ALAC Monthly Teleconference
(September 11, 2007)
Legend
Name:
First name of member of group
Name?:
If we think we might know who's speaking but aren't 100% sure.
Male:
Unsure of who's speaking, but know it's a male.
Female:
Unsure of who's speaking, but know it's a female.
Name:
[French 00:29:52 - 0:31:06] We will identify a foreign language in square
brackets with a time code for the beginning and end, so that you can quickly
identify those passages. At the top of the transcript, we will advise you of the
name(s) of the foreign languages you'll need to search for. For example,
some transcripts may contain German, so you'll have to search for "[German"
instead of "[French" to find all the passages. The speaker identification is the
same convention as all the others. i.e. If we know the speaker's name we'll
include it, otherwise we'll put a question mark after it, or if we can't even
guess, then Male, Female or SP.
Translator:
If translator actually translates French or German for a participant we will note
it as "Translator". It will normally be evident from the dialogue who the
translator is translating for. If not, we will include a note in square brackets
with respect to who they are translating for.
[cuts out]:
Audio cuts out for less than 2 seconds. We may have missed something. We
do not put this if it's just natural silence where no-one is speaking. We only
put this if we can hear that there was briefly a technical problem with the
phone line and/or the recording which resulted in temporary loss of sound.
[cuts out 2 secs] When the audio cuts out for 2 seconds or more we'll show approximately
how many seconds were missed. We will most likely have missed something
if it cuts out for this long.
[-ation]
If we believe that all we missed was the beginning of a word because the
audio cuts out, we will just put the end of the word that we can hear. If we are
very sure from context what the whole word is, we'll just put the whole word,
to make it easier for the reader. However, if the word could be a variety of
different things, then we will show only the part of the word we could hear or
thought we heard.
[very faint - barely audible] We will put this at the beginning of paragraphs where we are
having a very difficult time hearing.
********************************************************************************************************
-2-
Attendance:
Izumi Aizu, Interim Chair (Japan)
Annette Muehlberg (Germany)
Mohamed El Bashir (Sudan)
Hawa Diakite (Mali)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (Australia)
Veronica Cretu (Moldova)
Sebastien Bachollet (France)
Alan Greenberg (Canada)
Ron Sherwood (lost connection)
Wendy Seltzer (United States)
Beau Brendler (United States)
Hong Xue (China)
Nick Ashton-Hart (staff)
Absent:
Robert Guerra (Canada)
Apologies:
Siavash Shahshahani, Carlos Aguirre, Jose O Salgueiro, Jacqueline Morris
Observers:
Didier Kasole (AFRALO Secretariat)
Minutes Taken By:
Nick Ashton-Hart
Absent due to Technical Issues:
Alice Wanjira-Munyua (attended part of meeting)
********************************************************************************************************
Nick:
Sounds like no objections?
Izumi:
Anybody from Africa?
Mohamed:
Mohamed here.
Izumi:
Hawa?
Nick?:
Yeah, Hawa is here.
Izumi:
Okay, Alice is not.
-3-
Annette:
So what happened to Alice? Is anyone calling her?
Male:
No answer.
Izumi:
Okay, let’s move to Asia-Pacific. Izumi, myself, is here and Cheryl you are
there, right?
Cheryl:
Correct.
Izumi:
Siavash?
Annette:
He said he might have problems…
Izumi:
Okay. Move on to Europe... Veronica, are you there?
Veronica:
Yes I’m here.
Izumi:
And Annette is there?
Annette:
Yeah.
Izumi:
How about Sebastien?
Sebastien:
I’m here.
Izumi:
You are there, great. From Latin America, only Carlos may be able to call
from [inaudible name 1:16] airport. Are you there?
Male:
No.
Izumi:
So we have received two apologies and one…
[phone beeps once]
Izumi:
[inaudible name] there?
Female:
Yeah.
Izumi:
Okay, we miss all three folks from Latin America [again]. From North America,
Robert? Beau? Alan?
Alan:
I’m here.
-4-
Izumi:
And so the liaisons, Wendy?
Wendy:
Yes.
Izumi:
And Ron? Ron was there. How about Hong?
Hong:
I’m here.
Izumi:
Do we have the quo-…?
Alan:
Can I interrupt? I am now hearing a severe echo for almost everyone
speaking.
Annette:
Yeah, me too.
Alan:
Except for Hong.
Hong:
My line is fine.
Alan:
Then you’re probably causing the echo for the rest of us.
Hong:
Okay, I’ll mute myself.
Alan:
Does that make a difference? Yeah, echo’s gone now.
Izumi:
So when, Hong, you need to speak up come back, but otherwise… But we
have Annette, Veronica, Sebastien, Cheryl, Alan, Mohamed, Hawa, Izumi…
are these the committee members? [pause 2 secs] Do we have one, two,
three, four, five, six, seven, eight… so we have a quorum.
Male:
Then let’s go.
Izumi:
It can be started.
Female:
Yes please.
Izumi:
First of all, I need to confirm… I was asked to Chair this conference call only
by Siavash and seconded by Annette and there seem to be no objections. So
may I assume that I will take care of the Chair for this conference only, and
when Jose comes back the day after tomorrow, he will be the Chair. Is that all
right?
-5-
Alan:
I think that’s what we’re doing. [laughs]
Izumi:
Any objections?
Female:
No objection.
Female:
Thank you Izumi.
Male:
May I suggest that you Chair up to the comeback of one of the two who are
able to be chair, because if we have three days delay and you need to act as
chairman, I will prefer to have you as chairman, as before to have another
discussion.
Izumi:
Thank you for proposal. Any second?
Male:
[Second, third.]
Izumi:
Any objection. I might, but no. [laughs]
Female:
No objection.
Alan:
You’re not allowed to Izumi. [laughter]
Izumi:
Accepted, and I hope Jose will come back soon, and even after I go back I
will take care to some extent. Make sure things go forward… as a member.
Female:
Thank you Izumi.
Izumi:
Okay, and then I made some suggestion in the wiki for the agenda, but I think
first of all we need to go the usual thing… let’s see, where? I’m sorry I have
some problem with the screen. So we need to first of all adoption of the
agenda. There are several things added in the past six hours or so. I added
three points and Jacqueline added things around the LA. Before that, [it’s not
AP RALO agenda], but Cheryl added the regional activities. I think that’s the
major additions of the agenda. Did I miss anything?
Annette:
Budget, I didn’t see it on the agenda.
Izumi:
I’m sorry, which one?
Annette:
Budget.
-6-
Izumi:
Budget? So you propose to add budget?
Cheryl:
It isn’t on the agenda, but it would come up under matters arising from
previous minutes.
Annette:
Yeah, right.
Izumi:
Okay. Is that okay?
Alan:
It’s Alan here. Can I state my dissatisfaction with items being added to the
agenda – that is two-thirds of it – six hours before the meeting. Actually, when
it’s first thing in the morning here.
Izumi:
I’m sorry… what?
Alan:
I’m talking about the agenda in general. It’s now four times or five times larger
than it was last night.
Izumi:
I see. Okay let’s take note and shouldn’t repeat it again. With that, could we
adopt the agenda?
Female:
Izumi, there’s just one tiny issue. It’s about IGF, the workshop that ALAC
could possibly organize as IGF… should we spend at least one minute on
this? What is the update and what is the current status?
Izumi:
Okay, at the very bottom we can do that.
Female:
Thanks.
Male:
Thank you.
Izumi:
So with that, shall we move to the roll call, which we already did – is there any
additional member [logged] in? [pause 2 secs] Okay, then let’s move to the
number (3), that’s Adoption of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting. I read it
and it seems okay, is there anyone who would like to comment on that?
Male:
[…have you really read it?]
Female:
No.
Izumi:
But, I would say even though I didn’t attend the meeting, I think it fairly well
captured the meeting. Is there anyone who would second the adoption?
-7-
Cheryl:
Yes, Cheryl.
Izumi:
Any objection or comments? Okay, then the minutes of the previous meeting
adopted. Review of the action items of the previous meeting – can somebody
take care of that?
Cheryl:
Izumi, Cheryl here. May I ask for clarification? Are you calling for us to raise
items, or…?
Izumi:
Well because I wasn’t there, if somebody has a better memory, or summary
of the action items from the previous meeting.
Annette:
Annette here. I’m confused now. The agenda, are we going by the list at
public in the wiki, or is it…? It’s on the bottom part of the wiki agenda.
Izumi:
No, it’s… I’m following the wiki on the very top – Standing Agenda Items
number (4).
Annette:
Oh.
Izumi:
Review of action items of the previous meeting.
Annette:
Okay, good.
Alan:
Was there a published list of action items? I did not find one.
Izumi:
That’s what I mean. I couldn’t find either.
Nick:
Can you hear me?
Alan:
I can hear you…
Nick:
Yeah…
Alan:
…and an echo.
Nick:
I somehow muted myself and un-muted myself too many times on my
headset and couldn’t figure out which was which. Just before I answer that
question, Didier Kasole is also on the call – the AFRALO secretariat. This is in
relation to… I mean you can kick him off if you want to. [chuckles] This is in
rela-… I invited him without… because he was… some matters that were
discussed on the secretariat’s teleconference last night at 1 am UTC, it
-8-
seemed to me sensible that he observe in this call and join in on the
discussion on the LA meeting, since the secretariats are going to be present
there.
Annette:
Didier, very welcome.
Cheryl:
That’s fine with Asia-Pacific.
Alan:
That’s fine with me, but we do have a severe echo again.
Nick:
I’ll page the operator. On the question about the Action Items, I did not
compile a list of specific separate action items – an omission which I have just
noticed actually – my apologies for that.
Alan:
Given our history of acting on those action items that weren’t published, I
would think that you should try to do better in the future. [chuckles]
Annette:
Annette here, one of the action items was that we ask Jacqueline to send out
the report of the Budget Committee meeting in San Juan.
Cheryl:
That’s correct. That really is the most [glaring] one that I was going to bring up
as well.
Annette:
So Cheryl and I were also on the Budget Committee. Cheryl, as Jacqueline
has problems now to take part in ALAC work, I would just suggest I volunteer
to draft it. You could correct it, and we send it out to…
Cheryl:
I think that is the only way forward, and I certainly would support that we do
that.
Annette:
Great, because we really cannot wait any longer.
Cheryl:
No.
Annette:
Just for the information, the idea is… because I think it’s really an important
issue. The budget is the… we should have presented a proposal to [Doug?
11:26] already, and we should really hurry up. So the budget planning is really
important – it is for the current term.
Nick:
It’s a little late for that now, actually.
-9-
Annette:
Well not too late. It’s late, but at least we can do some planning.
Cheryl:
And as the most important part of our meeting was the plan for the [mixed]
budget which was to call between September and December for RALO input
onto planning…
Annette:
Exactly.
Cheryl:
So, I think we are on time course for that.
Nick:
Certainly.
Cheryl:
And I think, you know, providing we get it out in the next seven to ten days,
we haven’t lost much ground at all.
Annette:
Okay, the two us take care of this and I draft something.
Izumi:
I second this, unless there is any objection.
Male:
[inaudible comment 12:25]
Izumi:
Okay. Now coming back to the Action Items of the Previous Meeting, I
[propose] three decisions made [in the] action items, which is to vote on the
ALS and also vote on the Rules of Procedure, and vote on the Board Liaison.
And these are the three items I put immediately after that, to discuss how to
do with these three. I would propose to discuss about the Rules of Procedure
first, and then about ALS voting, [and its announcement perhaps], and then
the Board Liaison election result. Are you okay with these three items first to
discuss?
Female:
Yeah.
Izumi:
Okay, and then we will move onto the membership matters and then to the
Liaisons and ALACS as all written on the wiki. Cheryl, about the Rules of
Procedures... Cheryl, you are the Chair of the Working Group. Could you
explain what you have in mind?
Cheryl:
Certainly. Before explaining what we…
[phone beeps once]
- 10 -
Cheryl:
[poor audio connection] …I think it’s still important that I reiterate what [Nick]
put forward on one or more of the lists, [over the] last month, and that was
due to [non-]volunteer activities, we have virtually impossible [inaudible word
13:57] to tidy up what appeared as obvious after our last meeting, as a small
problem with the election-only version that was put up at the last meeting. We
should also note that the Working Group hadn’t met or consulted on that
version either, there was still work that needed to be done on that. That said,
we have got to move our way forward. Alan had put to the list after quite… a
considerable amount of work and I can empathize with it, it’s not easy dotting
i’s and crossing t’s from numbers of different draft versions. I have
interpretation and comments from one of the more recent…
[phone beeps once]
[Female:
Hawa] [overtalking 14:50]
Cheryl:
[poor audio connection] I think then we have put another [inaudible word
14:56] version up and it is that version, which is appended to tonight’s wiki
page that we’re making, which says “ALAC ROPs draft including AG
comments, September 11, 2007,” that I would like to suggest we call for the
rest of the ALAC to make comments on, so they [inaudible word] where those
comments will be closing, and that we move forward onto then a final version
for approval in the seven to ten days after that closing of comments. The
other version that had been put up in preparation for tonight’s meeting,
labelled “ALAC ROP, September 7 Draft” – and that is a .pdf – I’ve left for the
convenience of those of you who wish to compare what the working group
had created and put comments from our comment period into, and compare
that to the original Vittorio document. So the .pdf file…
[phone beeps once]
Cheryl:
…if you care to look at that, what it has is the [inaudible word 16:12] of
information without Alan’s comments, and along the side Vittorio’s original
pieces of work, so you can see if anything has been lost or not. By those
Vittorio comments original pieces of work are not separate in the top
document, the ones including Alan’s comments… [inaudible overtalking
16:35]
Annette:
Excuse me, Cheryl?
- 11 -
Cheryl:
…clean up. Yes?
Annette:
Annette here. I’m sorry it’s just hard for me to hear you. I don’t know what is
the reason, it’s just not loud enough.
Veronica:
Yeah, the same for me… Veronica here, it’s very, very difficult to here out.
But anyways… okay sorry.
Cheryl:
Is that any better? If I yell even louder?
Annette:
Even louder if you can. I’m really sorry to have to…
Cheryl:
Okay, well let me cut to a short version. Open up Izumi’s suggestion way
forward link on the wiki. Are they all there?
Female:
Gone.
Annette:
On the wiki?
Cheryl:
Are the links to way forward? [pause 5 secs] In the way forward link, Izumi
makes a three-point suggestion… which I would recommend that we act
upon. Specifically, the version that we would like to see you comment upon is
the version posted most recently as an attachment to the main wiki page, but
includes Alan’s comments put to the list today.
Alan:
Cheryl does it include my comments, or the comments have been integrated
into the document?
Cheryl:
Integrated.
Alan:
Okay.
Annette:
Good, very good.
Cheryl:
So anybody who wishes to compare original Vittorio documentation [onto] the
current or almost current version that I suggest we work upon, I have left the
previous version as an attachment. They do not however, include Alan’s
comments as integrated… and that is only for reference purposes.
Male:
Okay, sorry…
[phone beeps once]
- 12 -
Annette:
Okay, okay, now… [it’s right. 19:08].
Cheryl:
Is there any other information that you would like me to give you at this point,
or can we forward Izumi’s way forward?
Izumi:
Alan?
Alan:
I’d like to comment on the way forward. What it says is, we should discussed
upon ourselves and presumably make suggestions by the 15 th which is four
days from now – the end of this week – and then presumably the Working
Group will create yet another version. We will have one pass on it by
September 30th and then vote on the October meeting. Is that the intent?
Izumi?:
Oh sorry, my intent was that first the Working Group will first discuss among
yourselves by September 11… I mean September 15…
Male:
September 15…
Izumi:
…and then because there are many things to be sorted out and I think it’s
more efficient by a fewer members working group to [produce] one single kind
of version.
Alan:
Okay, but is the working group looking for suggestions on the version
published today?
Izumi:
Oh, I see. You need feedback first.
Cheryl:
I believe we’re ready for feedback.
Izumi:
Okay.
Alan:
I would comment… something I said… implied in the mail, there were enough
things that were rough in the version that was published last time and so few
comments, I have to assume that not many people really read it thoroughly.
For whatever reason. We can’t afford to miss this deadline again. We do not
want to go into Los Angeles with an agenda item of having to revise and
approve our procedures, so we have to meet this deadline, one way or
another, even if it takes another conference call.
Izumi:
Could you suggest then the different timeline, or may I do so?
- 13 -
Cheryl:
Please go ahead Izumi.
Izumi:
Okay, then the committee members will spend a week plus… meaning by the
September 20-ish to give us feedback. And the working group spend one
week by September 30 to produce the final, and then one way is to discuss
online and finalize… take a vote, at or before or after the next conference call.
But still, before the Los Angeles.
Nick:
Can I get those dates again, sorry.
Izumi:
Okay…
Nick:
For the minutes.
Izumi:
Okay, let me say it clearly. By 23rd, Sunday, all the committee members will
make comments, feedback. Working group [work] one week, by the 30th
September to compile all the comments into the one final document to be
discussed and voted. The date of vote, I’m not too sure yet now, if there are
fewer things then we can vote almost immediately without making the
conference call of October. If we need several things to be say discussed,
then we use the conference call on next… you know, October 1 and then go
for vote. I think the [former] will work if we do all the things now.
Alan:
Assuming people actually do their work and are willing to stand by whatever
is produced by the end of September, or whatever the date was, by the
Working Group, assuming… if their comments have… if all comments have
been integrated then people cannot start raising points again at that point. If
comments haven’t been integrated, that’s a valid thing for us to discuss.
Cheryl:
And Alan… Cheryl here, I think we also need to remind ourselves that once
this is an endorsed document, it is not set in stone for the [term] of our natural
lives. There are processes in documents [inaudible 23:41] …later on.
Alan:
Cheryl agreed, but some of us do not want to start this again immediately.
[laughter]
Cheryl:
But then again some of us would like to have something.
- 14 -
Alan:
Yes. All I’m saying is if people don’t do their homework over the next two or
three weeks, they’re going to have to accept what the rest of the people who
have done their work, have come to.
Izumi?:
I have no problem with that.
Izumi:
So the proposal is to ask everyone to give a comment by the end of next
week. The working group to produce the final version by the end of this
month, and then we’ll see if we can do this vote immediately. If we reach a
consensus online, let’s do that.
Alan
Izumi, do we really need almost two weeks for people to read it and make
comments? I would think the time is better placed giving the group time to
rework after the comments, and then one other iteration if necessary.
Izumi:
Do you propose the end of comments by the end of this week? That’s fine
with me.
Alan:
I would say by Monday morning’s [enough] time, the 17th? Is that rea-…?
Izumi:
Sounds reasonable to me. And then the Working Group will produce a final
version by when?
Alan:
I think the Working Group should produce a final version roughly a week later
and either… if there are no comments on it then it’s the final version,
otherwise one more iteration, and that’s one more iteration, well… which
should be finished by roughly the… well before the next conference call.
Izumi:
Cheryl, you are the Chair of the Working Group, and is it feasible?
Cheryl:
Absolutely.
Izumi:
Okay…
Nick:
That’s the 24th?
Izumi:
24th, yes.
Nick:
Okay.
- 15 -
Izumi:
If there’s not much [substantive] problem, let’s aim to finalize by the end of
September, by online decision making.
Cheryl:
Izumi, may I ask… Cheryl here, may I ask one question, and that is that in
your part (c) of the way forward, you did mention a mechanism to vote on
each point rule, were you indicating there as we have done in face to face
meetings on procedures, we should go section by section on a yes or no, or
are you suggesting that the document in total will be voted on, endorsement
or not?
Izumi:
Okay, my interpretation is that I assume there will be say five or ten points –
specific points – of the entire document, which may require some decision, (a)
or (b), after the comments. So, I thought to make sort of a list of items to be
decided one by one on the wiki or a poll, and tallied.
Cheryl:
As I understand it then, could I suggest that it might be a useful additional role
for the working group to, as they create the final document, that they put –
with Nick’s assistance – a set of… if we do need to have points “yeah” or
“nayed”, option (a) or option (b) voted for together, and that that is all done at
the one time?
Izumi:
Yeah, in the end.
Cheryl:
Is that workable Nick?
Nick:
Yes, I can arrange… if I understand what you’re suggesting, I can arrange a
vote with multiple placards like we do, you know, like each placard being like
an ALS… when you’re voting “Yes/No”. I can have multiple placards for all
those specific areas that need a vote and then an overall vote at the end, or
whatever you need.
Cheryl:
Okay.
Alan:
Is it correct our next meeting is the 9th of October? Second Monday in
October?
Female:
Monday?
Alan:
Second Tuesday. Tuesday.
- 16 -
Nick:
That’s right.
Female:
I believe so.
Alan:
I would suggest that if there are no comments which you cannot integrate to
the satisfaction of the working group, then we vote online, and it’s a yes/no
because no one has quibbled with any of the issues. If there are issues which
you do not feel comfortable in integrating, then I would suggest we have a
face to… we do it at the conference call, and come to closure on the point by
point and then vote on the whole thing. I think we’re more likely to end up with
a document that we all feel comfortable with or can live with if we do it that
way, as opposed to having yeah/nay votes. When we’re actually talking, we
may come to a compromised position.
Male:
What I am afraid as a [inaudible word 28:57] and with 15 members, or
whatever, it is not always easy to express everyone’s opinion in a limited
time, so I sort of… well we can discuss in the conference call, but sometimes
it’s easier to take the vote in the end, by item by item. [inaudible comment
29:18]
Alan:
I think we can do that ultimately in the conference, and we should have all
presented our input electronically way prior to that. I’m just saying, often the
better… best result is not (a) or (b), but it’s a merger of the two. If we really
have major differences between us.
Cheryl:
Cheryl here, perhaps some flexibility then between points (c) and (d) in many
ways we need to see what suggestions come from the rest of the…
[phone beeps once]
Cheryl:
…[inaudible 29:54] at this point in time.
Male:
That sounds good.
Izumi:
I’m sorry, could you repeat the answer again.
Cheryl:
As long as we have some flexibility between the… your way forward point (c)
and what would be a new point (d), a final document vote after discussion on
the next conference call on October 9th, we are second-guessing ourselves as
- 17 to whether we will have [diverging] points. Let’s see if we have [diverging]
points first.
Izumi:
So, in other words, we try to agree on the conference call if there is anything
remaining, but then if we can’t resolve everything, then only the remaining
one will go online voting.
Alan:
Or vote at the conference call, if it comes to that.
Izumi:
Okay.
[phone beeps once]
Izumi:
Any other comments from those who haven’t said anything?
Alan:
I’m just going to make one more comment, I’ve been participating in the
GNSO meetings where there have been very, very [inaudible word 30:57]
differences between some of the constituencies on some issues, and you can
come to closure on these things.
Izumi:
Okay.
Cheryl:
Izumi, I have made edits as we have been speaking in your way forward
section, so we do have some [reflection] of what we’ve discussed tonight
before the minutes come out.
Izumi:
Sure that will be great.
Nick:
Izumi?
Izumi:
Yes.
Nick:
Hawa is looking to make a comment.
Hawa:
[Hawa veut faire un commentaire.]
Male:
S’il vous plait?
Female:
[Oui? Je peux? Can I?] [overtalking 31:39][Je suis parfaitement d’accord…]
Translator:
[She perfectly agrees with… to vote section by section…]
- 18 -
Hawa:
[French 31:49 – 31:56 (translated in next line)]
Translator:
[But will, if we work at the next conference, won’t this prolongs the conference
longer?]
Female:
That is true.
[C’est vraie…inaudible 32:10]
Alan:
If we actually start on time, then we won’t have a problem.
Hawa:
[Si on commence à temps il n’y aura pas de problème…]
Annette:
We’ll never start on time.
[inaudible technical difficulties 32:20]
Operator:
Please have your pass-code and conference leader’s name available, a
coordinator will assist you momentarily.
Female:
Is that our new…?
Female:
This is not the only point of the meeting. Can we do this online?
Izumi:
So, Alan suggested to use the next conference call, and Hawa is little bit
afraid of the time, um… shall we have the compromise, such as say, we will
spend maximum 30 minutes on the conference call if so happens, and if we
can’t resolve then we go online for the finalizing points. But we will combine
the best of two worlds.
Male:
Fine.
Annette:
And then we have to have a procedure how to do it after the conference call.
Izumi:
Yeah, I think Cheryl can [make] it on the wiki.
Cheryl:
Yeah.
[phone beeps once]
- 19 -
Izumi:
And I will work with her about that. We really move onto other items,
otherwise it will take forever. Unless there is a strong objection or comment,
I’d like to close…
[phone beeps once]
Izumi:
…on this and move to the next agenda item.
Male:
[Let’s go. 33:44]
Izumi:
Thank you.
Annette:
Excuse me, Annette here. Did I hear Alan change the topic in between? I was
not sure what was going on on the… Alan, you talked about GNSO?
Cheryl:
No, he was making a comment that people can [inaudible 34:02] a consensus
view even with highly divergent beginnings. It was an affirmation that we
should be able to move forward.
Annette:
Ah, okay.
Alan:
And with luck if people do their homework, we will have consensus before the
conference call.
Annette:
Thank you, that sounds good.
Izumi:
Okay, next one is the results of the ALS voting of August. I think we got the
result…
[phone beeps once]
Izumi:
The only thing is to make sure that the results be announced and also
communicated to both the ALS and the RALO in the region. Nick, is this what
you need?
Nick:
I’m doing that… those two things today.
Izumi:
Okay. Is there any comments from the committee members on this?
[inaudible loud background noise 35:05-35:17]
Annette:
Highway or ocean?
- 20 -
Alan:
Vacuum cleaner.
[Male:
inaudible comment loud background noise 35:22]
Nick:
I don’t hear anything now…
Izumi:
Yes, please Nick.
Nick:
Sorry, I was just mumbling that I didn’t hear anything.
Izumi:
Okay, nobody hears anything.
Male:
Well I did, yeah.
Izumi:
Okay, sorry… so about this result of the ALS voting, Nick will announce and
also communicate with both ALS and the RALO today, so we’ll welcome them
shortly. And especially mindful that the internet has some, you know,
challenges with us, or between both of us, so we better take care of that.
Okay, then number (3), the result of the Board Liaison Election. As we all
saw, the result was announced yesterday, and many people appreciate the
work of Vittorio and the work of Wendy. Any comment?
Alan:
I would like to formally propose a motion to thank Vittorio for his significant
efforts over the last nine months.
Cheryl:
I’m more than happy to second that. Cheryl here.
Beau:
Yeah, third. This is…
Annette:
Yeah, I second… Annette.
Izumi:
I see almost everyone is seconding or thirding.
Female:
And as a [non]-member of the committee I would like to second that as well.
Izumi:
Oh, well, please. I will not ask any objection at all. So this is passed
unanimously.
Male:
Great.
Izumi:
Could someone write a nice, sort of message to him. Any volunteer? Okay,
shall I volunteer myself?
- 21 -
Alan:
I’ll do it. If you want a volunteer, it’s Alan.
Izumi:
Okay, you’re the [English 37:15] speaker. Thank you. And also welcome
Wendy. Wendy?
Wendy:
Thank you.
Izumi:
Wendy, do you have any comments please now, shortly?
Wendy:
I look forward to working with Vittorio to understand the issues that are before
the Board, to working with all of you, and all of the At-Large structures and
regional groups as well. Please, as I said, feel free to ask me questions,
comments. I don’t know whether we should send a formal note to the Board
requesting that I be added to their list, and I’d like to ask Nick that I please be
added back to the ALAC internal list, just to make sure that all of the
communications are in place.
Alan:
I will point out that Vint said he didn’t think liaisons were necessarily coming in
only after the annual general meeting. I checked the bylaws and all they say
is we will annually appoint, but doesn’t give a timeframe. I think we need…
our own procedures – which we haven’t approved – say you would only take
your seat at the end of the annual general meeting. I think we need to get
some consistency here, so we know what it is we’re talking about.
Cheryl:
Cheryl here, I think the other important thing is a satisfactory transition. There
is an enormous amount of information and work in process that [need to be
effectively handed across] and I would think an opportunity for both Wendy
and Vittorio to be together in the same place and [space] could be
enormously helpful.
Alan:
But that’s perhaps the reason why the rules we had said that there was a time
lag to allow both of them… to allow Wendy to be added to lists and participate
as an observer, and still have a sitting representative on the committee. Lame
duck perhaps, but a sitting representative. Otherwise we have a danger that if
Wendy takes place immediately, then Vittorio is off all the lists and off all the
processes.
Wendy:
Let me just suggest, that’s what I anticipated would happen. That I was being
elected for… to take the seat at the conclusion of the annual meeting. I simply
- 22 -
thought the communications could start earlier so that we could get up to
speed.
Alan:
We just need to make sure that everyone understands the same thing.
Nick:
I will come back with a definitive answer. I have received answers… they’re
not from the general council’s office, but indeed the term does start at the end
of the annual general meeting, but of course I still have Vint’s comments.
Anyway, I’ll get the GC’s office to provide a definitive [view] and all the
[technical arrangements] will be made.
Cheryl:
It’s Cheryl here, apart from the definitive view in L-A-W, I think there’s also an
intelligent view we might wish to state and that is the benefit with an October
Board retreat as an example of having a hand-over opportunity at some point
there, might also be worthwhile exploring, but that’s very much ICANN’s
business, not ours.
Nick:
I’ll explore that also.
Cheryl:
Thank you.
Izumi:
In the interest of time, Nick you can explore that and come back to us.
Nick:
Sure.
Izumi:
Make sure the smooth transition. Is that…?
Annette:
Excuse me, Izumi, the idea was… well first we all agree that Vittorio still
continues his term until the end of the general meeting, and that we politely,
friendly, ask the Board to already add Wendy and we of course do it
ourselves, to put her on the internal list… ALAC list?
Izumi:
Yeah.
Annette:
Okay, great.
Alan:
This is not the first transition the Board has had. I suspect there are
established procedures.
Annette:
Very good.
- 23 -
Izumi:
Yeah, subject to Nick’s investigation. But in general, yes. And also explore
what would be the best way for the Board retreat.
Annette:
Yeah.
Izumi:
Okay, so we’ve got… let’s move to the NomCom nominations. Is that okay?
Female:
Yeah.
Izumi:
Okay, then… there’s a motion by Jacqueline that the ALAC open a vote
online on the ones that have more than one name suggested to close by end
of this weekend, so the results will be transmitted to George by next Monday.
Is there any comment?
Annette:
I second.
Alan:
For at least the North Americans, we are still deliberating and would like to
have the opportunity of putting forward a recommended candidate or
candidates before that happens.
Beau:
Yeah, and the RALO people asked us yesterday for some more time…
Female:
Oh Beau, you’re back.
Beau:
Yeah. And we tried to be circumspect, but if we could have a couple more
days, that might be helpful.
Izumi:
When would you estimate that you finish that work?
Beau:
Well we told them no longer than ten days.
Female:
Oh.
Annette:
That’s too late.
Beau:
Too late? Well we can get back to them. I don’t know, what do you think
Alan?
Alan:
Right now we’re still waiting for a pending confirmation, which Robert was
supposed to check on. We’re going to need at least four or five days.
- 24 -
Annette:
I also heard that in Europe some people would like to make a
recommendation, so maybe it would be…
Izumi:
How about a week and then by end of Sunday or Monday morning, and the
vote will start shortly after, as soon as technical [inaudible 43:38].
Male:
By Tuesday.
Annette:
What is the deadline? We just have to make sure that we really meet the
deadline.
Izumi:
30th of September. End of the month to George. But for any foreseeable issue
we got to have a few days [in advance].
Annette:
Exactly.
Alan:
I’m not sure how we do a Board vote if there are multiple candidates from
each region and for some reason the ALAC feels that we do not want to take
the advice of the… if the ALAC members from each region cannot come up
with a single name, I’m not sure how the ALAC is supposed to vote on that.
Izumi:
So, in a way you have to read the bylaws and stuff like that, and make a
decision.
Alan:
Well, is that the intention? I thought the intention from the huge amount of
correspondence we had, is that the… each region, not necessarily the RALO,
but each region, will come up with an ordered list.
Izumi:
Well in any case, if we need to turn the order around, we need some kind of
material to judge upon, right?
Alan:
For the [moment 45:02], yes.
Izumi:
For both, the communications on the RALOS we [sort of, verbal] explanations
of why you can’t reach an agreement but these candidates are at least
qualified in such a way that we can make a decision.
Beau:
Well, that’s actually sort of one of the issues that got hung-up on, was that
there did not appear to be any backup information on some of the people who
they wanted to talk about, but they were going to try to get that immediately
and there was also discussion of them wanting to set up a poll, and you know,
- 25 -
we tried to just really move that along, but we will take whatever steps we
need to make sure that there’s materials that… [inaudible overtalking 45:44]
Alan:
Well as I said yesterday on our call, I think it’s too late to start with a poll at
this point.
Beau:
Yeah, yeah, but I don’t know that that’s going to stop them doing it, but…
[laughs]
Alan:
Well… [laughs]
Izumi:
Remember that the… making the recommendations is ALAC’s job…
Name:
[NomCom 46:00]
Izumi:
So we just take them as a reference.
Beau:
Oh sure, I know that. But I mean, I think, you know there was so much
emotion expressed from this particular RALO that, you know, they at least
wanted the feeling of being able to be involved and we are supposed to be
[bottom] up as much as possible, so that’s why we are trying to encourage
them to move fast if they’re going to move at all.
Alan:
But similarly Beau, I think each set of ALAC members… each group from
each region, have a responsibility that if they can, to make a definitive
recommendation, or at least an ordered set of recommendations to the ALAC.
Beau:
Yeah…
Alan:
As opposed to just presenting three names without any prior [-zation 46:38]
for everyone to individually pick.
Beau:
Yeah, well you and I and Robert have been doing that, so…
Alan:
Well, I’m just saying in general we’re not the only ones without an ordered list.
Beau:
Gotcha.
Izumi:
Well, I would suggest each RALO or each members of ALAC in region will
come up with own ways of recommending the people. By the order, or by the
- 26 quality, or the rationale… and then they collectively will make the judgment. I
don’t think there’s any other way to finish by this two weeks’ time.
Cheryl:
Cheryl here. If I can speak on behalf of the process that went on in AsiaPacific, we were very careful not to prioritize our [inaudible word 47:22]
suggested candidates. That we were saying here are some regional based
recommendation for ALAC’s consideration and here are their bios and ICANN
areas of activities, showing what credibility we as ALAC may want to look at
when we’re making those decisions. We also made the representatives back
to the RALOs [inaudible 47:51] the ALSes and within AP RALO were very
careful to make it clear that ALAC could pick another name out of thin air if it
so desired, [and apply it.]
Alan:
Cheryl, I think… I agree with your procedure at the RALO level. I am now
talking at the three ALAC member level, which includes one person who is
not formally a representative of the RALO.
Annette:
May I just suggest that we think about the procedure we used in the past that
was asking for the regional advice and also… I mean the regional advice of
the ALAC members and if they did not agree, then we said, “Okay, what are
your arguments and please let us know” and then everyone has to make his
or her own decisions.
Alan:
Which is pretty well exactly what I was just saying.
Annette:
Yeah. I just wanted to support it and say this is how we dealt in the past.
Izumi:
I take that proposal and I second that. If I may, or Alan already second it.
Alan:
I mean it’s clearly up to each regional group of three, to decide how they want
to do it. If the three members from a region choose to say, “We cannot come
to a conclusion, here are the three members, everyone choose for
themselves.” That’s fine. But each of the group of three should decide.
Izumi:
May I ask those who haven’t commented, like Veronica, Sebastien, or Hawa,
or whoever, please?
Veronica:
Ah, Veronica here. I second Alan’s proposal. I completely agree with that.
Izumi:
Good. Sebastien? Are you still there?
- 27 -
Sebastien:
Yeah, I’m there. It’s a long discussion for something we can’t find a real
agreement. Some want the RALO vote, some [inaudible comment 49:52]… I
think at the end of the day, each one of us will have to make his own
decisions. The question is to be sure to have a list of candidates and possible
choice, for example for Africa we have just one name. Ah, I have no problem
with the name at all, but are we sure that there is just one possible candidate
for all region, or is it because they make the choice? I heard because it’s the
only candidate.
Izumi:
Okay.
Annette:
May I add…? Izumi, Annette here. I would just like to add that it sounds funny
to me though that a chair just reports that you took care not give an advice
and just hand in the list. So the idea at least, still is… to give regional advice
and for the ALAC members it is always very difficult to really find out. Some
people, sometimes they just don’t have no idea about the candidate – you just
don’t know them. So, and advice helps, and if there is… if all people agree…?
Excuse me?
Male:
One [inaudible word 51:06]… AP RALO didn’t decide to give one name as an
advice, doesn’t mean that three ALAC members of the AP region will not give
advice.
Annette:
Oh, okay.
Alan:
Annette, for North America, I have… they don’t have to honour it, but I have
specifically said I would like the RALO to come up with a small number of
people that they feel comfortable… any of which would be good NomCom
members and that is what the RALO should give, not necessarily an ordered
list or a single name. So, I support the process that Izumi and Cheryl just
described. That doesn’t mean I don’t think the members will not come up with
a list, but the RALO I think should give advice in the form of, “Here are good
people. Any of them would be good members.”
Annette:
I just think it’s important that RALOs know, if they give advice, that they know
it is just advice and it is up to the ALAC to decide.
Alan:
Indeed.
- 28 -
Izumi:
That’s all confirmed. Okay, so we agree that the… each member of ALAC will
come up with – in consultation with RALO – their candidates by the end of
this week.
Alan:
That’s the target.
Izumi:
And then we set up the voting where necessary… well all of them, for Africa
it’s almost a confirmation, but I still think it’s better to vote and starting…
[targeting] on Tuesday, closing on Sunday the 23rd and announce on Monday.
Alan:
Izumi, I’ll point out that other than an attempt to get things like gender
balance, all of the sides do not have to proceed on the exact same time
schedule, if there are particular hang-ups in any given region.
Izumi:
What would you suggest?
Alan:
I’m just saying that if everyone but North America, or but Europe, is ready on
that time schedule, we can go ahead with that knowing that we’re going to
have to do something different for whatever region that’s lagging behind.
Izumi:
Any additional [comment] from other North America member?
Beau:
No.
Izumi:
Otherwise I think we’ll go like that. One additional thing, I received from
Carlos in case he cannot attend the conference call, that he said the priority
went to Matias Altamira Gigena, but I think it’s not the real issue now, that we
can go back to them and make sure it’s all up to them. [pause] Okay? Shall
we go to the reporting of the regional activities in a very brief mode, if there is
any pressing reporting, please do so, otherwise we read online or other…
Nick:
I’m sorry, one question of interest, because I’m doing several things at once…
Is there going to be a vote held on whatever the regions provide, to determine
the five names – when does it start and when does it end?
Izumi:
If there are more than two candidates from the region, we will vote. Is that
okay?
Alan:
I think we have to vote anyway. This is our ALAC decisions.
Izumi:
Yeah.
- 29 -
Alan:
We could [inaudible word 54:43] say we will always agree with each region,
but I think there has to be a formal vote.
Female:
Yes.
Nick:
Shall I make a placard then for each region and you can select from amongst
the…?
Alan:
If there is not… if there are multiple candidates.
Nick:
If there’s more than one.
Male:
Are we going to implement the… whatever the method – first runoff?
Nick:
Instant runoff?
Male:
Instant runoff?
Annette:
Yes.
Male:
Yes.
Cheryl:
Cheryl here. [overtalking 55:22]
Nick:
When does it end and start?
Cheryl:
[poor audio connection 55:27] Cheryl here. I was just going to clarify we were
leaving North America to the end of this week to perhaps modify or extend
this bio material [they need]. It starts after the [14th].
Sebastien:
It’s Sebastien, I’m very concerned about… that if we wait for an instant runoff
for each region, we will end up with a situation… with no balance, with no…
yeah, we will chose one name in each region, but nothing at the global level
and we are supposed to do this job and I’m not sure that election is good
process for this kind of nomination. We need to have five good people coming
from five regions…
Alan:
That balance each other.
Sebastien:
Not just the region. The region is one point, there are others. I will take…
yeah, we have different [region]. Some region want to have ALS as member,
maybe we will decide that we would like to have no ALS as member. There is
- 30 just one woman on this list. That’s for my point of view absolutely crazy and I
hope that in the next round we will say that each region must come with one
woman and one man at least, and so on. And if I take Europe once again, if
we decide all together that it’s Patrick then we will have no woman on the list.
It’s [not a good sign]…
Name:
[inaudible comment 57:26]
Izumi:
Do you propose any other methods?
Sebastien:
We need to be… to take our responsibility and to discuss… to say why we
would like to have this one and not this one. It’s… in this situation, it’s too
easy to say, “Let’s go to vote”. We don’t face our responsibility.
Alan:
However, we… right now we do not have a mechanism and before we get to
LA to do this, we cannot really have this kind of discussion on a conference
call. It’s a recorded open conference call, and that means you, for all intents
and purposes, cannot say anything negative about anyone.
Cheryl:
That’s correct.
Alan:
We don’t have any real mechanism. We need one. This is a perfect type of
thing to do in a face-to-face and closed meeting.
Annette:
Well we did that online already in the past. And I think that’s the way we have
to do it.
Nick:
On a point of information, I can pause the call… the recording at any point in
any call, if you all wish to go “in camera”.
Alan:
Assuming we don’t have any visitors at the time.
Izumi:
There are two ways I can propose. One is to have a conference call, say like
Monday or Tuesday next week, right after the region closes? Or, to have one
week of online list discussion in internal list of [inaudible word 58:58] [and
then vote], but then for the closure, the vote will take place in three days or
something like that. If we need that.
[loud background noises 59:08]
Izumi:
Any comment?
- 31 -
Annette:
I’m just checking the timeline. [loud background noises]
Alan:
There’s very loud music coming from somewhere… dancing.
Annette:
[laughs]
Male:
It’s some African music.
Alan:
I thought it was South American, but…
Male:
[laughs] [inaudible overtalking 59:43]
Izumi:
Okay, what I said is one way to set up a conference call, likely Tuesday next
week. Or we do the online discussion for a while.
Annette:
Online.
Alan:
I have one comment. I agree with Sebastien about things like gender balance,
unfortunately in this particular situation the only way to attain any gender
balance is for Europe to pick their female candidate, because we have no
other potential ones. In general, I think a face-to-face or real person-to-person
discussion is good for this kind of thing. In this particular case, it may not
matter.
Izumi:
Okay, how about if there is… start a vote on Friday the 25th, until then from
Monday to Thursday, we spend online, email, [extend to] the internal list, if we
need to ask questions from region and whatever, to make this final judgment.
And vote closes on Monday, announce Wednesday.
Alan:
If we really find that there is some region that cannot come up with a
recommended name or we have some major discussion, then we can revert
to a conference call if necessary.
Annette:
I, I… well… I’m really not a friend of ad hoc conference calls. I have really… I
plan these calls a long time ahead for my office, so I really think we should try
to solve these issues online and only if there is an [open] question, we vote.
[…after the discussion.]
Male:
Fine.
- 32 -
Annette:
…and we should just place the vote for a time that we can announce the vote,
whatever, the 27th or something like that.
Izumi:
Beau, you have so many candidates for North America, do you agree with
that?
Beau:
Yes.
Alan?:
Yes.
Izumi:
Okay, and also Europe, Veronica? Is that okay?
Veronica:
Yes that’s fine.
Izumi:
And Sebastien, so you’re point was well taken. Is that okay?
Sebastien:
Yes.
[inaudible very faint audio 1:02:07]
Nick:
So when does the voting start now? It ends on the 29th? …on the 21st?
Male:
On Friday, the 21st.
Annette:
Well, maybe a little later. Twenty… Saturday… is that okay?
Izumi:
What’s the difference?
Annette:
Oh, it’s just, if you have a discussion then, you know, you need some time to
discuss. So, that’s all.
Izumi:
I’d like to give at least two working days for both, because somebody will not
vote, or you know…
Annette:
Oh, there is much more working days… if we have 22nd of…
Male:
[inaudible 1:02:47]
Annette:
Yeah, if we start voting on the 22nd, then we have time until the 27th or 28th…
Izumi:
Then if things go wrong, we have no backup dates. That’s what I’m afraid. For
whatever reasons, unforeseeable.
- 33 -
Alan:
22nd to the 20-… ending on the end of the 26th, is that okay?
Male:
Yes.
Annette:
Fine with me.
Female:
Yes.
Izumi:
So Nick, could you take note? All the names should be analyzed from the
region by Sunday the 16th. We go to the online discussion, or in the meantime
we go to the discussion, but the vote will start on the 22 nd, Saturday, and
closes on the end of Wednesday, 26th.
Nick:
But when do the regions have to provide their… they have to provide their
information by the… 21st?
Izumi:
No, Sunday the 16th. The ALAC will discuss after that for four days.
Alan:
The target is that regions provide their input by… their input or
recommendation by the end of this week, beginning of next week. The ALAC
has one week to discuss and then four or five days to vote.
Izumi:
Is this all clear, everyone?
Male:
Okay.
Female:
Okay.
Annette:
May I just interrupt? There is an email by Alice saying, “Please call me this
number.” Nick, did you get that? Because she is obviously waiting for more
than an hour to be…
Male:
Oh god.
Nick:
She was on at the beginning of the call, and then she disconnected and they
could not reach her back. I haven’t been monitoring email because I only
have…
Annette:
This is why I’m saying…
Nick:
…too many things on my screen, yeah.
- 34 -
Annette:
Can you see it now?
[inaudible overtalking situation 1:04:57]
Alan:
Her message just came in nine minutes ago, so she is waiting now.
Nick:
I…
Alan:
You have the number?
Nick:
No.
Alan:
+254 723 657 660
Nick:
723 657 660
Alan:
That’s correct. She has a 0 before the 723, but I assume that’s only if you’re
calling in the country.
Annette:
Well there are brackets around the… I don’t know what that is supposed to
mean. It’s probably…
Alan:
It’s… it’s the area code.
Annette:
Okay.
Alan:
If it doesn’t work without the zero, they should try with a zero, but I don’t think
it’s necessary.
Izumi:
Gentlemen, or ladies and gentlemen. It’s about eight minutes before midnight
for me, and past midnight for Cheryl. So may I suggest to skip the regional
activities report, and move to the liaison report of Cheryl, and there are
several written reports from the liaisons, but if there is any need for oral
report, please do so. And Hong as IDN, you have anything to say? Hong are
you there?
[phone beeps once]
Nick:
I’m back, they’re [dialling] Alice now.
Izumi:
Hong?
- 35 -
Alan:
Hong doesn’t seem to be here.
Izumi:
Okay, Wendy for WHOIS?
Wendy:
Hello.
Nick:
Hong is on mute.
Hong:
Right I was muted.
Izumi:
Do you have any urgent or important message from the IDN working group?
Hong:
No, it is working and you see my message sent to the list. It’s now appeared
for public [consultation] and looking forward to feedback.
Izumi:
Thank you. Wendy, do you have anything to say?
Wendy:
Unless anyone has questions, I posted a report to the list. The WHOIS
working group has concluded with a much-disputed report to GNSO council
and discussion will be ongoing there.
Izumi:
I have only one question. What’s your, sort of, prediction? [laughter]
Wendy:
I predict that as has been the case in the past, nothing at all will happen. I’m
intrigued by Ross’s… Ross Rader’s suggestion that the Board should
declare… council…
[phone beeps once]
Wendy:
…and the Board should declare a total lack of consensus on WHOIS, and
[drop] all WHOIS requirements and I personally would support that, because I
believe there is an [inaudible word beeping noise 1:08:07] consensus around
anything in the WHOIS discussion any more.
Alan:
That motion was withdrawn however.
Wendy:
Sadly.
Izumi:
Okay. Alan, how about GNSO.
Alan:
My… everything I had to say was in the report. There’s an exhaustive amount
of documentation if anyone wants to read and if anyone has specific
- 36 questions for me I’ll be glad to answer them. There’s been a lot going on,
including WHOIS… I’m talking over a jet engine right now. I don’t know if you
can hear me or not.
Izumi:
Any real suggestion to focus in for ALAC?
Alan:
There… the ongoing process on WHOIS is not over yet. The GNSO has not
made a specific recommendation yet. There may be a recommendation made
as a result of the further work that’s going to be done over the next month. I
would suggest people look at the… there’s a request for information out. If
people feel they have any input… If ALSes feel they have any input, then they
should take action on it.
Annette:
How much time do we have?
Female:
Sorry, where was the report on?
Alan:
There’s another two, three, or I think four days… I believe the request for
information closes on the 15th of September.
Izumi:
Okay. Thank you. Anything about [new] gTLD or domain tasting or any other
issues?
Alan:
It’s all in my report.
Wendy:
Where is your report please.
Alan:
It was sent by email… which you didn’t get it. I’ll send you a copy Wendy.
Wendy:
Thank you very much.
Alan:
And Nick, did you forward it to the At-Large? Nick?
Nick:
No, I haven’t forwarded it…
Alan:
I will send it to the At-Large list.
Izumi:
Thank you.
Nick:
And on the larger point there, can liaisons please remember to ensure that a
public version of their report, if there is anything confidential, is always posted
to the public list.
- 37 -
Izumi:
Okay, is Ron still there?
Male:
He went offline.
Izumi:
Too bad. Vittorio is not here.
Annette:
He did.
[inaudible comment 1:10:18]
Annette:
Ron? No, no. It was Didier who was answering?
Izumi:
Oh, Didier. I am sorry. Didier, can you hear now?
Male:
Yes, I can hear you.
Izumi:
Do you have anything from CC?
Male:
No, nothing.
Izumi:
Vittorio sends his board liaison report online already. Any other liaison
reports? None? Any other report from say, working group or [project] or
whatever? [pause 5 secs] Okay, then we need to discuss the… some
suggestions for the LA ICANN meeting, unless I missed something out. And
we may also touch-up on the workshops. Well, after that I hear Workshops
briefly.
Cheryl:
Sorry Izumi, Cheryl here. You have jumped over the other matters, under the
Non-Standing Agenda Items.
Izumi:
Okay, sorry about that. Yes.
Cheryl:
The first one is Working Practices of the Committee in the ROPs. That has
now been dealt with. The second one, [Division of Labour], I have put on…
and the echo is bad, I can hear myself…
Annette:
Yeah, it’s terrible.
Cheryl:
…I apologize. I had put much of the report from the working group as is
available. That is a work in progress.
Izumi:
Thank you. Any comments?
- 38 -
Annette:
Thank you.
Izumi:
Okay, let’s… now move to the LA meeting. There’s a motion from Jacqueline,
that ALAC will form a sub-committee…
[phone beeps once]
Izumi:
…of two or three people to work with a Chair and the [inaudible poor
connection 1:12:26] …draft the calendar or plan for the meeting, including the
items listed below. Any comments?
Alan:
My only comment is I am assuming that travel arrangements are going to be
called for very soon. I hope they will, and therefore we need to know what the
envelope is. What days do we need to be there? Quickly, before we work out
detailed agendas.
Izumi:
Noted. Usually the most business of ALAC will begin on Sunday. If there is a
strong need it might be Saturday night.
Annette:
Saturday night.
Izumi:
Very difficult for everyone to gather. That’s the standard practice.
Alan:
I wasn’t trying to debate it here. I’m just saying that it would be nice if by the
time they put out a call for travel – and the GNSO already has started that
process – that we know what days we’re supposed to be there.
Izumi:
Okay, thank you. Any other comment? If not, we need… if you agree with this
motion? Any second?
Female:
Yes.
Izumi:
Any objections? There are none. So, it’s accepted and we need several
names to volunteer. Anyone? Self nominate or nominate some others.
Annette:
I volunteer. Annette here.
Izumi:
Annette.
Beau:
Yeah, this is Beau. I volunteer with the understanding that I’m going to be out
of the country for basically the next two weeks.
- 39 -
Alan:
Out of the country and available, or out of the country and not available?
Beau:
Out of the country and not available. I mean I could probably get online and
do the vote as agree to, but I can’t do organizing.
Alan:
I think… doesn’t this work have to be done in the next two weeks? Nick?
Izumi:
And so Annette, and…
Annette:
Sure. I mean, I actually expect all the North Americans to join the
preparations.
[inaudible technical difficulties 1:14:39]
Izumi:
Alan, is Robert seemingly able to do so?
Alan:
I cannot commit for Robert over the… Can I ask what timeframe are we
talking about? When is this committee going to do its work?
Izumi:
From now until LA.
Alan:
Well, now… The agenda… the basic agendas are going to have to be done a
lot earlier than that, in coordination with when other people are meeting and
to get… to arrange for travel. Is Nick still here?
Female:
He’ll be just a moment, he’ll be joining us.
Annette:
I think we need some volunteers now and we have to come up with some
proposals…
[phone beeps once]
Annette:
…we put on the ALAC list in the next ten days.
Veronica:
Veronica here. I also volunteer to be part of that working group or committee.
Male:
Great.
Nick:
[poor audio connection] Sorry, I got disconnected.
Izumi:
Okay. We are discussing about the sub-committee for the preparation of the
ICANN meeting in LA. Annette and Beau volunteer, and Veronica just
- 40 volunteered. Beau couldn’t really do for the coming two weeks, we may need
one more person.
Nick:
Obviously I’ll help.
Alan:
Nick, what timeframe do we need to come up with deciding when our… what
days our meetings are on and what the overall envelope is. In conjunction…
to make sure we don’t have conflicts with other committees and other things.
Nick:
I should know what the rest of the schedule is in a more [settled] way in the
next couple of days, than I do now. With respect the schedule, I don’t know if
you all want to hear from… Didier told me about the fact that the secretariats
are going to be present and what they wish to accomplish and your
involvement in that now, or if that goes to the sub-committee who are working
on the planning.
Alan:
I would say it goes to the subcommittee.
Izumi:
Annette?
Annette:
Yeah?
Izumi:
Could you take the lead, and in case please recruit somebody from other
region such as Latin America. There’s nobody now.
Annette:
Okay.
Izumi:
But basically, she said two or three, so let’s go ahead.
Annette:
Okay.
Alan:
Nick do we know when there will be a call for travel arrangements?
Nick:
Yeah, it should have already happened. It will be within the next couple of
days.
Alan:
Then I think we need to know what the envelope is for the overall meetings,
so what days do we need to be present?
Nick:
Yeah…
- 41 -
Alan:
I for one want to make my travel arrangements as quickly as possible so that I
can get flights that I want.
Sebastien:
Yeah, I would like… it’s Sebastien. It’s very late, very late. It will cost more
and it’s very difficult to organize. Some of us are going then to Rio, or some
will come back to their country, some will stay and we can’t organize nothing.
It’s a shame.
Nick:
I will reiterate it. I had intended that… there is a new person who will be
handling travel for the fellowships program, and At-Large and anyone else
getting travel, doing travel, including the staff – in house. And that person was
supposed to have introduced herself to you already and hasn’t done so yet. I
will…
Male:
[inaudible word 1:18:33]
Nick:
…on that.
Alan:
But Nick, that won’t help unless we know what days we need to be there.
Nick:
Yeah, so you can assume that you need to arrive on Sunday and that you can
leave on Friday. Except for you Alan…
Alan:
Yeah, my schedule I know. I’m talking about the rest of the committee.
Nick:
So everybody else can assume Sunday through Thursday.
Alan:
So you’re saying there will be no formal meetings prior to Monday, for the
ALAC people.
Annette:
This is exactly what we did not discuss yet.
Alan:
[inaudible comment 1:19:02]
Nick:
If you wish to have one, you certainly are welcome to. I’m just saying that as it
stands at the present it would be… there’s no, except for the GNSO, there’s
no reason for anyone to be there on Saturday… except Alan.
Alan:
And the point I was making was, if we want to have a meeting on Sunday, or
group dinner on Saturday night, or whatever, we need to make that decision
very soon.
- 42 -
Annette:
I really would like to make the proposal to have the Saturday night dinner.
That is one proposal, if I remember right, made by Veronica to have a sort of
get-together always at the beginning, and experience shows that we do need
to come together the day before the actual ICANN meeting. So I think
Saturday evening really does make sense.
[overtalking 1:20:00]
Izumi:
…that sub-committee quickly at least, compile these ideas as a draft plan…
Annette:
Okay.
Izumi:
…and work out. I don’t think we have time to discuss now, here.
Annette:
Okay.
Izumi:
[poor audio connection] Thank you. Does the IGF workshop requested to be
discussed? Is there any comment or proposal, whatever, or question? Who
asked for that as an agenda item? I don’t remember. I think the basic
workshop plans are all… Cheryl [generally agreed on the IGF… I mean, by
the consultation meeting, with no specific information] [inaudible 1:21:07] I
don’t know where ALAC should be positioned with. Is there anyone who has
any clue about that? Or, alternatively is there any proposal to have ALAC or
ICANN related meeting there?
Nick:
Cheryl already proposed meetings there.
Izumi:
ICANN related meeting right?
Nick:
Yeah.
Annette:
Izumi, may I just interrupt? There’s another email by Alice and she says,
“…and if that does not work out I am afraid I shall not be available for any
other ALAC telephone conference”.
Izumi:
Nick…
Alice:
I am here.
Annette:
You are there?
- 43 -
Alice:
Yes, they managed to connect me with my alternate number.
Annette:
Oh, how wonderful. Okay. Good.
Male:
Welcome.
Hong?:
Izumi, I do have a question to Nick. Because ICANN is going to have an IDN
workshop along with [Unesco] in… and ALAC also proposed for an IDN
workshop, and Nick talked with the ICANN staff about a possibility of merging
the two workshops. So I really want to know the update. What was the reply
from the ICANN side?
Nick:
I sent you and Jacqueline an email weeks ago now. I think, actually. Did you
not receive it, in which I said that they needed to be kept separate?
Hong?:
Absolutely I did not get it, and two days ago I got an email from [inaudible
name 1:22:50] and he’s asking the possibility of merge of the two workshops.
And I forward that email to you, because Jacqueline was not able to reply.
Nick:
Let us do talk about this separately, anyway, would be my suggestion.
Izumi:
Okay, is that okay Hong?
Hong:
[Right.]
Nick:
Hong, whenever you like.
Izumi:
Are there any questions related to the IGF in Rio? None? And just one piece
of information. I sent my question to the IGF Secretariat yesterday, of how to
prepare workshop, because I’m part of [inaudible 1:23:36] and they said
please wait for a few days for a fixed timeline when we need to decide panel
wish to speak, and stuff like that. So things are still up in the air in [specifics.]
But within a few days I think there will be some kind of announcement. With
that, there is also one possibility related to the working group and especially
for the [inaudible 1:24:04] I know that [inaudible technical difficulties] in Los
Angeles ICANN meeting, I haven’t really contacted with them. I should have
done that. But any other comment or information for that? Okay. I will try to
proceed or [check them]. In the meantime, Vittorio ask if we have any
comment on the allocation policy of the remaining before, because Beau is
- 44 -
discussing about that. So please come up with that. And also he was wanting
to have your comments on the [RRA] which may be too late, but still.
Nick:
It’s not yet too late, but he is looking for someone else to take over Chairing
that working group.
Izumi:
Okay, if there is a volunteer please? Otherwise we go online. We really need
to close it soon. Any other items in this?
Sebastien:
[poor audio connection] Yes, on my wiki there is a new business.
Izumi:
[So, number one it details the IDN [inaudible word] proposal?]
Cheryl:
Ah, Cheryl here. I’m happy to speak to that very briefly. Speaking slowly
because of the translator, so bear with me while I try and slow down from my
normal fast- track. At the last teleconference the outlines reported in the AP
RALO meeting report further up in the wiki, we have put together a motion
supporting the APTLD IDN [fast-track] proposal, an AP RALO request that
ALAC give us a response or opinion [of the activity] …is simply something
that they would like to see between now and the next meeting.
Izumi:
Thank you. Any comment or questions? Okay, thank you for patience. And
the second point [background noises 1:26:24]… Cheryl again.
Cheryl:
[poor audio connection 1:26:36] Izumi, Cheryl here, I’m happy to speak to
that. Again at the meeting not reported in the AP RALO meeting report, we
requested that [inaudible 2 or 3 words] …the At-Large Summit meeting and
that has happened, and was this agreement amongst the AP RALO that we
most certainly support in principle, the At-Large Summit, which is currently
[for June 2008], we were concerned that there may be [inaudible 1:27:11]
ramifications, and that in this case those budget ramifications would be set
particularly hard by us because we are the regional meeting that would be
immediately before that and we wished to seek some assurance from ICANN,
so via ALAC sent through Nick, that we won’t be suffering any limitation on
our regional meeting in February because of a At-Large summit in June.
Pointing out particularly that we have already had our proper regional meeting
for the end of this year, which is why we’re meeting in Los Angeles.
Izumi:
Thank you. Nick, do you have any comment?
- 45 -
Nick:
I had heard no… it’s still very early in the stages… in the preplanning of this,
there certainly isn’t any thought that any regional meeting would not happen if
this meeting happened at this point. That certainly hasn’t been discussed,
so… even if that were… even if the senior staff felt that that was the
compromise that would need to be made, we would come back to you all and
ask for your views before deciding anything in any case. But I would
anticipate that the AP region would not be able to meet if the summit were to
be held…
Cheryl:
Just so that you’re painfully aware of the Asia-Pacific view on this, we would
suggest that a summit [come to the] AP region, rather than have our AP
regional meeting affected.
Nick:
Cheryl, no, I can understand the strong feelings there.
Cheryl:
Oh, believe me, they are very strong.
Sebastien:
It’s Sebastien, I would like to support the [inaudible word 1:29:30] when we
are in the region, the RALO from the region, must have a meeting there… a
general meeting there, for their RALO. It’s a must. And this question about the
summit, it’s nothing we [dismiss] it’s something in addition, and we need to
have discussion with whoever in the staff… senior staff , we will have it, it’s
not for… for my point of view, it’s not a question, it must be done.
Annette:
May I add, Annette, here…
Izumi:
…just a second please.
Annette:
Yeah, very short, because this is actually also part of the budget planning and
we should raise all these questions and come up with solutions.
Izumi:
Okay, and the next two items… Summit in Paris, and travel to LA, any urgent
need to explain things? Otherwise, let’s go offline for these. We discussed
them already.
Sebastien?: I have a concern about the summit. I think we really need to… I was thinking
the reverse a few weeks ago, but I really think that we need to move the
discussion about the summit on our usual tools, because in addition to… it’s
too complicated.
- 46 -
Annette:
I agree.
Sebastien?: Then, we need to have it and we need to take our role in that. I heard about
discussion within the North American RALO, and with no other people, and I
think it’s the wrong way to go. It’s very good that one RALO is taking the lead
for that, but not [inaudible 1:31:24] into others, it’s not a good thing.
Izumi:
Beau, could you or somebody else convey that to those who are working on
summit?
Male:
Sorry?
Izumi:
If you tell those who are very active in summit, about these concerns. [We
note that, and…]
Annette:
Izumi, I think the proposal… Sebastien please correct me, the proposal was
to [loud background noise 1:31:52] change the discussion from [inaudible] to
the At-Large list, right?
Sebastien:
To move from the Google group to [one of our] usual tool to work together.
Cheryl:
Cheryl here. A list already exists. When our Chair from AP RALO joined us…
[phone beeps once]
Cheryl:
…that it was an empty list. He raised that issue with the Google summit
[planning] committee list, and as far as we understand, their intention was to
shift across to the tool that already exists. But perhaps one of our…
Sebastien:
Cheryl, it was not an empty list. And…
Cheryl:
I’m sorry, no, no. The list that is already on the ALAC…
Sebastien:
Okay.
Cheryl:
…had no traffic.
Sebastien:
No, it had no traffic because the discussion, it’s in the other tool, it’s why I am
suggesting that we really decide to move it to our normal [inaudible 1:33:08]
because they send a mail today with some information and as a matter of fact
they didn’t take into account some of the inputs and [inaudible] put some
- 47 -
inputs in middle of August, and it was not taken into account. I love that North
American people [like] the idea about the summit, I am not sure that
[inaudible 1:33:39]...
[phone beeps once]
Sebastien:
But, never mind. I really think we need to be involved and to be able to do so.
Cheryl:
I agree, and that is why we asked the same question. The answer from the
summit committee was, they were planning on moving to our list. Perhaps it
should be fast-tracked by the North American representatives.
Izumi:
Okay, either Sebastien or Cheryl, can write to [inaudible 1:34:11] about that…
Cheryl:
Izumi, my point is that has already been done in writing from AP RALO. We
have had…
Izumi:
[inaudible overtalking 1:34:22]
Annette:
This is an ALAC suggestion now.
Izumi:
Yeah, not AP RALO, but ALAC discussed this and so we would like to further
confirm that a clear and fast move is very much appreciated, or something
like that.
Cheryl:
Would it not be better for one of the members of ALAC who are actively
involved in the summit planning to do that?
Izumi:
Is there anyone now?
Annette:
Sebastien.
Sebastien:
Yeah, but… okay, I can do, but I think…
Izumi:
Oh behalf of all of us.
Sebastien:
Okay, I will.
Izumi:
Okay, anything else?
Sebastien:
Yes, we want to thank you Izumi for your very good job to this meeting.
- 48 -
Annette:
Applause, applause.
Izumi:
Oh, come on. So let’s keep with the timeline we agreed this time. Don’t miss.
And Nick, or whoever, just chase us if we miss, or the other way around. It’s
very important to stick with what we agreed to. With that, I think the meeting is
just adjourned. Thank you.
Male:
Thank you Izumi.
Female:
Thank you Izumi.
Female:
Thank you.
Female:
Thank you, bye-bye.
[end of audio]