- lac-discuss-es - lists.iana.org

Extensi�n del Plazo del wiki - apoyo Recordatorio- Suave declaraci�n LACTLD
by myaguero＠msn.com Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Extensión del Plazo del wiki - apoyo Recordatorio- Suave declaración LACTLD De: myaguero(a)msn.com Queridos todos, Justo lo permiten saber que los commnets se publican en el wiki. https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=62392904&focusedCo… Saludos, Maritza ________________________________ De: lac-discuss-en-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <lac-discuss-en-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> En nombre de myaguero(a)msn.com <myaguero(a)msn.com> Enviado: martes, 18 de octubre de 2016 10:48 am Para: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: [lac-discuss en-] ampliación del plazo - el apoyo Recordatorio- Suave declaración LACTLD [[--Translated Texto (es -> es) -]] Asunto: ampliación del plazo - el apoyo Recordatorio- Suave declaración LACTLD From: myaguero(a)msn.com Queridos todos, Debido a las observaciones formuladas en la lista y dentro de las posiciones que se han hablado ayer en la llamada de LACRALO, se acordó ampliar el plazo de 10 días con el fin de dar la oportunidad a los miembros de la comunidad a ser informado sobre la Declaración y LACTLD para recibir más comentarios en este tema. Saludos, Maritza ________________________________ De: Maritza Aguero Minano Y. <myaguero(a)msn.com> Publicado: Lunes 26 de septiembre de, el año 2016 8:55 am Para: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: Ayuda Recordatorio- Suave declaración LACTLD FYI ... Saludos, De: Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)gmail.com<mailto:hcarrascob@gmail.com> > Fecha: September 23, el año 2016 08:10:56 pmGMT-5 A: lista de discusión de LACRALO <lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Asunto: [lac-discuss-es] (no subject) Queridos todos, Teniendo en cuenta la moción presentada por Alejandro Pisanty 19 de septiembre en la llamada mensual de LACRALO < https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/2016-09-19+LACRALO+Monthly+Tele…>, 1. fueron declaración LACTLD publicado en la página wiki de LACRALO: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=62392904 2. A partir de hoy, se abrirá un plazo de 7 días naturales para comentarios. 3. En caso de consenso, la moción se aprobará de conformidad con el artículo 12.8 del Reglamento de Procedimiento. Esta norma establece: "12.8 La Asamblea se esforzará, Al discutir cualquier cuestión no de procedimiento, para decidir las cuestiones que se le han Generales de acuerdo.Las votaciones se basó únicamente en la medida en que es necesario en los casos en que no se puede llegar a un acuerdo general. Cuyo caso será necesaria una votación sobre una cuestión no de procedimiento, la medida se llevarán a si recibe el voto de las dos terceras partes de los ALS presentes y votantes. " 4. Si no hay acuerdo, no debe haber una votación durante 1 semana. Saludos Humberto Carrasco (Presidente) Maritza Aguero (Secretario) _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/5fee1f9072.html --]]

1 0

???????? = Iso-8859-1 q = Informaci D3N_ESPECIFICA_sobre_CR = = iso-8859-1 q OPP _-_ Postulaciones = 2E =
by myaguero＠msn.com Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto:???????? = Iso-8859-1 q = Informaci D3N_ESPECIFICA_sobre_CR = = iso-8859-1 q OPP _-_ Postulaciones = 2E = De: myaguero(a)msn.com Estimados Miembros de la comunidad, Enviamos la siguiente informacin párrafo Conocimiento de Todos: * Procedimiento de las RALOS para postular: https://community.icann.org/m/mobile.action#page/43982055 * < https://community.icann.org/m/mobile.action#page/43982055> Procedimiento y gua postular en general: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=59647287 * < https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=59647287> Preguntas Frecuentes: https://community.icann.org/display/croppfy17/Frequently+Asked+Questions Saludos, Humberto Carrasco / Maritza Aguero ________________________________ De: Maritza Aguero Y. Minano <myaguero(a)msn.com> Enviado: martes, 18 de octubre de 2016 10:50 am lista de discusión de LACRALO; Párrafo lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: CROPP - Postulaciones. Estimados Miembros de la comunidad, En el siguiente enlace podrn ENCONTRAR EL Plan de Estratgico de LACRALO Aprobado: https://community.icann.org/display/croppfy17/LACRALO+Outreach+Strategic+Pl… En Este SENTIDO, se les pueden postular Recuerda A Todo evento relacionado con los cupos CROPP con la Debida antelacin. En el Caso de las Personas Que deseen postular para ir al IGF de Mxico, pueden enviar SUS Solicitudes Hasta Esta Semana. Saludos, Humberto Carrasco / Maritza Aguero [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/e383ba8421.html --]]

1 0

ampliaci�n del plazo - el apoyo Recordatorio- Suave declaraci�n LACTLD
by myaguero＠msn.com Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: ampliación del plazo - el apoyo Recordatorio- Suave declaración LACTLD De: myaguero(a)msn.com Queridos todos, Debido a las observaciones formuladas en la lista y dentro de las posiciones que se han hablado ayer en la llamada de LACRALO, se acordó ampliar el plazo de 10 días con el fin de dar la oportunidad a los miembros de la comunidad a ser informado acerca de la Declaración y LACTLD para recibir más comentarios en este tema. Saludos, Maritza ________________________________ De: Maritza Aguero Y. Minano <myaguero(a)msn.com> Enviado: Lunes, 26 de septiembre de 2016 08:55 Para: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: Apoyo Recordatorio- Suave declaración LACTLD FYI ... Saludos, De: Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)gmail.com<mailto:hcarrascob@gmail.com> > Fecha: 23 de setiembre de 2016, 08:10:56 pmGMT-5 Para: lista de discusión de LACRALO <lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Asunto: [lac-discuss-es] (no subject) Queridos todos, Teniendo en cuenta la moción presentada por Alejandro Pisanty en el LACRALO de septiembre de 19 Te llamamos mensual < https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/2016-09-19+LACRALO+Monthly+Tele…>, 1.- declaración LACTLD se han publicado en la página wiki de LACRALO: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=62392904 2.- A partir de hoy, se abrirá un plazo de 7 días naturales para comentarios. 3.- En caso de consenso, la moción será aprobada de conformidad con el artículo 12.8 del Reglamento de Procedimiento. Esta norma establece: "12.8 La Asamblea se esforzará, cuando se habla de cualquier cuestión no de procedimiento, para decidir cuestiones que tiene ante sí por acuerdo general. Las votaciones se basó únicamente en la medida en que es necesaria en los casos en que no se llega a un acuerdo general. En caso de una votación sobre una se requerirá pregunta no procedimental, la medida se lleva a si recibe el voto de dos tercios de esos ALS presentes y votantes ". 4.- Si no hay acuerdo, no debería haber una votación durante 1 semana. Saludos Humberto Carrasco (Presidente) Maritza Aguero (Secretario) _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/131497e236.html --]]

1 0

TERM EXTENSION - Gentle reminder- support LACTLD declaration
by Maritza Y. Aguero Minano Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

Dear all, Due to the comments made in the list and within the positions that have been talked yesterday in the LACRALO call, it was agreed to extend the term for 10 days in order to give the chance to the community members to be informed about the LACTLD Declaration and to receive more comments into this issue. Regards, Maritza ________________________________ De: Maritza Y. Aguero Minano <myaguero(a)msn.com> Enviado: lunes, 26 de septiembre de 2016 08:55 a. m. Para: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: Gentle reminder- support LACTLD declaration Fyi... Regards, De: Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)gmail.com<mailto:hcarrascob@gmail.com>> Fecha: 23 de setiembre de 2016, 8:10:56 p.m. GMT-5 Para: LACRALO discussion list <lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> Asunto: [lac-discuss-en] (no subject) Dear All, Taking into account the motion presented by Alejandro Pisanty at the LACRALO September 19 monthly call<https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/2016-09-19+LACRALO+Monthly+Tele…>, [ " I present the following formal motion : To support the LACTLD declaration "] the following procedure will be adopted: 1.- LACTLD declaration have been published in the LACRALO wiki page: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=62392904 2.- From today, a period of 7 calendar days will be opened for comments. 3.- In case of consensus, the motion will be approved in accordance with article 12.8 of the rules of Procedure. This rule states: "12.8 The Assembly shall endeavour, when discussing any non-procedural question, to decide issues before it by general agreement. Voting shall be relied upon only to the extent that is necessary in cases where general agreement cannot be reached. Where a vote on a non-procedural question shall be required, the measure shall be carried if it receives a two-thirds vote of those ALSes present and voting." 4.- If there is no agreement, there should be a vote for 1 week. Regards Humberto Carrasco (Chair) Maritza Aguero (Secretary) _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en

1 0

Recordatorio amistoso: Tomar la A-gran encuesta de la opini�n!
by myaguero＠msn.com Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Recordatorio amistoso: Tomar la A-gran encuesta de la opinión! De: myaguero(a)msn.com Queridos todos, Este es un nuevo recordatorio. Saludos, Maritza ________________________________ De: at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> En nombre de la ICANN At-Large Personal <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Enviado: Lunes, 17 de octubre de 2016 16:30 Para: at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: [At-Large] RECORDATORIO: Tomar la A-gran encuesta de la opinión! Queridos todos, Este es un recordatorio de la Encuesta de la opinión de alcance. Esta es tu oportunidad de ayudar a mejorar la eficacia de la organización de la comunidad de alcance. Por favor, tome la encuesta antes del 21 de octubre de 2016, hacen oír su voz! Encuesta está disponible en 3 idiomas: Inglés: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/ Los artículos internacionales, ciudades inteligentes, energía inteligentes, infraestructuras digitales, aplicaciones digitales, cultura digital, de datos grande <http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/> items.fr consultoría estratégica, la innovación digital, Marketing Consulting, ciudades inteligentes, la energía inteligente, infraestructuras digitales, aplicaciones digitales, cultura digital, grande Franais: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-fr/ Los artículos internacionales, ciudades inteligentes, energía inteligentes, infraestructuras digitales, aplicaciones digitales, cultura digital, de datos grande <http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-fr/> items.fr consultoría estratégica, la innovación digital, Marketing Consulting, ciudades inteligentes, la energía inteligente, infraestructuras digitales, aplicaciones digitales, cultura digital, grande Espaol: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-es/ Atentamente, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie peregrino, Terri Agnew y Yesim Nazlar El personal de políticas de ICANN en apoyo de la comunidad de alcance De: El personal de ICANN At-Large <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Fecha: Martes 13, de septiembre de, 2016 a 17:48 Para: "at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: Tome la Encuesta de Revisión de At-Large! Queridos todos, Ayudar a hacer At-Large en una parte más eficiente y eficaz de la comunidad de ICANN - Todos están invitados a participar en la encuesta de opinión de alcance: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/ La Revisión de At-Large se lleva a cabo por la consultora con sede en París, ARTÍCULOS <http://www.items.fr/> que actúa como el examinador independiente. Tomando (no más de) 30 minutos para participar en la revisión a través de la encuesta en línea <http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/> será una valiosa contribución para el éxito de este proceso de revisión importante. Si usted es el representante de una estructura At-Large (ALS), un participante regular en las reuniones de ICANN, una información privilegiada de ICANN o un recién llegado al mundo de la gobernanza de Internet, su opinión nos interesa! ARTÍCULOS compartirán la evaluación y los resultados de la encuesta preliminar durante la Reunión ICANN57 Hyderabad. Le instamos a que llene la encuesta <http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/> a la brevedad posible, haga escuchar su voz! Esta es tu oportunidad de compartir sus puntos de vista sobre lo que funciona, lo que no funciona tan bien, y las mejoras que se podrían hacer. IMPORTANTE: Si tiene una interrupción, no puede completar el formulario, asegúrese de ir a la última página y enviar el formulario por primera vez. Sus respuestas serán entonces guardan y se pueden volver en una etapa posterior, utilizando el mismo dispositivo y completar la encuesta, al hacer clic en "Enviar" una vez más. Le sondeo sueros available in franais en fin de semaine. Vous recevrez davantage información d'lorsque celui-ci sueros en ligne. La Encuesta se ENCONTRAR posteriormente disponible Esta Semana in English.Mayor informacin Ser notificada tan pronto mar posible. Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie peregrino, Terri Agnew y Yesim Nazlar El personal de políticas de ICANN en apoyo de la comunidad de alcance E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Página web: atlarge.icann.org < https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann < https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @ < https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/6945c9548e.html --]]

1 0

Friendly REMINDER: Take the At-Large Review Survey!
by Maritza Y. Aguero Minano Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

Dear all, This is a new friendly reminder. Regards, Maritza ________________________________ De: at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> en nombre de ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Enviado: lunes, 17 de octubre de 2016 04:30 p. m. Para: at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: [At-Large] REMINDER: Take the At-Large Review Survey! Dear All, This is a friendly reminder on the At-Large Review Survey. This is your opportunity to help improve the organization effectiveness of the At-Large Community. Please take the survey no later than 21 October 2016, make your voice heard! Survey is available in 3 languages: English: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/ ITEMS International, Smart Cities, Smart energy, digital infrastructures, digital applications, digital culture, big data<http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/> items.fr Strategic consulting, digital innovation, Marketing Consulting, Smart Cities, Smart energy, digital infrastructures, digital applications, digital culture, big Français: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-fr/ ITEMS International, Smart Cities, Smart energy, digital infrastructures, digital applications, digital culture, big data<http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-fr/> items.fr Strategic consulting, digital innovation, Marketing Consulting, Smart Cities, Smart energy, digital infrastructures, digital applications, digital culture, big Español: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey-es/ Best regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Terri Agnew and Yesim Nazlar ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 5:48 PM To: "at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Take the At-Large Review Survey! Dear All, Help make At-Large a more efficient and effective part of the ICANN community - all are invited to take part in the At-Large Review survey: http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/ The At-Large Review is conducted by the Paris-based consultancy firm, ITEMS<http://www.items.fr/> who acts as the independent examiner. Taking (no more than) 30min to participate in the review via the online survey<http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/> will be an invaluable contribution to the success of this important review process. Whether you are the representative of an At-Large structure (ALS), a regular participant in ICANN meetings, an ICANN insider or a newcomer to the world of Internet governance, your opinion interests us! ITEMS will share the preliminary evaluation and findings of the survey during the ICANN57 Hyderabad Meeting. We urge you to fill in the survey<http://items.fr/atlargesurvey/> at your earliest convenience, make your voice heard! This is your opportunity to share your views on what's working, what's not working so well, and improvements that could be made. IMPORTANT: If you have an interruption and cannot complete the form make sure you go to the last page and submit the form first. Your answers will then be saved and you can return at a later stage, using the same device, and complete the survey, clicking 'submit' once more. Le sondage sera disponible en français en fin de semaine. Vous recevrez davantage d'information lorsque celui-ci sera en ligne. La encuesta se encontrará posteriormente disponible esta semana en español. Mayor información será notificada tan pronto sea posible. Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Terri Agnew and Yesim Nazlar ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0

DNS Marketplace - LAC Study WG
by Maritza Y. Aguero Minano Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

Estimados todos, El presente correo es para enviarles la siguiente información: Enlace directo del grupo de trabajo: https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/Lacralo+WG+DNS+Marketplace+-+LA… Web de ICANN de anuncio para comentarios - vence martes 01 de noviembre: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/lac-dns-marketplace-2016-09-22-en Estudio DNS (el cual también lo podrán descargar de la web indicada en el párrafo anterior): https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/lac-dns-marketplace-study-22sep… Gracias por su atención. Saludos, Maritza ________________________________ De: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Enviado: viernes, 14 de octubre de 2016 09:26 p. m. Para: Aida Noblia; crg(a)isoc-cr.org; cveraq(a)gmail.com; sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org; Vanda Scartezini; Harold Arcos; apisan(a)unam.mx; Raitme Citterio; Maritza Y. Aguero Minano; Humberto Carrasco; carlos(a)ie9s.com Cc: ICANN At-Large Staff Asunto: Meeting Invite/ LACRALO Working Group DNS Marketplace - LAC Study Dear All, Further to the doodle poll, the LACRALO Working Group DNS Marketplace - LAC Study call is scheduled on Tuesday, 18 October 2016 at 23:00 UTC For other times: http://tinyurl.com/hr2hg84 The draft agenda (to be updated) and call details are available at: https://community.icann.org/x/-iC4Aw NEW Adobe Connect Link: https://participate.icann.org/lacralo/ Conference ID: EN 1638 ES 1738 Wiki workspace: https://community.icann.org/x/Fx64Aw Please confirm your dial-out and preferred number to: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Terri Agnew and Yesim Nazlar ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> [unknown.png] From: ICANN At-Large Staff Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 10:33 AM To: Aida Noblia <aidanoblia(a)gmail.com>; crg(a)isoc-cr.org; cveraq(a)gmail.com; sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org; Vanda Scartezini <vanda(a)scartezini.org>; Harold Arcos <harold.arcos(a)gmail.com>; apisan(a)unam.mx; Raitme Citterio <rcitterio(a)gmail.com>; Maritza Y. Aguero Minano <myaguero(a)msn.com>; Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)gmail.com>; carlos(a)ie9s.com Cc: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Subject: REMINDER: Doodle/ LACRALO Working Group DNS Marketplace - LAC Study Dear All, On behalf of LACRALO chair and Secretariat please complete this doodle to participate in the call - LACRALO Working Group DNS Marketplace - LAC Study http://doodle.com/poll/aw9bky2mtcgd3fsi I have enabled the time zone so that it can be changed to your zone. This doodle will close on Friday, 14 October 2016. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri

3 5

Re: orden del d�a de hoy
by myaguero＠msn.com Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: orden del día de hoy De: myaguero(a)msn.com De Acuerdo! Saludos Enviado desde mi iPhone > El 18 oct. 2016, a las 08:39, Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)gmail.com> escribió: > > Muchas gracias Carlos!! > > Maritza por favor agrégalos a la wiki. > > > Abrazos > > Enviado desde mi iPhone > >> El 18-10-2016, a las 10:37, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. <crg(a)isoc-cr.org> escribió: >> >> Estimados, >> >> les adjunto dos links mas que no pude encontrar ayer sobre el proceso del GAC y la delegación de los códigos de país de 2 letras al segundo nivel. Estos links me los pasó el secretariado del GAC. >> >> Saludos >> >> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez >> +506 8837 7176 >> Skype: carlos.raulg >> Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) >> Forwarded message: >> >>> From: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org> >>> To: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. <carlosraulg(a)gmail.com> >>> Subject: RE: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda >>> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:07:46 +0000 >>> >>> Dear Carlos, >>> The GDD webpage for this matter is at https://www.icann.org/resources/two-character-labels/ but it doesn't take the form of any table. You can also get an overview of the steps foreseen regarding release of 2-char labels at a web page on the GAC website, notably at https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Two-Letter+Second-Level+Domains . >>> Hope this is somewhat helpful. >>> All the best >>> Olof >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. [mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 7:54 PM >>> To: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org> >>> Subject: Fwd: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda >>> >>> Dear Olof, >>> >>> hope all is well on your side. As the discussion on the use of 2 -letter codes as Country and Territory names as a TLD warms up for the next ICANN meeting. I have a quick question for you: Where can I find a summary or table of what Governments answered about the delegation of the country 2 -letter codes as a Second Level Domain to the new gTLDs? >>> >>> Thank you very much for your help. >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez >>> +506 8837 7176 >>> Skype: carlos.raulg >>> Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) >>> Forwarded message: >>> >>>> From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> >>>> To: ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org <ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org> >>>> Subject: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda >>>> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:32:03 +0000 >>>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> Please find included latest version of the Progress report and Interim >>>> paper. >>>> >>>> Proposed agenda: >>>> >>>> - Welcome and Roll call >>>> >>>> - Progress report. Discussion recommendation 2 ( Alternative A >>>> or B, other) >>>> >>>> - Presentation Progress report to community >>>> >>>> - Hyderabad meeting: >>>> >>>> o F-2-f session WG >>>> >>>> o Other session (ccNSO- GNSO Council meeting, ccNSO GAC- meeting, >>>> ccNSO-Board meeting) >>>> >>>> - Draft Interim paper staff update >>>> >>>> - AOB & Closure >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Bart >>>> >>>> Changes Progres report >>>> The recommendations have been updated follwing the discussions of two >>>> weeks ago. Although a long discussion was held on the impact of >>>> closure of this WG , to date no alternatives were suggested. Please >>>> note that recommendation 1 and 3 were adopted 4 weeks ago. Two weeks >>>> ago the discussion focused on the alternatives and no conclusion was >>>> reached. If the progress report needs to be out in time for the >>>> Hyderabad meeting, this is a matter of urgency. >>>> >>>> Recommendations Progress Report >>>> In light of the need for further work, the complexity of the issue at >>>> hand, the aforementioned inconsistencies between various ICANN >>>> policies, and the limited mandate of the CWG on the use of Country and >>>> Territory Names as TLDs, the CWG makes the following recommendations: >>>> >>>> Recommendation 1 >>>> The CWG unanimously recommends that the ICANN community consolidate >>>> all policy efforts relating to geographic names (as that term has >>>> traditionally very broadly been defined in the ICANN environment to >>>> this point) to enable in-depth analyses and discussions on all aspects >>>> related to all geographic-related names at all levels of the DNS. This >>>> is the only way, in our view, to determine whether a harmonized >>>> framework is truly achievable. >>>> >>>> Recommendation 2 Alternative A >>>> The CWG could not agree unanimously on the following: >>>> Future work should take place with the authority of a policy >>>> development process under ICANNs Bylaws, with a clearly drafted >>>> Charter or scope of works that sets out how conclusions and >>>> recommendations will inform that policy development process. This >>>> addresses a key deficiency of this CWG, as it has not been made clear >>>> how the groups work can or will be incorporated in policy-making >>>> pursuant to ICANNs Bylaws. >>>> >>>> Some members of the WG raised the concern that issues that are in >>>> scope of both the ccNSO and GNSO policy development processes, for >>>> example how full names of countries and territories other than Latin >>>> scripts are dealt with, should be addressed through a coordinated >>>> effort under both processes. >>>> >>>> Recommendation 2 Alternative B >>>> To ensure that the conclusions and recommendations of a CWG will at >>>> one point have the authority of a policy developed through the >>>> relevant processes under ICANNs Bylaws, future work should take place >>>> with a clear view on how this work at some point will reach the >>>> authority of a policy developed as or relates to and provides input to >>>> formal policy development processes. With regard to the subject >>>> matter, the use of country and territory names as TLDs the CWG notes >>>> that this should be defined with respect to both the ccNSO and GNSO >>>> Policy development processes. Due to the overlapping definitions used >>>> under existing policies, additional policy developed by one group, >>>> impact and has an effect upon the policy developed for another group. >>>> This may be achieved through a clearly drafted Charter or scope of >>>> works that sets out how these policy development processes will be >>>> informed. This addresses a key deficiency this CWG has encountered, as >>>> it has not been made clear how the groups work can or will be >>>> incorporated in policy-making pursuant to ICANNs Bylaws. >>>> >>>> Recommendation 3 >>>> Future policy development work must facilitate an all-inclusive >>>> dialogue to ensure that all members of the community have the >>>> opportunity to participate. Again, we believe that this is the only >>>> way to determine whether a harmonized framework is truly achievable. >>>> >>>> Draft Interim Paper >>>> Staff has also been working on the interim paper. We have cleaned it >>>> up on the basis of the feed-back received to date, updating some of >>>> the sections and checking whether the research questions in section >>>> 4 of the paper (Methodology) are addressed in section 5. 1 on >>>> two-letter codes. If so that provides a starting point for the >>>> conclusion of no conclusion on 3-letter codes. >>>> As to section 4 methodology, it now includes a reference to the >>>> surveys/ questionnaires on two-and three letter codes. The results are >>>> included in Annex D. >>>> >>>> In addition, Annex C has been added: listing of the members, >>>> participants and observers of the WG >>>> >>>> We have also included the final section (6) the observations, >>>> conclusions and recommendations of the progress report. >>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ctn-crosscom mailing list >>>> Ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org >>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ctn-crosscom [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/b68f2cd127.html --]]

1 0

Re: orden del d�a de hoy
by hcarrascob＠gmail.com Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: orden del día de hoy De: hcarrascob(a)gmail.com Muchas gracias Carlos !! Maritza por favor agrégalos a la wiki. Abrazos Enviado desde mi iPhone > El 18-10-2016, a las 10:37, Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez G. <crg(a)isoc-cr.org> escribiÃ³: > > Estimados, > > les adjunto dos links mas que no pude encontrar ayer sobre el proceso del GAC y la delegaciÃ³n de los cÃ³digos de paÃs de 2 letras al segundo nivel. Estos links me los pasÃ³ el secretariado del GAC. > > Saludos > > Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez > +506 8837 7176 > Skype: carlos.raulg > Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) > Forwarded message: > >> From: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org> >> To: Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez G. <carlosraulg(a)gmail.com> >> Subject: RE: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda >> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:07:46 +0000 >> >> Dear Carlos, >> The GDD webpage for this matter is at https://www.icann.org/resources/two-character-labels/ but it doesn't take the form of any table. You can also get an overview of the steps foreseen regarding release of 2-char labels at a web page on the GAC website, notably at https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Two-Letter+Second-Level+Domains . >> Hope this is somewhat helpful. >> All the best >> Olof >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez G. [mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 7:54 PM >> To: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org> >> Subject: Fwd: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda >> >> Dear Olof, >> >> hope all is well on your side. As the discussion on the use of 2 -letter codes as Country and Territory names as a TLD warms up for the next ICANN meeting. I have a quick question for you: Where can I find a summary or table of what Governments answered about the delegation of the country 2 -letter codes as a Second Level Domain to the new gTLDs? >> >> Thank you very much for your help. >> >> Best regards >> >> Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez >> +506 8837 7176 >> Skype: carlos.raulg >> Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) >> Forwarded message: >> >>> From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> >>> To: ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org <ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org> >>> Subject: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda >>> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:32:03 +0000 >>> >>> Dear all, >>> Please find included latest version of the Progress report and Interim >>> paper. >>> >>> Proposed agenda: >>> >>> - Welcome and Roll call >>> >>> - Progress report. Discussion recommendation 2 ( Alternative A >>> or B, other) >>> >>> - Presentation Progress report to community >>> >>> - Hyderabad meeting: >>> >>> o F-2-f session WG >>> >>> o Other session (ccNSO- GNSO Council meeting, ccNSO GAC- meeting, >>> ccNSO-Board meeting) >>> >>> - Draft Interim paper staff update >>> >>> - AOB & Closure >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Bart >>> >>> Changes Progres report >>> The recommendations have been updated follwing the discussions of two >>> weeks ago. Although a long discussion was held on the impact of >>> closure of this WG , to date no alternatives were suggested. Please >>> note that recommendation 1 and 3 were adopted 4 weeks ago. Two weeks >>> ago the discussion focused on the alternatives and no conclusion was >>> reached. If the progress report needs to be out in time for the >>> Hyderabad meeting, this is a matter of urgency. >>> >>> Recommendations Progress Report >>> In light of the need for further work, the complexity of the issue at >>> hand, the aforementioned inconsistencies between various ICANN >>> policies, and the limited mandate of the CWG on the use of Country and >>> Territory Names as TLDs, the CWG makes the following recommendations: >>> >>> Recommendation 1 >>> The CWG unanimously recommends that the ICANN community consolidate >>> all policy efforts relating to geographic names (as that term has >>> traditionally very broadly been defined in the ICANN environment to >>> this point) to enable in-depth analyses and discussions on all aspects >>> related to all geographic-related names at all levels of the DNS. This >>> is the only way, in our view, to determine whether a harmonized >>> framework is truly achievable. >>> >>> Recommendation 2 Alternative A >>> The CWG could not agree unanimously on the following: >>> Future work should take place with the authority of a policy >>> development process under ICANNâs Bylaws, with a clearly drafted >>> Charter or scope of works that sets out how conclusions and >>> recommendations will inform that policy development process. This >>> addresses a key deficiency of this CWG, as it has not been made clear >>> how the groupâs work can or will be incorporated in policy-making >>> pursuant to ICANNâs Bylaws. >>> >>> Some members of the WG raised the concern that issues that are in >>> scope of both the ccNSO and GNSO policy development processes, for >>> example how full names of countries and territories other than Latin >>> scripts are dealt with, should be addressed through a coordinated >>> effort under both processes. >>> >>> Recommendation 2 Alternative B >>> To ensure that the conclusions and recommendations of a CWG will at >>> one point have the authority of a policy developed through the >>> relevant processes under ICANNâs Bylaws, future work should take place >>> with a clear view on how this work at some point will reach the >>> authority of a policy developed as or relates to and provides input to >>> formal policy development processes. With regard to the subject >>> matter, the use of country and territory names as TLDs the CWG notes >>> that this should be defined with respect to both the ccNSO and GNSO >>> Policy development processes. Due to the overlapping definitions used >>> under existing policies, additional policy developed by one group, >>> impact and has an effect upon the policy developed for another group. >>> This may be achieved through a clearly drafted Charter or scope of >>> works that sets out how these policy development processes will be >>> informed. This addresses a key deficiency this CWG has encountered, as >>> it has not been made clear how the groupâs work can or will be >>> incorporated in policy-making pursuant to ICANNâs Bylaws. >>> >>> Recommendation 3 >>> Future policy development work must facilitate an all-inclusive >>> dialogue to ensure that all members of the community have the >>> opportunity to participate. Again, we believe that this is the only >>> way to determine whether a harmonized framework is truly achievable. >>> >>> Draft Interim Paper >>> Staff has also been working on the interim paper. We have cleaned it >>> up on the basis of the feed-back received to date, updating some of >>> the sections and checking whether the âresearch questionsâ in section >>> 4 of the paper (Methodology) are addressed in section 5. 1 on >>> two-letter codes. If so that provides a starting point for the >>> conclusion of no conclusion on 3-letter codes. >>> As to section 4 methodology, it now includes a reference to the >>> surveys/ questionnaires on two-and three letter codes. The results are >>> included in Annex D. >>> >>> In addition, Annex C has been added: listing of the members, >>> participants and observers of the WG >>> >>> We have also included the final section (6) the observations, >>> conclusions and recommendations of the progress report. >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ctn-crosscom mailing list >>> Ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ctn-crosscom lac-discuss-en la lista de correo lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/10538e3337.html --]]

1 0

Fwd: agenda de hoy
by crg＠isoc-cr.org Oct. 18, 2016

Oct. 18, 2016

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Fwd: agenda de hoy De: crg(a)isoc-cr.org Estimados, Les adjunto DOS enlaces Mas Que No Pude ENCONTRAR ayer Sobre el Proceso del GAC y La Delegación de los Códigos de país de 2 letras al Segundo Nivel. Estós me une los Paso El secretariado del GAC. Saludos Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez +506 8837 7176 Skype: carlos.raulg desplazamiento UTC actual: -6.00 (Costa Rica) Mensaje reenviado: > From: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org> > To: Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez G. <carlosraulg(a)gmail.com> > Subject: RE: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda > Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:07:46 +0000 > > Dear Carlos, > The GDD webpage for this matter is at > https://www.icann.org/resources/two-character-labels/ but it doesn't > take the form of any table. You can also get an overview of the steps > foreseen regarding release of 2-char labels at a web page on the GAC > website, notably at > https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Two-Letter+Second-Level+Domains > . > Hope this is somewhat helpful. > All the best > Olof > > -----Original Message----- > From: Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez G. [mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 7:54 PM > To: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org> > Subject: Fwd: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda > > Dear Olof, > > hope all is well on your side. As the discussion on the use of 2 > -letter codes as Country and Territory names as a TLD warms up for the > next ICANN meeting. I have a quick question for you: Where can I find > a summary or table of what Governments answered about the delegation > of the country 2 -letter codes as a Second Level Domain to the new > gTLDs? > > Thank you very much for your help. > > Best regards > > Carlos RaÃºl GutiÃ©rrez > +506 8837 7176 > Skype: carlos.raulg > Current UTC offset: -6.00 (Costa Rica) > Forwarded message: > >> From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> >> To: ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org <ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org> >> Subject: [Ctn-crosscom] Todays agenda >> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:32:03 +0000 >> >> Dear all, >> Please find included latest version of the Progress report and >> Interim >> paper. >> >> Proposed agenda: >> >> - Welcome and Roll call >> >> - Progress report. Discussion recommendation 2 ( Alternative >> A >> or B, other) >> >> - Presentation Progress report to community >> >> - Hyderabad meeting: >> >> o F-2-f session WG >> >> o Other session (ccNSO- GNSO Council meeting, ccNSO GAC- meeting, >> ccNSO-Board meeting) >> >> - Draft Interim paper staff update >> >> - AOB & Closure >> >> Kind regards, >> Bart >> >> Changes Progres report >> The recommendations have been updated follwing the discussions of two >> weeks ago. Although a long discussion was held on the impact of >> closure of this WG , to date no alternatives were suggested. Please >> note that recommendation 1 and 3 were adopted 4 weeks ago. Two weeks >> ago the discussion focused on the alternatives and no conclusion was >> reached. If the progress report needs to be out in time for the >> Hyderabad meeting, this is a matter of urgency. >> >> Recommendations Progress Report >> In light of the need for further work, the complexity of the issue at >> hand, the aforementioned inconsistencies between various ICANN >> policies, and the limited mandate of the CWG on the use of Country >> and >> Territory Names as TLDs, the CWG makes the following recommendations: >> >> Recommendation 1 >> The CWG unanimously recommends that the ICANN community consolidate >> all policy efforts relating to geographic names (as that term has >> traditionally very broadly been defined in the ICANN environment to >> this point) to enable in-depth analyses and discussions on all >> aspects >> related to all geographic-related names at all levels of the DNS. >> This >> is the only way, in our view, to determine whether a harmonized >> framework is truly achievable. >> >> Recommendation 2 Alternative A >> The CWG could not agree unanimously on the following: >> Future work should take place with the authority of a policy >> development process under ICANNâs Bylaws, with a clearly drafted >> Charter or scope of works that sets out how conclusions and >> recommendations will inform that policy development process. This >> addresses a key deficiency of this CWG, as it has not been made clear >> how the groupâs work can or will be incorporated in policy-making >> pursuant to ICANNâs Bylaws. >> >> Some members of the WG raised the concern that issues that are in >> scope of both the ccNSO and GNSO policy development processes, for >> example how full names of countries and territories other than Latin >> scripts are dealt with, should be addressed through a coordinated >> effort under both processes. >> >> Recommendation 2 Alternative B >> To ensure that the conclusions and recommendations of a CWG will at >> one point have the authority of a policy developed through the >> relevant processes under ICANNâs Bylaws, future work should take >> place >> with a clear view on how this work at some point will reach the >> authority of a policy developed as or relates to and provides input >> to >> formal policy development processes. With regard to the subject >> matter, the use of country and territory names as TLDs the CWG notes >> that this should be defined with respect to both the ccNSO and GNSO >> Policy development processes. Due to the overlapping definitions used >> under existing policies, additional policy developed by one group, >> impact and has an effect upon the policy developed for another group. >> This may be achieved through a clearly drafted Charter or scope of >> works that sets out how these policy development processes will be >> informed. This addresses a key deficiency this CWG has encountered, >> as >> it has not been made clear how the groupâs work can or will be >> incorporated in policy-making pursuant to ICANNâs Bylaws. >> >> Recommendation 3 >> Future policy development work must facilitate an all-inclusive >> dialogue to ensure that all members of the community have the >> opportunity to participate. Again, we believe that this is the only >> way to determine whether a harmonized framework is truly achievable. >> >> Draft Interim Paper >> Staff has also been working on the interim paper. We have cleaned it >> up on the basis of the feed-back received to date, updating some of >> the sections and checking whether the âresearch questionsâ in >> section >> 4 of the paper (Methodology) are addressed in section 5. 1 on >> two-letter codes. If so that provides a starting point for the >> conclusion of no conclusion on 3-letter codes. >> As to section 4 methodology, it now includes a reference to the >> surveys/ questionnaires on two-and three letter codes. The results >> are >> included in Annex D. >> >> In addition, Annex C has been added: listing of the members, >> participants and observers of the WG >> >> We have also included the final section (6) the observations, >> conclusions and recommendations of the progress report. > >> _______________________________________________ >> Ctn-crosscom mailing list >> Ctn-crosscom(a)icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ctn-crosscom lac-discuss-en la lista de correo lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/9c4da0360d.html --]]

1 0