[NCSG-EC] [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas

Fri Feb 21 15:57:28 EET 2025

Thanks Rafik.

I am referring to muscat meeting ++

Agreed that people need to proposed something that would lead to concrete
outcome. And I appreciate clarifying the essence of the meeting or
engagement to build stronger ties which is not only limited to board seat
14.

I believe your chairing with csg can drive expected outcomes.

Best regards

*Taiwo Peter Akinremi*
------ ------ -------  ------ ------ -------  ------ ------ ------- -
*Phone*; +2348117714345, +2347063830177 *Skype*: akinremi.taiwo
*Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com, peterexecute at gmail.com
___________________________________________

On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 6:28 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Peter,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
> I think for the outcomes is really up to us and based on discussion.
> People need to propose and lead to concrete outcomes. The agenda is only a
> vehicle to structure and facilitate that purpose but cannot guarantee the
> results. CSG lead asked us what we expect as outcome from the topics
> proposed from our side. I believe some topics have clear expected outcome
> either a follow-up activity to be actionned or planning like for board seat
> 14. Anyway, I can emphasize to CSG lead that we want concrete outcomes.
> Building better relation with CSG is one of the goal of those meetings and
> that is why we want to ensure that they are scheduled and planned
> accordingly. It is also the space to work with them on common goals and
> that require listening and discuss in first place.
>
> This meeting is not day 0 but session in  saturday which can be seen as
> first day of meeting at least for those from GNSO . But if you are meaning
> the one envisioned for Muscat meeting then yes there will be more
> preparation before that of course. Again, planning need everyone
> participation and input.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025, 20:11 Akinremi Peter Taiwo <compsoftnet at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Rafik for the excellent sharing.
>>
>> The agenda looks good.
>>
>> What I am a bit worried about is for the meeting to generate a concrete
>> outcome. Most times csg folks just discuss and is difficult to grasp what
>> is it they wanted to achieve. The zero day is going to demand extra time
>> from our dedicated members if we don’t know why it is importance to us
>> except is to keep both SG relationships intact and inform which mostly
>> isn’t the case when we meet.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> *Taiwo Peter Akinremi*
>> ------ ------ -------  ------ ------ -------  ------ ------ -------
>> *Phone*; +2348117714345, +2347063830177 *Skype*: akinremi.taiwo
>> *Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com, peterexecute at gmail.com
>> ___________________________________________
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 7:56 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Please find attached the slides deck with the draft agenda for the NCPH
>>> meeting. Let me know if you have any concerns or suggestions or if you want
>>> to lead one of the topics.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>>
>>> Le jeu. 20 févr. 2025 à 11:59, Pedro de Perdigão Lana <
>>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> *Pedro de Perdigão Lana*
>>>> Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 <https://www.nic.br/>,  Pesquisador (
>>>> GEDAI/UFPR <https://www.gedai.com.br/>)
>>>> Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra),
>>>> Coordenação/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC <https://www.ncuc.org> & NCSG
>>>> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN), IODA
>>>> <https://ioda.org.br/> e CC Brasil <https://br.creativecommons.net/>.
>>>> Essa mensagem é restrita ao remetente e destinatário(s). Se recebida
>>>> por engano, favor responder informando o erro.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 às 20:57, Rafik Dammak <
>>>> rafik.dammak at gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Pedro,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the material, let me check and see if we can share them
>>>>> with GAC.
>>>>> If we meet with CSG, it means de facto a NCPH meeting :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025, 00:48 Pedro de Perdigão Lana <
>>>>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Rafik,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a follow-up, I'm not sure if we will be able to have someone on
>>>>>> our side who was involved with the SubPro/New gTLDs from the beginning and
>>>>>> is deeply knowledgeable on the subject on this day, so it may not be very
>>>>>> fruitful to have this discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Btw, I may have confused myself a bit - are we having a separate
>>>>>> session only with the CSG, or are we talking about the NCPH session here?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cordially,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Pedro de Perdigão Lana*
>>>>>> Lawyer <https://www.nic.br/>, GEDAI/UFPR <https://www.gedai.com.br/>
>>>>>> Researcher
>>>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra)
>>>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC <https://www.ncuc.org> & NCSG
>>>>>> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN),
>>>>>> IODA <https://ioda.org.br/> and CC Brasil
>>>>>> <https://br.creativecommons.net/>
>>>>>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If
>>>>>> received by mistake, please reply informing it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Em ter., 18 de fev. de 2025 às 22:34, Pedro de Perdigão Lana <
>>>>>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Rafik, all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We do have slides prepared by multiple members of NCSG, but more of
>>>>>>> an explanation of the ASP handbook. They do, however, have some important
>>>>>>> commentaries about gaps and risks among them. We also have the Public
>>>>>>> Comment that Bolu led re: Review of the Draft Applicant Support Program
>>>>>>> Handbook
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Besides those who are focused on the ASP, we have public comments we
>>>>>>> elaborated collectively to the Second Proceeding and Third Proceeding of
>>>>>>> the Next Round of AGB, which are useful for a potential discussion with the
>>>>>>> CSG about the Next Round (if others feel that there are topics that would
>>>>>>> benefit from a conversation with the CSG in this area)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am sending those four documents attached. I hope they are helpful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cordially,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Pedro de Perdigão Lana*
>>>>>>> Lawyer <https://www.nic.br/>, GEDAI/UFPR <https://www.gedai.com.br/>
>>>>>>> Researcher
>>>>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra)
>>>>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC <https://www.ncuc.org> & NCSG
>>>>>>> <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN),
>>>>>>> IODA <https://ioda.org.br/> and CC Brasil
>>>>>>> <https://br.creativecommons.net/>
>>>>>>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If
>>>>>>> received by mistake, please reply informing it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Em ter., 18 de fev. de 2025 às 03:02, Rafik Dammak <
>>>>>>> rafik.dammak at gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a reminder if you have any comments on the draft agenda.
>>>>>>>> On the other hand, we got a request from GAC if we have any
>>>>>>>> material about HRIA on DNS and gTLD Applicant Support we want to share with
>>>>>>>> them and to be added to the briefing for GAC members. @farzaneh
>>>>>>>> badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>  @Pedro de Perdigão Lana
>>>>>>>> <pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com>  do you have anything we can share
>>>>>>>> or if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Le jeu. 13 févr. 2025 à 17:09, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> some updates to share
>>>>>>>>> for CSG session, they shared those topics for our consideration:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    - Providing NCPH input to ICANN CEO regarding ICANN priorities
>>>>>>>>>    - Further Day 0 event planning (perhaps for Muscat) for NCPH
>>>>>>>>>    - Regular quarterly house meetings
>>>>>>>>>    - WSIS + 20
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In addition we proposed  those: membership system follow-up, board
>>>>>>>>> seat 14, DNS abuse positions and plan. We will need to get board seat 14
>>>>>>>>> procedure finalized by Prague as the process will start by then.
>>>>>>>>> I think those are acceptable topics and linked to what we
>>>>>>>>> discussed previously with them
>>>>>>>>> Regarding DNS abuse they acknowledge that we have different views
>>>>>>>>> and ask how we can have productive discussion on the topic and move ahead.
>>>>>>>>> let me know if you agree with this list
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> for GAC, as we discussed during the NCSG policy call, we can send
>>>>>>>>> to the GAC those 2 topics and finalize the agenda:    HRIA on DNS and gTLD
>>>>>>>>> Applicant Support
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> any comment or question for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>>> Le ven. 7 févr. 2025 à 17:29, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am coordinating the agenda for the joint sessions with CPH,
>>>>>>>>>> CSG, ALAC and GAC, the current status is:
>>>>>>>>>> - Waiting for comments from CSG about the draft topics  we
>>>>>>>>>> shared: membership system follow-up, board seat 14, DNS abuse positions and
>>>>>>>>>> plan. They didn't propose anything yet from their side.
>>>>>>>>>> - I shared again those topics (HRIA on DNS abuse, applicant
>>>>>>>>>> support, ethics policy and community participant code,
>>>>>>>>>> continuous improvement program) with ALAC waiting for their
>>>>>>>>>> comments and Jonathan asked about the INFERMAL report (
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/icann-webinar-to-discuss-infermal-a-project-focused-on-malicious-domain-registrations-05-02-2025-en
>>>>>>>>>> ). We might review and pick up some topics from the list.
>>>>>>>>>> - For CPH, they are discussing internally and we shared this
>>>>>>>>>> initial topic of HRIA on DNS Abuse. They didn't propose any
>>>>>>>>>> topic from their side yet.
>>>>>>>>>> - GAC proposed this based on back and forth discussion:
>>>>>>>>>> 1- Introduction of the NCSG and its work (5 mins)
>>>>>>>>>> 2- Discussion on (25 mins) :
>>>>>>>>>>     HRIA on DNS
>>>>>>>>>>     gTLD Applicant Support
>>>>>>>>>>     Public Interest Commitments (PICs)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have concerns about whether we can really cover ASP and PICs
>>>>>>>>>> and how much we can discuss about the latter. Please let me know your
>>>>>>>>>> thoughts and which we should pick up.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - For SSAC, we cannot meet them this time but I agreed with SSAC
>>>>>>>>>> chair Ram Mohan to schedule it for Prague meeting. Andea will handle that
>>>>>>>>>> on due time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In the meantime, I want to confirm for those topics who
>>>>>>>>>> can be the lead for each. For HRIA on DNS abuse, I am assuming Farzaneh and
>>>>>>>>>> Michaela can handle that, for ASP that can be Pedro and Manju for
>>>>>>>>>> continuous improvement.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regarding other NCSG sessions such as NCSG membership, I invited
>>>>>>>>>> the new policy head in ICANN but he cannot confirm yet and if we cannot
>>>>>>>>>> meet him in Seattle we will schedule a call with him later.
>>>>>>>>>> For the NCSG policy related meetings, @Tomslin Samme-Nlar
>>>>>>>>>> <mesumbeslin at gmail.com>  can share from his side. For the NCSG
>>>>>>>>>> issue forum, @Pedro de Perdigão Lana
>>>>>>>>>> <pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com>  can you share more about the
>>>>>>>>>> selected topic and agenda?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So please give me your input about the points above.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-ec/attachments/20250221/4b64a4e9/attachment-0001.htm>