[NCSG-PC] [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for NCSG Comment on Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP) Study 1

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi all,

reminder to review the draft comment (short one). please raise concern if
you have any,

Best,

Rafik

Le mar. 31 mars 2020 à 20:25, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
écrit :

> hi all,
>
> reminder to review the draft comment.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
> Le lun. 30 mars 2020 à 22:49, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We have this draft comment for your review.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>> Date: Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 03:51
>> Subject: Re: [Public Comments] Call for Volunteers for NCSG Comment on
>> Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP) Study 1
>> To: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> Cc: NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
>>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Due to the approaching deadline, Rafik and I worked to propose a draft
>> response
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_27iFmqrAnVJ7Aq1jedo9CmBlb6MbBFq-roaMpb-xGU/edit> to
>> this Public comment and would like to gather your inputs for the draft
>> report
>> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ncap-study-1-report-12feb20-en.pdf> published
>> by the contractor (Karen Scarfone, Scarfone Cybersecurity) for Study 1 for
>> the Name Collision Analysis Project. Please note that there are only 2 days
>> (even less) lefts for the PC to be closed. The report is very brief, one
>> page long.
>>
>> What is needed from you:
>>
>>
>>    1. Do you think that this study (Study 1 of  3) was broad enough to
>>    include all prior works related to the Name Collisions related issues?
>>    2. According to you,  is the approach used efficient?
>>
>>
>> For a quick background on the topic:
>>
>> 1) In October 2018 the BTC asked for OCTO’s assessment of the NCAP
>> proposal, which OCTO provided on 27 November 2018. Subsequently, OCTO and
>> SSAC had discussions that provided additional information and further
>> clarification to OCTO on the details of the proposal. OCTO provided its
>> assessment on all three studies that comprise the NCAP proposal. In that
>> assessment, OCTO expressed concerns about the scope of Study 1, that the
>> goals of Studies 2 and 3 might not be achievable, and that the overall
>> project might not ultimately provide the necessary information to the Board
>> to make decisions on whether or not a TLD is a “collision string” and can
>> be safely delegated. OCTO also noted the high cost and long duration of the
>> overall project. (Source)
>>
>> 2) Study 1 (subjected to this call for Public Comment) is focused on
>> performing a survey of all the research that has been undertaken in the
>> area of name collision since 2014 and evaluating if this work could meet,
>> or assist in meeting, the objectives set out in the Board resolutions. The
>> study includes a decision on if the project should proceed based on the
>> results of the survey and the availability of data necessary to perform
>> Studies 2 and 3. Study 1 also calls for creating a data repository and
>> associated policies and processes to store data necessary for use in
>> subsequent studies. (Source)
>>
>> 3) In July 2019, ICANN publishes a call for applications to select a
>> contractor to conduct Study 1. Details can be found here
>> <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2019-07-09-en>.
>> 4)  The RFC for proposal that outline the requirements that the
>> contractor  in 3) should meet is available here
>> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rfp-ncap-study-1-09jul19-en.pdf>
>> .
>>
>> 5) Our draft response is available through this link
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_27iFmqrAnVJ7Aq1jedo9CmBlb6MbBFq-roaMpb-xGU/edit>
>> .
>>
>>
>> That is all….by now ;)
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> GNSO Councillor
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14 Feb 2020, at 02:52, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> ICANN just published a consultation on Name Collision Analysis Project
>> (NCAP) Study 1. You can find here all the details here
>> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ncap-study-1-2020-02-13-en . We
>> preciously commented on NCAP plan and so this is an opportunity to comment
>> on the study and follow-up.
>>
>> I created this google doc to be used during the drafting and accessible
>> to all in order to kick off the discussion and comments:
>>  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_27iFmqrAnVJ7Aq1jedo9CmBlb6MbBFq-roaMpb-xGU/edit
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_27iFmqrAnVJ7Aq1jedo9CmBlb6MbBFq-roaMpb-xGU/edit>
>>
>> Please let me offline if you want to volunteer to participate in drafting
>> the NCSG comment and join the drafting team. For those interested by the
>> policy and technology discussion, this is a good topic to review and work
>> on drafting a comment.
>>
>> You can find previous public comments submitted by NCSG in this wiki page
>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments+-+2020 and
>> listing those who drafted them.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rafik Dammak
>>
>> NCSG Policy Committee Chair
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20200401/ed87f8b1/attachment.htm>