| Date | Name | Ralo | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sat | Glenn McKnight | NARALO | ATLAS 2 Meeting Reporting event Mentoring 3 new members Pictures at FLICKR Full pictures without watermarks https://www.flickr.com/photos/glennmcknight/sets/72157645271920682/ Video of ATLAS 2 https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHeYfhcpf4QTn4Ce_2u-sOpr6Yh2vzJTT |
| Sun | Glenn McKnight | NARALO | ATLAS 2 Meeting Reporting event Mentoring 3 new members |
| Mon | Glenn McKnight | NARALO | Atlas 2 Slideshow and report production NARALO General Assembly http://animoto.com/play/4BMRkxMuHHMiQcOesm4cMQ Mentor Meeting ISOC Delegate meeting |
| Tues | Glenn McKnight | NARALO | Fayre of Opportunities Creation of Survey of event |
| Wed | Glenn McKnight | NARALO | Atlas 2 TS3 report discussion ATLAS 2 report edits Creation of SSAC Video clip with Patrik Folstrom |
Eduardo Díaz | NARALO | GAC Communiqué Overview (10:30-12:00 BST): Interesting exchange on how the GAC works to get consensus on a GAC statement. Check meeting recording here: http://london50.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-gac-communique-overview | |
| Thurs | Glenn McKnight | NARALO | ATLAS 2 Reporting Update pictures and Videos of today's session Wrap up meeting |
| Narine Khachatryan | APRALO | on June 21, 2014, Saturday ATLAS II Plenary Session 1 ATALS II Plenary Session 2 Orientation Meeting of ATLAS II At-Large Mentoring program ATLAS II Thematic Group 3 Session 1 ATLAS II Plenary Session 3 on June 22, 2014, Sunday Joint ALAC/ccNSO Leadership Working Breakfast ATLAS II Thematic Group 3 Session 2 ATLAS II Thematic Group 3 Session 3 on June 23, 2014, Monday DNS Women's Meeting Welcome Ceremony and President's Opening ALAC and Regional Leadership Working Session on June 24, 2014, Tuesday ATLAS II Discussion with the SO/AC/SG Chairs - Session 1 - London ALAC Meeting with ICANN Board EURALO General Assembly ALAC Work on June 25, 2014, Wednesday APRALO General Assembly on June 26, 2014, Thursday ATLAS II Plenary Session 5 ALAC & Regional Leadership Wrap-Up Meeting Public Forum | |
| Maureen Hilyard | APRALO ALAC | Friday 20 June - attended the ISOC Chapter Leaders' Workshop Saturday 21 June - participated in the ATLASII Plenary Sessions and Thematic Group 3 - Global Internet: The User Perspective Sunday 22 June - co-led the joint ALAC-ccNSO meeting with Katrina Sataki. Discussion focused on a collaborative project. Action item was for me, Dev and Ron Sherwood to work on developing a list of matches of ALSes and their ccTLDs. The aim will be to enhance knowledge of ALSes about the role of ccTLDS, and to encourage the building of relationships between ALSes and their ccTLDs. Also ALSes may help to get more ccTLDs to join, and benefit from the support of, the ccNSO. The rest of the day was spent on the Thematic Group. Monday 23 June - Attended the DNS Women's Breakfast before the Welcome Ceremony; followed by a brief attendance at the At Large Policy Roundtable and then the ALAC and Regional Leadership Meeting Tuesday 24 June - Attended the ATLASII session with SO/AC Chairs, and the ALAC meeting with the ICANN Board. During the ALAC Work meetings I updated on the ALAC metrics procedure which is now being left to the RALOs to notify the Metrics Committee about how they aim to assess the performance of their ALAC members based on the expectations of the ALAC Rules of Procedure.The highlight was the Fayre of Opportunities in which APRALO shone! Great teamwork. Weds 25 June - Attended the second ATLASII session with AO/AC Chairs and the APRALO General Assembly where I introduced the APRALO Rules Procedure to ALSes highlighting the section on the selection/election of APRALO officers and ALAC members, and the section on Metrics and the performance of ALSes and ALAC members. I also introduced the new ALAC-ccNSO project discussed on Sunday. Unfortunately I was ill in the afternoon so could not attend the afternoon meetings, including the ccNSO Council meeting. However, I was able to spend a short time at the Gala event which was very low key but enjoyable. | |
| Maureen Hilyard | APRALO ALAC | Thurs 26 June - Attended the entertaining wrap up of the ATLASII programme followed by a looong session of the ALAC & Regional Leadership Meeting where we voted on the NETmundial statement from the ALAC, and discussed at some length the ATLASII Declaration. | |
| Ognian Mitev | NARALO | Saturday June 21st 9 am - Atlas II Meeting 11.30 am - ATLAS II Plenary - Session 2 3 pm – ATLAS II – Thematic Group 3 6 pm meeting - ATLAS II Plenary Session 3 7 pm meeting - ATLAS II Dinner Sunday June 22nd 8 am meeting - ATLAS II Thematic Group 3: Global Internet: The User Perspective - Session 2 11 am meeting - ATLAS II Thematic Group 3: Global Internet: The User Perspective - Session 3 3 pm meeting - ATLAS II Thematic Group 3: Global Internet: The User Perspective - Session 4 6 pm meeting - ATLAS II Plenary Session 4 Monday June 23rd 8.30 am meeting - Welcome Ceremony and President's Opening 12.00 pm meeting - High Level Government Meeting 3.30 pm meeting Tech day 5.00 pm meeting – Name Collision 7 pm meeting - ISOC Members @ ICANN 50 Tuesday June 24th 7.30 am meeting - ATLAS II Discussion with the SO/AC/SG Chairs - Session 1 8.30 am meeting - ALAC Meeting with the ICANN Board 10.30 am meeting - Expanded Academy Working Group 11.00 am meeting - NARALO General Assembly 2.00 pm meeting - Internet Service Provider and Connectivity Providers – ISP and Connectivity 7.30 pm meeting - Wednesday June 25th 8.30 am meeting - DNSSEC Workshop 3.30 pm meeting - ICANN's Security Stability Resiliency Team - Outreach Session 7.30 pm meeting - ICANN 50 Gala Thursday June 26th 8.00 am meeting - ATLAS II Plenary Session 5 12.00 pm meeting - ALAC & Regional Leadership Wrap-Up Meeting 1.30 pm meeting - Transition of NTIA's Stewardship of the IANA Functions 7 pm meeting - ICANN 50 Wrap-Up Cocktail
| |
5 Comments
Glenn McKnight
No edit ability
Pastor Peters Omoragbon
REPORT OF MY ACTIVITIES THUS FAR AT THE ATLAS 11 CONFERENCE HOLDING IN LONDON-June 21-27 2014.
June 20 2014: Arrived the London Hilton Metropole Edgeware Road and was checked into Room 711. The room A/C and internet service were poor, room and bed size so small compared to other ICANN Meeting hotels I have attended since 2010. This was later changed Monday 24 June 2014 to Room 1396. A better and appropriate ICANN standard hotel room.
June 21 2014: The first plennary of the Atlas 11 Conference was declared open by the Chair of ALAC-Mr, Olivier Leblond supported by other ALAC Leadership with the ICANN top echelon the President and CEO-Mr. Fadi Chehade, ICANN Board Chairman-Mr. Steve Crocker with AC/SO Chairs. The official opening was done with speeches from all the dignitaries and by 11am, the 2nd Plenary session continued with the business proper for the Summit at the core of discussions. A general overview of all the thematic discussion was done by Mr. Leblond and at 1pm, we all retired to the Windsor Suite for the Mentors/Mentees meeting. Here we were all intoroduced to the our individual mentors and certificates given to all the Mentors. At the end of this was lunch break and by 3pm every ALsec Representative was to return to their Thematic Group.
Thematic Group(s): There were 5 thematic groups agreed upon by the Organizing Committees during the planning of the this summit and these were:
-Thematic Group 1: The Future of Multistakeholderism
-Thematic Group 2: The Globalization of ICANN
-Thematic Group 3: Global Internet: The User Perspective
-Thematic Group 4: ICANN Transparency and Accountability
Thematic Group 5: At Large Community Engagement in ICANN
I chose TG 3 because of the its attention and recognition of the Internet User at the core for discussion. Mr. Wolf moderated with the two experts on the subject matter doing justice to the discussion. My intervention was to draw attention to the need for ICANN not ONLY use or work with just experts and technocrats in public activities-this is good but to equally encourage the non experts like us who represent the end users whenever we volunteer to play any role. For instance I volunteered to be a moderator at this session and my name was pencilled down, but shock to discover that my name was removed without any information prior to today. The end user need to have a sense of belonging and not treated with disdain. If we are not encouraged with our limited knowldege of the techinicalities of the I.T how do we learn and improve? On the Snowden revelation which was a subject dealing on whether the end user should trust the internet or not. I said the internet is a double edged sword. It is both good and bad. I have achieved most of all I have today through the internet but it is sad that, those who created the internet seems to have lost control of their creation. For instance, the terrorists and other criminals are using the internet to promote their dastard acts without the autorities able to apprehend them as they cannot locate them. The internet should go into more research in order to be able to trace those using it for criminal activities!
At 6pm, it was the third Plennary where summary of the thematic groups discussion was moderated by the Chair of ALAC Mr. Leblond. It was a whole day of serious discussions and interactions
Sponsored Dinner: This was at The Pub with each invitee allowed five glass of beers each. I thought it was too small but could ONLY manage 3! It was fun and fair. At the end we all retired to our various rooms.
OBSERVATIONS: The mentor/Mentees even though were all introduced, there was NO TIME in the program where they could all engage. It made the whole exercise a futility as their meetings was to be based on chance meeting either when the mentor is free from any engagement of the mentees free in the same manner. It will be good a time table is created for this, if not, the mentors would have all be awarded a certificate for doing nothing for no fault of theirs.
More reports to follow... above all, my understanding of the ICANN process and procedures has been enhanced by this summit so far....
Otunte Otueneh
Otunte Otueneh ICANN 50 Meeting Report
2. The Atlas II discussion meeting with the SO-AC Chairs, some information gathered were:
a. Non for Profit was created in June 2011
b. advice goes from ALAC to board but it the advices are not binding
c. IGF is young
d. communities should know they have a voice on the internet
e. ICANN is looking at Non Commercial users
f. Trade mark Clearing House was created for gTLD
g. ICANN cannot change ccTLDs
3. Board meeting with At-Large:
a. at NETMundial, everyone listened to everyone which is good
b. NETMundial was a global programme that got the developing world leading
c. NETMundial had a global opinion but was not decisive. It was a great success
d. Civil Society is for IGF and not ICANN
e. Language barrier should be broken
Observation:
Time allocation to meeting sessions were not enough to round up discussions.
Holly Raiche
Apart from my report on the At-Large Registrant Data Multi-Stakeholder Forum led by Carlton Samuels and me, these reports are of meetings where I was the only or one of a couple of ALAC members attending.
At-Large Policy Roundtable - Registrant data: Existing Rules, Future Rules 23 June 1030-1230
The meeting covered two separated but related WGs: the GNSO Privacy and Proxy Services WG and the Final Report of the Expert Working Group (EWG). Moderators: Holly Raiche and Carlton Samuels. Panel speakers included James Bladel, Graham Bunton, Steve Metalitz, Kathy Kleiman, Stephanie Perrim, Michael Neylon.
Privacy/Proxy: The session began with an outline of the background to the P/P WG, beginning with the ongoing discussion about the competing requirements of Whois (under the RAA) to make publicly available contact details of registrants and the competing rights of individuals to their privacy. Individuals/companies who do not want their contact details publicly available (for legitimate - or otherwise) currently can use privacy/proxy services.
The WG is an outcome of the 2013 RAA that includes a bare bones specification on requirements for Privacy and Proxy services. It has basic requirements that P/P providers be accredited, that the terms under which they operate must be available publicly. The WG issued an Issues paper in April, and ALAC provided a response.
The WG has reached provisional agreement on some issues including verification for registrants should be as per the 2013 RAA requirements, that ICANN should have a public list of all accredited P/P providers, and that commercial and non-commercial users should be able to use P/P providers on the same terms.
Outstanding isssues include who accredits the P/P providers, on what basis and how are requirements monitored/enforced, and how will P/P providers respond to requests for information about a registrant - from whom and for what reasons.
Discussion from the panel/audience included:
EWG Final Report: This section began with a background to the EWG report, looking for a better alternative to Whois, with its issues of privacy - the open access to personal information in Whois and inaccuracies in the data, with the conclusion that Whois is not service its purpose.
The underlying theme of the EWG report - the collection, validation and disclosure of registranat data for permissible purposes only. A minimum data set will be available for everyone, with safeguards to protect personal data - revealed only for specific purposes. The idea of gated data and gated access.
Stephanie discussed her dissent from the EWG report, particularly aro8nd purposed based contacts (what if a person is the only contact and so reveal their personal information)and some confusion as to what is inside and outside of the gate.
Other comments on changes between the interim and final EWG reports, and apparent change of Whois purpose, and the need for ICANN to develop its onw privacy policy.
Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy - D (IPRT-D) WG 23 June 1330-1430
The meeting discussed three main issues being discussed in the WG:
Definitions for the final report: accepted
Statute of limitations for initiating a disupte: extending the time from 6 months to 12 months - accepted (what the ALAC proposed in its comments)
funding of a dispute: there was some discussion as to whether the registrars should bear the cost of initiating the dispute. While there was agreement the cost of an IRTP disute is expensive, the actual costs were discussed, plus the fact that very few disputes are raised under this. While the WG did not accept that registrars should absorb the cost, it was decided to keep the issue under review
Retention of Forms of Authorisation: (forms emailed to the original registrar in the transfer process to confirm the idenetity of the party seeking transfer. Agreed to retain both as required under the 2013 RAA and confirmation of the identity of the party
Privacy Proxy (P/P) Services Accreditation Issues 24 June 1000-1130
Discussion of issues tentatively agreed by the WG to date
ICANN publish a lost of all P/P accredited providers with contact details of the providers (once scheme is put in place)
Validation and verification of beneficial users of P/P services to be along lines of 2013 RAA requirements
P/P services will have to relay notices to beneficial users
Rights and responsibilities of P/P services must be given to beneficial users
It was commented that privacy and proxy services are becoming indistinguishable
Considerable discussion on whether a distinction should be made between commercial and non-commercial users of the services (most of the WG agree that no distinction should be made either in access to the service or whether there is a distinction between how the user is listed - recognising the difficulty in distinguishing between the two categories.
Privacy Discussion hosted by the NCSG 25 June 1500 - 1800
The session discussed key privacy issues within ICANN including the following:
Aida Noblia
Informe algunas reuniones 50 ICANN. Este informe NO incluye ATLAS II
Women's Breakfast. Intercambio de ideas.
Welcome Ceremony and President s Opening.
Tema de Colisión de Nombres de Dominio. Se analizó un informe de la empresa contratada JAS. Del informe surge que agregar los dominios de alto nivel no agrega riesgos significativos. El riesgo se concentra en .home .corp y .mail. Se encontró una vulnerabilidad y se solicitó información al SAC que hizo un informe de asesoramiento fase 1 en junio y desarrolló una propuesta que se está considerando como marco. El informe fase 2 está en etapa de comentarios públicos en esta sesión, no cambiará las evaluaciones sino que contendrá pruebas y vulnerabilidades que se resuelven por el proveedor afectado. ICANN tiene un mecanismo para denuncias y control de situaciones de colisión que está funcionando durante las 24 horas diarias y no ha aparecido ninguna denuncia hasta ahora. Frente a riesgos el mecanismo es prevenirlos. Aunque éste es un riesgo poco probable, hay dos procedimientos posibles, uno es la interrupción del funcionamiento del dominio por cierto tiempo y otro de interrupciones intermitentes de ese dominio durante 90 días. Esos períodos de interrupción serán casos excepcionales y solo si está en juego la vida de una persona.
Reunión del Board con ccNSO se analizó el progreso en el FOI (Framework of Interpretation) WG para delegación y redelegación de ccTLDs. Findings ofthe strategic and operational planning Working Group on Strategic, plan, operations plan and budget .
La reunión del GAC relativa a multishtakeholder y grupo de estrategia fue muy activa, con mucha información de diversos países, coincidencia en la necesidad de incrementar el trabajo y la cantidad de participantes en el GAC dado el crecimiento de asuntos a tratar. Propuestas interesantes : 1) generar grupos de trabajo por temas dentro del GAC y 2) mejorar la comunicación interna, entre la presidencia y los miembros del GAC, para mantener informados. 3) También mejorar la comunicación externa, desde el GAC hacía afuera y a la inversa. Esto incrementa transparencia. Se destacó además la importancia del GAC en esta etapa de transición de la IANA.
Reunión de ALAC Se insistió en la profundización en el tema capacitación. Después de dos años de capacitación y formación interna ICANN está en la etapa de difusión, capacitación y sensibilización externa hacia todos los usuarios. Se relataron experiencias en distintos países al respecto. Se describió la capacitación para líderes, su proceso de selección, que se realiza con líderes experimentados y otros no experimentados. Otra actividad relacionada fue la del Grupo de Medios y Relaciones Sociales, cuyo objetivo es mejorar el compromiso con la comunidad y la participación de los usuarios finales. Se mencionó el uso de redes con contenido estático y fluido. Este grupo de redes trabaja en las cinco regiones de ICANN y tiene cuentas en twiter, youtube y facebook. Respecto a IDN (Datos de registración internacionalizados) hay cinco grupos. Un grupo de expertos que se dedica a ver qué campos deben ser internacionalizados, otro cuyo objeto es traducción y transliteración, estan en etapa de comentarios publicos la factibilidad de la traducción y transliteración y la hoja de ruta. Hay un problema que ALAC debiera ocuparse: solo se pueden usar caracteres ASCII. Cubren también el progama sobre códigos de escritura, estan creando una tabla de idiomas para el sistema raíz, necesitan mas voluntarios para trabajar. Solicitan también aportes a la comunidad para hacer un plan de acción relativo a problemas de percepción y reconocimiento de los IDN que están en dos idiomas diferentes que ocasionan problemas por ejemplo solicitudes de un mismo nombre de dominio por personas de diferentes idiomas. Del Grupo de Accesibilidad se mencionó que tienen un documento breve relativo a personas con discapacidad. En cuanto al tema Métricas, hay una para medir la asistencia a reuniones presenciales y a distancia y otra para medir el rendimiento. Hay diferentes situaciones y formas de medir según las regiones. No tienen porque tener todos los RALOS la misma forma pero si tener formas de medir. Se esta estudiando el tema.
REUNIÓN LACRALO
Actualización de estrategia para América Latina y el Caribe y otras cuestiones. Hay algunos avances en la estrategia regional y que contamos con su apoyo y el equipo de A. Latina y Caribe en particular además de toda ICANN. La propuesta principal es mantener autonomia de LACRALO en ICANN pero trabajar en conjunto con ella. Debemos recordar la agenda individual para recordar el compromiso, ceder un poco las necesidades individuales para apoyar una necesidad colectiva. En el net mundial en dos dias se aprobó la redacción de un documento donde distintos actores pudieron aprobar algo cediendo parte de su interés particular por el interes colectivo ,esto debe estar en la cabeza de todos. En la estrategia regional se trabaja el proyecto de comunicaciones. Se necesitará ayuda. Hay que tener en cuenta la dispersión geográfica. Es necesario fortalecer la estrategia regional.
Se presentaron y analizaron en la reunion con diferentes opiniones 5 documentos:
1. Las reglas ordinarias de procedimiento para reuniones de organismos deliberantes de LACRALO elaboradas por personalde ICANN y secretariado de LACRALO
2. Propuesta de métricas de participación activa en LACRALO: Alberto Soto.
3. Propuesta de procedimiento de LACRALO para la elaboración, emisión y publicación de Declaraciones
4. Propuesta para uniformar las versiones en inglés y español de las Reglas de Procedimiento.-
5. Análisis de los criterios mínimos para una Estructura At- Large.
En Procedimiento para certificar futuras ALS: El documento propone criterios mìnimos: analizar metas, participación liderazgo, tener un Estatuto con referencia ausuario final, tener un sitio web, participación en elaboración de políticas. Etc. Luego de diversas propuestas el tema se deriva al grupo Gobernanza. En el documento de Procedimiento de LACRALO para la elaboraciòn, emisión y publicación de declaraciones. La idea es hacer una propuesta y votar y aprobar por consenso institucionalizando lo que se viene haciendo en la práctica. Luego de su discusión se resuelve pasar el documento a resolución Presidente y Secretario de LACRALO.
Propuesta de métricas de participación activa en LACRALO. Se comenta el tema de la participación y distintos criterios, se cuestiona la falta de participación y sus motivos, se menciona tambien agregar el concepto de representación y la contribución a la elaboración de políticas que debe ser considerado en las métricas para lograr elaborar cada vez mejores políticas y procedimientos. Esto es distinto de la participación para votaciones de cargos de representación o participación en eventos. Hay que desarrollar métricas que tengan en cuenta los objetivos de la región, hoy la transición de IANA. El tema pasa al grupo de Gobernanza,que se ocupa de métricas, para que se fije forma y plazos para la participación. Tambien hay opinión de que todo se resume en capacitación. El curso está para presentar en la próxima llamada mensual.
Se debe tener en cuenta respecto a las métricas: quièn va a compilar estas estadìsticas en LACRALO, decidir primero quien va a realizar las métricas y qué métricas serán. Se sugiere un anàlisis , ver las tendencias y umbrales mínimos , hacer el anàlisis de todas las personas en LACRALO y ver còmo participan. El que levante las estadìsticas las someterà a la comunidad , es revisión por pares. Se propone y vota que pase al Grupo Gobernanza.
Respecto a la Propuesta para unificar versiones de inglés y español de las Reglas de Procedimiento hay un Documento que hace muchos años se preparó y después fue al grupo de traducción que fue aprobado para ser sometido a votación. Habia discrepancias y diferencias entre las versiones en ingles y español , se preparó una lista de discrepancias, publicada hace dos o tres años. Hay que armonizar las versiones en español y en el inglés, y actualizar la numeración de la regla 11.2- Esto de las versiones diferentes se debe a que se hizo dos veces la traducción. Luego de intercambio de ideas se voto armonizar las normas en los dos idiomas.
Propuesta: programa de reclutamiento para captación de nuevas ALS. Se considera el tema y se resuelve esperar a que se publique en inglés para someter a votaciónel programa.
Tema: Rendición de cuentas de LACRALO. Concepto de red de confianza . Ser claro en el actuar. En la medida que estemos reclamando rendición de cuentas de ICANN, somos nosotros mismos los que tenemos que ocuparnos de ellas. También no tratar de que una posición prime sobre otras, sino que la diversidad es la que nos debe marcar el camino. La creación y construcción de capacidades es básico en esto.