[Igf-team] Global IGF 2017 - NCSG

Sat Apr 29 19:27:48 EEST 2017

Agree 100% on with Bill, unless someone has something already cooked that
we can go behind, let's reach out to those experts, and hope some others
ncsg experts follow, thanks James !!! I am not an expert but I think the
topic is something different, new and concrete compared to other panels and
our usual work, worth for a try. So even if it is not my field I am more
than willing to fully support and engage.

If by the end of today we don't have any new opinions I say let's bring the
experts we have in our contacts. I know there is a civil society
cibersecurity approach to DNS!

Cheers,
Martin

On 29 Apr 2017 8:37 a.m., "Farell Folly" <farellfolly at gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 Martin and William.
>
> Best Regards
> @__f_f__
> about.me/farell
> ________________________________.
> Mail sent from my mobile phone. Excuse for brievety.
> Le 29 avr. 2017 07:45, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> Hi
>>
>> So if time pressures and switching costs mean that NCSG wants to to stick
>> with the blue skies idea of DNS security issues for its IGF proposal this
>> year, we’re going to need some engagement from people who know these issues
>> well.  James Gannon is here in the group and can certainly help a lot if he
>> has the bandwidth, not sure who else feels close enough to the topic.
>> Folks please speak up if you’re feel you’re in a position to help lead.
>>
>> I would also suggest we try to get some guidance from friendly folks we
>> know who are subject experts on the issues.  Here’s some suggestions of
>> people who could a) be speakers if they’re coming to Geneva and willing and
>> b) either way could help craft a session description and agenda if they’re
>> inclined:
>>
>> 1. Brenden Kuerbis from NCUC/SG (who I’m taking the liberty of Ccing
>> without asking him first, sorry)
>>
>> From the SSAC https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ssac-biographies-
>> 2017-02-16-en
>>
>> 2. Robert Guerra (also on the Cc as he expressed interest in talking
>> about security @ IGF in another convo)
>> 3. Patrik Fältström (SSAC Chair)
>> 4. Mark Seiden
>> 5. Suzanne Woolf
>> 6. Ram Mohan
>> 7. Don Blumenthal
>>
>> If we could get these folks engaged we’d have good guidance and (if
>> they’re coming and willing) the start of a good panel, with private
>> sector/technical community/civil society.  It would need geo/gender balance
>> as well.
>>
>> If people agree with this approach we could write to them and try to get
>> something going.  Choice of format would depend how many bodies we have etc.
>>
>> In the meanwhile, Brenden and Robert, your thoughts please.  Martin’s
>> place holder description would obviously need to be built out and specified
>> in keeping with the IGF proposal form which asks for agenda and description
>> of the convo flow etc:
>>
>> *The workshop will look at cybersecurity specifically in relation to DNS,
>> including management interfaces, owner authentication processes, RDS/whois
>> and related problems like domain hijacking, privacy endangerment, spam etc,
>> not from purely technical perspective but also in how they should affect
>> ICANN policy. The idea is that even non-technical people developing policy
>> should acquire an understanding on how and what kind of security issues
>> they should consider when making policy decisions.*
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2017, at 19:27, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
>> mpsilvavalent at GMAIL.COM <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>> Because of time we cannot go into detail on each subject, I would suggest
>> to choose one and just work with it. We may not all be experts but we
>> should be able to bring them. We can change it to other besides Security as
>> long as you have already something sort out.  To save time I suggest we use
>> all the same setting we used last year that was successful. If we can agree
>> on the subject, the more time consuming and difficult will be to get the
>> speakers, although her ewe might need Bill guidance, I think we can change
>> this a little bit later in order to submit it on time. If you already have
>> a subject to do that we can write down and work around this is your time to
>> talk. All ideas are welcomed, have always been.
>>
>> Here I summarize the question we need to answer so you can just answer
>> this email instead of going to the doc, I will then consolidate things on
>> the doc.
>>
>> *1) ¿Session Format?**
>> We can go for the 60 Min Break-out Group Discussions, we can also go for
>> the 90 minutes it really depends on what we have to do. We could use the
>> same format that we used last year here.
>>
>> *2) Session Format Description: *
>> The easiest way it to have multi-stakeholder balanced roundtable with the
>> basic subjects of the agenda and open the floor for in-site/remote
>> participation. Again, if anyone have in mind an already thought idea for
>> this just bring it in.
>>
>> *3) Proposer and co-proposer: *
>> NCSG chair, Tapani and who ever is co-hosting the workshop, if we are
>> going for cybersecurity then it should be someone with an organization
>> regarding that.
>>
>> *4) Speakers*
>> *Depending on the subject. If you have names for the cybersecurity let’s
>> start listing that, we can maybe find that co-host there if it is not
>> already in this list.*
>>
>>
>> *5) Content of the Session * (we outlined ciber security, but you can use
>> this space if you have an alternative)5.1) outline for the session*
>> A workshop in Internet Governance Forum on cybersecurity and DNS.
>> *5.2) description of the intended agenda for the session and the issues
>> that will be discussed.*
>> The workshop will look at cybersecurity specifically in relation to DNS,
>> including management interfaces, owner authentication processes, RDS/whois
>> and related problems like domain hijacking, privacy endangerment, spam etc,
>> not from purely technical perspective but also in how they should affect
>> ICANN policy. The idea is that even non-technical people developing policy
>> should acquire an understanding on how and what kind of security issues
>> they should consider when making policy decisions.
>>
>> *6) Relevance of the Issue **
>> Please provide a concise description of the Internet Governance issue
>> that your session will explore, including how this issue relates to
>> Internet governance broadly, as well as to the main theme of IGF 2017:
>> “Shape Your Digital Future!” In other words, please tell us why this
>> workshop is important to include in the IGF programme.
>>
>>
>> *7) Interventions *Same model as last year
>>
>> *8) Diversity*
>>
>> *9) Here we need people that are going to be in the IGF already:*
>>
>>
>> *9.1) Onsite Moderator 9.2) Online Moderator 9.3) Rapporteur*
>>
>>
>> *10) Online Participation * Yes, we will have remote acces and moderators
>> to que any on-line participation into the room.*
>>
>> *11) Discussion facilitation *We can use the same model as last year
>>
>>
>> *Past IGF Participation*
>> *History in IGF : *How many other workshop has the NCSG and
>> Co-organziers have? Report Links
>>
>>
>>
>> *VOLUNTARY INFORMATION / RESOURCES FOR PROPOSERS*
>> XVIII. Sustainable Development Goals
>>
>> If your workshop proposal is based upon one or more of the UN Sustainable
>> Development Goals, please indicate which numbers here. Note that this
>> information is voluntary and collected for programming purposes only; this
>> item has no bearing on the MAG’s evaluation of your workshop proposal.
>>
>> XIX. Connecting with IGF Intersessional Groups & NRIs
>>
>> If you would like to incorporate content/speakers related to the IGF’s
>> intersessional work or the National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs) into
>> your workshop, please indicate which of the following would be of interest.
>> To the extent possible, the MAG/IGF Secretariat will provide contacts for
>> your outreach to pertinent points of contact.
>>
>> Best Practice Forums
>>
>> Information
>>
>> Dynamic Coalitions
>>
>> Information
>>
>> National and Regional Initiatives
>>
>> Information
>>
>> XX. Connecting with International or Other Relevant Organizations
>>
>> If you are interested in involving in your workshop any of the numerous
>> organizations or subject matter experts based in Geneva (UN Agencies, NGOs,
>> academia, think tanks, etc.), please indicate your interest above. Please
>> find a selection of such organizations at: http://dig.watch/igf2017 For
>> comprehensive information on “International Geneva” please consult:
>> http://www.genIGF <http://www.genigf/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2017, at 4:42 AM, Farell Folly <farellfolly at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> So what do we decide? Regarding the short deadline, we should take a
>> decision  today  whether we do the initial proposal or not (and quickly
>> vote for another, if not).
>>
>> Best Regards
>> @__f_f__
>> about.me/farell
>> ________________________________.
>> Mail sent from my mobile phone. Excuse for brievety.
>> Le 26 avr. 2017 2:43 PM, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Well, I didn't mean to upset the apple cart here, especially since at
>>> the outset I’d suggested we might consider security.  But I’m looking now
>>> at a multi-person consensus process that has to finish a week from today,
>>> coupled with a topic on which many of us may not be subject matter experts,
>>> and I’m just wondering if this is sensible or we should try something that
>>> would come a lot easier to us?  I organized I think seven approved workshop
>>> proposals for NCUC and NCSG between 2013-2015 and they were each time
>>> consuming. So I’m inclined to say that if NCSG is going to get something
>>> out quickly that meets the MAG’s criteria there’s no time for navel
>>> gazing.  Take a topic we know well and can populate easily and start doing
>>> it.
>>>
>>> We’ve done a number of these on civil society experiences in ICANN and
>>> their wider implications so that might be a bit tired by now.  But maybe a
>>> hot substantive issue, like ICANN jurisdiction, or CS @ ICANN as a model
>>> for other IG, or development aspects of ICANN, etc…?
>>>
>>> BD
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 26, 2017, at 15:22, Louise Marie Hurel <
>>> louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Agree with Bill when he says that it is challenging to pin down security
>>> @ ICANN. We should keep in mind that not all people who attend the IGF are
>>> familiar with discussions at ICANN -- and if it is challenging for us (at
>>> least for me) to understand what are the borderlines of cybersecurity
>>> within ICANN, imagine for people outside it. However, I do believe that
>>> this session could contribute to a broader discussion about cybersecurity
>>> governance (and thus the identification of overlapping spaces for
>>> collaboration and interaction with other actors/institutions within this
>>> field).
>>> If the breakout session is the desired format, I'd suggest that we need
>>> to think about how we are going to make it more inclusive in the sense of
>>> leveraging between "going deeper into DNS security" (for example) and
>>> "interacting with a wider public" -- as Martin suggested: "The idea is
>>> that even non-technical people developing policy should acquire an
>>> understanding of how and what kind of security issues they should consider
>>> when making policy decisions."
>>>
>>> I know most of our agendas are loaded with calls, but perhaps scheduling
>>> a one might help us in tackling some of these points more rapidly.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Louise
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-26 5:23 GMT-03:00 AbdulRasheed Tamton <rasheedt.c at stc.com.sa>:
>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Happy to be part of the list.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone put some pointers for the subject so that it would be more
>>>> easier for us to start with. I have already read mail from Martin and
>>>> others but still would like to get the above, if anyone can really do it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>>
>>>> Rasheed Tamton.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Igf-team [mailto:igf-team-bounces at lists.ncsg.is] *On Behalf Of
>>>> *Farell Folly
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 26, 2017 10:56 AM
>>>> *To:* William Drake
>>>> *Cc:* igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Igf-team] Global IGF 2017 - NCSG
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks  Martins for reaching. @William is right about how to choose the
>>>> topic and what are the reasons behind the choice of Security and DNS.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest we give today (NLT tomorrow) as deadline for anyone who would
>>>> like to make any other suggestion. Otherwise, me must try and increase our
>>>> chance to  win application  for this one.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards
>>>> @__f_f__
>>>> about.me/farell
>>>> ________________________________.
>>>> Mail sent from my mobile phone. Excuse for brievety.
>>>>
>>>> Le 25 avr. 2017 15:53, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the boot-up Martin.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I’m in the middle of organizing another IGF workshop proposal at the
>>>> moment so I thought I’d flag a couple things. It looks like we have over 30
>>>> people in this group, which is great. I don’t know if everyone is equally
>>>> familiar with how the IGF workshop proposal process works, or how the
>>>> Multistakeholder Advisory Committee (MAG) evaluates proposals.  But it is
>>>> an increasingly competitive and difficult business, they usually get well
>>>> over 200 proposals for under 100 workshop slots, so it’s important to
>>>> maximize the fit with their multiple and increasingly time-consuming
>>>> guidelines.  There are about five documents at the URL Martin shared one
>>>> could look at in this regard.  Bottom line, the proposal needs to be crisp
>>>> and provocative in content; it needs co-sponsors from other organizations
>>>> (preferably not civil society); the speakers need to be very
>>>> multistakeholder and diverse (geo/gender/perspective/etc), and we have to
>>>> have full contact and other details on them; there needs to be a plan for
>>>> remote participation; all the roles must be filled, so we need names of
>>>> people we know will come to Geneva in December; and so on.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  All a reasonably tall order given that the deadline for submission is
>>>> a week from tomorrow.  This being the case, it will be important to reach
>>>> agreement quickly on things like text so that outreach to potential
>>>> speakers, co-sponsors etc. can begin in earnest.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I see Martin has indicated on the Google doc the choice of format as 60
>>>> minute break out session.  I’ve organized workshops at every IGF except
>>>> last year (including a number of them for NCUC and NCSG) and have never
>>>> done one of these, I’ve always done 90 minute panels or large roundtables.
>>>> Maybe first we should talk about the format we want?  Also, are we set on
>>>> security? I suggested it on the list when we were chatting about
>>>> possibilities, but I’m not sure how easy it will be for us to organize
>>>> something on security @ ICANN in the time available, what are the
>>>> overarching questions we want to explore, what kinds of people could we
>>>> get, etc.  So maybe it’d make sense to sort such threshold issues up front?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 16:28, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
>>>> mpsilvavalent at GMAIL.COM <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I sent this email wrong on sunday to the igf-team-request@ email. Here
>>>> goes right, sorry for that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> Welcome to the email-list that Tapani so thoughtfully created for us to
>>>> work on the NCSG Global IGF 2017 Workshop Proposal. A few month ago, after
>>>> a very successful workshop in the Global IGF 2016, we lunched once again
>>>> the idea to do a workshop for the 2017 IGF, after a few rounds of ideas in
>>>> discussions we submitted the request to ICANN and they approved our
>>>> project.At the end of this email I copy the details that outline the idea
>>>> that we shared with ICANN, originally given by William Drake (a.k.a Bill)
>>>> in the NCSG list among other good ones.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For those who might be new to the process, we now have to draft and
>>>> present a Workshop proposal to the MAG in order to get approved and be able
>>>> to do it in the IGF meeting. Since the deadline to submit is May 3, we
>>>> thought it would be wise to have our final draft for April 30 (which is end
>>>> of next week). The time is very tight, but it is what it is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here you can visit the terms and basic information for the proposal:
>>>> https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/i
>>>> gf-2017-call-for-workshop-proposals
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I created a googledoc with the official template of the proposal we
>>>> have to submit, I propose we work on it as we move forward:
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/10YJE8rT_yXNgtMD
>>>> ONb8tf4GMYMdmCIdcBIN6XOQSwo0/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I propose that the we try to channel the edits trough me on this list
>>>> and just do comments on the google doc to not overwrite things.
>>>>
>>>> What we need to do now:
>>>>
>>>> *First: *Defining the substantive focus more precisely and linking it
>>>> clearly to ICANN stuff so it’s not redundant with all the other
>>>> cybersecurity proposals the MAG will be reviewing.
>>>>
>>>> *Second*: Identifying speakers;
>>>>
>>>> So, based on what we already outlined, we need to tackle that *First* task.
>>>> I encourage you to read the outline below, the form in the google doc and
>>>> the resources in the IGF web I link above. Once we finish that we can start
>>>> making a pool of speakers to contact. I will be filling the draft as we
>>>> move forward and you can comment the doc if you see something wrong or want
>>>> to propose an answer or writing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Each day I will try push the work so sorry in advanced if I spam a
>>>> little this email list, but we only have a few days to draft this out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards to all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Martín Silva
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Outline of the Workshop Idea:*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *1)Activity: Please describe your proposed activity in detail *
>>>> A workshop in Internet Governance Forum on cybersecurity and DNS.
>>>>
>>>> The workshop will look at cybersecurity specifically in relation to
>>>> DNS, including management interfaces, owner authentication
>>>> processes, RDS/whois and related problems like domain hijacking, privacy
>>>> endangerment, spam etc, not from purely technical perspective but also
>>>> in how they should affect ICANN policy. The idea is that even non-technical
>>>> people developing policy should acquire an understanding on how and what
>>>> kind of security issues they should consider when making policy decisions.
>>>>
>>>> *2) Strategic Alignment. Which area of ICANN’s Strategic Plan does this
>>>> request support?*
>>>>
>>>> Support a healthy, stable and resilient unique identifier ecosystem.
>>>>
>>>> *3) Demographics. What audience(s), in which geographies, does your
>>>> request target?*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All ICANN regional groups (NCSG has members in more than 100 countries).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *4) Deliverables. What arethe desired outcomes of your proposed
>>>> activity? *
>>>> Raised awareness about cybersecurity issues related to DNS and their
>>>> policy implications; increased engagement in security work; report feeding
>>>> into ICANN processes as well as other cybersecurity discussions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *5) Metrics. What measurements will you use to determine whether your
>>>> activity achieves its desired outcomes? *
>>>> Attendance, both onsite and online; increased participation on related
>>>> working groups in ICANN and elsewhere; outcome document (report) that's
>>>> useful as input to other fora like IGF Cybersecurity Best Practices forum.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Igf-team mailing list
>>>> Igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/igf-team
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Igf-team mailing list
>> Igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/igf-team
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ***********************************************
>> William J. Drake
>> International Fellow & Lecturer
>>   Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>>   University of Zurich, Switzerland
>> william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
>>   www.williamdrake.org
>> ************************************************
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igf-team mailing list
>> Igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/igf-team
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/igf-team/attachments/20170429/c54665a5/attachment-0001.html>