From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Wed Mar 3 11:03:59 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:03:59 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Board Meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I can only add: What tangible steps do the board thinks can be taken to address the high community burnout and decrease in participation from some stakeholder groups, considering that such a decline poses a threat to the multistakeholder model? Cheers, Tomslin On Wed., 24 Feb. 2021, 16:05 Bruna Martins dos Santos, < bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear NCSG PC and EC, > > I need to provide our talking points for the NCSG meeting with the ICANN > Board by Feb. 26th, the latest. On that note, I would like to ask if any of > you would like to suggest and/or lead any of these discussions. > > For the ones not familiar with our Joint meeting with the Board at ICANN > meetings, this is a 1h meeting where both the NCSG and ICANN Board will > prepare their talking points for each other. We normally go with 2 to 3 > talking points and its also nice to see our community leaders leading the > discussions, so feel free to send your suggestions here and we can start > working on the discussion agenda. > > For my 1:1 meeting with the CEO that happened this week I chose to ask the > following questions, but I would like to hear from you whether you think > its good to repeat them: > > *SSAD and Content Moderation* > > > - *On a recent communication that was sent to the Board and to you, we > asked a few questions regarding an "ICANN Org Comments on the > Recommendations 01/2020 on Measures That Supplement Transfer Tools to > Ensure Compliance With the EU Level of Protection of Personal Data". NCSGs > letter was seeking clarification about an specific part of the statement > that highlighted that SSAD was "instrumental for stopping and preventing > the dissemination of illegal content and in order to avoid related societal > harms". On that note, I would like to ask you how the development of a new > System for Standardized Access/Disclosure falls within the realm of > instruments for preventing the dissemination of illegal content ?* > - *When the document mentions the prevention of the dissemination of > illegal content and societal harm, does it relate to factors other than the > access to information object of legitimate requests by legal authorities > and/or related to investigations ? * > > *DNS Abuse and the DNS Security Facilitation Initiative Technical Study > Group* > > > - *Do you believe ICANN is not working toward security and stability > and fighting with abuse as much as its mission allows? Why do you think > that ?* > - *NCSG would also like to know more about the DNS Security > Facilitation Initiative Technical Study Group. Where does this technical > study group fall within ICANNs strategy for dealing with DNS abuse? * > > > > Looking forward to hearing back from you! > > Best, > > -- > *Bruna Martins dos Santos * > > Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos > @boomartins > _______________________________________________ > 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: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Fri Mar 12 23:20:26 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 08:20:26 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] ICANN70 - NCSG Policy Committee AGENDA Message-ID: Dear PC, I would like to hear from you if there is any item you'd like to see on the agenda for our policy meeting during ICANN70. A draft agenda is below: # Discussion Topic(s) 1 GNSO Council Agenda 2 Policy update & plenaries during ICANN70 3 Public Comments Cheers, Tomslin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From PolicyCalendar at icann.org Mon Mar 15 14:42:48 2021 From: PolicyCalendar at icann.org (ICANN Policy Calendar) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 12:42:48 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC Message-ID: <0b86b05b2cec4ea1866531aac4e0b8ae@icann.org> Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at 11:30 UTC.  Additional time zone support here. Join Zoom Meeting:  https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 One tap mobile +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) PHONE ONLY DETAILS: Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 2486 bytes Desc: not available URL: From brenda.brewer at icann.org Mon Mar 15 14:46:33 2021 From: brenda.brewer at icann.org (Brenda Brewer) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 12:46:33 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC Message-ID: <5330ABF0-36C1-4FC5-8B62-35DB7C1000CD@icann.org> Good day all! Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at 11:30 UTC. Additional time zone support here. Also note, calendar invites have been sent and .ics is attached. Kind regards, Brenda & Maryam _____________________________________________ Join Zoom Meeting: https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 One tap mobile +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) PHONE ONLY DETAILS: Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: REMINDER- NCSG Monthly Policy call 16 March 11-30 UTC.ics Type: text/calendar Size: 2489 bytes Desc: REMINDER- NCSG Monthly Policy call 16 March 11-30 UTC.ics URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Mar 15 21:44:59 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 06:44:59 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC In-Reply-To: <5330ABF0-36C1-4FC5-8B62-35DB7C1000CD@icann.org> References: <5330ABF0-36C1-4FC5-8B62-35DB7C1000CD@icann.org> Message-ID: Dear PC, I don't think we need tomorrow's meeting since we have another next week Tuesday March 23rd at ICANN70 before the council meeting. So, I will be requesting that staff cancel tomorrow's meeting. I hope this is okay with you? Tomslin On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 23:46, Brenda Brewer wrote: > Good day all! > > > > *Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at > 11:30 UTC.* Additional time zone support here > > . > > Also note, calendar invites have been sent and .ics is attached. > > > > Kind regards, > > Brenda & Maryam > > _____________________________________________ > > > > Join Zoom Meeting: *https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 > * > > > > Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 > > Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 > > > > One tap mobile > > +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) > > +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) > > > > PHONE ONLY DETAILS: > > Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg > > Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 > > Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From bruna.mrtns at gmail.com Mon Mar 15 22:04:24 2021 From: bruna.mrtns at gmail.com (Bruna Martins dos Santos) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 17:04:24 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <5330ABF0-36C1-4FC5-8B62-35DB7C1000CD@icann.org> Message-ID: Support this, Tomslin! Em seg, 15 de mar de 2021 16:45, Tomslin Samme-Nlar escreveu: > Dear PC, > > I don't think we need tomorrow's meeting since we have another next week > Tuesday March 23rd at ICANN70 before the council meeting. So, I will be > requesting that staff cancel tomorrow's meeting. I hope this is okay with > you? > > Tomslin > > > > On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 23:46, Brenda Brewer > wrote: > >> Good day all! >> >> >> >> *Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at >> 11:30 UTC.* Additional time zone support here >> >> . >> >> Also note, calendar invites have been sent and .ics is attached. >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Brenda & Maryam >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> >> >> Join Zoom Meeting: *https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 >> * >> >> >> >> Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 >> >> Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 >> >> >> >> One tap mobile >> >> +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) >> >> +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) >> >> >> >> PHONE ONLY DETAILS: >> >> Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg >> >> Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 >> >> Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-PC mailing list >> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >> > _______________________________________________ > 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: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Mar 15 22:09:15 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 07:09:15 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC In-Reply-To: <0b86b05b2cec4ea1866531aac4e0b8ae@icann.org> References: <0b86b05b2cec4ea1866531aac4e0b8ae@icann.org> Message-ID: Dear all, Since we have the policy meeting next week at 10:30 EST ( 15:30 UTC ) 22 March 2021, we will cancel tomorrow's (March 16) call in favor of meeting next week during ICANN70. Sorry for any inconvenience. Best regards Tomslin On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 23:42, ICANN Policy Calendar < PolicyCalendar at icann.org> wrote: > *Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at > 11:30 UTC.* Additional time zone support here > > . > > > Join Zoom Meeting: > *https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 > * > > > Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 > > Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 > > > One tap mobile > > +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) > > +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) > > > > PHONE ONLY DETAILS: > > Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg > > Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 > > Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Mar 15 22:09:37 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 07:09:37 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <5330ABF0-36C1-4FC5-8B62-35DB7C1000CD@icann.org> Message-ID: Thank you Bruna Tomslin On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 07:04, Bruna Martins dos Santos < bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote: > Support this, Tomslin! > > Em seg, 15 de mar de 2021 16:45, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > escreveu: > >> Dear PC, >> >> I don't think we need tomorrow's meeting since we have another next week >> Tuesday March 23rd at ICANN70 before the council meeting. So, I will be >> requesting that staff cancel tomorrow's meeting. I hope this is okay with >> you? >> >> Tomslin >> >> >> >> On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 23:46, Brenda Brewer >> wrote: >> >>> Good day all! >>> >>> >>> >>> *Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at >>> 11:30 UTC.* Additional time zone support here >>> >>> . >>> >>> Also note, calendar invites have been sent and .ics is attached. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Brenda & Maryam >>> >>> _____________________________________________ >>> >>> >>> >>> Join Zoom Meeting: *https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 >>> * >>> >>> >>> >>> Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 >>> >>> Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 >>> >>> >>> >>> One tap mobile >>> >>> +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) >>> >>> +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) >>> >>> >>> >>> PHONE ONLY DETAILS: >>> >>> Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg >>> >>> Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 >>> >>> Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-PC mailing list >>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From PolicyCalendar at icann.org Tue Mar 16 02:21:56 2021 From: PolicyCalendar at icann.org (ICANN Policy Calendar) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:21:56 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Canceled: REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC Message-ID: CANCELLED: NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at 11:30 UTC. Additional time zone support here. Join Zoom Meeting: https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 One tap mobile +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) PHONE ONLY DETAILS: Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 2348 bytes Desc: not available URL: From brenda.brewer at icann.org Tue Mar 16 02:25:07 2021 From: brenda.brewer at icann.org (Brenda Brewer) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:25:07 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] FW: CANCELLED: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC Message-ID: <0102FB7F-4D5E-428F-87BA-7384D3FB110F@icann.org> This meeting is cancelled! Thank you. From: Brenda Brewer Date: Monday, March 15, 2021 at 7:46 AM To: NCSG List , "ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is" Cc: Maryam Bakoshi , Brenda Brewer Subject: REMINDER: NCSG Monthly Policy call | 16 March | 11:30 UTC Good day all! Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at 11:30 UTC. Additional time zone support here. Also note, calendar invites have been sent and .ics is attached. Kind regards, Brenda & Maryam _____________________________________________ Join Zoom Meeting: https://icann.zoom.us/j/98878189584?pwd=ZVpkSVVuaXVqeGRMelNEWW1LMkxQUT09 Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Passcode: i!y7.qx+11 One tap mobile +16699006833,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (San Jose) +12532158782,,98878189584#,,,,,,0#,,7740925615# US (Tacoma) PHONE ONLY DETAILS: Find your local number: https://icann.zoom.us/u/ayKmeftWg Meeting ID: 988 7818 9584 Phone only Passcode: 7740925615 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Thu Mar 18 02:00:49 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 11:00:49 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] ICANN70 session on Transfer Policy PDP Message-ID: Dear members As some of you might know, in February 2021, the GNSO Council voted to initiate a policy development process to review the Transfer Policy and determine if changes to the policy are needed to improve the ease, security, and efficacy of inter-registrar and inter-registrant transfers. I believe this is a policy that directly affects registrants and while only the Registrars have shown keen interest so far in this policy development process, I think it would benefit us and our interest to participate in it. For those still on the fence as to why participating in this PDP is of benefit, there will be a session in ICANN70 next Tuesday to discuss this. Please attend if you can. Details are as follows: *GNSO - Introduction: PDP to Review the Transfer Policy* 14:30 EST, 22 March 2021 19:30 UTC, 22 March 2021 Agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/nA5ACQ Regards, Tomslin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Mar 22 13:02:19 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 22:02:19 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] Final Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meeting 24 March 2021 at 17:30 UTC In-Reply-To: <79E1CA51-C88A-4369-A98D-775B0DE2F413@icann.org> References: <79E1CA51-C88A-4369-A98D-775B0DE2F413@icann.org> Message-ID: Dear members, See below final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 24 March 2021 Tomslin ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Andrea Glandon via council Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 10:10 Subject: [council] Final Proposed Agenda | GNSO Council Meeting 24 March 2021 at 17:30 UTC To: council at gnso.icann.org Cc: gnso-secs at icann.org Dear all, Please find below the final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 24 March 2021 at 17:30 UTC. Draft GNSO Council Agenda 24 March 2021 Please note that all documents referenced in the agenda have been gathered on a Wiki page for convenience and easier access: https://community.icann.org/x/jgxACQ This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures v3.5, updated on 24 October 2019 For convenience: - An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. - An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. GNSO Council meeting held 17:30 UTC (12:30 local time) Coordinated Universal Time: 17:30 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/2dc33d7k 10:30 Los Angeles; 13:30 Washington; 17:30 London; 18:30 Paris; 20:30 Moscow; (Thursday) 04:30 Melbourne GNSO Council Meeting Remote Participation: Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not be able to attend and/or need a dial out call. ___________________________________ *Item 1: Administrative Matters (10 mins)* 1.1 - Roll Call 1.2 - Updates to Statements of Interest 1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda 1.4 - Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 21 January 2021 were posted on 4 February 2021. Minutes of the GNSO Council meeting on 18 February 2021 were posted on 4 March 2021. *Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (0 minutes)* 2.1 - Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics, to include review of Projects List and Action Item List. *Item 3: Consent Agenda (5 minutes) * - Confirmation of the Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board regarding adoption of relevant Outputs from the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP. *Item 4: COUNCIL VOTE - IANA Naming Functions Contract Amendment (10 minutes)* The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Naming Function Review Team (IFRT) Final Report contains a recommendation that requires GNSO Council action. The IFR is an evaluation of Public Technical Identifiers (PTI) performance of the IANA naming function against the contractual requirements in the IANA Naming Function Contract and the IANA Naming Function SOW . The IFR Review Team's Recommendation 4 (page 5 of the IFR Final Report [PDF, 2.2MB]) calls for an amendment to Article 7, Section 7.1 (a) of the IANA Naming Function Contract. Pursuant to ICANN Bylaws Article 18.6 (iv) , there must be "*public comment* * on the amendments that are under consideration by the IFRT through a public comment period that complies with the designated practice for public comment periods within ICANN." *In addition, Article 18.6 (b) requires that in order for the recommendation of the IFRT that amends the IANA Naming Function Contract or IANA Naming Function SOW to become effective, one of the requirements is for GNSO approval by a Supermajority. The IANA Naming Function Contract currently states at Article VII, Section 7.1 (a): Audits: ?Contractor shall generate and publish via the IANA Website a monthly audit report identifying each root zone file and root zone ?WHOIS? database change request and its status. The relevant policies under which the changes are made shall be noted within each monthly report. Such audit report shall be due to ICANN no later than 15 calendar days following the end of each month.? The IFRT recommends that this statement, "The relevant policies under which the changes are made shall be noted within each monthly report" be removed from the contract. Per the letter from the Co-chairs of the IANA Naming Function Review (IFR), ?This section refers to the Root Operations Audit Reports ( https://www.iana.org/performance/root-audit) which is published monthly by PTI. This statement, carried over from the contract between ICANN and NTIA, is no longer required; further, implementation of this requirement has long been recognised as being operationally impracticable, as a single change request cannot be traced back to a single relevant policy. The IFRT is satisfied that there is no value to this statement remaining in the IANA Naming Function Contract, as the referenced line adds no value to the reports.? Here, the Council will vote to approve the IFRT Recommendation 4. 4.1 ? Presentation of the Motion (TBD) 4.2 ? Council discussion 4.3 ? Council vote (voting threshold: supermajority) *Taking this action is within the GNSO?s remit as outlined in ICANN?s Bylaws, as a GNSO Supermajority is one of the required elements to allow for an amendment to either the IANA Naming Function Contract, IANA Naming Function SOW or CSC Charter, as set forth these Bylaws? (Art.18.6).* *Item 5: COUNCIL VOTE - Charter for the Transfer Policy PDP (10 minutes)* During its February Council meeting, the GNSO Council resolved to initiate a PDP on the Transfer Policy, while also determining that further time was needed to draft the charter. The Preliminary Issue Report included a draft charter, which was included in the public comment proceeding. That draft charter is also included in the Final Issue Report, Annex A . Comment on the draft charter was solicited from Councilors via a pre-recorded webinar prior to this Council meeting. A small team of Councilors was convened to refine the charter, focusing primarily on the membership structure. After receiving input from various communities, the small team proposed a representative structure that it believes allows for appropriate levels of participation. Here, the Council will vote to approve the Charter. 5.1 ? Presentation of the Motion (Pam Little, GNSO Council Vice-Chair) 5.2 ? Council discussion 5.3 ? Council vote (voting threshold: an affirmative vote of more than one-third (1/3) of each House or more than two-thirds (2/3) of one House) *Taking this action is within the GNSO?s remit as outlined in ICANN?s Bylaws as the GNSO ?shall be responsible for developing and recommending to the Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains and other responsibilities of the GNSO as set forth in these Bylaws? (Art.11.1). Furthermore, this action complies with the requirements set out in Annex A: GNSO Policy Development Process of the ICANN Bylaws.* *Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Nominating Committee Outreach Subcommittee Outreach (10 minutes)* The Nominating Committee (NomCom) initiated its application process on 25 January 2021 (with the deadline extended to 29 March 2021). For this cycle, the NomCom will be selecting two members of the GNSO Council, one representing the Contracted Parties House and one representing the Non-Contracted Parties House. The GNSO Council provided updated criteria to the NomCom in January 2021. Here, the NomCom Outreach Subcommittee will provide information about the NomCom panel, about the positions being filled for the GNSO Council, and answer questions that the Council might have. 6.1 - Introduction of topic (NomCom Outreach Subcommittee) 6.2 ? Council discussion 6.3 ? Next steps *Item 7: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ? Status Update Regarding EPDP Phase 2A (20 minutes)* On 21 October 2020, the GNSO Council approved the initiation of EPDP Phase 2A, to examine the topics of legal/natural and feasibility of unique contacts. In doing so, the Council required that: "[a]t the latest 3 months after reconvening, the Chair of the EPDP Team and GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP will report back to the GNSO Council on the status of deliberations. Based on this report, which is expected to include an update on progress made and the expected likelihood of consensus recommendations, the GNSO Council will decide on next steps, which could include providing additional time for the EPDP to finalize its recommendations or termination of the EPDP if it is clear that no progress is being made or consensus is unlikely).? Here, the Chair of the EPDP Team and GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP will provide an update to the Council. 7.1 ? Introduction of topic (EPDP Team Chair, Keith Drazaek and GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP, Philippe Fouquart) 7.2 ? Council discussion 7.3 ? Next steps *Item 8: COUNCIL UPDATE - EPDP Phase 1 Rec 27 (Wave 1.5) (10 minutes)* Recommendation 27 from the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report , ?... recommends that as part of the implementation of these policy recommendations, updates are made to the following existing policies / procedures, and any others that may have been omitted, to ensure consistency with these policy recommendations as, for example, a number of these refer to administrative and/or technical contact which will no longer be required data elements.? In support of this recommendation, ICANN org prepared the Wave 1 report, an updated version of which was shared with the Council on 19 February 2020. ICANN org has performed additional analysis for recommendation 27, resulting in the Wave 1.5 Report that focuses on Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues (PPSAI) and Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information (T/T) policy recommendations, for which implementation has been started but not completed. For the Wave 1 Report, the staff support team conducted a first analysis of the report, identifying possible next steps for Council consideration that the Council subsequently reviewed to determine next steps. The Council may elect to follow a similar approach to the Wave 1.5 Report, to determine appropriate next steps. Here, the Council will discuss the Wave 1.5 Report. 8.1 ? Introduction of topic (Council Leadership) 8.2 ? Council discussion 8.3 ? Next steps *Item 9: Council Discussion - Debrief on the Consultation with the ICANN Board on the Financial Sustainability of the SSAD (15 minutes)* In the adoption of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification Phase 2 Final Report and Recommendations, the Council resolved that: ?Noting some of the questions surrounding the financial sustainability of SSAD and some of the concerns expressed within the different minority statements, the GNSO Council requests a consultation with the ICANN Board as part of the delivery of the GNSO Council Recommendations Report to the ICANN Board to discuss these issues, including whether a further cost-benefit analysis should be conducted before the ICANN Board considers all SSAD-related recommendations for adoption.? The GNSO Council communicated its Recommendations Report to the Board 29 October 2020, in which the Council proposed, ?to form a small team consisting of GNSO Council and ICANN Board members to develop a proposed approach and agree on expectations in relation to this consultation.? The ICANN Board responded on 1 December 2020, stating that it believed the Operational Design Phase (ODP) it envisioned, will help facilitate the consultation with the Council. The Council responded on 22 January 2021, suggesting that it is more important to agree upon the elements of the operational impact assessment, rather than relying on the ODP framework exclusively. That consultation between the Board and the GNSO Council took place on 22 February 2021. The Council will meet with the Board again, connected with ICANN70, on 1 April 2021. There, the Operational Design Phase for the SSAD will be one of the topics for discussion. A small team of Councilors is preparing a letter to be sent to the Board, in advance of the 1 April 2021 meeting, which is expected to be available for this 24 March Council meeting. Here, the Council will hold a debrief on the 22 February consultation and plan for the 1 April meeting. 9.1 ? Introduction of topic (Council Leadership) 9.2 ? Council discussion 9.3 ? Next steps *Item 10: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Introduction to the Briefing Paper on Accuracy Requirements and Programs from ICANN?s Global Domains & Strategy (GDS) (5 minutes)* On 4 November 2020, the GNSO Council wrote to ICANN org, requesting the preparation of a briefing document outlining both the existing accuracy requirements and programs as well as the impact that GDPR has had on implementing and enforcing the identified requirements and programs. This briefing is intended to inform an accuracy scoping team that the GNSO Council envisioned initiating , which would be tasked with furthering the community?s understanding of the issue and assist in scoping and defining the issue. On 10 December 2020, ICANN org responded to confirm its understanding of the request and to commit to delivering that briefing by 26 February 2021. ICANN org delivered the briefing on the 26th. In addition to the briefing providing an overview of accuracy requirements and programs, ICANN org included a suggestion that a study to measure accuracy of registration data might be beneficial. In parallel to the request for the briefing, ICANN SO/AC/SG/Cs were requested to start thinking about whether their groups would be interested to participate in a scoping team once created. To date, the BC, ISPCP, RySG and GAC have expressed an interest and identified potential volunteers with relevant knowledge and expertise. Here, the Council will discuss next steps as it relates to the briefing as well as the scoping team. 10.1 ? Introduction of topic (Council Leadership) 10.2 ? Council discussion 10.3 ? Next steps *Item 11: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - GNSO Council Consideration of SAC114 (5 minutes)* On 15 February 2021, the SSAC shared SAC114 with the GNSO Council, which are the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC)?s comments on the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP?s Draft Final Report, but are directed at the ICANN Board for its consideration. While the comments are directed at the ICANN Board, they pertain to the work of the GNSO and as a result, the Council may benefit from considering SAC114 and formulating its impressions of the recommendations. Here, the Council will consider SAC114 and discuss next steps, if any. 11.1 ? Introduction of topic (Council Leadership) 11.2 ? Council discussion 11.3 ? Next steps *Item 12: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - GNSO Framework for Continuous Improvement (5 minutes)* The GNSO Council has sought an approach to address work that focuses on GNSO structural, procedural and process improvement related work. The proposal from Council leadership is to create a GNSO Framework for Continuous Improvement that will help provide structure to manage the numerous non-PDP related efforts residing on the Council?s Action Decision Radar (ADR). An overview was developed and shared on 20 January 2021. Based on initial feedback from Councilors and other GNSO stakeholders, a much more detailed draft document was prepared and shared on 2 March 2021, which provides additional information about the structure and potential work assignments. Input was sought from the Council and SG/C Chairs. Here, the Council will consider whether the framework serves as an appropriate path forward, as well as relevant next steps. 12.1 ? Introduction of topic (Council Leadership) 12.2 ? Council discussion 12.3 ? Next steps *Item 13: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (10 minutes)* 13.1 - Open Microphone _______________________________ Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article 11, Section 11.3(i)) See https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11. Appendix 2: GNSO Council Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 4.4) See https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-procedures-30jan18-en.pdf References for Coordinated Universal Time of 17:30 UTC Local time between November and March Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 10:30 San Jos?, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 11:30 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 13:30 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 14:30 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3 14:30 London, United Kingdom (GMT) UTC+0 17:30 Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 18:30 Paris, France (CEST) UTC+1 18:30 Moscow, Russia (MST) UTC+3 20:30 Singapore (SGT) (+1 day) UTC+8 01:30 Melbourne, Australia (AEDT)(+1 day) UTC+11 04:30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on Sunday 28 March 2021, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) for EU countries and on Sunday 14 March 2021 for the US. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com and https://tinyurl.com/2dc33d7k _______________________________________________ council mailing list council at gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Mar 22 13:09:20 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 22:09:20 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] REMINDER: NCSG Policy Committee Meeting at ICANN70 Message-ID: Dear members, Please be reminded that our policy meeting is in 4 hours 30mins time. 10:30 EST, 22 March 2021 15:30 UTC, 22 March 2021 ID# 12332 *Agenda:* 1. Introduction 2. GNSO Council Agenda a. Agenda - Tatiana 3. Policy update & plenaries during ICANN70 a. Update from IGO WT ? Ioana or Juan b. Update from EPDP Phase 2a ? Milton and Stephanie 4. Public Comments 5. AOB Regards, Tomslin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Thu Mar 25 22:19:30 2021 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie E Perrin) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 16:19:30 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] draft comments on the EPDP final report Message-ID: Here is the link to the draft comment https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48/edit?usp=sharing Please let me know if you have trouble editing cheers Stephanie Perrin From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Fri Mar 26 01:28:11 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:28:11 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] draft comments on the EPDP final report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you so much Stephanie. PC and EPDP members, please use Friday and the weekend to review and make edits, so that it is ready to go on Monday the 29th. Best regards Tomslin On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 07:19, Stephanie E Perrin < stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote: > Here is the link to the draft comment > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48/edit?usp=sharing > > Please let me know if you have trouble editing > > cheers Stephanie Perrin > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From milton at gatech.edu Mon Mar 29 21:25:59 2021 From: milton at gatech.edu (Mueller, Milton L) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 18:25:59 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Stephanie: Really appreciate the work involved in the first draft. I am commenting on the doc and I want to alert everyone in NCSG that I think it is a major strategic error for our comments to reinforce the IPC/BC's attacks on the financial viability of the SSAD. The SSAD is viable if the users (e.g., Facebook, Markmonitor, etc) pay for it. When the surveillance caucus says it is too costly they are just angling for free access and our having registrars and registrants pay for it. When you reinforce the false argument that this will be too expensive, you are advancing their agenda. Not deliberately, of course, but you seem to be unaware of how your argument shoots us in the foot. During the negotiations over the SSAD, NCSG's position was that users pay for their own accreditation costs, and that usage of the system should be tiered to differentiate between light and heavy users. Also, the existence of an SSAD helps us argue for keeping the private data redacted. So I have suggested various changes and deletions in the comments to reflect this perspective. --MM -----Original Message----- From: EPDP On Behalf Of Stephanie E Perrin Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 4:20 PM To: NCSG PC ; 'epdp (epdp at lists.ncsg.is)' ; kathy at dnrc.tech Subject: [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report Here is the link to the draft comment https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=a4Ynu4ypaEqf%2BlpL6BQykzPkInixeCFof%2BKQVapNces%3D&reserved=0 Please let me know if you have trouble editing cheers Stephanie Perrin _______________________________________________ EPDP mailing list EPDP at lists.ncsg.is https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ncsg.is%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fepdp&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CqqohHcA2A1lEe5KhmARjJz8ufSLhSQvjqhWrjjmNiA%3D&reserved=0 From stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca Tue Mar 30 00:53:54 2021 From: stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 17:53:54 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks, i will go have a look... Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 29, 2021, at 14:26, Mueller, Milton L wrote: > > ?Stephanie: > Really appreciate the work involved in the first draft. > I am commenting on the doc and I want to alert everyone in NCSG that I think it is a major strategic error for our comments to reinforce the IPC/BC's attacks on the financial viability of the SSAD. The SSAD is viable if the users (e.g., Facebook, Markmonitor, etc) pay for it. When the surveillance caucus says it is too costly they are just angling for free access and our having registrars and registrants pay for it. When you reinforce the false argument that this will be too expensive, you are advancing their agenda. Not deliberately, of course, but you seem to be unaware of how your argument shoots us in the foot. > > During the negotiations over the SSAD, NCSG's position was that users pay for their own accreditation costs, and that usage of the system should be tiered to differentiate between light and heavy users. Also, the existence of an SSAD helps us argue for keeping the private data redacted. > > So I have suggested various changes and deletions in the comments to reflect this perspective. > > --MM > > > -----Original Message----- > From: EPDP On Behalf Of Stephanie E Perrin > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 4:20 PM > To: NCSG PC ; 'epdp (epdp at lists.ncsg.is)' ; kathy at dnrc.tech > Subject: [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report > > Here is the link to the draft comment > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=a4Ynu4ypaEqf%2BlpL6BQykzPkInixeCFof%2BKQVapNces%3D&reserved=0 > > Please let me know if you have trouble editing > > cheers Stephanie Perrin > > _______________________________________________ > EPDP mailing list > EPDP at lists.ncsg.is > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ncsg.is%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fepdp&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CqqohHcA2A1lEe5KhmARjJz8ufSLhSQvjqhWrjjmNiA%3D&reserved=0 > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc From stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca Tue Mar 30 02:45:57 2021 From: stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca (Stephanie E Perrin) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 19:45:57 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <65df82dc-5a96-d433-a52f-5c2bb10c3aa1@digitaldiscretion.ca> Ok I have added bits as requested....I did not accept your rejection of the premise that the accreditation body cost estimate may be low.? This is not based on my opinions alone, it is is based on all the work done in private by the EWG....we looked at the possible options for accreditation of entities, and it was considered by all to be a nightmare and potentially expensive.? I also worked on this, including with respect to cross border data sharing in my capacity of DG Risk Management when I was at Service Canada....managing credentials for users of a global system is extremely expensive.? I used the term "may" so we are not making a fact assertion, but I will be stunned if they can do this for that kind of budget. Remember that permitting the wrong users eg criminals into the system would be the cause of a major data breach, which comes with big $$$ penalties.? If there are no further comments I will go in , accept your additions, and turn it over to Tomslin to submit.? (what day is it for you Tomslin?? ) we have approx 24 hours to the deadline. cheers and thanks for the comments Milton!? I don't necessarily agree with totally downpedalling the cost issues but am willing to compromise on it, we have signalled strongly that this is a new payer and you left that in. Steph On 2021-03-29 2:25 p.m., Mueller, Milton L wrote: > Stephanie: > Really appreciate the work involved in the first draft. > I am commenting on the doc and I want to alert everyone in NCSG that I think it is a major strategic error for our comments to reinforce the IPC/BC's attacks on the financial viability of the SSAD. The SSAD is viable if the users (e.g., Facebook, Markmonitor, etc) pay for it. When the surveillance caucus says it is too costly they are just angling for free access and our having registrars and registrants pay for it. When you reinforce the false argument that this will be too expensive, you are advancing their agenda. Not deliberately, of course, but you seem to be unaware of how your argument shoots us in the foot. > > During the negotiations over the SSAD, NCSG's position was that users pay for their own accreditation costs, and that usage of the system should be tiered to differentiate between light and heavy users. Also, the existence of an SSAD helps us argue for keeping the private data redacted. > > So I have suggested various changes and deletions in the comments to reflect this perspective. > > --MM > > > -----Original Message----- > From: EPDP On Behalf Of Stephanie E Perrin > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 4:20 PM > To: NCSG PC ; 'epdp (epdp at lists.ncsg.is)' ; kathy at dnrc.tech > Subject: [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report > > Here is the link to the draft comment > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=a4Ynu4ypaEqf%2BlpL6BQykzPkInixeCFof%2BKQVapNces%3D&reserved=0 > > Please let me know if you have trouble editing > > cheers Stephanie Perrin > > _______________________________________________ > EPDP mailing list > EPDP at lists.ncsg.is > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ncsg.is%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fepdp&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CqqohHcA2A1lEe5KhmARjJz8ufSLhSQvjqhWrjjmNiA%3D&reserved=0 > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Tue Mar 30 05:20:05 2021 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie E Perrin) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 22:20:05 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Final cleaned up document for EPDP Phase 2 comments Message-ID: OK folks, I have cleaned up the document, accepted all but one of Milton's comments, written an annex with proposed text for section 13, and attach it here in word and PDF.? I presume Tomslin is going to send it in on the 30th, absent further changes.? Let me know if I need to do anything further. Thanks for all the great input! Cheers Stephanie -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EPDP Phase 2 Policy Recommendations for Board Consideration.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 30193 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EPDP Phase 2 Policy Recommendations for Board Consideration.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 108534 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Tue Mar 30 12:33:02 2021 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 20:33:02 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report In-Reply-To: <65df82dc-5a96-d433-a52f-5c2bb10c3aa1@digitaldiscretion.ca> References: <65df82dc-5a96-d433-a52f-5c2bb10c3aa1@digitaldiscretion.ca> Message-ID: Thank you again everyone for the comments, edits and discussion. It is 20:00 on 30th April now my time. So I have to either submit it before I go to bed or first thing in the morning. However, if there are no more comments to the draft, I'll prefer submitting it before I go to bed. Cheers, Tomslin On Tue., 30 Mar. 2021, 10:46 Stephanie E Perrin, < stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca> wrote: > Ok I have added bits as requested....I did not accept your rejection of > the premise that the accreditation body cost estimate may be low. This > is not based on my opinions alone, it is is based on all the work done > in private by the EWG....we looked at the possible options for > accreditation of entities, and it was considered by all to be a > nightmare and potentially expensive. I also worked on this, including > with respect to cross border data sharing in my capacity of DG Risk > Management when I was at Service Canada....managing credentials for > users of a global system is extremely expensive. I used the term "may" > so we are not making a fact assertion, but I will be stunned if they can > do this for that kind of budget. Remember that permitting the wrong > users eg criminals into the system would be the cause of a major data > breach, which comes with big $$$ penalties. If there are no further > comments I will go in , accept your additions, and turn it over to > Tomslin to submit. (what day is it for you Tomslin? ) we have approx > 24 hours to the deadline. > > cheers and thanks for the comments Milton! I don't necessarily agree > with totally downpedalling the cost issues but am willing to compromise > on it, we have signalled strongly that this is a new payer and you left > that in. > > Steph > > On 2021-03-29 2:25 p.m., Mueller, Milton L wrote: > > Stephanie: > > Really appreciate the work involved in the first draft. > > I am commenting on the doc and I want to alert everyone in NCSG that I > think it is a major strategic error for our comments to reinforce the > IPC/BC's attacks on the financial viability of the SSAD. The SSAD is viable > if the users (e.g., Facebook, Markmonitor, etc) pay for it. When the > surveillance caucus says it is too costly they are just angling for free > access and our having registrars and registrants pay for it. When you > reinforce the false argument that this will be too expensive, you are > advancing their agenda. Not deliberately, of course, but you seem to be > unaware of how your argument shoots us in the foot. > > > > During the negotiations over the SSAD, NCSG's position was that users > pay for their own accreditation costs, and that usage of the system should > be tiered to differentiate between light and heavy users. Also, the > existence of an SSAD helps us argue for keeping the private data redacted. > > > > So I have suggested various changes and deletions in the comments to > reflect this perspective. > > > > --MM > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: EPDP On Behalf Of Stephanie E Perrin > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 4:20 PM > > To: NCSG PC ; 'epdp (epdp at lists.ncsg.is)' < > epdp at lists.ncsg.is>; kathy at dnrc.tech > > Subject: [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report > > > > Here is the link to the draft comment > > > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=a4Ynu4ypaEqf%2BlpL6BQykzPkInixeCFof%2BKQVapNces%3D&reserved=0 > > > > Please let me know if you have trouble editing > > > > cheers Stephanie Perrin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EPDP mailing list > > EPDP at lists.ncsg.is > > > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ncsg.is%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fepdp&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CqqohHcA2A1lEe5KhmARjJz8ufSLhSQvjqhWrjjmNiA%3D&reserved=0 > > _______________________________________________ > > NCSG-PC mailing list > > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > _______________________________________________ > 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: From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Tue Mar 30 17:35:27 2021 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie E Perrin) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:35:27 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report In-Reply-To: References: <65df82dc-5a96-d433-a52f-5c2bb10c3aa1@digitaldiscretion.ca> Message-ID: <9cb65c0f-3a4b-5729-48b0-54e83b9f555a@mail.utoronto.ca> Fine be me. cheers Stephanie On 2021-03-30 5:33 a.m., Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > *EXTERNAL EMAIL:* > Thank you again everyone for the comments, edits and discussion. It is > 20:00 on 30th April now my time. So I have to either submit it before > I go to bed or first thing in the morning. However, if there are no > more comments to the draft, I'll prefer submitting it before I go to bed. > > Cheers, > Tomslin > > On Tue., 30 Mar. 2021, 10:46 Stephanie E Perrin, > > wrote: > > Ok I have added bits as requested....I did not accept your > rejection of > the premise that the accreditation body cost estimate may be low.? > This > is not based on my opinions alone, it is is based on all the work > done > in private by the EWG....we looked at the possible options for > accreditation of entities, and it was considered by all to be a > nightmare and potentially expensive.? I also worked on this, > including > with respect to cross border data sharing in my capacity of DG Risk > Management when I was at Service Canada....managing credentials for > users of a global system is extremely expensive.? I used the term > "may" > so we are not making a fact assertion, but I will be stunned if > they can > do this for that kind of budget. Remember that permitting the wrong > users eg criminals into the system would be the cause of a major data > breach, which comes with big $$$ penalties.? If there are no further > comments I will go in , accept your additions, and turn it over to > Tomslin to submit.? (what day is it for you Tomslin?? ) we have > approx > 24 hours to the deadline. > > cheers and thanks for the comments Milton!? I don't necessarily agree > with totally downpedalling the cost issues but am willing to > compromise > on it, we have signalled strongly that this is a new payer and you > left > that in. > > Steph > > On 2021-03-29 2:25 p.m., Mueller, Milton L wrote: > > Stephanie: > > Really appreciate the work involved in the first draft. > > I am commenting on the doc and I want to alert everyone in NCSG > that I think it is a major strategic error for our comments to > reinforce the IPC/BC's attacks on the financial viability of the > SSAD. The SSAD is viable if the users (e.g., Facebook, > Markmonitor, etc) pay for it. When the surveillance caucus says it > is too costly they are just angling for free access and our having > registrars and registrants pay for it. When you reinforce the > false argument that this will be too expensive, you are advancing > their agenda. Not deliberately, of course, but you seem to be > unaware of how your argument shoots us in the foot. > > > > During the negotiations over the SSAD, NCSG's position was that > users pay for their own accreditation costs, and that usage of the > system should be tiered to differentiate between light and heavy > users. Also, the existence of an SSAD helps us argue for keeping > the private data redacted. > > > > So I have suggested various changes and deletions in the > comments to reflect this perspective. > > > > --MM > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: EPDP > On Behalf Of Stephanie E Perrin > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 4:20 PM > > To: NCSG PC >; 'epdp (epdp at lists.ncsg.is > )' >; kathy at dnrc.tech > > Subject: [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report > > > > Here is the link to the draft comment > > > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=a4Ynu4ypaEqf%2BlpL6BQykzPkInixeCFof%2BKQVapNces%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > Please let me know if you have trouble editing > > > > cheers Stephanie Perrin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EPDP mailing list > > EPDP at lists.ncsg.is > > > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ncsg.is%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fepdp&data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CqqohHcA2A1lEe5KhmARjJz8ufSLhSQvjqhWrjjmNiA%3D&reserved=0 > > > _______________________________________________ > > NCSG-PC mailing list > > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From kathy at kathykleiman.com Tue Mar 30 18:34:41 2021 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:34:41 -0400 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report In-Reply-To: <9cb65c0f-3a4b-5729-48b0-54e83b9f555a@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: ? Huge tx to Stephanie for drafting these comments - especially during/after a busy ICANN meeting.? Tx to Milton for his edits I've read them and appreciate the hard work, deep thought, and great passion for our NCSG members and the lives that are on the line with this data.? Just yesterday the Washington Post had an article about a Egyptian man based in the US whose family has been arrested and is being tortured in Egypt for the words/posting of the son in the US Tx you both for trying so hard to preserve privacy and balance in this process. Best, Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephanie E Perrin" To: Cc: Sent:Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:35:27 -0400 Subject:Re: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report Fine be me.? cheers Stephanie On 2021-03-30 5:33 a.m., Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: EXTERNAL EMAIL: Thank you again everyone for the comments, edits and discussion. It is 20:00 on 30th April now my time. So I have to either submit it before I go to bed or first thing in the morning. However, if there are no more comments to the draft, I'll prefer submitting it before I go to bed. Cheers, Tomslin ??? On Tue., 30 Mar. 2021, 10:46 Stephanie E Perrin, wrote: Ok I have added bits as requested....I did not accept your rejection of the premise that the accreditation body cost estimate may be low.? This is not based on my opinions alone, it is is based on all the work done in private by the EWG....we looked at the possible options for accreditation of entities, and it was considered by all to be a nightmare and potentially expensive.? I also worked on this, including with respect to cross border data sharing in my capacity of DG Risk Management when I was at Service Canada....managing credentials for users of a global system is extremely expensive.? I used the term "may" so we are not making a fact assertion, but I will be stunned if they can do this for that kind of budget. Remember that permitting the wrong users eg criminals into the system would be the cause of a major data breach, which comes with big $$$ penalties.? If there are no further comments I will go in , accept your additions, and turn it over to Tomslin to submit.? (what day is it for you Tomslin?? ) we have approx 24 hours to the deadline. cheers and thanks for the comments Milton!? I don't necessarily agree with totally downpedalling the cost issues but am willing to compromise on it, we have signalled strongly that this is a new payer and you left that in. Steph On 2021-03-29 2:25 p.m., Mueller, Milton L wrote: > Stephanie: > Really appreciate the work involved in the first draft. > I am commenting on the doc and I want to alert everyone in NCSG that I think it is a major strategic error for our comments to reinforce the IPC/BC's attacks on the financial viability of the SSAD. The SSAD is viable if the users (e.g., Facebook, Markmonitor, etc) pay for it. When the surveillance caucus says it is too costly they are just angling for free access and our having registrars and registrants pay for it. When you reinforce the false argument that this will be too expensive, you are advancing their agenda. Not deliberately, of course, but you seem to be unaware of how your argument shoots us in the foot. > > During the negotiations over the SSAD, NCSG's position was that users pay for their own accreditation costs, and that usage of the system should be tiered to differentiate between light and heavy users. Also, the existence of an SSAD helps us argue for keeping the private data redacted. > > So I have suggested various changes and deletions in the comments to reflect this perspective > > --MM > > > -----Original Message----- > From: EPDP On Behalf Of Stephanie E Perrin > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 4:20 PM > To: NCSG PC ; 'epdp (epdp at lists.ncsg.is [4])' ; kathy at dnrctech [6] > Subject: [NCSG EPDP] draft comments on the EPDP final report > > Here is the link to the draft comment > https://nam12safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharingdata=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=a4Ynu4ypaEqf%2BlpL6BQykzPkInixeCFof%2BKQVapNces%3Dreserved=0 [7] > > Please let me know if you have trouble editing > > cheers Stephanie Perrin > > _______________________________________________ > EPDP mailing list > EPDP at lists.ncsg.is [8] > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ncsg.is%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fepdpdata=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=CqqohHcA2A1lEe5KhmARjJz8ufSLhSQvjqhWrjjmNiA%3Dreserved=0 [9] > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is [10] > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc [11] _______________________________________________ NCSG-PC mailing list NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is [12] https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc [13] _______________________________________________ NCSG-PC mailing list NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is [14] https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc [15] Links: ------ [1] mailto:stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca [2] mailto:epdp-bounces at lists.ncsg.is [3] mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is [4] mailto:epdp at lists.ncsg.is [5] mailto:epdp at lists.ncsg.is [6] mailto:kathy at dnrc.tech [7] https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1AEQv0knS3fI_AaCNWAr3Y4H1sf1BlUgani4dqcBQZ48%2Fedit%3Fusp%3Dsharing&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=a4Ynu4ypaEqf%2BlpL6BQykzPkInixeCFof%2BKQVapNces%3D&amp;reserved=0 [8] mailto:EPDP at lists.ncsg.is [9] https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ncsg.is%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fepdp&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cmilton%40gatech.edu%7Ca6ce1b2a2bbf4f35e41f08d8efcb5633%7C482198bbae7b4b258b7a6d7f32faa083%7C0%7C0%7C637523004364133736%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=CqqohHcA2A1lEe5KhmARjJz8ufSLhSQvjqhWrjjmNiA%3D&amp;reserved=0 [10] mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is [11] https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc [12] mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is [13] https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc [14] mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is [15] https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: