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

Oksana Prykhodko sana.pryhod at gmail.com
Thu Mar 28 22:08:50 UTC 2013


Dear Olivier,

Thank you very much for your letter and for your understanding!

Last week we survived the whole transport and communication doomsday in Kiev)

So sorry for my late answer(

I just let you to know, that I have sent my informational request to 	
didp at icann.org (thanks to Sebastien - see the text of request below).

I  really will highly appreciate all comments and recommendations!

Best,
Oksana

Dear all,

I am writing you to ask for more information on the delegation of the IDN
ccTLD .ykp to Ukraine.

On the Board web-site I can find very limited piece of information

(http://www.icann.org/en/about/transparency/didp).

I would like to know:

1. What was the package of documents, submitted to IANA/ICANN on this
issue (first of all, could you please send us "publicly available
registration policy" of .ykp, confirmation of support from Ukrainian
government and
Ukrainian Internet community, concept of the development of this
domain)? Could you please let us know "a brief overview of the history
of the request" and "ICANN Staff ... report to the ICANN Board"?

2. Did ICANN/IANA perform the test on security and stability of .ykp?
If yes, what is the result? Are you monitoring the situation after
delegation?

3. Did you ask for any additional consultations with other SO (for
example, Ukrainian representatives in GAC, ccNSO, ALAC)? If yes, what
reaction did you receive? If not - why?

Thank you very much in advance,

Oksana Prykhodko
director of iNGO European Media Platform
EURALO secretary
Ukraine




Delegation of the .укр domain representing Ukraine

The Board received a brief overview of the history of the request for
delegation of the IDN ccTLD. The Board then took the following action:

Resolved (2013.02.28.04), ICANN has reviewed and evaluated the
request, and the documentation demonstrates the delegation process was
followed and is in the interests of the local and global Internet
communities.

Fourteen members of the Board voted in favor of the resolution. Two
Board members were unavailable to voted on the resolution. The
resolution carried.

Rationale for Resolution 2013.02.28.04

As part of the IANA Functions, ICANN receives request to delegate and
redelegate country-code top-level domains. ICANN Staff has reviewed
and evaluated a delegation request for this domain and has provided a
report to the ICANN Board that proper procedures were followed in that
evaluation. The Board's oversight of the process helps ensure ICANN is
properly executing its responsibilities relating to the stable and
secure operation of critical unique identifier systems on the Internet
and pursuant to the IANA Functions Contract. Ensuring that the process
is followed adds to the accountability of ICANN. This action will have
no fiscal impact on ICANN or the community, and will have a positive
impact on the security, stability and resiliency of the domain name
system.

This is an Organizational Administrative Function not requiring public comment.





http://isearch.avg.com/tab?cid={DA755F65-4868-40DF-A0C1-10587C8BB29B}&mid=cc0a132d7c724b87aaebdb8be44704c0-05bbe7583e18f76d3574dca19792a2e01db74b86&lang=en&ds=hk015&pr=sa&d=2013-02-28%2020:37:40&v=14.2.0.1&pid=avg&sg=&sap=nt

2013/3/21 Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>:
> Dear Oksana,
>
> no need to delete the comment as such. The final draft of the statement
> will just not take this comment into account.
> However, I do believe that it is important that this comment was made
> and remains recorded. The question you raise in indeed very important
> and as Cheryl mentioned, this is something which we should raise between
> Beijing & Durban. The same problem has arisen in many different
> countries - and often between a government and a local organisation that
> started running the TLD many years ago.
> I'll ask staff to put this on the list of issues we need to look at soon.
> Kindest regards,
>
> Olivier
>
> On 21/03/2013 05:39, Oksana Prykhodko wrote:
>> Dear Cheryl,
>>
>> Thank you very much for your explanation. Have I to delete my comment
>> or to move it to another place?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Oksana
>>
>> 2013/3/20 Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>:
>>> We can talk about the need to do this all we want. But, based on the one
>>> concrete example to date, informed ALS input can be (and is) ignored without
>>> consequence. And when the RALO threatens to get involved, just send in some
>>> lawyers to intimidate and shut them up.
>>>
>>> This is not theory. This actually happened with .pr. I was personally in a
>>> F2F NARALO meeting that had more lawyers in the room than ALSs reps.
>>>
>>> So unless we have something to say beyond wishful thinking, that accounts
>>> for and learns from real lessons of the past and has the actual promise to
>>> change policy and prevent intimidation of At-Large members, we are wasting
>>> our time and ought not to lend respectability to a process done only for
>>> show.
>>>
>>> - Evan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 20 March 2013 14:30, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>>>> Cheryl, I am on a WG call and only just noticed this thread.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with your reply. Oksana's comment is very relevant to the
>>>> ccTLD redelegation process and the need to get the entire 'Local
>>>> Internet Community" and  'Significantly Interested Parties' involved,
>>>> which certainly can include a local ALS, is critical. But this
>>>> particular comment period is not the place to lock in such a process.
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> At 20/03/2013 01:52 PM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote:
>>>>> 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)
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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)
>>
>
> --
> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>




More information about the ALAC mailing list