discussed

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

• APRALO Statement on Prioritization of IDN gTLD Applications in the New gTLD Program - Next steps being confirmed
• At-Large RRR WG – RAA Section 3.7.8 Modification - Garth Bruen to confirm when a finalized version is ready.
• OCL: We must see how the recent changes in ICANN affect this Statement.
• GB: Because it is a structural thing, it might require board approval. OCL: Garth, should we leave this Statement open or should we close it for now?
• GB: I think we need to wait and see what happens.
• ST: There is interest within the New gTLD agreement where a registry is not responsible for what happens at the bottom. I think we should include this in our discussion and am happy to talk to Garth about this issue offline.
• EL: Since Fadi has taken his place a CEO; there have been significant personal changes. The promotion of the head of Compliance to VP and reporting to the CEO has a very direct impact. This may change how Compliance interprets the RAA.
• AG: Making someone a VP is of great importance.  
• R3 White Paper - The ALAC is currently voting on this document

c. Current open policy forums:

• DSSA Working Group Phase 1 Report  - Comment Period closed 13 September. Reply period closes 21 October  - At this stage there is to be no comment. Discussion will take place in Toronto.
• Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings - Comment Period closes 18 October - Edmon Chung to confirm if a Statement is necessary
• CLO: As you know, I am on the workgroup but I have interacted with Rinalia and others on the team. The latest I have heard from Edmon is that work is required on this Statement.
• OCL: May I ask that you or Rinalia liaise with Matt to work on this issue?

7. Draft ALAC Statement on protection for the Red Cross, IOC and other IGOs and NGOs - Olivier (10 minutes)

• OCL: On one hand we have Alan Greenberg, who is out GNSO Liaison and needs to have an answer for tomorrow's GNSO call. While on the other side, there is a strong sense within At-Large that the RC and the IOC are two separate issues and should not be grouped together and this might lead to an ALAC statement to the Board..
• AG: The issue is that the drafting team has been working for a while on 2nd level protections. A compromise has been proposed that the IOC and RC are not looking for, but that most other constituencies are leaning towards. The compromise has two parts (1) It makes clear that in the long term, the first batch of PDP with regards to these two will be taken (2) limiting protection that is specific in the GAC memo to the GNSO. If the PDP given them protection but in the interim they do not have protection, they will be disadvantaged. If the PDP completes quicker, the issue is moot. If protection is not granted, then there will be costs to pay. If it is granted, it gets turned off if the PDP does not agree. There has been some discussion about separating them, that may happen during the PDP. My personal view is that it is a reasonable compromise. It is not giving the RD and IOC what they want, but it is granting them some protection.
• ST: Any recommendations we make would be reviewed by the board. One of the things that still concern me is that the Final Issues report is still not out.
• JJS: Reminded that Hong mentioned various international organizations that no one could say that we should distinguished between various types of international organizations. They all have to be treated in the same way.
• Rinalia: The issue is are we doing harm by not providing temporary protection. We have to provide temporary protection.
• AG: The drafting group is not looking at the long-term issues for IGO. We have to decide pending a PDP. The two issues are separate. The position of the Board claim that the Red Cross and IOC are unique, the position was pretty strong.
• IOC and Red Cross issues cannot be separated, like it or not – the GNSO has already ruled that they stay together.
• Consensus call is something that we need to work on right away.
• Whether the ALAC will support the PDP.
• Support of the PDP: Evan and Sala
• AG: Splitting the PDP is not today's decision.
• Should a PDP be initiated by the GNSO on the protection for the Red Cross, IOC and other IGOs and NGOs?
  
  • Motion: Olivier Crépin-Leblond
  • Seconded: Sala Tamanikaiwaimaro
  • Y: Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Sala Tamanikaiwaimaro, Eduardo Diaz, Evan Leibovitch, Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Yaovi Atohoun
  • A: Jean-Jacques Subrenat
  • N: n/a
• Do you agree, disagree, or abstain to granting both temporary protection?
  
  • Motion: Olivier Crépin-Leblond
  • Seconded: Tijani Ben Jemaa
  • Y: Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Eduardo Diaz, Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Tijani Ben Jemaa
  • A: Yaovi Atohoun and Jean-Jacques Subrenat
  • N: Evan Leibovitch and Sala Tamanikaiwaimaro
• OCL (chat): Alan will let it be known to the GNSO that there's support for PDP. Split regarding IOC/RC if the two are together. More support if the two were separated, with this benefiting the RC.

8. Update from Selected At-Large Working Groups - WG Chairs (15 minutes)

a. ALAC RoP WG and ALAC Metrics Sub-committee - Cheryl Langdon-Orr

• 4 drafting teams have been meeting weekly and we are getting to a point where a template is going to be input in the 7-10 days. The combined metrics and ROP is meeting in 24 hrs. And we will look at the issues.
• I am still hopeful on the progress. We are tracking well enough to have something substantive to have something to prepare in Toronto.
• We hope that this will be complete in Toronto.

b. New gTLD Review Group - Dev Anand Teelucksingh

• The group received the comment from IT for change India, and it was focused on that there should not be any expansion in the gTLD space and allowing private words would be against the public interest.
• The application closing period tomorrow.
• Review Group has came up with a timetable and the timeline is Nov 7th. for comments from At Large and after they comments will be reviewed in the dashboard.
• Dec 21st each of the RALOs will have to review each of the objection statements.
• Jan 2nd the ALAC has to consider those objection statements supported by 2 or more RALOs and file it by Jan 12 2013.
• OCL: there is an article in the Hindu newspaper that is causing noise outside of ICANN.
• There are many different people objecting. Why are they now coming to the table?
• The ALAC 2-3 years ago was very careful about treating those names and such was the political landscape that the Board was not listened to as much as it is today. Some of the matters become a real problem.

c. At-Large Academy WG - Sandra Hoferichter

• Pilot postponed due to lack of consensus within ICANN.
• The preparation was done in a tight schedule and pilot was not ready but there are ongoing discussions are needed and are taking place.
• There will be a conference call before Toronto.
• Sandra's first choice for a pilot would be Beijing. But it takes time to convince people.
• Tijani: Corrected the name is ICANN Academy.

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

a. Collection of questions for various meetings:

• ICANN Board Questions
• OCL: If anyone has immediate questions, please note them as there is only 1 question at the moment.
  
  
• GAC Questions
• OCL: Does anyone have any suggestions for this topic?
• SB: Just be sure that there is a special invitation from the GAC, which is called a high level meeting.
• OCL: I think we can work out cooperation as the agenda becomes finalized and we are closer to the meeting.
• At-Large Topics for Public Forum in Toronto Workspace
• OCL: If we give these Statements, I invite everyone to contribute to the wiki space. We need to have this task completed as soon as possible.
• Compliance Questions
• OCL: Garth will likely submit questions
  
• Global Partnerships Questions
• Communications Department Questions

b. GAC High Level Meeting - 15 October

• SB: Just be sure that there is a special invitation from the GAC, which is called a high level meeting.
• OCL: I think we can work out cooperation as the agenda becomes finalized and we are closer to the meeting.

10. Selection of Topics for At-Large Issue Briefing Papers - Olivier (10 minutes)

• Existing At-Large Issue Briefing Papers:
• Domain Name Monetization - June 2008 | [PDF, 204 KB]
• OCL: Since we are all here, with regards to updating the current ones, what would the group think about this approach?
• EL: I was involved in some of the early briefing papers. I don't recall one being done at our request, but I think this is an issue for registrants and not necessarily Internet end users.
• AG: Monetization implies parked pages. I think this is an issue worthy of discussion.
• MH: We should make sure that these are drafted from the users' perspectives.
• RAR: Policy briefs like brochures should be live documents, continuously updated as the issues expand.
• Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) - June 2008 [PDF, 448 KB]
• New gTLDs - June 2008 | [PDF, 440 KB]
• WHOIS - June 2008 | [PDF, 172 KB]
• IPv6 Factsheet - October 2007 | [PDF]
• ST: It is within our scope it intersects with abuse of dominant position and egregious market behavior (concerning Domain Name Monetization)

11. Any Other Business – Olivier (5 minutes)

a. Update on the At-Large SOI wiki page

• OCL: We have a new standard format where we can automatically create our SOIs. I invite you all to view the SOIs and to follow the instructions on the page.
• OCL: It is important that we have an SOI for all ALAC Members.
• CLO: I think we need to encourage regional leaders and representatives of the ALAC to complete SOIs. But I do think that page's instructions should be modified in the not too distant future as an attachment
• AI: ALAC Members and Regional Leaders to complete their SOIs by Toronto.

b. Baku

• TBJ: I was hoping out participation at the IGF would be more than what is current being offered. However, we do not have any feedback on the other options we have.
• TBJ: I have also asked for two interpreters to come to Baku but this request was not granted despite the fact that the IGF Secretariat is waiting for my response to indicate if we are going to change the time and/or change the room.
• OCL: I believe there has been a response.
• HU: Yes, she did. I will forward her response.