[ALAC] RUSH: Statement on ccTLD/gTLD Delegation/Redelegation Consultation

[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]

Oksana your points are well made  and this process for greater engagement
with direct push information  to ALSes on many ICANN matters including the
work of the IANA on delegation and redelegation is a conversation we *must*
have (and soon I would think) so perhaps between Beijing and Durbin
meetings...  But  I copy here an email I sent earlier today re this matter
to the APRALO list  to inform their discussion and the ALAC Working list...

<snip>Just to be clear the Call for Public Comments that the ALAC is
responding to iin its draft is *not*  looking *AT* any new gTLD or ccTLD
deligations or  redeligations per se at all; *but is*  limited to comment
on proposed performance measures and metrics for IANA performance in
processing such things, as required under the new contract with NTIA, when
they do (rarely) come to pass...

Discussion on specific cases as might be tempting is interesting and
occasionally challenging of course but *not* germane to this piece of work
at all.

CLO from my Mobile phone <end snip>
*Cheryl Langdon-Orr ...  **(CLO)*
 http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr


On 21 March 2013 04:33, Oksana Prykhodko <sana.pryhod at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I just submitted my comment on the wiki, but I would like to copy it
> here - with some explanations.
>
> "In my opinion, "accountability and transparency of the involvement of
> the ‘Local Internet Community” and  ‘Significantly Interested
> Parties’" mean also consultation with ALSes, which represent
> "interested or affected" local Internet community. It means that each
> such ALS has to receive direct e-mail from ICANN At-Large Staff with
> information, that IANA received any request for redelegation. In case,
> if ANY of such ALSes will object to such redelegation, this objection
> has to be considered on the level of corresponding RALO and the result
> of this consideration has to be reported to ALAC. In case if ALAC will
> find such objections reasonable, the decision of ALAC has to be
> submitted to the Board."
>
> Explanations: I would like to clarify the role, the rights and
> responsibilities of each ALS in any issue, which is "interesting or
> affecting for local community". In case of redelegation of ccTLD or
> delegation of new IDNS ccTLD it's easy to find such ALSes. In case of
> new gTLD it would be necessary to relay on dashboard, on which
> Capacity Building WG is working just now. That is why it is necessary
> to register the sphere of primary interests of each ALS in this
> dashboard.
>
> Best regards,
> Oksana
>
>
>
> 2013/3/19 Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>:
> > Looks OK to me. But given how anything ICANN even suggests to the ccNSO
> > that isn't purely procedural (ie, the FOI) is met with
> > out-of-your-jurisdiction fury in response (see the lengthy response to a
> > single line of the R3 white paper as but one example), I really wonder
> > whether the ccTLD component of this (both the statement and the response)
> > is more than wishful thinking
> >
> > - Evan
> >
> >
> > On 19 March 2013 15:02, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> Cheryl and I were asked to put together a statement in responce to the
> >> IANA ccTLG delegation/redelagation consultation (
> >> https://community.icann.org/**x/EgFlAg<
> https://community.icann.org/x/EgFlAg>)
> >> and the similar one for gTLDs (https://community.icann.org/**x/CgFlAg<
> https://community.icann.org/x/CgFlAg>
> >> ).
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, due to other commitments, it is just now that the
> statement
> >> is ready and can be found on the ccTLD consulation page (
> >> https://community.icann.org/**x/EgFlAg<
> https://community.icann.org/x/EgFlAg>
> >> ).
> >>
> >> The statement must be submitted by the end of Wednesday, so I am
> guessing
> >> that it will be submitted just prior to a vote beginning. Therefore it
> is
> >> essential that any comments on this statement be submitted very quickly.
> >>
> >> I am also attaching a copy of the proposed statement for your
> convenience.
> >>
> >> I will leave it to Olivier to decide on the exact process to be
> followed.
> >>
> >> Alan
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ALAC mailing list
> >> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >>
> >> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> >> ALAC Working Wiki:
> >>
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Evan Leibovitch
> > Toronto Canada
> >
> > Em: evan at telly dot org
> > Sk: evanleibovitch
> > Tw: el56
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >
> > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> > ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>