[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.

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/20200331/db23c3c8/attachment.htm>