From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Mon Feb 3 15:42:19 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 22:42:19 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Thanks Pedro for the comments. Yes the budget related documents show high cost by supported traveler. We should review the different options in the strawman document. @everyone please review and share your input. @Tomslin Samme-Nlar Greg didn't say anything about deadline for input but was it discussed at GNSO council leadership? Best, Rafik On Fri, Jan 24, 2025, 20:38 Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Rafik, > > Just as a first comment before reading through all documents (focusing > (for now) only on the graphs and shorter docs), although this may be deeply > unpopular, comparing the budget for other events that I participated in one > way or another of the organization and/or supervision, hotel accommodation > seems to be in a higher percentage (meaning it looks a bit > disproportionate), especially if we take into account that flight costs > refer to the participation of (many) people from all over the world. I > note, however, that this may be caused by the large amount of days some > ICANN meetings have. > > Cordially, > > *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* > Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR > Researcher > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC > & NCSG > (ICANN), > YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC > Brasil > This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by > mistake, please reply informing it. > > > Em seg., 20 de jan. de 2025 ?s 22:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < > ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: > >> Hi all, >> >> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >> context. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community >> Group >> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> >> >> >> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >> | >> >> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >> | >> >> - ICANN >> | >> >> - ATT00001.txt >> | >> >> >> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >> us what you think >> >> For more information click here >> >> >> Dear SG/C Chairs, >> >> >> >> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >> >> >> >> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >> >> >> >> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >> provide feedback on: >> >> 1. What options are missing? >> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >> put out for public comment). >> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >> >> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to ICANN. >> I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and will >> likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the ?strawman? >> will be necessary. >> >> >> >> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts their >> work. >> >> >> >> Thank You! >> >> >> >> Greg >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - Meeting >> #1 - How We Meet Community Group >> >> >> >> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >> know the content is safe. >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had a >> wonderful start to 2025. >> >> >> >> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the ICANN >> Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >> Date: 13 January 2024 >> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >> >> >> >> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. >> Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for >> this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC >> Chairs: >> >> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >> 2. Agenda >> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >> >> Background Documents: >> >> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >> >> >> >> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are keeping >> a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, meeting >> agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any document that >> we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >> >> >> >> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >> >> >> >> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >> >> >> >> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at >> the meeting! >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> >> Alp Eken >> >> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-EC mailing list >> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Mon Feb 3 16:03:40 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 23:03:40 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Topics for session with GAC Message-ID: Hi all, As you know we will have 30 min session with GAC in Seattle meeting. We envisioned this from our side as an outreach to GAC and sharing our perspective on some topics. We have this list of possible topics but we have to shorten it to 2 or 3 topics (unlikely we will be able to cover 3 topics well in 30 minutes) The list is: 1. HRIA on DNS Abuse, 2. Registration Data, 3. gTLD Applicant Suppport, 4. Closed Generics, 5. PICs, 6. Latin Diacritics I believe HRIA on DNS abuse is among our top priority, possibly registration data too. But looking forward to hear from the committee member about the shortlist. I would like to confirm who also can join and lead for the proposed topics. Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Tue Feb 4 01:05:00 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:05:00 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, My analysis, topic by topic: - A. Meeting Locations & Purposes - 1 - Should be done, but does not seem to have that high of an impact, because ICANN already plans in advance. There is an ideal time in advance to buy airline tickets (too early makes the price go up again), but space contracts are actually cheaper. That, however, doesn't seem like such a substantial saving. - 2 - If the economy here is really substantial, it should be done. However, it does not seem a high impact option. - 3 - Seems like a bad idea, plain and simple. ICANN should rotate more, not less, going for regions where the local costs of the meetings would be lower, prioritizing cost-effectiveness instead of comfort. - 4 - This is a really high-impact alternative resource-wise, but this applies to everything (including negative impacts). Should be done only if the other alternatives that are well received do not accumulate to the amount needed. - 5 - This is a relatively impactful measure that could be implemented, but with a lot of care. I feel there is room for optimization here, but the community would have to organize itself a little better and with more previous planning. - 6 - When allied with 5, this is an interesting alternative when we are talking about good impact without too much harm being done. - 7 - Seems like a bad idea. It is better to have more online work, culminating in physical meetings, than having a multiple-day online meeting, considering that those who do not work specifically with ICANN wouldn't be able to focus without traveling (because of timezones, work commitments that would continue, etc). - B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources - 1 and 2 (the idea behind those two is too close to be separated on a comment) - See number 5, 'A', with the difference that this alternative seems much less impactful (financially speaking). - 3 - Really do not have a good idea on this one. Does not seem high-impact financially, but could be, and it largely affects the experience of both onsite and online participants. - 4 - This one should be considered after we have AI tools that are efficient enough, and it would indeed be a good alternative. At the moment, however, this should not be considered, since it would be against a major concern of the community about accessibility. - 5 - See comment on A, '4 to 6', above. - 6 - This seems like the most consensual thing to let go of if we are thinking about necessary and good to have. - 7 - For sure. If it is possible and could fill much of the gap, this should be priority one. - 8 - Heavily against it. This seems like the worst alternative of them all. - C. Travel-Related Matters - 1 - I really don't like this option. I think having staff on site is important and this is a good perk for the job, which seems to be very hard. ICANN already seems to be cutting costs in this space, and going beyond what is already being implemented could have negative impacts on the meetings for the rest of the community. - 2 - Can't comment on this one without more info on what this item really means. It looks, as of now, of a way to justify suppressing funded travelers, but this justification looks fragile and could be biased. Cordially, *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC Brasil This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by mistake, please reply informing it. Em seg., 3 de fev. de 2025 ?s 10:42, Rafik Dammak escreveu: > Thanks Pedro for the comments. Yes the budget related documents show high > cost by supported traveler. We should review the different options in the > strawman document. > @everyone please review and share your input. > @Tomslin Samme-Nlar Greg didn't say anything > about deadline for input but was it discussed at GNSO council leadership? > > Best, > > Rafik > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025, 20:38 Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Rafik, >> >> Just as a first comment before reading through all documents (focusing >> (for now) only on the graphs and shorter docs), although this may be deeply >> unpopular, comparing the budget for other events that I participated in one >> way or another of the organization and/or supervision, hotel accommodation >> seems to be in a higher percentage (meaning it looks a bit >> disproportionate), especially if we take into account that flight costs >> refer to the participation of (many) people from all over the world. I >> note, however, that this may be caused by the large amount of days some >> ICANN meetings have. >> >> Cordially, >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >> Researcher >> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >> & NCSG >> (ICANN), >> YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC >> Brasil >> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by >> mistake, please reply informing it. >> >> >> Em seg., 20 de jan. de 2025 ?s 22:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < >> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >>> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>> context. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>> Community Group >>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>> >>> >>> >>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - ICANN >>> | >>> >>> - ATT00001.txt >>> | >>> >>> >>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >>> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >>> us what you think >>> >>> For more information click here >>> >>> >>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>> >>> >>> >>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >>> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>> >>> >>> >>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>> >>> >>> >>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>> provide feedback on: >>> >>> 1. What options are missing? >>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >>> put out for public comment). >>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>> >>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>> their work. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank You! >>> >>> >>> >>> Greg >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - Meeting >>> #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>> >>> >>> >>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >>> know the content is safe. >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> >>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had a >>> wonderful start to 2025. >>> >>> >>> >>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>> >>> >>> >>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. >>> Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for >>> this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC >>> Chairs: >>> >>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>> 2. Agenda >>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>> >>> Background Documents: >>> >>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>> >>> >>> >>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are keeping >>> a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, meeting >>> agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any document that >>> we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>> >>> >>> >>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >>> >>> >>> >>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>> >>> >>> >>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at >>> the meeting! >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> Alp Eken >>> >>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>> >>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From PolicyCalendar at icann.org Tue Feb 4 14:06:36 2025 From: PolicyCalendar at icann.org (ICANN Policy Calendar) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 12:06:36 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Policy Call | 07 April at 11:30 UTC Message-ID: <71d3101cc74f4a4796245b2e1003eef0@icann.org> Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Monday, 07 April at 11:30 UTC. 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: 2033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From PolicyCalendar at icann.org Tue Feb 4 14:07:02 2025 From: PolicyCalendar at icann.org (ICANN Policy Calendar) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 12:07:02 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Policy Call | 12 May at 11:30 UTC Message-ID: Please join the NCSG Monthly Policy call on Monday, 12 May at 11:30 UTC. 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: 2029 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Thu Feb 6 23:52:25 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 18:52:25 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [For Review] NCSG Public Comment - Third Proceeding for Proposed Language for Draft Sections of Next Round AGB Message-ID: Hi everyone, Sorry for sending this on such a short deadline, but we had to use all the time available to finish the document. So, here is the link for our Comment to the "Third Proceeding for Proposed Language for Draft Sections of Next Round AGB ", for the NCSG Policy Committee to review: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vWhVaPxkqelYu5PK1hn5E7uV1OMVpqZmikB_ehGSuOw/edit?usp=sharing There was a lot to comment on, so it has a few more pages than the usual Public Comment, but for a very good reason (: Cordially, *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC Brasil This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by mistake, please reply informing it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Fri Feb 7 04:56:17 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 13:56:17 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Public Comment - Third Proceeding for Proposed Language for Draft Sections of Next Round AGB In-Reply-To: References: <03d95705-f733-4d96-bfa3-6ea2374cd25b.05b495a4-acd5-4405-a5fb-09b87eaaeafb.5a406984-dbcd-4f78-9049-512140daabc0@emailsignatures365.codetwo.com> Message-ID: Hi PC, all, The comment for the third proceeding for proposed language for draft Sections of the Next round AGB has been shared by the drafting team here for your review. Tricky one because deadline is Feb 7th at midnight UTC, so if you can comment urgently, that would be much appreciated. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vWhVaPxkqelYu5PK1hn5E7uV1OMVpqZmikB_ehGSuOw/edit Warmly, Tomslin ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Pedro de Perdig?o Lana Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025, 08:16 Subject: Re: Public Comment - Third Proceeding for Proposed Language for Draft Sections of Next Round AGB To: Angie Orejuela Cc: Tomslin Samme-Nlar , Michaela Nakayama Shapiro < michaela.shapiro at article19.org>, Hakikur Rahman , Stephen Dakyi , John Gbadamosi , Bolutife Adisa , Emmanuel Vitus NCSG NPOC < emmanuelvitus at gmail.com>, Kathy Kleiman , farzaneh badii , Bruna Martins dos Santos < bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>, Juan Manuel Rojas Hi Angie and all! The contributions you all made (thanks for that, and sorry for my lack of further orientations and messages in the past few days) were used in different parts of our Public Comment. Some of those were incorporated into other sections, some were adapted to the overall style of the document, and some of them were copied and pasted in what will be our main submission (together with the form, that would not allow for a structured and systematized submission, a pdf file will be sent, so our comment can be better understood). I can only thank you all for your hard work and for helping in this effort. This Comment will be surely one of the most (if not the most) substantial one, and we hope it will be useful in improving the final text of the AGB! If you'd like to review the text, this is the time! (: Cordially, *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC Brasil This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by mistake, please reply informing it. Em qui., 6 de fev. de 2025 ?s 14:15, Angie Orejuela escreveu: > Happy Belated Birthday Pedro! > > Please let me know if I can assist with this more. > > Best Regards, > > *Angie M. Orejuela* > > mobile: +1 201-759-4972 > LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/angiemorejuela > email: amorejuela3 at gmail.com > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 12:01?PM Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Tomslin, >> >> Yes, I'll do it today! I couldn't focus on this during the last few days >> and had my birthday celebration on the weekend, when I usually focus on >> voluntary efforts, so I left the bulk of it to be done today, which is the >> actual birthday and a day off from work. In a few hours we will have a more >> complete version (: >> >> Cordially, >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >> Researcher >> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >> & NCSG >> (ICANN), >> YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC >> Brasil >> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by >> mistake, please reply informing it. >> >> >> Em qui., 6 de fev. de 2025 ?s 05:19, Tomslin Samme-Nlar < >> mesumbeslin at gmail.com> escreveu: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I noticed you didn't get a chance to clean up the document for it to be >>> shared. Any chance that can be done today so that the PC quickly looks >>> through it? >>> >>> Warmly, >>> Tomslin >>> >>> On Tue, 28 Jan 2025, 22:15 Michaela Nakayama Shapiro, < >>> michaela.shapiro at article19.org> wrote: >>> >>>> INTERNAL >>>> >>>> INTERNAL >>>> >>>> Hi Pedro, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you again for facilitating this process! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I wanted to ask if anyone in this group could help me with a question I >>>> put in the doc >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Under the Privacy Policy section *7. Security*, I posited that ?*Service >>>> providers (in this case, ICANN) should only be required to disclose >>>> personal information about their users subject to a court order??. *As >>>> I am not a legal expert, *I would appreciate having any insight from >>>> the lawyers in the group as to whether this claim is accurate/well-phrased.* >>>> This is based on my reading of ICANN?s privacy policy and the data >>>> protection laws in place within the jurisdictions that ICANN operates (e.g. >>>> the GDPR, among other legislation). However, my concern is this is a >>>> stretch and/or distracts from the main point, in which I could remove this >>>> and focus our intervention on ensuring that the privacy policy is in line >>>> with international human rights law. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Any input is welcome! I?m also happy to chat through anything. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Michaela >>>> >>>> >>>> *Michaela Nakayama Shapiro *(she/her/hers) >>>> Programme Officer - Censorship >>>> [image: Logo.png] Defending freedom of >>>> expression >>>> and information >>>> *www.article19.org* Subscribe to our >>>> Newsletter >>>> >>>> Follow us >>>> [image: Bluesky1x.png] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> [image: women-journalists-banner.jpeg] >>>> >>>> >>>> *From: *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>> *Date: *Friday, 24 January 2025 at 11:14 >>>> *To: *Michaela Nakayama Shapiro , cc: >>>> Angie Orejuela , email at hakik.org < >>>> email at hakik.org>, Stephen Dakyi , >>>> john at mediarightsagenda.org >>>> *Cc: *Tomslin Samme-Nlar , Bolutife Adisa < >>>> adisabolutifeo at gmail.com>, Emmanuel Vitus NCSG NPOC < >>>> emmanuelvitus at gmail.com>, Kathy Kleiman , >>>> farzaneh badii , Bruna Martins dos Santos < >>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>, Juan Manuel Rojas >>>> *Subject: *Re: Public Comment - Third Proceeding for Proposed Language >>>> for Draft Sections of Next Round AGB >>>> >>>> Dear everyone, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> A kind reminder of our second deadline, to add your bullet points to >>>> the document :D >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> (I'm also late on this, so don't feel pressured, I'll write mine at the >>>> end of today!) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Cordially, >>>> >>>> >>>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>>> >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >>>> & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), >>>> YouthLACIGF , IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> >>>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received >>>> by mistake, please reply informing it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Em dom., 19 de jan. de 2025 ?s 13:39, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >>>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> escreveu: >>>> >>>> Hi everyone! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So, for those who could not be at the meeting, and sharing what we >>>> talked about, here is what we have to do (all dates here consider the end >>>> of the day as the deadline, i.e., midnight UTC/GMT): >>>> >>>> 1. *By tomorrow, 20/01/2025,* we will *assign ourselves a topic >>>> (you can do this directly on Google Docs or by responding to this message)* >>>> as they are divided in the Public Comment form for submission (please note >>>> that this is not entirely aligned with the list of documents provided to us >>>> to comment on, since a few of these topics are in the same document, and it >>>> makes sense to group them together when choosing here): >>>> >>>> >>>> - Application Comments (Topic 28: Role of Application Comment) >>>> - GAC Member Early Warnings (Topic 30: GAC Consensus Advice and >>>> GAC Early Warning) >>>> - GAC Advice (Topic 30: GAC Consensus Advice and GAC Early >>>> Warning) >>>> - Singular/Plural Notification (Topic 24: String Similarity >>>> Evaluations) >>>> - Objections (Topic 31: Objections and Topic 32: Limited >>>> Challenge/Appeal Mechanism) >>>> - ICANN Dispute Resolution Procedure (Topic 31: Objections and >>>> Topic 32: Limited Challenge/Appeal Mechanism) >>>> - ICANN Objection Appeals Procedure (Topic 31: Objections and >>>> Topic 32: Limited Challenge/Appeal Mechanism) >>>> - New gTLD Program: Next Round Privacy Policy >>>> - Post-Contracting >>>> - DNS Stability >>>> - Security and Stability (Topic 26: Security and Stability) >>>> - Different TLD Types (Topic 4: Different TLD Types) >>>> - Legal Compliance Check >>>> >>>> >>>> 2. *Read the document listed in the Public Comment page *( >>>> https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/proposed-language-for-draft-sections-of-the-next-round-applicant-guidebook-01-02-2024) >>>> *related to the topic(s) you got*. Also read the background >>>> provided on the same page, so you can better understand the context. >>>> 3. *Read other NCSG materials that are related to your chosen issue* >>>> (even if it is not exactly about the same thing) to have an idea of what >>>> non-commercial positions are. A few examples: >>>> >>>> >>>> - Our Comment regarding the Second Proceeding: >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yl4g5N-BwW6zzr4aHkQgkBBwCmtC62xoOqC6d9aaPS0/edit?tab=t.0 >>>> - We have here a great list of other public comments that could >>>> be relevant to the topic you chose (for example, the person who chose the >>>> Privacy Policy topic on the Third Proceeding will surely find a lot of >>>> non-commercial arguments in other public comments related to the privacy of >>>> registrants): >>>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Public+Comments >>>> - Searching for policy discussions that happened in the mailing >>>> list may also be useful: >>>> https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A0=NCSG-DISCUSS >>>> >>>> >>>> 4. *Until JANUARY 23rd (Thursday), *after reading the materials, *write >>>> short bullet points on the Google Docs with*: >>>> >>>> >>>> - 4.1: *Copying and pasting section of the document you are reading* >>>> that you believe to be strange, risky, or against NCSG positions in the >>>> document. You can also select sections that you think are really positive, >>>> to compliment the work done. >>>> - 4.2: *The reasons why you believe these sections are >>>> problematic*, or the reasons why you would like to highlight the >>>> right choice that was made by those who wrote the document. >>>> - 4.3: *The reasons why you believe these sections are important >>>> from a non-commercial perspective* (are rights of the >>>> registrants at risk? Is that rule a problem in authoritarian countries? Is >>>> that requirement a barrier for non-traditional applicants for a new gTLD?) >>>> or are important to the whole community (is that a bureaucratic rule that >>>> won't serve a real purpose and make the process slower and less efficient? >>>> Is the text confusing or contradictory?) >>>> - 4.4: *What are your proposals to make it better * - what would >>>> you suppress, change, or add to the current text/wording. If you do not >>>> have a solution yet, that is not a problem, we will have other experts from >>>> the non-commercial community helping us as we go by and in the final week >>>> before submission *(we will also leave it open for comments of >>>> others from NCSG from February 1st to February 6th)*. >>>> >>>> >>>> - I've copied a few of those who have worked on issues that are >>>> relevant to this Third Proceeding before (Bolutife, Emmanuel, Kathy, Farzi, >>>> Bruna e Juan), as listed in our Public Comment page, so that, *if >>>> they have the time and availability*, they can help with >>>> their knowledge and experience on some of the topics that may be more >>>> complex. If you know someone that I forgot, please add them to the loop! (: >>>> >>>> >>>> 5. *By January 29th, **we will write a more complete draft, >>>> expanding on the arguments*. We can already start to help what >>>> others are writing, but there will be a phase specifically for that. >>>> 6. *By February 1st, **we will review our own text and the text >>>> from others on subjects that you are also interested in*, so as to >>>> help each other and make our whole argument more consistent and complete. *We >>>> will then share our work with the NCSG mailing list*. >>>> 7. *By February 6th*, the non-commercial community will review and >>>> comment on our draft. We can also use this time to do our own reviews if >>>> there wasn't enough time to do this in the previous phase. >>>> 8. *By February 7th morning, **we will do a last review adding all >>>> the contributions* that were not already incorporated as they were >>>> being made from Feb. 1st to Feb. 6th, so Tomslin can submit the doc >>>> respecting the Public Comment deadline. >>>> >>>> *Remember to add your text on suggestion mode, so we can track >>>> contributions, especially when you are commenting on/helping with what >>>> others are writing.* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If you have any questions or if any clarification is needed, just let >>>> me know! If you would like to change any deadline or add another step you >>>> think could be useful, I would also appreciate your input. *Thank you >>>> all so much for your time, effort, and energy, this is what we need as NCSG >>>> and a great path to get more recognition and appreciation within the >>>> community.* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We have been receiving good feedback on some of our last public >>>> comments, so if we do this right it will surely have an impact on the final >>>> version of the Applicant Guidebook (AGB). Let's get to work, team, and >>>> produce another great Public Comment! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Cordially, >>>> >>>> >>>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>>> >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >>>> & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), >>>> YouthLACIGF , IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> >>>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received >>>> by mistake, please reply informing it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Em dom., 19 de jan. de 2025 ?s 10:04, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >>>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> escreveu: >>>> >>>> Hi everyone! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind reminder we are about to start. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Cordially, >>>> >>>> >>>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>>> >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >>>> & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), >>>> YouthLACIGF , IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> >>>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received >>>> by mistake, please reply informing it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Em sex., 17 de jan. de 2025 ?s 19:04, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >>>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> escreveu: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Creating a new email chain so we focus our conversation to write NCSG >>>> public comment regarding the *Third Proceeding for Proposed Language >>>> for Draft Sections of Next Round AGB* here. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Link: >>>> https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/third-proceeding-for-proposed-language-for-draft-sections-of-next-round-agb-19-12-2024 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Our working doc: >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vWhVaPxkqelYu5PK1hn5E7uV1OMVpqZmikB_ehGSuOw/edit >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We already have a winning time for our planning meeting, which is >>>> January 19th (Sunday), at 13h00 (or 1 pm) UTC/GMT. I think 30 min will be >>>> enough. Here is the link for our meeting (I've already sent a calendar >>>> invite): >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Pedro de Perdig?o Lana is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. >>>> Join Zoom Meeting >>>> >>>> https://us04web.zoom.us/j/75802194797?pwd=n0WpNiHG7d9klej6GYmlndwCa6TKQ8.1 >>>> >>>> Meeting ID: 758 0219 4797 >>>> Passcode: 9GVaq8 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Cordially, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>>> >>>> Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador ( >>>> GEDAI/UFPR ) >>>> >>>> Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), >>>> >>>> Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >>>> & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), >>>> YouthLACIGF , IODA e CC >>>> Brasil . >>>> >>>> Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida >>>> por engano, favor responder informando o erro. >>>> >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: linkedin_199dc89c-14aa-41cd-b2a7-37b8ae8d667d.png Type: image/png Size: 720 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: women-journalists-banner_b1cece5c-a86d-452f-b9f8-9e72943680f6.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15471 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo_1c766458-35ee-431a-9a22-e00b47cd2091.png Type: image/png Size: 6889 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bluesky1x_864ef831-9476-4116-88b8-2a3410741630.png Type: image/png Size: 788 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: instagram_05fbcc72-6df2-442b-8c34-146d0e9d8c41.png Type: image/png Size: 840 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: x_d21e0607-da5a-44a7-80c7-e2d86bc18a92.png Type: image/png Size: 895 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: newsletter_02744340-c607-4374-8a37-11b8b216096d.png Type: image/png Size: 379 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: facebook_2853baa0-f060-42e6-b448-6a8788c1b5dd.png Type: image/png Size: 670 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: youtube_ffe95af1-d962-4acd-ab59-4eb4ea07466e.png Type: image/png Size: 678 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Feb 7 10:29:38 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 17:29:38 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas Message-ID: 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 can share from his side. For the NCSG issue forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you share more about the selected topic and agenda? So please give me your input about the points above. Best, Rafik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Fri Feb 7 14:28:17 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 23:28:17 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] ICANN82 NCSG PC Membership Agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrea, Thank you. We'll begin work on this now. Warmly, Tomslin On Thu, 30 Jan 2025, 01:41 Andrea Glandon, wrote: > Hello all, > > > > I wanted to start the conversation about the NCSG PC agendas for ICANN82. > I have created a Google doc below. Reminder that there are 2 NCSG PC > sessions at ICANN82. The first session is on Saturday, 1500-1600 local > time. The second session is on Tuesday, 1030-1200 local time. Both agendas > can be added to this Google doc. > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-0AkNo5pDklLaPB-C5BHPrQSEOKQc57rLdrfPO8GObg/edit?usp=sharing > > > > Thanks! > > *Andrea Glandon* > > Policy Operations Sr. Coordinator > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > *Skype ID:* acglandon76 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Feb 10 13:01:14 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 22:01:14 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, I think that email came from staff after the leadership meeting, so no deadlines have been discussed. However, we are meeting tomorrow or today (depending on where you are in the world) and I will update once I get this information. Warmly, Tomslin On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 00:42, Rafik Dammak wrote: > Thanks Pedro for the comments. Yes the budget related documents show high > cost by supported traveler. We should review the different options in the > strawman document. > @everyone please review and share your input. > @Tomslin Samme-Nlar Greg didn't say anything > about deadline for input but was it discussed at GNSO council leadership? > > Best, > > Rafik > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025, 20:38 Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Rafik, >> >> Just as a first comment before reading through all documents (focusing >> (for now) only on the graphs and shorter docs), although this may be deeply >> unpopular, comparing the budget for other events that I participated in one >> way or another of the organization and/or supervision, hotel accommodation >> seems to be in a higher percentage (meaning it looks a bit >> disproportionate), especially if we take into account that flight costs >> refer to the participation of (many) people from all over the world. I >> note, however, that this may be caused by the large amount of days some >> ICANN meetings have. >> >> Cordially, >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >> Researcher >> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >> & NCSG >> (ICANN), >> YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC >> Brasil >> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by >> mistake, please reply informing it. >> >> >> Em seg., 20 de jan. de 2025 ?s 22:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < >> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >>> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>> context. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>> Community Group >>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>> >>> >>> >>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - ICANN >>> | >>> >>> - ATT00001.txt >>> | >>> >>> >>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >>> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >>> us what you think >>> >>> For more information click here >>> >>> >>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>> >>> >>> >>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >>> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>> >>> >>> >>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>> >>> >>> >>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>> provide feedback on: >>> >>> 1. What options are missing? >>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >>> put out for public comment). >>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>> >>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>> their work. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank You! >>> >>> >>> >>> Greg >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - Meeting >>> #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>> >>> >>> >>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >>> know the content is safe. >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> >>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had a >>> wonderful start to 2025. >>> >>> >>> >>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>> >>> >>> >>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. >>> Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for >>> this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC >>> Chairs: >>> >>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>> 2. Agenda >>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>> >>> Background Documents: >>> >>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>> >>> >>> >>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are keeping >>> a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, meeting >>> agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any document that >>> we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>> >>> >>> >>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >>> >>> >>> >>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>> >>> >>> >>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at >>> the meeting! >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> Alp Eken >>> >>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>> >>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Feb 11 01:10:30 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 08:10:30 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 In-Reply-To: <90717C28-7B05-4683-B64F-5C70623A616E@icann.org> References: <90717C28-7B05-4683-B64F-5C70623A616E@icann.org> Message-ID: Hi everyone, I reached out to CSG leadership to coordinate as we can have each 1 volunteer. @Tomslin Samme-Nlar can PC handle selection and call for volunteer in short time Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Terri Agnew via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership Date: Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 06:49 Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org Cc: GNSO-Secs , Joe Catapano Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder Engagement team. Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be *time-limited*, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) *answering specific questions*. With your help, we hope to surface *implementable ideas* with *measurable impact*to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours *total*, inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this year. Participation is *voluntary*. An SG/C may opt to not to send a volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). Interested community members may email joe.catapano at icann.org with one or two named volunteers (per House) for this activity by Friday, February 21, 2025. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Policy Team Supporting the GNSO _______________________________________________ GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org _______________________________________________ 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 rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Feb 11 02:20:37 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 09:20:37 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Thanks Tomslin, Greg sent an email saying the deadline is 14th Feb. so last chance to chime in and share input . Rafik Le lun. 10 f?vr. 2025 ? 20:01, Tomslin Samme-Nlar a ?crit : > Hi Rafik, > > I think that email came from staff after the leadership meeting, so no > deadlines have been discussed. However, we are meeting tomorrow or today > (depending on where you are in the world) and I will update once I get this > information. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > > On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 00:42, Rafik Dammak wrote: > >> Thanks Pedro for the comments. Yes the budget related documents show high >> cost by supported traveler. We should review the different options in the >> strawman document. >> @everyone please review and share your input. >> @Tomslin Samme-Nlar Greg didn't say anything >> about deadline for input but was it discussed at GNSO council leadership? >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025, 20:38 Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Rafik, >>> >>> Just as a first comment before reading through all documents (focusing >>> (for now) only on the graphs and shorter docs), although this may be deeply >>> unpopular, comparing the budget for other events that I participated in one >>> way or another of the organization and/or supervision, hotel accommodation >>> seems to be in a higher percentage (meaning it looks a bit >>> disproportionate), especially if we take into account that flight costs >>> refer to the participation of (many) people from all over the world. I >>> note, however, that this may be caused by the large amount of days some >>> ICANN meetings have. >>> >>> Cordially, >>> >>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>> Researcher >>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >>> & NCSG >>> (ICANN), >>> YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC >>> Brasil >>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received >>> by mistake, please reply informing it. >>> >>> >>> Em seg., 20 de jan. de 2025 ?s 22:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < >>> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >>>> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>>> context. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>>> Community Group >>>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - ICANN >>>> | >>>> >>>> - ATT00001.txt >>>> | >>>> >>>> >>>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >>>> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >>>> us what you think >>>> >>>> For more information click here >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >>>> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>>> provide feedback on: >>>> >>>> 1. What options are missing? >>>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >>>> put out for public comment). >>>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>>> >>>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>>> their work. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank You! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Greg >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - >>>> Meeting #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >>>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >>>> know the content is safe. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had >>>> a wonderful start to 2025. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. >>>> Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for >>>> this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC >>>> Chairs: >>>> >>>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>>> 2. Agenda >>>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >>>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>>> >>>> Background Documents: >>>> >>>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are >>>> keeping a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, >>>> meeting agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any >>>> document that we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at >>>> the meeting! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Alp Eken >>>> >>>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>>> >>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Tue Feb 11 04:59:02 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 13:59:02 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Hi all, *A. Meeting Locations & Purposes* I personally support #7. On #1, what I don't see is possible impact of booking flights "well in advance" can cause to overall cost due to the risk of closer-to-date changes *B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources* I find #1 and #2 interesting if done together. *C. Travel-Related Matters* No to the options provided. Warmly, Tomslin On Tue, 21 Jan 2025, 12:32 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC, wrote: > Hi all, > > there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should > review the different options proposed in the strawman document. > I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some > context. > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < > gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> > Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 > Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community > Group > To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org > > > > - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * > - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf > | > > - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf > | > > - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf > | > > - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf > | > > - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf > | > > - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf > | > > - ICANN > | > > - ATT00001.txt > | > > > Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. > Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell > us what you think > > For more information click here > > > Dear SG/C Chairs, > > > > I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for ?How > We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). > > > > As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential > recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. > > > > Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN > meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet > Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft > strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I > think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and > provide feedback on: > > 1. What options are missing? > 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be put > out for public comment). > 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? > > I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to ICANN. > I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and will > likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the ?strawman? > will be necessary. > > > > Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts their > work. > > > > Thank You! > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM > *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org > *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - Meeting > #1 - How We Meet Community Group > > > > *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not > click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know > the content is safe. > > > > Dear all, > > > > Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had a > wonderful start to 2025. > > > > Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the ICANN > Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: > Date: 13 January 2024 > Time: 1700-1800 UTC > > > > We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. > Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for > this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC > Chairs: > > 1. Meeting invitation ICS file > 2. Agenda > 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy > 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report > > Background Documents: > > 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups > 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings > 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings > 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings > > > > We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are keeping a > drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, meeting > agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any document that > we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: > https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link > > > > Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. > > > > I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any > questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue > please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . > > > > We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at > the meeting! > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Alp Eken > > Policy Development Support Senior Specialist > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > > _______________________________________________ > GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org > To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org > > _______________________________________________ > 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. > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-EC mailing list > NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Feb 11 08:32:34 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:32:34 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: hi all, regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: 1- I think #1 is common sense practice about deciding and planning earlier to control cost, 2- I am not in favor of #2, the risk is there will be recurring countries with challenges for parts of the community to attend i.e.g access to visa etc. I think IETF does or did that and it is not a good example IMHO of diversity. 3- #3 proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented .e.g are we will visit some regions more than others within the 5 years time frame? 4- I know it can be almost a taboo but we really should question having 3 meetings per year , it is a non negligible time commitment and I believe it is a hindrance for many to participate. 5- While it can bring some cost reduction regarding hotels and venues, it doesn't change the impact on attendees and based on policy forum examples, it will require overhaul of agenda and schedule. it can also impact the possibility of having the NCPH day meeting 6- I think that makes sense as an approach as we are trying for an NCPH meeting but it can possibly impact GNSO council SPS or WGs F2F (I didn't hear about any since EPDP on RDS)? 7- if it is a virtual meeting in the same format as during the pandemic it might work fine, with challenges but can be handled better than full remote participation as-is now. It will be kind of interessional. regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources 1- I think that is already ongoing. I think such a constraint will encourage everyone org and community to rethink what the sessions priority. 2- if that is targeting all sessions, setting criteria and deciding will be impossible. We usually have a challenge to agree on the community session. I think it is inapplicable but if it is about some informational session mostly proposed by ICANN staff, it might be worthy to explore. 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. 4- reducing interpretation and scribing, I think that can impact local attendance experience. 5- not sure how the block schedule can be revisited, GNSO already uses the weekend (well we used saturday and sunday previously). it might be more related to other parts of the community? 6- I understand that reduction of networking receptions is already implemented? 7- that can be explored but as noted requires much effort to work with local hosts and sponsors. I think it is typical of any conference 8- we can say to that proposal in many languages Regarding Travel-Related Matters 1- I think it is already being implemented and we need to see the impact in terms of support and meeting staff. 2- this is a pandora box : who will decide who should attend and it will create more tension within the community. I highly doubt if that is effective or good usage of community time. regarding metrics. 1- average is not a good metric and doesn't give a good idea about distribution of cost 2- for the rest I guess they are fine to set We need to consolidate and get a common position. At least we can agree on what is no-go for us. Best, Rafik Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 12:57, Tomslin Samme-Nlar a ?crit : > Hi all, > > *A. Meeting Locations & Purposes* > I personally support #7. On #1, what I don't see is possible impact of > booking flights "well in advance" can cause to overall cost due to the risk > of closer-to-date changes > > *B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources* > I find #1 and #2 interesting if done together. > > *C. Travel-Related Matters* > No to the options provided. > > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > On Tue, 21 Jan 2025, 12:32 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC, < > ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >> context. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community >> Group >> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> >> >> >> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >> | >> >> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >> | >> >> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >> | >> >> - ICANN >> | >> >> - ATT00001.txt >> | >> >> >> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >> us what you think >> >> For more information click here >> >> >> Dear SG/C Chairs, >> >> >> >> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >> >> >> >> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >> >> >> >> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >> provide feedback on: >> >> 1. What options are missing? >> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >> put out for public comment). >> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >> >> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to ICANN. >> I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and will >> likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the ?strawman? >> will be necessary. >> >> >> >> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts their >> work. >> >> >> >> Thank You! >> >> >> >> Greg >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - Meeting >> #1 - How We Meet Community Group >> >> >> >> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >> know the content is safe. >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had a >> wonderful start to 2025. >> >> >> >> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the ICANN >> Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >> Date: 13 January 2024 >> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >> >> >> >> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. >> Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for >> this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC >> Chairs: >> >> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >> 2. Agenda >> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >> >> Background Documents: >> >> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >> >> >> >> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are keeping >> a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, meeting >> agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any document that >> we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >> >> >> >> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >> >> >> >> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >> >> >> >> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at >> the meeting! >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> >> Alp Eken >> >> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >> >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-EC mailing list >> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Tue Feb 11 22:40:38 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 17:40:38 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, I think there is already a high level of agreement among us three, at least. The biggest divergence seems to be around having one online meeting a year (I think just reducing it from 3 to 2 and improving the online decentralized methodology of work is better). And I'd still get back to my first suggestion, reg: possible downgrade regarding what hotels ICANN chooses, even if it is not popular (but, then again, nice to have vs. necessary to have). Maybe something a bit less luxurious, while still very comfortable, would already have a substantial impact, but ICANN should look a bit more around that so this could be objectively evaluated since it could heavily affect the "experience" criteria mentioned in the documents. Cordially, *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC Brasil This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by mistake, please reply informing it. Em ter., 11 de fev. de 2025 ?s 03:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: > hi all, > > regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: > 1- I think #1 is common sense practice about deciding and planning earlier > to control cost, > 2- I am not in favor of #2, the risk is there will be recurring countries > with challenges for parts of the community to attend i.e.g access to visa > etc. I think IETF does or did that and it is not a good example IMHO of > diversity. > 3- #3 proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented .e.g are > we will visit some regions more than others within the 5 years time frame? > 4- I know it can be almost a taboo but we really should question having 3 > meetings per year , it is a non negligible time commitment and I believe it > is a hindrance for many to participate. > 5- While it can bring some cost reduction regarding hotels and venues, it > doesn't change the impact on attendees and based on policy forum examples, > it will require overhaul of agenda and schedule. it can also impact the > possibility of having the NCPH day meeting > 6- I think that makes sense as an approach as we are trying for an NCPH > meeting but it can possibly impact GNSO council SPS or WGs F2F (I didn't > hear about any since EPDP on RDS)? > 7- if it is a virtual meeting in the same format as during the pandemic it > might work fine, with challenges but can be handled better than full > remote participation as-is now. It will be kind of interessional. > > regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources > 1- I think that is already ongoing. I think such a constraint will > encourage everyone org and community to rethink what the sessions priority. > 2- if that is targeting all sessions, setting criteria and deciding will > be impossible. We usually have a challenge to agree on the community > session. I think it is inapplicable but if it is about some informational > session mostly proposed by ICANN staff, it might be worthy to explore. > 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. > 4- reducing interpretation and scribing, I think that can impact local > attendance experience. > 5- not sure how the block schedule can be revisited, GNSO already uses the > weekend (well we used saturday and sunday previously). it might be more > related to other parts of the community? > 6- I understand that reduction of networking receptions is already > implemented? > 7- that can be explored but as noted requires much effort to work with > local hosts and sponsors. I think it is typical of any conference > 8- we can say to that proposal in many languages > > Regarding Travel-Related Matters > 1- I think it is already being implemented and we need to see the impact > in terms of support and meeting staff. > 2- this is a pandora box : who will decide who should attend and it will > create more tension within the community. I highly doubt if that is > effective or good usage of community time. > > regarding metrics. > 1- average is not a good metric and doesn't give a good idea about > distribution of cost > 2- for the rest I guess they are fine to set > > We need to consolidate and get a common position. At least we can agree on > what is no-go for us. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > > > > > Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 12:57, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > a ?crit : > >> Hi all, >> >> *A. Meeting Locations & Purposes* >> I personally support #7. On #1, what I don't see is possible impact of >> booking flights "well in advance" can cause to overall cost due to the risk >> of closer-to-date changes >> >> *B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources* >> I find #1 and #2 interesting if done together. >> >> *C. Travel-Related Matters* >> No to the options provided. >> >> >> Warmly, >> Tomslin >> >> On Tue, 21 Jan 2025, 12:32 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC, < >> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >>> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>> context. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>> Community Group >>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>> >>> >>> >>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>> | >>> >>> - ICANN >>> | >>> >>> - ATT00001.txt >>> | >>> >>> >>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >>> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >>> us what you think >>> >>> For more information click here >>> >>> >>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>> >>> >>> >>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >>> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>> >>> >>> >>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>> >>> >>> >>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>> provide feedback on: >>> >>> 1. What options are missing? >>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >>> put out for public comment). >>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>> >>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>> their work. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank You! >>> >>> >>> >>> Greg >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - Meeting >>> #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>> >>> >>> >>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >>> know the content is safe. >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> >>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had a >>> wonderful start to 2025. >>> >>> >>> >>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>> >>> >>> >>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. >>> Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for >>> this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC >>> Chairs: >>> >>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>> 2. Agenda >>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>> >>> Background Documents: >>> >>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>> >>> >>> >>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are keeping >>> a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, meeting >>> agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any document that >>> we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>> >>> >>> >>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >>> >>> >>> >>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>> >>> >>> >>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at >>> the meeting! >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> Alp Eken >>> >>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>> >>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>> >> _______________________________________________ > NCSG-EC mailing list > NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Thu Feb 13 02:34:44 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 09:34:44 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 In-Reply-To: References: <90717C28-7B05-4683-B64F-5C70623A616E@icann.org> Message-ID: Hi all, Can we proceed with call for volunteers for this? The deadline is 21st Feb. FYI CSG appointed their rep from NCPH, so we should appoint ours in the coming days. Best, Rafik Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 08:10, Rafik Dammak a ?crit : > Hi everyone, > > I reached out to CSG leadership to coordinate as we can have each 1 > volunteer. > @Tomslin Samme-Nlar can PC handle selection and > call for volunteer in short time > > Best, > > Rafik > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Terri Agnew via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership > > Date: Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 06:49 > Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American > Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 > To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org > Cc: GNSO-Secs , Joe Catapano > > > Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder Engagement > team. > > > > Dear SG/C Chairs, > > > > It is time to begin the planning process for the next iteration of the > North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North > America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the important work > of stakeholder engagement across the region. > > > > To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team > to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort > will be *time-limited*, including one (potentially two) virtual events, > as well as work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) *answering > specific questions*. With your help, we hope to surface *implementable > ideas* with *measurable impact*to enhance engagement. We know you are all > very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not > expect the time commitment for community members to be high (though actual > time will vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 > hours *total*, inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time > to complete a survey and/or responding to requests for input). > > > > This email serves as the beginning of the process, with completion > expected by mid-June of this year. > > > > Participation is *voluntary*. An SG/C may opt to not to send a > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to > provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including > through an official Public Comment period. > > > > We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement plan > inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at least one North > American based volunteer (though up to two volunteers are welcome) from > each of the CPH and NCPH to participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) > individuals in total for the GNSO). > > > > Interested community members may email joe.catapano at icann.org with one or > two named volunteers (per House) for this activity by Friday, February 21, > 2025. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Terri > > Policy Team Supporting the GNSO > > > > > _______________________________________________ > GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org > To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org > > _______________________________________________ > 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 farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Thu Feb 13 04:57:05 2025 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 21:57:05 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 In-Reply-To: References: <90717C28-7B05-4683-B64F-5C70623A616E@icann.org> Message-ID: Hi Rafik I can volunteer if no one else wants to do it. Farzaneh On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 7:35?PM Rafik Dammak wrote: > Hi all, > > Can we proceed with call for volunteers for this? The deadline is 21st Feb. > FYI CSG appointed their rep from NCPH, so we should appoint ours in the > coming days. > > Best, > > Rafik > > Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 08:10, Rafik Dammak a > ?crit : > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I reached out to CSG leadership to coordinate as we can have each 1 >> volunteer. >> @Tomslin Samme-Nlar can PC handle selection and >> call for volunteer in short time >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> From: Terri Agnew via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >> Date: Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 06:49 >> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American >> Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 >> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> Cc: GNSO-Secs , Joe Catapano > > >> >> >> Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder Engagement >> team. >> >> >> >> Dear SG/C Chairs, >> >> >> >> It is time to begin the planning process for the next iteration of the >> North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North >> America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the important work >> of stakeholder engagement across the region. >> >> >> >> To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory >> Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s development. This >> effort will be *time-limited*, including one (potentially two) virtual >> events, as well as work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a >> survey) *answering specific questions*. With your help, we hope to >> surface *implementable ideas* with *measurable impact*to enhance >> engagement. We know you are all very busy and want to make this as easy as >> possible for you. We do not expect the time commitment for community >> members to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, we >> would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours *total*, inclusive of a 60-minute >> virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey and/or responding to >> requests for input). >> >> >> >> This email serves as the beginning of the process, with completion >> expected by mid-June of this year. >> >> >> >> Participation is *voluntary*. An SG/C may opt to not to send a >> volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to >> provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including >> through an official Public Comment period. >> >> >> >> We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement plan >> inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at least one North >> American based volunteer (though up to two volunteers are welcome) from >> each of the CPH and NCPH to participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) >> individuals in total for the GNSO). >> >> >> >> Interested community members may email joe.catapano at icann.org with one >> or two named volunteers (per House) for this activity by Friday, February >> 21, 2025. >> >> >> >> Thank you. >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> >> Terri >> >> Policy Team Supporting the GNSO >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Feb 13 05:40:50 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 14:40:50 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 In-Reply-To: References: <90717C28-7B05-4683-B64F-5C70623A616E@icann.org> Message-ID: Hi Rafik, Only seeing this email now. Let me prepare the email to make the call Warmly, Tomslin On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, 11:34 Rafik Dammak, wrote: > Hi all, > > Can we proceed with call for volunteers for this? The deadline is 21st Feb. > FYI CSG appointed their rep from NCPH, so we should appoint ours in the > coming days. > > Best, > > Rafik > > Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 08:10, Rafik Dammak a > ?crit : > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I reached out to CSG leadership to coordinate as we can have each 1 >> volunteer. >> @Tomslin Samme-Nlar can PC handle selection and >> call for volunteer in short time >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> From: Terri Agnew via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >> Date: Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 06:49 >> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Seeking Volunteers | ICANN North American >> Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 | Kindly REPLY by 21 February 2025 >> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> Cc: GNSO-Secs , Joe Catapano > > >> >> >> Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder Engagement >> team. >> >> >> >> Dear SG/C Chairs, >> >> >> >> It is time to begin the planning process for the next iteration of the >> North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North >> America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the important work >> of stakeholder engagement across the region. >> >> >> >> To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory >> Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s development. This >> effort will be *time-limited*, including one (potentially two) virtual >> events, as well as work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a >> survey) *answering specific questions*. With your help, we hope to >> surface *implementable ideas* with *measurable impact*to enhance >> engagement. We know you are all very busy and want to make this as easy as >> possible for you. We do not expect the time commitment for community >> members to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, we >> would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours *total*, inclusive of a 60-minute >> virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey and/or responding to >> requests for input). >> >> >> >> This email serves as the beginning of the process, with completion >> expected by mid-June of this year. >> >> >> >> Participation is *voluntary*. An SG/C may opt to not to send a >> volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to >> provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including >> through an official Public Comment period. >> >> >> >> We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement plan >> inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at least one North >> American based volunteer (though up to two volunteers are welcome) from >> each of the CPH and NCPH to participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) >> individuals in total for the GNSO). >> >> >> >> Interested community members may email joe.catapano at icann.org with one >> or two named volunteers (per House) for this activity by Friday, February >> 21, 2025. >> >> >> >> Thank you. >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> >> >> Terri >> >> Policy Team Supporting the GNSO >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 rafik.dammak at gmail.com Thu Feb 13 10:09:54 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:09:54 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a ?crit : > 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 > can share from his side. For the NCSG issue > forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you > share more about the selected topic and agenda? > > So please give me your input about the points above. > > Best, > > Rafik > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Thu Feb 13 21:15:40 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 06:15:40 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 Message-ID: Hi all, NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 for PC's review. See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder Engagement team for more information. *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this year.Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * Warmly, Tomslin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Feb 14 09:18:56 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 16:18:56 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: thanks Pedro, we need to summarize the response then. For the meeting frequency, we can go with 2 F2F and raise the point about the impact of virtual meetings. Regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: 1- we are in favor 2- we are not in favor 3- the proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented 4- meeting reduction (a big change that requires buy-in in the list otherwise I will leave that blank) 5- we are not in favor 6- need to check impact such SPS GNSO council meeting or NCPH meeting 7- conditional for having 2 F2F meetings and virtual meeting is to review the approach for virtual meeting to take into account the challenges Regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources 1- we are in favor 2- concern about the feasibility and how this will be implemented by the community 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. 4- concerns about local attendance experience. 5- it is unclear how the block schedule can be revisited, requires more details 6- no position 7- we are in favor for looking for sponsorship and support 8- we are not in favor Regarding Travel-Related Matters 1- requires assessment of the impact in terms of support and meeting staff. 2- we are not in favor @everyone last chance to send your input as the deadline is today, let me know if you have concern about responses above. Best, Rafik Le mer. 12 f?vr. 2025 ? 05:40, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : > Hi Rafik, > > I think there is already a high level of agreement among us three, at > least. The biggest divergence seems to be around having one online meeting > a year (I think just reducing it from 3 to 2 and improving the online > decentralized methodology of work is better). > > And I'd still get back to my first suggestion, reg: possible downgrade > regarding what hotels ICANN chooses, even if it is not popular (but, then > again, nice to have vs. necessary to have). Maybe something a bit less > luxurious, while still very comfortable, would already have a substantial > impact, but ICANN should look a bit more around that so this could be > objectively evaluated since it could heavily affect the "experience" > criteria mentioned in the documents. > > Cordially, > > *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* > Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR > Researcher > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC > & NCSG > (ICANN), > YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC > Brasil > This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by > mistake, please reply informing it. > > > Em ter., 11 de fev. de 2025 ?s 03:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < > ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: > >> hi all, >> >> regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: >> 1- I think #1 is common sense practice about deciding and planning >> earlier to control cost, >> 2- I am not in favor of #2, the risk is there will be recurring countries >> with challenges for parts of the community to attend i.e.g access to visa >> etc. I think IETF does or did that and it is not a good example IMHO of >> diversity. >> 3- #3 proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented .e.g are >> we will visit some regions more than others within the 5 years time frame? >> 4- I know it can be almost a taboo but we really should question having 3 >> meetings per year , it is a non negligible time commitment and I believe it >> is a hindrance for many to participate. >> 5- While it can bring some cost reduction regarding hotels and venues, it >> doesn't change the impact on attendees and based on policy forum examples, >> it will require overhaul of agenda and schedule. it can also impact the >> possibility of having the NCPH day meeting >> 6- I think that makes sense as an approach as we are trying for an NCPH >> meeting but it can possibly impact GNSO council SPS or WGs F2F (I didn't >> hear about any since EPDP on RDS)? >> 7- if it is a virtual meeting in the same format as during the pandemic >> it might work fine, with challenges but can be handled better than full >> remote participation as-is now. It will be kind of interessional. >> >> regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources >> 1- I think that is already ongoing. I think such a constraint will >> encourage everyone org and community to rethink what the sessions priority. >> 2- if that is targeting all sessions, setting criteria and deciding will >> be impossible. We usually have a challenge to agree on the community >> session. I think it is inapplicable but if it is about some informational >> session mostly proposed by ICANN staff, it might be worthy to explore. >> 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. >> 4- reducing interpretation and scribing, I think that can impact local >> attendance experience. >> 5- not sure how the block schedule can be revisited, GNSO already uses >> the weekend (well we used saturday and sunday previously). it might be more >> related to other parts of the community? >> 6- I understand that reduction of networking receptions is already >> implemented? >> 7- that can be explored but as noted requires much effort to work with >> local hosts and sponsors. I think it is typical of any conference >> 8- we can say to that proposal in many languages >> >> Regarding Travel-Related Matters >> 1- I think it is already being implemented and we need to see the impact >> in terms of support and meeting staff. >> 2- this is a pandora box : who will decide who should attend and it will >> create more tension within the community. I highly doubt if that is >> effective or good usage of community time. >> >> regarding metrics. >> 1- average is not a good metric and doesn't give a good idea about >> distribution of cost >> 2- for the rest I guess they are fine to set >> >> We need to consolidate and get a common position. At least we can agree >> on what is no-go for us. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 12:57, Tomslin Samme-Nlar >> a ?crit : >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> *A. Meeting Locations & Purposes* >>> I personally support #7. On #1, what I don't see is possible impact of >>> booking flights "well in advance" can cause to overall cost due to the risk >>> of closer-to-date changes >>> >>> *B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources* >>> I find #1 and #2 interesting if done together. >>> >>> *C. Travel-Related Matters* >>> No to the options provided. >>> >>> >>> Warmly, >>> Tomslin >>> >>> On Tue, 21 Jan 2025, 12:32 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC, < >>> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >>>> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>>> context. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>>> Community Group >>>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>>> | >>>> >>>> - ICANN >>>> | >>>> >>>> - ATT00001.txt >>>> | >>>> >>>> >>>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >>>> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >>>> us what you think >>>> >>>> For more information click here >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >>>> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>>> provide feedback on: >>>> >>>> 1. What options are missing? >>>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >>>> put out for public comment). >>>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>>> >>>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>>> their work. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank You! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Greg >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - >>>> Meeting #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >>>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >>>> know the content is safe. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had >>>> a wonderful start to 2025. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. >>>> Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for >>>> this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC >>>> Chairs: >>>> >>>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>>> 2. Agenda >>>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >>>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>>> >>>> Background Documents: >>>> >>>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are >>>> keeping a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, >>>> meeting agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any >>>> document that we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at >>>> the meeting! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Alp Eken >>>> >>>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>>> >>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-EC mailing list >> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julf at Julf.com Fri Feb 14 09:24:18 2025 From: julf at Julf.com (Johan Helsingius) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 08:24:18 +0100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: <3ab6f8f0-da68-4e5d-a7e9-3e7b400a38a4@Julf.com> On 14/02/2025 08:18, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC wrote: > 4- meeting reduction (a big change that requires buy-in in the list > otherwise I will leave that blank) I am in support of 2 meetings per year. Julf From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Fri Feb 14 14:10:23 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 09:10:23 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Agreed, Rafik. Cordially, *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC Brasil This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by mistake, please reply informing it. Em sex., 14 de fev. de 2025 ?s 04:19, Rafik Dammak escreveu: > thanks Pedro, > we need to summarize the response then. For the meeting frequency, we can > go with 2 F2F and raise the point about the impact of virtual meetings. > > Regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: > 1- we are in favor > 2- we are not in favor > 3- the proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented > 4- meeting reduction (a big change that requires buy-in in the list > otherwise I will leave that blank) > 5- we are not in favor > 6- need to check impact such SPS GNSO council meeting or NCPH meeting > 7- conditional for having 2 F2F meetings and virtual meeting is to review > the approach for virtual meeting to take into account the challenges > > Regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources > 1- we are in favor > 2- concern about the feasibility and how this will be implemented by the > community > 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. > 4- concerns about local attendance experience. > 5- it is unclear how the block schedule can be revisited, requires more > details > 6- no position > 7- we are in favor for looking for sponsorship and support > 8- we are not in favor > > Regarding Travel-Related Matters > 1- requires assessment of the impact in terms of support and meeting staff. > 2- we are not in favor > > @everyone last chance to send your input as the deadline is today, let me > know if you have concern about responses above. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > Le mer. 12 f?vr. 2025 ? 05:40, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : > >> Hi Rafik, >> >> I think there is already a high level of agreement among us three, at >> least. The biggest divergence seems to be around having one online meeting >> a year (I think just reducing it from 3 to 2 and improving the online >> decentralized methodology of work is better). >> >> And I'd still get back to my first suggestion, reg: possible downgrade >> regarding what hotels ICANN chooses, even if it is not popular (but, then >> again, nice to have vs. necessary to have). Maybe something a bit less >> luxurious, while still very comfortable, would already have a substantial >> impact, but ICANN should look a bit more around that so this could be >> objectively evaluated since it could heavily affect the "experience" >> criteria mentioned in the documents. >> >> Cordially, >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >> Researcher >> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >> & NCSG >> (ICANN), >> YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC >> Brasil >> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by >> mistake, please reply informing it. >> >> >> Em ter., 11 de fev. de 2025 ?s 03:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < >> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: >> >>> hi all, >>> >>> regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: >>> 1- I think #1 is common sense practice about deciding and planning >>> earlier to control cost, >>> 2- I am not in favor of #2, the risk is there will be recurring >>> countries with challenges for parts of the community to attend i.e.g access >>> to visa etc. I think IETF does or did that and it is not a good example >>> IMHO of diversity. >>> 3- #3 proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented .e.g are >>> we will visit some regions more than others within the 5 years time frame? >>> 4- I know it can be almost a taboo but we really should question having >>> 3 meetings per year , it is a non negligible time commitment and I believe >>> it is a hindrance for many to participate. >>> 5- While it can bring some cost reduction regarding hotels and venues, >>> it doesn't change the impact on attendees and based on policy >>> forum examples, it will require overhaul of agenda and schedule. it can >>> also impact the possibility of having the NCPH day meeting >>> 6- I think that makes sense as an approach as we are trying for an NCPH >>> meeting but it can possibly impact GNSO council SPS or WGs F2F (I didn't >>> hear about any since EPDP on RDS)? >>> 7- if it is a virtual meeting in the same format as during the pandemic >>> it might work fine, with challenges but can be handled better than full >>> remote participation as-is now. It will be kind of interessional. >>> >>> regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources >>> 1- I think that is already ongoing. I think such a constraint will >>> encourage everyone org and community to rethink what the sessions priority. >>> 2- if that is targeting all sessions, setting criteria and deciding will >>> be impossible. We usually have a challenge to agree on the community >>> session. I think it is inapplicable but if it is about some informational >>> session mostly proposed by ICANN staff, it might be worthy to explore. >>> 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. >>> 4- reducing interpretation and scribing, I think that can impact local >>> attendance experience. >>> 5- not sure how the block schedule can be revisited, GNSO already uses >>> the weekend (well we used saturday and sunday previously). it might be more >>> related to other parts of the community? >>> 6- I understand that reduction of networking receptions is already >>> implemented? >>> 7- that can be explored but as noted requires much effort to work with >>> local hosts and sponsors. I think it is typical of any conference >>> 8- we can say to that proposal in many languages >>> >>> Regarding Travel-Related Matters >>> 1- I think it is already being implemented and we need to see the impact >>> in terms of support and meeting staff. >>> 2- this is a pandora box : who will decide who should attend and it will >>> create more tension within the community. I highly doubt if that is >>> effective or good usage of community time. >>> >>> regarding metrics. >>> 1- average is not a good metric and doesn't give a good idea about >>> distribution of cost >>> 2- for the rest I guess they are fine to set >>> >>> We need to consolidate and get a common position. At least we can agree >>> on what is no-go for us. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 12:57, Tomslin Samme-Nlar >>> a ?crit : >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> *A. Meeting Locations & Purposes* >>>> I personally support #7. On #1, what I don't see is possible impact of >>>> booking flights "well in advance" can cause to overall cost due to the risk >>>> of closer-to-date changes >>>> >>>> *B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources* >>>> I find #1 and #2 interesting if done together. >>>> >>>> *C. Travel-Related Matters* >>>> No to the options provided. >>>> >>>> >>>> Warmly, >>>> Tomslin >>>> >>>> On Tue, 21 Jan 2025, 12:32 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC, < >>>> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We should >>>>> review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>>>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>>>> context. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> Rafik >>>>> >>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>>>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>>>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>>>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>>>> Community Group >>>>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>>>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> - ICANN >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> - ATT00001.txt >>>>> | >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >>>>> Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell >>>>> us what you think >>>>> >>>>> For more information click here >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >>>>> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>>>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>>>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>>>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>>>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>>>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>>>> provide feedback on: >>>>> >>>>> 1. What options are missing? >>>>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be >>>>> put out for public comment). >>>>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>>>> >>>>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>>>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>>>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>>>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>>>> their work. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank You! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Greg >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >>>>> >>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>>>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>>>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - >>>>> Meeting #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do >>>>> not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and >>>>> know the content is safe. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had >>>>> a wonderful start to 2025. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>>>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>>>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>>>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable >>>>> contributions. Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we >>>>> prepared for this group, and background documents that were previously >>>>> shared with SOAC Chairs: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>>>> 2. Agenda >>>>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy >>>>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>>>> >>>>> Background Documents: >>>>> >>>>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>>>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>>>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>>>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are >>>>> keeping a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, >>>>> meeting agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any >>>>> document that we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>>>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>>>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>>>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone >>>>> at the meeting! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Alp Eken >>>>> >>>>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>>>> >>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>>>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Fri Feb 14 23:07:43 2025 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 16:07:43 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment - Questions to be answered by NCSG In-Reply-To: References: <091F7CC1-8220-47D9-80BB-2F04099219D6@icann.org> Message-ID: Hello all, Submitting the attached today to the Council today. Best regards, Farzaneh On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 4:39?AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi all, > > Since there are no further inputs or comments, I will proceed to submit > what I have here to the council as NCSG response, since today is the > deadline for submission. > > Thanks again Farzi for your contribution to this. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > On Wed, 29 Jan 2025, 07:30 Tomslin Samme-Nlar, > wrote: > >> Hi Farzi, >> >> Thanks for the contribution. It is timely! >> >> @everyone, are there any other suggested contributions to these questions? >> >> I am also re-attaching the ICANN Org response here since it appears the >> previous link is now broken. >> >> Warmly, >> Tomslin >> >> >> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 at 15:17, farzaneh badii >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Tomslin. Please see my responses below: >>> >>> Farzaneh >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 8:58?PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> If you recall, Registration data accuracy has been a topic of >>>> contention in the community now for a while. Those who follow the the topic >>>> know that the Accuracy Scoping team was paused by the council due to >>>> challenges of pursuing further work on accuracy, including that >>>> >>>> 1. It is unclear whether [the scenarios] would provide useful data >>>> to inform the Accuracy Scoping Team?s efforts; >>>> 2. The scenarios are not expected to provide data as it relates to >>>> identity verification of the registrant or veracity of the contact >>>> information (i.e., the data belongs to the data subject); >>>> 3. The costs associated with a full-scale registrar audit [Scoping >>>> Team Recommendation #2] may be prohibitive when taking into account the >>>> relatively low level of insight the audit may yield; >>>> 4. ICANN does not have the authority to mandate collection of >>>> nonpublic registration data necessary to conduct reviews outside of >>>> auditing current contractual requirements; and >>>> 5. ICANN may not be able to demonstrate the purpose of some of the >>>> data processing outweighs the rights of the impacted data subject. >>>> >>>> As a result, deliberations on this topic on the council was deferred >>>> till February and an assignment to ask ICANN Org some clarifying legal >>>> questions, and thereafter ask each SG/C to respond to a set of threshold >>>> questions that will help guide the way forward on this topic was agreed by >>>> the council. ICANN Org came back with their response >>>> >>>> just before the December holidays. >>>> >>>> Now therefore, each SG/C is required to respond to the threshold >>>> questions >>>> >>>> by Friday 31 January 2025. We forgot to include it for discussion in our >>>> Policy meeting earlier this week. However, I request that members provide >>>> their input via this email thread. Once agreed, we'll forward our response >>>> to the Council. The questions we have to answer are in the link above but >>>> for convenience, I'll list them here below: >>>> >>>> 1. *What are concrete and articulable examples of what inaccurate >>>> data DOES prevent or inhibit, and how does it do so?* >>>> >>>> Inaccurate domain name registrant data should be defined based on the >>> purpose of accuracy within the scope of ICANN's mandate: ensuring that the >>> registrant is 'contactable.' If the registrant cannot be reached due to >>> undeliverable messages caused by errors in the provided contact details, >>> the data should be deemed inaccurate. >>> >>>> >>>> 1. *What are concrete and articulable examples of what inaccurate >>>> data does NOT prevent?* >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. *Are there specific stakeholders, industries, or sectors >>>> particularly vulnerable to the effects of inaccurate registration data? If >>>> so, what are they and why?* >>>> >>>> Domain name registrants can be affected by insisting on having even >>> more "accuracy" requirements. In order to ensure accuracy suggestions could >>> be made to "identify" domain name registrants which goes against the >>> principle of respecting anonymity should the domain name registrant want to >>> remain anonymous and identification of registrants can have an >>> adverse impact on data protection and access to domain names globally. >>> >>> >>> >>>> 1. *Given the examples provided in response to the three questions >>>> above (if any), please articulate a short problem statement for accuracy. >>>> The problem statement should consider:* >>>> - *What is the current problem or challenge?* >>>> - *What are the consequences of this problem or challenge?* >>>> - *What is the ultimate objective of working on this problem or >>>> challenge?* >>>> - *Considering the limitations of data processing, how do you >>>> propose to address this problem?* >>>> >>>> We don't believe there are many challenges facing data accuracy. There >>> are already requirements in place for domain name registrants to keep their >>> data accurate, and there is an ultimate punishment for that: losing their >>> domain name if they don't do so. Please refer to registrants obligation >>> here: >>> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registration-data-accurate-2023-11-02-en?utm_source=chatgpt.com >>> >>> >>>> >>>> 1. *Is now the appropriate time to address the problem? For >>>> example, some stakeholders have mentioned the implementation of NIS2 as an >>>> important precursor to understanding new accuracy requirements. Should this >>>> or other examples be considered prior to engaging in potential policy work?* >>>> >>>> it's crucial to remember that NIS2 is a directive, not a regulation. >>> Its implementation will vary across European jurisdictions, and it >>> shouldn't set the accuracy standard for ICANN. This is due to two key >>> reasons: >>> >>> 1. NIS2's provisions concerning domain names were influenced by specific >>> stakeholder groups, not by multistakeholder consensus. >>> 2. Some transposing laws (e.g., Germany) aim to identify registrants >>> through data accuracy to prevent fraud. However, we believe that accuracy >>> at ICANN should not necessitate registrant identification. >>> >>>> >>>> 1. *Are the ICANN org alternatives proposals worth exploring, such >>>> as:* >>>> - *Provision of historical audit data that measures registrars? >>>> compliance with accuracy-related provisions in the RAA.* >>>> - *Engagement with contracted parties and ccTLD operators on >>>> developments in European policymaking regarding registration data accuracy.* >>>> 2. *What are the limitations of the ICANN proposals? Why should or >>>> should they not be pursued?* >>>> 3. *What other possibilities can be explored to move our work on >>>> Accuracy forward?* >>>> >>>> I look forward to your contribution to these questions. >>>> >>>> Warmly, >>>> Tomslin >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>> From: Feodora Hamza via council >>>> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 at 23:11 >>>> Subject: [council] Re: Follow-up GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment >>>> To: DiBiase, Gregory , council at gnso.icann.org < >>>> council at gnso.icann.org> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear Councilors, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> due to technical issues, please see accuracy assignment attached and >>>> linked below. >>>> >>>> Accuracy Assignment: >>>> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/draft-concept-proposal-accuracy-12sep24.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> Feodora Hamza >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From: *"DiBiase, Gregory via council" >>>> *Reply to: *"DiBiase, Gregory" >>>> *Date: *Thursday, 12 December 2024 at 20:57 >>>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org" >>>> *Subject: *[council] Follow-up GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>>> - Answer to the GNSO questions on accuracy.pdf >>>> [us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com] >>>> | >>>> >>>> - ATT00001.txt [us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com] >>>> | >>>> >>>> >>>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. >>>> Downloads will be available until January 11, 2025, 19:56 (UTC+00:00). Tell >>>> us what you think [amazonexteu.qualtrics.com] >>>> >>>> >>>> For more information click here [docs.secure-attach.amazon.com] >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear Councilors, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I am following up on the attached email from ICANN Org in which they >>>> provided their input on the accuracy assignment. On 25 October, we shared >>>> the proposed accuracy assignment, which included questions for ICANN org >>>> and the community. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Now that ICANN org has provided responses to the Council?s questions, >>>> we are now sending the remaining questions in the attached proposal to >>>> interested SG/C/ACs for their input. Given the proximity to the holidays, >>>> we propose giving groups until Friday, 31 January 2025 to provide their >>>> input to the Council. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> As noted during the Council?s previous discussions on the topic of >>>> accuracy, the Council recognizes the importance of accuracy and is >>>> committed to making progress on this issue. Your group?s responses to these >>>> questions are very important for the Council?s future discussion, and we >>>> strongly encourage your groups to think about these questions and provide >>>> candid responses. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you in advance for your input. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Greg >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> council mailing list -- council at icann.org >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave at icann.org >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment - Questions to be answered by NCSG.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 66092 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Sat Feb 15 01:18:45 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 08:18:45 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Hi all, I will send the comment to Greg, including support for reduction to 2 meetings . Best, Rafik On Fri, Feb 14, 2025, 21:10 Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote: > Agreed, Rafik. > > Cordially, > > *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* > Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR > Researcher > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC > & NCSG > (ICANN), > YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC > Brasil > This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by > mistake, please reply informing it. > > > Em sex., 14 de fev. de 2025 ?s 04:19, Rafik Dammak > escreveu: > >> thanks Pedro, >> we need to summarize the response then. For the meeting frequency, we >> can go with 2 F2F and raise the point about the impact of virtual meetings. >> >> Regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: >> 1- we are in favor >> 2- we are not in favor >> 3- the proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented >> 4- meeting reduction (a big change that requires buy-in in the list >> otherwise I will leave that blank) >> 5- we are not in favor >> 6- need to check impact such SPS GNSO council meeting or NCPH meeting >> 7- conditional for having 2 F2F meetings and virtual meeting is to >> review the approach for virtual meeting to take into account the challenges >> >> Regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources >> 1- we are in favor >> 2- concern about the feasibility and how this will be implemented by the >> community >> 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. >> 4- concerns about local attendance experience. >> 5- it is unclear how the block schedule can be revisited, requires more >> details >> 6- no position >> 7- we are in favor for looking for sponsorship and support >> 8- we are not in favor >> >> Regarding Travel-Related Matters >> 1- requires assessment of the impact in terms of support and meeting >> staff. >> 2- we are not in favor >> >> @everyone last chance to send your input as the deadline is today, let me >> know if you have concern about responses above. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> >> Le mer. 12 f?vr. 2025 ? 05:40, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : >> >>> Hi Rafik, >>> >>> I think there is already a high level of agreement among us three, at >>> least. The biggest divergence seems to be around having one online meeting >>> a year (I think just reducing it from 3 to 2 and improving the online >>> decentralized methodology of work is better). >>> >>> And I'd still get back to my first suggestion, reg: possible downgrade >>> regarding what hotels ICANN chooses, even if it is not popular (but, then >>> again, nice to have vs. necessary to have). Maybe something a bit less >>> luxurious, while still very comfortable, would already have a substantial >>> impact, but ICANN should look a bit more around that so this could be >>> objectively evaluated since it could heavily affect the "experience" >>> criteria mentioned in the documents. >>> >>> Cordially, >>> >>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>> Researcher >>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >>> & NCSG >>> (ICANN), >>> YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC >>> Brasil >>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received >>> by mistake, please reply informing it. >>> >>> >>> Em ter., 11 de fev. de 2025 ?s 03:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < >>> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: >>> >>>> hi all, >>>> >>>> regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: >>>> 1- I think #1 is common sense practice about deciding and planning >>>> earlier to control cost, >>>> 2- I am not in favor of #2, the risk is there will be recurring >>>> countries with challenges for parts of the community to attend i.e.g access >>>> to visa etc. I think IETF does or did that and it is not a good example >>>> IMHO of diversity. >>>> 3- #3 proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented .e.g >>>> are we will visit some regions more than others within the 5 years time >>>> frame? >>>> 4- I know it can be almost a taboo but we really should question having >>>> 3 meetings per year , it is a non negligible time commitment and I believe >>>> it is a hindrance for many to participate. >>>> 5- While it can bring some cost reduction regarding hotels and venues, >>>> it doesn't change the impact on attendees and based on policy >>>> forum examples, it will require overhaul of agenda and schedule. it can >>>> also impact the possibility of having the NCPH day meeting >>>> 6- I think that makes sense as an approach as we are trying for an NCPH >>>> meeting but it can possibly impact GNSO council SPS or WGs F2F (I didn't >>>> hear about any since EPDP on RDS)? >>>> 7- if it is a virtual meeting in the same format as during the pandemic >>>> it might work fine, with challenges but can be handled better than full >>>> remote participation as-is now. It will be kind of interessional. >>>> >>>> regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources >>>> 1- I think that is already ongoing. I think such a constraint will >>>> encourage everyone org and community to rethink what the sessions priority. >>>> 2- if that is targeting all sessions, setting criteria and deciding >>>> will be impossible. We usually have a challenge to agree on the community >>>> session. I think it is inapplicable but if it is about some informational >>>> session mostly proposed by ICANN staff, it might be worthy to explore. >>>> 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. >>>> 4- reducing interpretation and scribing, I think that can impact local >>>> attendance experience. >>>> 5- not sure how the block schedule can be revisited, GNSO already uses >>>> the weekend (well we used saturday and sunday previously). it might be more >>>> related to other parts of the community? >>>> 6- I understand that reduction of networking receptions is already >>>> implemented? >>>> 7- that can be explored but as noted requires much effort to work with >>>> local hosts and sponsors. I think it is typical of any conference >>>> 8- we can say to that proposal in many languages >>>> >>>> Regarding Travel-Related Matters >>>> 1- I think it is already being implemented and we need to see the >>>> impact in terms of support and meeting staff. >>>> 2- this is a pandora box : who will decide who should attend and it >>>> will create more tension within the community. I highly doubt if that is >>>> effective or good usage of community time. >>>> >>>> regarding metrics. >>>> 1- average is not a good metric and doesn't give a good idea about >>>> distribution of cost >>>> 2- for the rest I guess they are fine to set >>>> >>>> We need to consolidate and get a common position. At least we can agree >>>> on what is no-go for us. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 12:57, Tomslin Samme-Nlar < >>>> mesumbeslin at gmail.com> a ?crit : >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> *A. Meeting Locations & Purposes* >>>>> I personally support #7. On #1, what I don't see is possible impact of >>>>> booking flights "well in advance" can cause to overall cost due to the risk >>>>> of closer-to-date changes >>>>> >>>>> *B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources* >>>>> I find #1 and #2 interesting if done together. >>>>> >>>>> *C. Travel-Related Matters* >>>>> No to the options provided. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Warmly, >>>>> Tomslin >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, 21 Jan 2025, 12:32 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC, < >>>>> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We >>>>>> should review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>>>>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>>>>> context. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> Rafik >>>>>> >>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>>>>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>>>>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>>>>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>>>>> Community Group >>>>>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>>>>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> - ICANN >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> - ATT00001.txt >>>>>> | >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download >>>>>> links. Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 >>>>>> (UTC+00:00). Tell us what you think >>>>>> >>>>>> For more information click here >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for >>>>>> ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>>>>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>>>>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>>>>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>>>>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>>>>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>>>>> provide feedback on: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. What options are missing? >>>>>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not >>>>>> be put out for public comment). >>>>>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>>>>> >>>>>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>>>>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>>>>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>>>>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>>>>> their work. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank You! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Greg >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>>>>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>>>>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - >>>>>> Meeting #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. >>>>>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender >>>>>> and know the content is safe. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve >>>>>> had a wonderful start to 2025. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>>>>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>>>>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>>>>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable >>>>>> contributions. Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we >>>>>> prepared for this group, and background documents that were previously >>>>>> shared with SOAC Chairs: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>>>>> 2. Agenda >>>>>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting >>>>>> Strategy >>>>>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>>>>> >>>>>> Background Documents: >>>>>> >>>>>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>>>>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>>>>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>>>>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are >>>>>> keeping a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, >>>>>> meeting agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any >>>>>> document that we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>>>>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight >>>>>> timeline. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>>>>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>>>>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone >>>>>> at the meeting! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Alp Eken >>>>>> >>>>>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>>>>> >>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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. >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>>>>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Sat Feb 15 01:30:02 2025 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 18:30:02 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: <4dc64fca6b7f4193a88bf10c5b076156@amazon.com> <0100019474f81e50-a3ee597c-b322-405d-a31d-c79451fb9daa-000000@email.amazonses.com> Message-ID: Thanks Rafik. Supporting our position! Farzaneh On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 6:19?PM Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: > Hi all, > > I will send the comment to Greg, including support for reduction to 2 > meetings . > > Best, > > Rafik > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025, 21:10 Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Agreed, Rafik. >> >> Cordially, >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >> Researcher >> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >> & NCSG >> (ICANN), >> YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC >> Brasil >> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by >> mistake, please reply informing it. >> >> >> Em sex., 14 de fev. de 2025 ?s 04:19, Rafik Dammak < >> rafik.dammak at gmail.com> escreveu: >> >>> thanks Pedro, >>> we need to summarize the response then. For the meeting frequency, we >>> can go with 2 F2F and raise the point about the impact of virtual meetings. >>> >>> Regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: >>> 1- we are in favor >>> 2- we are not in favor >>> 3- the proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented >>> 4- meeting reduction (a big change that requires buy-in in the list >>> otherwise I will leave that blank) >>> 5- we are not in favor >>> 6- need to check impact such SPS GNSO council meeting or NCPH meeting >>> 7- conditional for having 2 F2F meetings and virtual meeting is to >>> review the approach for virtual meeting to take into account the challenges >>> >>> Regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources >>> 1- we are in favor >>> 2- concern about the feasibility and how this will be implemented by the >>> community >>> 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. >>> 4- concerns about local attendance experience. >>> 5- it is unclear how the block schedule can be revisited, requires more >>> details >>> 6- no position >>> 7- we are in favor for looking for sponsorship and support >>> 8- we are not in favor >>> >>> Regarding Travel-Related Matters >>> 1- requires assessment of the impact in terms of support and meeting >>> staff. >>> 2- we are not in favor >>> >>> @everyone last chance to send your input as the deadline is today, let >>> me know if you have concern about responses above. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> >>> Le mer. 12 f?vr. 2025 ? 05:40, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : >>> >>>> Hi Rafik, >>>> >>>> I think there is already a high level of agreement among us three, at >>>> least. The biggest divergence seems to be around having one online meeting >>>> a year (I think just reducing it from 3 to 2 and improving the online >>>> decentralized methodology of work is better). >>>> >>>> And I'd still get back to my first suggestion, reg: possible downgrade >>>> regarding what hotels ICANN chooses, even if it is not popular (but, then >>>> again, nice to have vs. necessary to have). Maybe something a bit less >>>> luxurious, while still very comfortable, would already have a substantial >>>> impact, but ICANN should look a bit more around that so this could be >>>> objectively evaluated since it could heavily affect the "experience" >>>> criteria mentioned in the documents. >>>> >>>> Cordially, >>>> >>>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC >>>> & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), >>>> YouthLACIGF , IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received >>>> by mistake, please reply informing it. >>>> >>>> >>>> Em ter., 11 de fev. de 2025 ?s 03:32, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < >>>> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: >>>> >>>>> hi all, >>>>> >>>>> regarding Meeting Locations and Purposes: >>>>> 1- I think #1 is common sense practice about deciding and planning >>>>> earlier to control cost, >>>>> 2- I am not in favor of #2, the risk is there will be recurring >>>>> countries with challenges for parts of the community to attend i.e.g access >>>>> to visa etc. I think IETF does or did that and it is not a good example >>>>> IMHO of diversity. >>>>> 3- #3 proposal impact is unclear and how it will be implemented .e.g >>>>> are we will visit some regions more than others within the 5 years time >>>>> frame? >>>>> 4- I know it can be almost a taboo but we really should question >>>>> having 3 meetings per year , it is a non negligible time commitment and I >>>>> believe it is a hindrance for many to participate. >>>>> 5- While it can bring some cost reduction regarding hotels and venues, >>>>> it doesn't change the impact on attendees and based on policy >>>>> forum examples, it will require overhaul of agenda and schedule. it can >>>>> also impact the possibility of having the NCPH day meeting >>>>> 6- I think that makes sense as an approach as we are trying for an >>>>> NCPH meeting but it can possibly impact GNSO council SPS or WGs F2F (I >>>>> didn't hear about any since EPDP on RDS)? >>>>> 7- if it is a virtual meeting in the same format as during the >>>>> pandemic it might work fine, with challenges but can be handled better >>>>> than full remote participation as-is now. It will be kind of interessional. >>>>> >>>>> regarding Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources >>>>> 1- I think that is already ongoing. I think such a constraint will >>>>> encourage everyone org and community to rethink what the sessions priority. >>>>> 2- if that is targeting all sessions, setting criteria and deciding >>>>> will be impossible. We usually have a challenge to agree on the community >>>>> session. I think it is inapplicable but if it is about some informational >>>>> session mostly proposed by ICANN staff, it might be worthy to explore. >>>>> 3- depends how much it impacts remote participation and the experience. >>>>> 4- reducing interpretation and scribing, I think that can impact local >>>>> attendance experience. >>>>> 5- not sure how the block schedule can be revisited, GNSO already uses >>>>> the weekend (well we used saturday and sunday previously). it might be more >>>>> related to other parts of the community? >>>>> 6- I understand that reduction of networking receptions is already >>>>> implemented? >>>>> 7- that can be explored but as noted requires much effort to work with >>>>> local hosts and sponsors. I think it is typical of any conference >>>>> 8- we can say to that proposal in many languages >>>>> >>>>> Regarding Travel-Related Matters >>>>> 1- I think it is already being implemented and we need to see the >>>>> impact in terms of support and meeting staff. >>>>> 2- this is a pandora box : who will decide who should attend and it >>>>> will create more tension within the community. I highly doubt if that is >>>>> effective or good usage of community time. >>>>> >>>>> regarding metrics. >>>>> 1- average is not a good metric and doesn't give a good idea about >>>>> distribution of cost >>>>> 2- for the rest I guess they are fine to set >>>>> >>>>> We need to consolidate and get a common position. At least we can >>>>> agree on what is no-go for us. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> Rafik >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Le mar. 11 f?vr. 2025 ? 12:57, Tomslin Samme-Nlar < >>>>> mesumbeslin at gmail.com> a ?crit : >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> *A. Meeting Locations & Purposes* >>>>>> I personally support #7. On #1, what I don't see is possible impact >>>>>> of booking flights "well in advance" can cause to overall cost due to the >>>>>> risk of closer-to-date changes >>>>>> >>>>>> *B. Meeting Format, Logistics & Funding Sources* >>>>>> I find #1 and #2 interesting if done together. >>>>>> >>>>>> *C. Travel-Related Matters* >>>>>> No to the options provided. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Warmly, >>>>>> Tomslin >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 21 Jan 2025, 12:32 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC, < >>>>>> ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> there is some update and request for input on "How to meet". We >>>>>>> should review the different options proposed in the strawman document. >>>>>>> I will share this later with larger NCSG membership and adding some >>>>>>> context. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rafik >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >>>>>>> De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < >>>>>>> gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> >>>>>>> Date: sam. 18 janv. 2025 ? 00:53 >>>>>>> Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet >>>>>>> Community Group >>>>>>> To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * >>>>>>> - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - ICANN >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - ATT00001.txt >>>>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download >>>>>>> links. Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 >>>>>>> (UTC+00:00). Tell us what you think >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For more information click here >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear SG/C Chairs, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals >>>>>>> for ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential >>>>>>> recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN >>>>>>> meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet >>>>>>> Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft >>>>>>> strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I >>>>>>> think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and >>>>>>> provide feedback on: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. What options are missing? >>>>>>> 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not >>>>>>> be put out for public comment). >>>>>>> 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to >>>>>>> ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and >>>>>>> will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the >>>>>>> ?strawman? will be necessary. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts >>>>>>> their work. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank You! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Greg >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 < >>>>>>> how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org> >>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM >>>>>>> *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org >>>>>>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - >>>>>>> Meeting #1 - How We Meet Community Group >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. >>>>>>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender >>>>>>> and know the content is safe. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve >>>>>>> had a wonderful start to 2025. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the >>>>>>> ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: >>>>>>> Date: 13 January 2024 >>>>>>> Time: 1700-1800 UTC >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable >>>>>>> contributions. Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we >>>>>>> prepared for this group, and background documents that were previously >>>>>>> shared with SOAC Chairs: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Meeting invitation ICS file >>>>>>> 2. Agenda >>>>>>> 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting >>>>>>> Strategy >>>>>>> 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Background Documents: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups >>>>>>> 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings >>>>>>> 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings >>>>>>> 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are >>>>>>> keeping a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, >>>>>>> meeting agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any >>>>>>> document that we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: >>>>>>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight >>>>>>> timeline. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any >>>>>>> questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue >>>>>>> please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone >>>>>>> at the meeting! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alp Eken >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Policy Development Support Senior Specialist >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>>>>>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> NCSG-EC mailing list >>>>> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ > NCSG-EC mailing list > NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaela.shapiro at article19.org Sat Feb 15 10:52:40 2025 From: michaela.shapiro at article19.org (Michaela Nakayama Shapiro) Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 08:52:40 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment - Questions to be answered by NCSG In-Reply-To: References: <091F7CC1-8220-47D9-80BB-2F04099219D6@icann.org> <03d95705-f733-4d96-bfa3-6ea2374cd25b.05b495a4-acd5-4405-a5fb-09b87eaaeafb.8405b8db-9ee4-4eaa-ab8f-086e8fbc1377@emailsignatures365.codetwo.com> Message-ID: INTERNAL INTERNAL Thanks Farzaneh for your work on this! Full support to your comments. Best, Michaela Michaela Nakayama Shapiro (she/her/hers) Programme Officer - Censorship [Logo.png] Defending freedom of expression and information www.article19.org Subscribe to our Newsletter [cid:newsletter_02744340-c607-4374-8a37-11b8b216096d.png] Follow us [Bluesky1x.png] [cid:facebook_2853baa0-f060-42e6-b448-6a8788c1b5dd.png] [cid:youtube_ffe95af1-d962-4acd-ab59-4eb4ea07466e.png] [cid:linkedin_199dc89c-14aa-41cd-b2a7-37b8ae8d667d.png] [cid:instagram_05fbcc72-6df2-442b-8c34-146d0e9d8c41.png] [cid:x_d21e0607-da5a-44a7-80c7-e2d86bc18a92.png] [women-journalists-banner.jpeg] From: NCSG-PC on behalf of farzaneh badii Date: Friday, 14 February 2025 at 21:08 To: Tomslin Samme-Nlar Cc: ncsg-pc , NCSG-Discuss Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment - Questions to be answered by NCSG Hello all, Submitting the attached today to the Council today. Best regards, Farzaneh On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 4:39?AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar > wrote: Hi all, Since there are no further inputs or comments, I will proceed to submit what I have here to the council as NCSG response, since today is the deadline for submission. Thanks again Farzi for your contribution to this. Warmly, Tomslin On Wed, 29 Jan 2025, 07:30 Tomslin Samme-Nlar, > wrote: Hi Farzi, Thanks for the contribution. It is timely! @everyone, are there any other suggested contributions to these questions? I am also re-attaching the ICANN Org response here since it appears the previous link is now broken. Warmly, Tomslin On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 at 15:17, farzaneh badii > wrote: Thanks Tomslin. Please see my responses below: Farzaneh On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 8:58?PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar > wrote: Hi all, If you recall, Registration data accuracy has been a topic of contention in the community now for a while. Those who follow the the topic know that the Accuracy Scoping team was paused by the council due to challenges of pursuing further work on accuracy, including that 1. It is unclear whether [the scenarios] would provide useful data to inform the Accuracy Scoping Team?s efforts; 2. The scenarios are not expected to provide data as it relates to identity verification of the registrant or veracity of the contact information (i.e., the data belongs to the data subject); 3. The costs associated with a full-scale registrar audit [Scoping Team Recommendation #2] may be prohibitive when taking into account the relatively low level of insight the audit may yield; 4. ICANN does not have the authority to mandate collection of nonpublic registration data necessary to conduct reviews outside of auditing current contractual requirements; and 5. ICANN may not be able to demonstrate the purpose of some of the data processing outweighs the rights of the impacted data subject. As a result, deliberations on this topic on the council was deferred till February and an assignment to ask ICANN Org some clarifying legal questions, and thereafter ask each SG/C to respond to a set of threshold questions that will help guide the way forward on this topic was agreed by the council. ICANN Org came back with their response just before the December holidays. Now therefore, each SG/C is required to respond to the threshold questions by Friday 31 January 2025. We forgot to include it for discussion in our Policy meeting earlier this week. However, I request that members provide their input via this email thread. Once agreed, we'll forward our response to the Council. The questions we have to answer are in the link above but for convenience, I'll list them here below: 1. What are concrete and articulable examples of what inaccurate data DOES prevent or inhibit, and how does it do so? Inaccurate domain name registrant data should be defined based on the purpose of accuracy within the scope of ICANN's mandate: ensuring that the registrant is 'contactable.' If the registrant cannot be reached due to undeliverable messages caused by errors in the provided contact details, the data should be deemed inaccurate. 1. What are concrete and articulable examples of what inaccurate data does NOT prevent? 1. Are there specific stakeholders, industries, or sectors particularly vulnerable to the effects of inaccurate registration data? If so, what are they and why? Domain name registrants can be affected by insisting on having even more "accuracy" requirements. In order to ensure accuracy suggestions could be made to "identify" domain name registrants which goes against the principle of respecting anonymity should the domain name registrant want to remain anonymous and identification of registrants can have an adverse impact on data protection and access to domain names globally. 1. Given the examples provided in response to the three questions above (if any), please articulate a short problem statement for accuracy. The problem statement should consider: * What is the current problem or challenge? * What are the consequences of this problem or challenge? * What is the ultimate objective of working on this problem or challenge? * Considering the limitations of data processing, how do you propose to address this problem? We don't believe there are many challenges facing data accuracy. There are already requirements in place for domain name registrants to keep their data accurate, and there is an ultimate punishment for that: losing their domain name if they don't do so. Please refer to registrants obligation here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registration-data-accurate-2023-11-02-en?utm_source=chatgpt.com 1. Is now the appropriate time to address the problem? For example, some stakeholders have mentioned the implementation of NIS2 as an important precursor to understanding new accuracy requirements. Should this or other examples be considered prior to engaging in potential policy work? it's crucial to remember that NIS2 is a directive, not a regulation. Its implementation will vary across European jurisdictions, and it shouldn't set the accuracy standard for ICANN. This is due to two key reasons: 1. NIS2's provisions concerning domain names were influenced by specific stakeholder groups, not by multistakeholder consensus. 2. Some transposing laws (e.g., Germany) aim to identify registrants through data accuracy to prevent fraud. However, we believe that accuracy at ICANN should not necessitate registrant identification. 1. Are the ICANN org alternatives proposals worth exploring, such as: * Provision of historical audit data that measures registrars? compliance with accuracy-related provisions in the RAA. * Engagement with contracted parties and ccTLD operators on developments in European policymaking regarding registration data accuracy. 1. What are the limitations of the ICANN proposals? Why should or should they not be pursued? 2. What other possibilities can be explored to move our work on Accuracy forward? I look forward to your contribution to these questions. Warmly, Tomslin ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Feodora Hamza via council > Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 at 23:11 Subject: [council] Re: Follow-up GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment To: DiBiase, Gregory >, council at gnso.icann.org > Dear Councilors, due to technical issues, please see accuracy assignment attached and linked below. Accuracy Assignment: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/draft-concept-proposal-accuracy-12sep24.pdf Kind regards, Feodora Hamza From: "DiBiase, Gregory via council" > Reply to: "DiBiase, Gregory" > Date: Thursday, 12 December 2024 at 20:57 To: "council at gnso.icann.org" > Subject: [council] Follow-up GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment * Attachments protected by Amazon: * Answer to the GNSO questions on accuracy.pdf [us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com] | * ATT00001.txt [us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com] | Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. Downloads will be available until January 11, 2025, 19:56 (UTC+00:00). Tell us what you think [amazonexteu.qualtrics.com] For more information click here [docs.secure-attach.amazon.com] Dear Councilors, I am following up on the attached email from ICANN Org in which they provided their input on the accuracy assignment. On 25 October, we shared the proposed accuracy assignment, which included questions for ICANN org and the community. Now that ICANN org has provided responses to the Council?s questions, we are now sending the remaining questions in the attached proposal to interested SG/C/ACs for their input. Given the proximity to the holidays, we propose giving groups until Friday, 31 January 2025 to provide their input to the Council. As noted during the Council?s previous discussions on the topic of accuracy, the Council recognizes the importance of accuracy and is committed to making progress on this issue. Your group?s responses to these questions are very important for the Council?s future discussion, and we strongly encourage your groups to think about these questions and provide candid responses. Thank you in advance for your input. Thanks, Greg _______________________________________________ council mailing list -- council at icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave at icann.org _______________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo_1c766458-35ee-431a-9a22-e00b47cd2091.png Type: image/png Size: 6889 bytes Desc: logo_1c766458-35ee-431a-9a22-e00b47cd2091.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: newsletter_02744340-c607-4374-8a37-11b8b216096d.png Type: image/png Size: 379 bytes Desc: newsletter_02744340-c607-4374-8a37-11b8b216096d.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bluesky1x_864ef831-9476-4116-88b8-2a3410741630.png Type: image/png Size: 788 bytes Desc: bluesky1x_864ef831-9476-4116-88b8-2a3410741630.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: facebook_2853baa0-f060-42e6-b448-6a8788c1b5dd.png Type: image/png Size: 670 bytes Desc: facebook_2853baa0-f060-42e6-b448-6a8788c1b5dd.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: youtube_ffe95af1-d962-4acd-ab59-4eb4ea07466e.png Type: image/png Size: 678 bytes Desc: youtube_ffe95af1-d962-4acd-ab59-4eb4ea07466e.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: linkedin_199dc89c-14aa-41cd-b2a7-37b8ae8d667d.png Type: image/png Size: 720 bytes Desc: linkedin_199dc89c-14aa-41cd-b2a7-37b8ae8d667d.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: instagram_05fbcc72-6df2-442b-8c34-146d0e9d8c41.png Type: image/png Size: 840 bytes Desc: instagram_05fbcc72-6df2-442b-8c34-146d0e9d8c41.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: x_d21e0607-da5a-44a7-80c7-e2d86bc18a92.png Type: image/png Size: 895 bytes Desc: x_d21e0607-da5a-44a7-80c7-e2d86bc18a92.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: women-journalists-banner_b1cece5c-a86d-452f-b9f8-9e72943680f6.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15471 bytes Desc: women-journalists-banner_b1cece5c-a86d-452f-b9f8-9e72943680f6.jpeg URL: From julf at Julf.com Sat Feb 15 13:49:06 2025 From: julf at Julf.com (Johan Helsingius) Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 12:49:06 +0100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] GNSO Standing Selection Committee (SSC) meeting Monday 27 Jan 2025 In-Reply-To: References: <38614c18-56ed-4553-8a4f-8100cbe61126@Julf.com> <98d825b7-5031-4098-9d11-0511b4ed8b8e@Julf.com> Message-ID: <0cb66b0a-f276-483e-adf8-91b1d6e90009@Julf.com> Just a reminder that the deadline for suggestions for SSC charter revisions is Tuesday 18 February. Julf On 10/02/2025 01:49, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Regarding the SSC charter, I'll be making two suggestions for a > potential change of the document, and would like to see if the community > agrees with them: > > * Considering what Julf mentioned in the last part of his report, it > would be beneficial to have clearer rules about when individual > votes would be open and when they wouldn't, so SSC members can raise > sensitive topics within their reasons to vote, and reach for a > proper level of accountability to the community at the same time. > * I am asking for a mechanism that would give the SSC the capability > to interact with the Ombudsperson when selecting certain positions. > To be more precise, it seems to me that, especially in roles such as > mentorships, it would be extremely inadequate to have someone > involved in harassment processes get into an asymmetrical position > of power with a newcomer. As mentioned before, I'm not sure how much > this would be possible considering the confidentiality/privacy > issues involved and their legal implications, but discussing this > could be a good step. > o I would, however, like to hear your considerations here (and if > someone already had a concrete idea on how to implement this, or > something similar to this). > > Cordially, > > *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* > Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR > Researcher > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > Coordination/Board/EC @ISOC BR ,NCUC www.ncuc.org> & NCSG gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN), YouthLACIGF >,IODA and CC Brasil br.creativecommons.net/> > This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received > by mistake, please reply informing it. > > > > Em ter., 28 de jan. de 2025 ?s 16:58, Johan Helsingius > escreveu: > > Thanks Pedro! > > ? ? ? ? Julf > > > On 28/01/2025 17:40, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana wrote: > > Thanks once again for the detailed report, Julf! > > > > Adding to the last part of your comment, if the community would > like to > > search for potential improvements to the current charter, this is > the > > link to the current version: https://community.icann.org/display/ > GSSC/2 . > > +Charter >. > > > > Pgs. 5 and 6 (part of "Section IV: Rules of Engagement"), appear > to be > > most relevant text to be analyzed.. > > > > Cordially, > > > > *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* > > Lawyer >, GEDAI/UFPR > > > > Researcher > > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > > Coordination/Board/EC @ISOC BR isoc.org.br/>>,NCUC > www.ncuc.org > & NCSG community.icann.org/display/ > > gnsononcomstake/Home>(ICANN), YouthLACIGF youthlacigf.lat/ > >? >,IODA > and CC > Brasil > br.creativecommons.net/ > > > This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If > received > > by mistake, please reply informing it. > > > > > > Em ter., 28 de jan. de 2025 ?s 07:21, Johan Helsingius > > <00001963cc94b85a-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu > > > >> escreveu: > > > >? ? ?Hi again everyone, > > > >? ? ?It has been a busy period for the SSC, with meetings every week, > >? ? ?but now all the appointments in the queue have been handled so > >? ? ?the frequency of meetings should go down significantly. > > > >? ? ?Yesterday the topic was the Latin Diacritics PDP Working > Group Chair. > > > >? ? ?Attendance was up, with all but 3 members (Mike Rodenbaugh (IPC), > >? ? ?Frank Anati (NCSG) and Susan Mohr (ISPC) - Susan did submit > apologies > >? ? ?in advance) present. > > > >? ? ?Again, as the SSC procedures prescribe a 48-hour consensus call > >? ? ?period allowing committee members who were not in the meeting to > >? ? ?raise objections I can't yet announce the result, but I can say > >? ? ?that the candidate everyone in the NCSG camp thought best suited > >? ? ?did get chosen. > > > >? ? ?The way the SSC works is that an initial round is done by a > 2-part > >? ? ?poll. The first part asks SSC members to state, for each > candidate, > >? ? ?if they think the candidate satisfies the requirements for the > >? ? ?position, and the second part asks the members to rank the > candidates. > >? ? ?Nominally this is just an initial poll to inform the discussion, > >? ? ?but there has been little discussion and usually the poll results > >? ? ?determine the choice. > > > >? ? ?Interestingly the SSC vice chair Segunfunmi Olajide (BC) > questioned the > >? ? ?mechanism and its results. > > > >? ? ?I did raise the issue that staff extended the poll deadline > by 2 hours > >? ? ?at last minute after chasing members who hadn't responded. My > concern > >? ? ?is that arbitrary decisions to extend the deadline can be used to > >? ? ?influence the result and is unfair towards members who make the > >? ? ?effort to meet the deadline. > > > >? ? ?In the previous meeting I raised the question about the fact > that the > >? ? ?(anonymous) poll replies showed one member stating that the > candidate > >? ? ?at the top of the poll was not suitable, and wondered if that > was a > >? ? ?showstopper. The member who had given the answer identified > themselves > >? ? ?and explained that as a new member, they had answered "no" simply > >? ? ?because that candidate wasn't one of their preferred choices, > so it > >? ? ?should not be seen as a showstopper. > > > >? ? ?Seems that my question was misconstrued as wanting to know > who answered > >? ? ?what, and to my surprise, this time the polling results and > answers > >? ? ?showed who had voted and answered what. I did raise the issue > that > >? ? ?this should not happen without the members being told in > advance that > >? ? ?that would be the case, and the Chair, Karen Day (RySG) > responded that > >? ? ?"the decision was made under leadership discretion to provide an > >? ? ?additional layer of transparency and provide full context to the > >? ? ?outcome". > > > >? ? ?In this case, it did give an opportunity to see that poll > responses > >? ? ?to a large degree reflected constituency/stakeholder group lines. > > > >? ? ?There was also some discussion about possibly requesting the > >? ? ?Council to review the SSC charter. The current charter will be > >? ? ?circulated to SSC members for comments. > > > >? ? ?So far no date has been set for the next meeting as there are > >? ? ?no appointments pending. > > > >? ? ? ? ? ? ? Julf > > > From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Mon Feb 17 06:28:01 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 13:28:01 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Pedro, We don't have a bilateral with RSSAC or SSAC. The meeting with GAC will be Sunday 09 March 09:30-10:00 local time and that is clashing with the NPOC session and the first GNSO council working session. Best, Rafik Le lun. 17 f?vr. 2025 ? 12:43, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : > Hi Rafik, > > Sorry for the delay, I was having a really rough time at work and was > working on urgency-only tasks that required a bit extra time, but I finally > got a lot of unfinished tasks out of the way this weekend and got up to > date with my ICANN obligations. > > I think I briefly mentioned this in a call or in another email, but we had > some progress and are finishing the first draft of the NCSG Issue Forum - > it will be a "phase 2" of the work started in the Issue Forum in ICANN 81, > but this time centered in the concerns regarding back-end > registries/Registry Service Providers. The plan is to go around and ask > potential non-commercial applicants what are the questions they would have > when reading the handbook and getting RSPs in the session to interact with > them, once again establishing a dialogue with ICANN staff about the > non-financial assistance they want to integrate with the ASP. I'll have > more details and share a well-developed draft soon to collect input and > help from the non-commercial leadership! > > I'd be glad to take the ASP lead, but I need to confirm that this isn't > the bilateral meeting that will conflict with an NCUC agenda - it's getting > late here and I can't find the emails about the GAC bilateral and the RSSAC > bilateral, maybe Andrea can help me with that, please? > > Cordially, > > *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* > Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR > Researcher > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC > & NCSG > (ICANN), > YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC > Brasil > This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by > mistake, please reply informing it. > > > Em qui., 13 de fev. de 2025 ?s 05:10, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < > ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: > >> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a >> ?crit : >> >>> 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 >>> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >>> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you >>> share more about the selected topic and agenda? >>> >>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> NCSG-EC mailing list >> NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is >> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Feb 17 14:04:34 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 23:04:34 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: FYI ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Caleb Ogundele Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 09:48 Subject: Re: Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 To: Tomslin Samme-Nlar Cc: Andrea Glandon , Rafik Dammak < rafik.dammak at gmail.com> Since this is time sensitive, I can jump on it if there is no one else volunteering. Regards Caleb On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 1:22?PM Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi all, > > NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for > the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). > > The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of > interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik > Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 > for PC's review. > > See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder > Engagement team for more information. > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next > iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN > org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the > important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I > am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise > GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be > time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as > work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering > specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas > with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy > and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the > time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will > vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, > inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a > survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the > beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this > year.Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to > provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including > through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we > can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We > are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to > two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate > (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * > > Warmly, > Tomslin > -- *Caleb Ogundele* Email: muyiwacaleb at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Feb 17 14:04:52 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 23:04:52 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: FYI ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Namra Naseer Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 at 02:59 Subject: Re: Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 To: Tomslin Samme-Nlar Cc: Andrea Glandon , Hi Tomslin, I hope you are doing well. I am unsure why I didn't receive this email, but Amin brought it to my attention. Please consider this to be my interest in the position. It sounds like some interesting work, and I would happily contribute. I would love it if there is some clarity on meeting times/ availability. Let me know if you need anything else from me. On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 3:12?PM Amin Hacha wrote: > Hi Namra, > Maybe interest you. > Amin > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Tomslin Samme-Nlar > Date: Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 8:22?PM > Subject: Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan > FY-26-30 > To: > > > Hi all, > > NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for > the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). > > The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of > interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik > Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 > for PC's review. > > See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder > Engagement team for more information. > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next > iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN > org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the > important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I > am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise > GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be > time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as > work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering > specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas > with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy > and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the > time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will > vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, > inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a > survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the > beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this > year.Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to > provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including > through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we > can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We > are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to > two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate > (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > > Virus-free.www.avg.com > > <#m_-3506989761275646775_m_1345964365511522885_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Mon Feb 17 14:09:51 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 23:09:51 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_Expression_of_Interest_=E2=80=93_NCSG?= =?utf-8?q?_Representative_for_NA_Engagement_Plan?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: FYI ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Lily Edinam Botsyoe Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:29 Subject: Expression of Interest ? NCSG Representative for NA Engagement Plan To: Cc: Andrea Glandon , Dear Tomslin, I hope you're doing well. I?d like to express my interest in representing NCSG in the planning process for the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). As a past ICANN 81 fellow and a PhD researcher in Ohio focusing on online privacy and user awareness, I am deeply engaged in Internet governance and stakeholder engagement. I believe my experience, along with my work in community-focused initiatives, can contribute meaningfully to this effort. Please let me know if any additional information is needed. Looking forward to the opportunity to contribute. Best regards, Lily -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Feb 18 08:02:36 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 15:02:36 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana do you have anything we can share or if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work Best, Rafik Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak a ?crit : > 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a > ?crit : > >> 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 >> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you >> share more about the selected topic and agenda? >> >> So please give me your input about the points above. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Mon Feb 17 05:43:06 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 00:43:06 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] [NCSG-EC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rafik, Sorry for the delay, I was having a really rough time at work and was working on urgency-only tasks that required a bit extra time, but I finally got a lot of unfinished tasks out of the way this weekend and got up to date with my ICANN obligations. I think I briefly mentioned this in a call or in another email, but we had some progress and are finishing the first draft of the NCSG Issue Forum - it will be a "phase 2" of the work started in the Issue Forum in ICANN 81, but this time centered in the concerns regarding back-end registries/Registry Service Providers. The plan is to go around and ask potential non-commercial applicants what are the questions they would have when reading the handbook and getting RSPs in the session to interact with them, once again establishing a dialogue with ICANN staff about the non-financial assistance they want to integrate with the ASP. I'll have more details and share a well-developed draft soon to collect input and help from the non-commercial leadership! I'd be glad to take the ASP lead, but I need to confirm that this isn't the bilateral meeting that will conflict with an NCUC agenda - it's getting late here and I can't find the emails about the GAC bilateral and the RSSAC bilateral, maybe Andrea can help me with that, please? Cordially, *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ ISOC BR , NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), YouthLACIGF , IODA and CC Brasil This message is restricted to the sender and recipient(s). If received by mistake, please reply informing it. Em qui., 13 de fev. de 2025 ?s 05:10, Rafik Dammak via NCSG-EC < ncsg-ec at lists.ncsg.is> escreveu: > 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a > ?crit : > >> 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 >> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you >> share more about the selected topic and agenda? >> >> So please give me your input about the points above. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-EC mailing list > NCSG-EC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-ec > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Wed Feb 19 13:58:08 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 22:58:08 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: <00af01db8232$4d4a9230$e7dfb690$@kherman.com> References: <00af01db8232$4d4a9230$e7dfb690$@kherman.com> Message-ID: FYI ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ken Herman Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 at 05:24 Subject: RE: Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 To: Tomslin Samme-Nlar Cc: Andrea Glandon , Rafik Dammak < rafik.dammak at gmail.com> Hi Tomslin. If there is still a need (and still time), I would be available to serve as the NCSG representative. As you know I have done some policy work, but also I served three terms as the NA Regional Rep to the NCUC EC. Ken *From:* NCSG-Discuss *On Behalf Of *Tomslin Samme-Nlar *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2025 2:16 PM *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU *Subject:* Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 Hi all, NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 for PC's review. See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder Engagement team for more information. *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this year.Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * Warmly, Tomslin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Wed Feb 19 14:02:59 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 23:02:59 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi PC, The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs from 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe 2. Caleb Ogundele 3. Namra Naseer 4. Ken Herman All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from NCSG. Warmly, Tomslin On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi all, > > NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for > the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). > > The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of > interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik > Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 > for PC's review. > > See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder > Engagement team for more information. > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next > iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN > org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the > important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I > am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise > GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be > time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as > work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering > specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas > with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy > and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the > time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will > vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, > inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a > survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the > beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this > year.Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to > provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including > through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we > can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We > are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to > two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate > (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * > > Warmly, > Tomslin > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Wed Feb 19 03:34:58 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 22:34:58 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), IODA and CC Brasil 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 ?s 03:02, Rafik Dammak 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 > @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana > do you have anything we can share or if > we can prepare something quickly based on previous work > > Best, > > Rafik > > Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak a > ?crit : > >> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a >> ?crit : >> >>> 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 >>> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >>> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you >>> share more about the selected topic and agenda? >>> >>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NCSG Comment - Third Proceeding for Proposed Language for Draft Sections of Next Round AGB..pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 336631 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NCSG Comment - Second Proceeding for Proposed Language for Draft Sections of the Next Round Applicant Guidebook.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 242820 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: [Info] NCUC Issues Forum.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 657909 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Public Comment - Draft Applicant Support Program (ASP) Handbook.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 273290 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca Wed Feb 19 16:28:27 2025 From: stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca (Stephanie E Perrin) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 09:28:27 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9dda8ae6-926a-4b46-9796-b7d1055843cb@digitaldiscretion.ca> All great entries, but I think Ken Herman has been doing a fantastic job for us and could perhaps come to grips with this issue the best. Cheers Stephanie On 2025-02-19 7:02 am, Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi PC, > > The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs from > > 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe > 2. Caleb Ogundele > 3. Namra Naseer > 4. Ken Herman > > > All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your > preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from NCSG. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > wrote: > > Hi all, > > NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the?planning > process for the next iteration of the North American Regional > Engagement Plan (FY26-30). > > The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of > interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon > and @Rafik Dammak > no later than Tuesday February 18, > 2025 for PC's review. > > See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global > Stakeholder Engagement team for more information. > > > /Dear SG/C Chairs, > > ?It is time to begin the planning process for the next iteration > of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN > org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance > the important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. > > ?To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional > Advisory Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s > development. This effort will be time-limited, including one > (potentially two) virtual events, as well as work done via email > lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering specific > questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas > with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all > very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do > not expect the time commitment for community members to be high > (though actual time will vary by level of interest, we would > expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, inclusive of a 60-minute > virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey and/or > responding to requests for input). > > This email serves as the beginning of the process, with completion > expected by mid-June of this year. > > Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity > to provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, > including through an official Public Comment period. > > We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement > plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at > least one North American based volunteer (though up to two > volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to > participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total > for the GNSO). / > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 compsoftnet at gmail.com Wed Feb 19 16:40:48 2025 From: compsoftnet at gmail.com (Akinremi Peter Taiwo) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 09:40:48 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I agree with Stephanie. Ken has been doing great job and I think he would be a good fit. Best regards *Taiwo Peter Akinremi* ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ *Policy Advisory | Data Governance and Privacy Consultant | Information Security & Cybersecurity | Certified Salesforce Administrator* *Phone*; +2348117714345, +2347063830177 *Skype*: akinremi.taiwo *Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com, peterexecute at gmail.com ___________________________________________ On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 7:03?AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi PC, > > The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs from > > 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe > 2. Caleb Ogundele > 3. Namra Naseer > 4. Ken Herman > > > All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your > preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from NCSG. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for >> the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). >> >> The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of >> interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik >> Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 >> for PC's review. >> >> See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder >> Engagement team for more information. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next >> iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN >> org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the >> important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I >> am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise >> GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be >> time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as >> work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering >> specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas >> with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy >> and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the >> time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will >> vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, >> inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a >> survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the >> beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this >> year.Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a >> volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to >> provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including >> through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we >> can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We >> are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to >> two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate >> (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * >> >> Warmly, >> Tomslin >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 emmanuelvitus at gmail.com Wed Feb 19 16:58:22 2025 From: emmanuelvitus at gmail.com (Emmanuel Vitus) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 14:58:22 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: <9dda8ae6-926a-4b46-9796-b7d1055843cb@digitaldiscretion.ca> References: <9dda8ae6-926a-4b46-9796-b7d1055843cb@digitaldiscretion.ca> Message-ID: Thanks Tomslin. I support Stephanie?s choice! Best, Emmanuel Typed with thumbs, powered by caffeine. Please excuse typos & brevity! On Wed 19 Feb 2025 at 14:28, Stephanie E Perrin via NCSG-PC < ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: > All great entries, but I think Ken Herman has been doing a fantastic job > for us and could perhaps come to grips with this issue the best. > > Cheers Stephanie > On 2025-02-19 7:02 am, Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > > Hi PC, > > The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs from > > 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe > 2. Caleb Ogundele > 3. Namra Naseer > 4. Ken Herman > > > All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your > preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from NCSG. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for >> the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). >> >> The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of >> interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik >> Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 >> for PC's review. >> >> See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder >> Engagement team for more information. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next >> iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN >> org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the >> important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I >> am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise >> GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be >> time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as >> work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering >> specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas >> with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy >> and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the >> time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will >> vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, >> inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a >> survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the >> beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this >> year. Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a >> volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to >> provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including >> through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we >> can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We >> are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to >> two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate >> (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * >> >> Warmly, >> Tomslin >> > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://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 farzaneh.badii at gmail.com Wed Feb 19 17:10:40 2025 From: farzaneh.badii at gmail.com (farzaneh badii) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 10:10:40 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: <9dda8ae6-926a-4b46-9796-b7d1055843cb@digitaldiscretion.ca> References: <9dda8ae6-926a-4b46-9796-b7d1055843cb@digitaldiscretion.ca> Message-ID: May I suggest that PC observers refrain from contributing to the decision making process until asked for advice? I think we should appoint two: a rep and an alternate. I like to engage newer members so I am leaning more towards Lily. Farzaneh On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 9:28?AM Stephanie E Perrin via NCSG-PC < ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: > All great entries, but I think Ken Herman has been doing a fantastic job > for us and could perhaps come to grips with this issue the best. > > Cheers Stephanie > On 2025-02-19 7:02 am, Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > > Hi PC, > > The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs from > > 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe > 2. Caleb Ogundele > 3. Namra Naseer > 4. Ken Herman > > > All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your > preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from NCSG. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning process for >> the next iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). >> >> The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression of >> interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon and @Rafik >> Dammak no later than Tuesday February 18, 2025 >> for PC's review. >> >> See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global Stakeholder >> Engagement team for more information. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Dear SG/C Chairs, It is time to begin the planning process for the next >> iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan (FY26-30). ICANN >> org?s North America GSE team is seeking community input to enhance the >> important work of stakeholder engagement across the region. To that end, I >> am inviting you to join a short-term regional Advisory Team to help advise >> GSE North America on the plan?s development. This effort will be >> time-limited, including one (potentially two) virtual events, as well as >> work done via email lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering >> specific questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable ideas >> with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you are all very busy >> and want to make this as easy as possible for you. We do not expect the >> time commitment for community members to be high (though actual time will >> vary by level of interest, we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, >> inclusive of a 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a >> survey and/or responding to requests for input). This email serves as the >> beginning of the process, with completion expected by mid-June of this >> year. Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a >> volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample opportunity to >> provide written feedback during the development of the Plan, including >> through an official Public Comment period. We hope that with your help, we >> can craft a regional engagement plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We >> are requesting at least one North American based volunteer (though up to >> two volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to participate >> (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in total for the GNSO). * >> >> Warmly, >> Tomslin >> > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://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 julf at julf.com Wed Feb 19 17:12:01 2025 From: julf at julf.com (Johan Helsingius) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 16:12:01 +0100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 Julf On 19/02/2025 15:40, Akinremi Peter Taiwo wrote: > I agree with Stephanie. > > Ken has been doing great job and I think he would be a good fit. > > > Best regards > > *Taiwo Peter Akinremi* > ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ > ------ ------- ------ ------ > *Policy Advisory | Data Governance and Privacy Consultant | Information > Security & Cybersecurity | Certified Salesforce Administrator* > *Phone*; +2348117714345, +2347063830177 *Skype*: akinremi.taiwo > *Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com , > peterexecute at gmail.com > ___________________________________________ > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 7:03?AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar > > wrote: > > Hi PC, > > The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs from > > 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe > 2. Caleb Ogundele > 3. Namra Naseer > 4. Ken Herman > > > All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your > preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from NCSG. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > > wrote: > > Hi all, > > NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the?planning > process for the next iteration of the North American Regional > Engagement Plan (FY26-30). > > The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression > of interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon > and @Rafik Dammak > no later than Tuesday February > 18, 2025 for PC's review. > > See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global > Stakeholder Engagement team for more information. > > > /Dear SG/C Chairs, > > ?It is time to begin the planning process for the next > iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan > (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North America GSE team is seeking > community input to enhance the important work of stakeholder > engagement across the region. > > ?To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional > Advisory Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s > development. This effort will be time-limited, including one > (potentially two) virtual events, as well as work done via email > lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering specific > questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable > ideas with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you > are all very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for > you. We do not expect the time commitment for community members > to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, > we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, inclusive of a > 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey > and/or responding to requests for input). > > This email serves as the beginning of the process, with > completion expected by mid-June of this year. > > Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample > opportunity to provide written feedback during the development > of the Plan, including through an official Public Comment period. > > We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement > plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at > least one North American based volunteer (though up to two > volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to > participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in > total for the GNSO). / > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > _______________________________________________ > NCSG-PC mailing list > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc 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 From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Wed Feb 19 17:47:52 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 12:47:52 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 Perdig?o Lana* Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR Researcher PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), IODA and CC Brasil 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* > Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR > Researcher > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG > (ICANN), IODA > and CC Brasil > 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 ?s 03:02, Rafik Dammak > 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 >> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >> do you have anything we can share or if >> we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak a >> ?crit : >> >>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a >>> ?crit : >>> >>>> 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 >>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >>>> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can >>>> you share more about the selected topic and agenda? >>>> >>>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Thu Feb 20 01:57:13 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 08:57:13 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* > Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR > Researcher > PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) > Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG > (ICANN), IODA > and CC Brasil > 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >> Researcher >> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >> (ICANN), IODA >> and CC Brasil >> 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 ?s 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 >>> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>> do you have anything we can share or >>> if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Rafik >>> >>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak a >>> ?crit : >>> >>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a >>>> ?crit : >>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >>>>> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can >>>>> you share more about the selected topic and agenda? >>>>> >>>>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> Rafik >>>>> >>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com Thu Feb 20 04:59:13 2025 From: pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_de_Perdig=C3=A3o_Lana?=) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 23:59:13 -0300 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe Thanks! *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador (GEDAI/UFPR ) Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC & NCSG (ICANN), IODA e CC Brasil . Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida por engano, favor responder informando o erro. Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 ?s 20:57, Rafik Dammak 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >> Researcher >> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >> (ICANN), IODA >> and CC Brasil >> 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>> Researcher >>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>> (ICANN), IODA >>> and CC Brasil >>> 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 ?s 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 >>>> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>> do you have anything we can share or >>>> if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Rafik >>>> >>>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak a >>>> ?crit : >>>> >>>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a >>>>> ?crit : >>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >>>>>> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can >>>>>> you share more about the selected topic and agenda? >>>>>> >>>>>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> Rafik >>>>>> >>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 02:55:50 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:55:50 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 11:59, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : > Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe > > Thanks! > > *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* > Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador (GEDAI/UFPR > ) > Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), > Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC & NCSG > (ICANN), IODA > e CC Brasil . > Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida por > engano, favor responder informando o erro. > > > Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 ?s 20:57, Rafik Dammak > 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>> Researcher >>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>> (ICANN), IODA >>> and CC Brasil >>> 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> 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 ?s 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 >>>>> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>> do you have anything we can share or >>>>> if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> Rafik >>>>> >>>>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak >>>>> a ?crit : >>>>> >>>>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak >>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG >>>>>>> issue forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>> can you share more about the selected topic and agenda? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rafik >>>>>>> >>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CSG - NCSG 8 March.pptx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation Size: 34914 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wisdom.dk at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 09:15:18 2025 From: wisdom.dk at gmail.com (Wisdom Donkor) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 07:15:18 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Looks good *Wisdom Donkor* (CASP+, CISM, CEH Certified,) President & CEO Africa Open Data and Internet Research Foundation (AODIRF) | Africa Geospatial Data and Internet Conference (AGDIC) P.O. Box CT 2439, Cantonments, Accra | www.aodirf.org / www. agdic.info Tel: +233 20 812 8851 Skype: wisdom_dk | Facebook: kwasi wisdom | Twitter: @wisdom_dk _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ICANN GNSO Council Member | ICANN transfer policy review working group Member | Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous Improvement (CCOICI) | UN IGF MAG Member | IGF Support Fund Association Executive Committee Member, World Bank Independent Consultant | AU AFIGF Member | Ghana OGP Advisory Committee member | GSS SDGs Advisory Committee Member ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Specialization: E-government Network Infrastructure and E-application, Internet Governance, Open Data policies platforms & Community Development, Cyber Security, Geospatial Technologies, Open Source Technologies, Domain Name Systems, Human Resource Planning and Development, Software Engineering, Event Planning & Management, On Fri, 21 Feb 2025, 12:56?am Rafik Dammak, 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 11:59, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : > >> Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe >> >> Thanks! >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador (GEDAI/UFPR >> ) >> Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), >> Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >> (ICANN), IODA >> e CC Brasil . >> Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida por >> engano, favor responder informando o erro. >> >> >> Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 ?s 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>>> Researcher >>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>>> (ICANN), >>>>> IODA and CC Brasil >>>>> >>>>> 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 ?s 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 >>>>>> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>> do you have anything we can share >>>>>> or if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> Rafik >>>>>> >>>>>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak >>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak >>>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG >>>>>>>> issue forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>>> can you share more about the >>>>>>>> selected topic and agenda? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rafik >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From compsoftnet at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 13:11:06 2025 From: compsoftnet at gmail.com (Akinremi Peter Taiwo) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 06:11:06 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 11:59, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : > >> Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe >> >> Thanks! >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador (GEDAI/UFPR >> ) >> Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), >> Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >> (ICANN), IODA >> e CC Brasil . >> Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida por >> engano, favor responder informando o erro. >> >> >> Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 ?s 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>>> Researcher >>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>>> (ICANN), >>>>> IODA and CC Brasil >>>>> >>>>> 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 ?s 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 >>>>>> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>> do you have anything we can share >>>>>> or if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> Rafik >>>>>> >>>>>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak >>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak >>>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG >>>>>>>> issue forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>>> 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: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 13:28:36 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 20:28:36 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 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 > 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 11:59, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : >> >>> Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>> Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador (GEDAI/UFPR >>> ) >>> Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), >>> Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>> (ICANN), IODA >>> e CC Brasil . >>> Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida por >>> engano, favor responder informando o erro. >>> >>> >>> Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 ?s 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>>> Researcher >>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>>> (ICANN), >>>>> IODA and CC Brasil >>>>> >>>>> 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>>>> Researcher >>>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>>>> (ICANN), >>>>>> IODA and CC Brasil >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 ?s 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 >>>>>>> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>> do you have anything we can share >>>>>>> or if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rafik >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak >>>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak >>>>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG >>>>>>>>> issue forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>>>> 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: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 14:12:25 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 23:12:25 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, So there are 3 votes for Ken and 1 for Lilly. @Rafik Dammak I believe that means Ken is the primary option and Lilly as alternate. Warmly, Tomslin On Thu, 20 Feb 2025, 02:12 Johan Helsingius via NCSG-PC, < ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: > +1 > > Julf > > On 19/02/2025 15:40, Akinremi Peter Taiwo wrote: > > I agree with Stephanie. > > > > Ken has been doing great job and I think he would be a good fit. > > > > > > Best regards > > > > *Taiwo Peter Akinremi* > > ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ > > ------ ------- ------ ------ > > *Policy Advisory | Data Governance and Privacy Consultant | Information > > Security & Cybersecurity | Certified Salesforce Administrator* > > *Phone*; +2348117714345, +2347063830177 *Skype*: akinremi.taiwo > > *Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com , > > peterexecute at gmail.com > > ___________________________________________ > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 7:03?AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar > > > wrote: > > > > Hi PC, > > > > The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs > from > > > > 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe > > 2. Caleb Ogundele > > 3. Namra Naseer > > 4. Ken Herman > > > > > > All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your > > preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from > NCSG. > > > > Warmly, > > Tomslin > > > > > > > > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar > > > wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning > > process for the next iteration of the North American Regional > > Engagement Plan (FY26-30). > > > > The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression > > of interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon > > and @Rafik Dammak > > no later than Tuesday February > > 18, 2025 for PC's review. > > > > See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global > > Stakeholder Engagement team for more information. > > > > > > /Dear SG/C Chairs, > > > > It is time to begin the planning process for the next > > iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan > > (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North America GSE team is seeking > > community input to enhance the important work of stakeholder > > engagement across the region. > > > > To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional > > Advisory Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s > > development. This effort will be time-limited, including one > > (potentially two) virtual events, as well as work done via email > > lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering specific > > questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable > > ideas with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you > > are all very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for > > you. We do not expect the time commitment for community members > > to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, > > we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, inclusive of a > > 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey > > and/or responding to requests for input). > > > > This email serves as the beginning of the process, with > > completion expected by mid-June of this year. > > > > Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a > > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample > > opportunity to provide written feedback during the development > > of the Plan, including through an official Public Comment period. > > > > We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement > > plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at > > least one North American based volunteer (though up to two > > volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to > > participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in > > total for the GNSO). / > > > > Warmly, > > Tomslin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NCSG-PC mailing list > > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is > > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > 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 mesumbeslin at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 14:57:09 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 23:57:09 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] My flight to Seattle Message-ID: Hi PC, I wanted to inform you that I requested to change my travel date to arrive on Saturday 8th, from Thursday 6th for the SO/AC Chairs meeting due to a change in personal circumstances from when the tickets were booked in early December. While I haven't received a final formal response yet from ICANN Travel, I have been informed there is a cost to the change and since I can't afford it, the ticket might be cancelled. So, I wanted to keep you informed. If the ticket is indeed cancelled, I might only be able to attend the meetings virtually between 10am and 3pm Seattle local time, due to timezone differences. As a result, I would need help on the ground chairing the PC meetings. Warmly, Tomslin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 15:32:20 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 22:32:20 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Seeking Volunteer | ICANN North American Regional Engagement Plan FY-26-30 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Tomslin. I will share the names. Rafik On Fri, Feb 21, 2025, 21:12 Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi all, > > So there are 3 votes for Ken and 1 for Lilly. > > @Rafik Dammak I believe that means Ken is the > primary option and Lilly as alternate. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > On Thu, 20 Feb 2025, 02:12 Johan Helsingius via NCSG-PC, < > ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Julf >> >> On 19/02/2025 15:40, Akinremi Peter Taiwo wrote: >> > I agree with Stephanie. >> > >> > Ken has been doing great job and I think he would be a good fit. >> > >> > >> > Best regards >> > >> > *Taiwo Peter Akinremi* >> > ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- ------ ------ ------- >> ------ >> > ------ ------- ------ ------ >> > *Policy Advisory | Data Governance and Privacy Consultant | Information >> > Security & Cybersecurity | Certified Salesforce Administrator* >> > *Phone*; +2348117714345, +2347063830177 *Skype*: akinremi.taiwo >> > *Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com , >> > peterexecute at gmail.com >> > ___________________________________________ >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 7:03?AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar >> > > wrote: >> > >> > Hi PC, >> > >> > The deadline to receive EOIs has officially ended. We received EOIs >> from >> > >> > 1. Lily Edinam Botsyoe >> > 2. Caleb Ogundele >> > 3. Namra Naseer >> > 4. Ken Herman >> > >> > >> > All of which I forwarded to you. Can you please let me know your >> > preference, noting that only a single volunteer is expected from >> NCSG. >> > >> > Warmly, >> > Tomslin >> > >> > >> > >> > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 06:15, Tomslin Samme-Nlar >> > > wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > NCSG is seeking a volunteer to represent NCSG in the planning >> > process for the next iteration of the North American Regional >> > Engagement Plan (FY26-30). >> > >> > The time deadline is a tight one, so please send you expression >> > of interest to me and copy @Andrea Glandon >> > and @Rafik Dammak >> > no later than Tuesday February >> > 18, 2025 for PC's review. >> > >> > See below Message sent on behalf of the North America Global >> > Stakeholder Engagement team for more information. >> > >> > >> > /Dear SG/C Chairs, >> > >> > It is time to begin the planning process for the next >> > iteration of the North American Regional Engagement Plan >> > (FY26-30). ICANN org?s North America GSE team is seeking >> > community input to enhance the important work of stakeholder >> > engagement across the region. >> > >> > To that end, I am inviting you to join a short-term regional >> > Advisory Team to help advise GSE North America on the plan?s >> > development. This effort will be time-limited, including one >> > (potentially two) virtual events, as well as work done via email >> > lists or other remote tools (e.g. a survey) answering specific >> > questions. With your help, we hope to surface implementable >> > ideas with measurable impact to enhance engagement. We know you >> > are all very busy and want to make this as easy as possible for >> > you. We do not expect the time commitment for community members >> > to be high (though actual time will vary by level of interest, >> > we would expect anywhere from 4-8 hours total, inclusive of a >> > 60-minute virtual session, as well as time to complete a survey >> > and/or responding to requests for input). >> > >> > This email serves as the beginning of the process, with >> > completion expected by mid-June of this year. >> > >> > Participation is voluntary. An SG/C may opt to not to send a >> > volunteer(s) to the Advisory Team. There will be ample >> > opportunity to provide written feedback during the development >> > of the Plan, including through an official Public Comment >> period. >> > >> > We hope that with your help, we can craft a regional engagement >> > plan inclusive of all ICANN SO/ACs/SG/C. We are requesting at >> > least one North American based volunteer (though up to two >> > volunteers are welcome) from each of the CPH and NCPH to >> > participate (e.g., up to a total of four (4) individuals in >> > total for the GNSO). / >> > >> > Warmly, >> > Tomslin >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > NCSG-PC mailing list >> > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is >> > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc > > 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 rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 15:43:24 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 22:43:24 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] My flight to Seattle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Tomslin, Thanks for letting us know. Let me know when you need a proxy for GNSO council meetings. Best, Rafik On Fri, Feb 21, 2025, 21:57 Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi PC, > > I wanted to inform you that I requested to change my travel date to arrive > on Saturday 8th, from Thursday 6th for the SO/AC Chairs meeting due to a > change in personal circumstances from when the tickets were booked in early > December. > > While I haven't received a final formal response yet from ICANN Travel, I > have been informed there is a cost to the change and since I can't afford > it, the ticket might be cancelled. So, I wanted to keep you informed. > > If the ticket is indeed cancelled, I might only be able to attend the > meetings virtually between 10am and 3pm Seattle local time, due to timezone > differences. As a result, I would need help on the ground chairing the PC > meetings. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > _______________________________________________ > 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 compsoftnet at gmail.com Fri Feb 21 15:57:28 2025 From: compsoftnet at gmail.com (Akinremi Peter Taiwo) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 08:57:28 -0500 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 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 > 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 >> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 11:59, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < >>> pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : >>> >>>> Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >>>> Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador ( >>>> GEDAI/UFPR ) >>>> Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), >>>> Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), IODA >>>> e CC Brasil . >>>> Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida >>>> por engano, favor responder informando o erro. >>>> >>>> >>>> Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 ?s 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>>>> Researcher >>>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>>>> (ICANN), >>>>>> IODA and CC Brasil >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>>>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>>>>> Researcher >>>>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>>>>> (ICANN), >>>>>>> IODA and CC Brasil >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 ?s 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 @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>>> do you have anything we can share >>>>>>>> or if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rafik >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak >>>>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak >>>>>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG >>>>>>>>>> issue forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>>>>> 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: From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Sat Feb 22 03:39:01 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 10:39:01 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, The CSG chair brought the proposal to discuss board composition and having 2 seats from each house, meaning NCSG and CSG can select their own board member. The topic will be discussed under the board seat 14 agenda item. I responded that I think something we can discuss and we raised previously. More than agreeing or not on the idea, the question is how to proceed and advocate this effectively knowing there will be a certain opposition. Best, Rafik Le ven. 21 f?vr. 2025 ? 09:55, Rafik Dammak a ?crit : > 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 11:59, Pedro de Perdig?o Lana < > pedrodeperdigaolana at gmail.com> a ?crit : > >> Sometimes I make stupid questions, but better safe than sorry hehe >> >> Thanks! >> >> *Pedro de Perdig?o Lana* >> Advogado - OAB/PR 90.600 , Pesquisador (GEDAI/UFPR >> ) >> Doutorando em Direito (UFPR), Mestre em Direito Empresarial (UCoimbra), >> Coordena??o/Diretoria/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >> (ICANN), IODA >> e CC Brasil . >> Essa mensagem ? restrita ao remetente e destinat?rio(s). Se recebida por >> engano, favor responder informando o erro. >> >> >> Em qua., 19 de fev. de 2025 ?s 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 Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>> Researcher >>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>> (ICANN), IODA >>>> and CC Brasil >>>> 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 ?s 22:34, Pedro de Perdig?o 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 Perdig?o Lana* >>>>> Lawyer , GEDAI/UFPR >>>>> Researcher >>>>> PhD Candidate (UFPR), LLM in Business Law (UCoimbra) >>>>> Coordination/Board/EC @ NCUC & NCSG >>>>> (ICANN), >>>>> IODA and CC Brasil >>>>> >>>>> 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 ?s 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 >>>>>> @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>> do you have anything we can share >>>>>> or if we can prepare something quickly based on previous work >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> >>>>>> Rafik >>>>>> >>>>>> Le jeu. 13 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:09, Rafik Dammak >>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak >>>>>>> a ?crit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> can share from his side. For the NCSG >>>>>>>> issue forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana >>>>>>>> can you share more about the >>>>>>>> selected topic and agenda? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So please give me your input about the points above. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rafik >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrea.glandon at icann.org Mon Feb 24 17:55:07 2025 From: andrea.glandon at icann.org (Andrea Glandon) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 15:55:07 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Joint Session: At-Large and NCSG Message-ID: <987525c665fa433ba4580988f85d9038@icann.org> At-Large will be hosting NCSG in room Regency A on Sunday, 09 March at 15:00 local time. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 1608 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mesumbeslin at gmail.com Tue Feb 25 03:37:47 2025 From: mesumbeslin at gmail.com (Tomslin Samme-Nlar) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 12:37:47 +1100 Subject: [NCSG-PC] My flight to Seattle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rafik, all, There has been a development on this. I have advised ICANN Travel that my per diem will be used to pay for the flight change difference, to which they have agreed. So, I will be coming to Seattle after all. Thanks for helping to get me a proxy. Warmly, Tomslin On Sat, 22 Feb 2025, 00:43 Rafik Dammak, wrote: > Hi Tomslin, > > Thanks for letting us know. > Let me know when you need a proxy for GNSO council meetings. > > Best, > > Rafik > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2025, 21:57 Tomslin Samme-Nlar > wrote: > >> Hi PC, >> >> I wanted to inform you that I requested to change my travel date to >> arrive on Saturday 8th, from Thursday 6th for the SO/AC Chairs meeting due >> to a change in personal circumstances from when the tickets were booked in >> early December. >> >> While I haven't received a final formal response yet from ICANN Travel, I >> have been informed there is a cost to the change and since I can't afford >> it, the ticket might be cancelled. So, I wanted to keep you informed. >> >> If the ticket is indeed cancelled, I might only be able to attend the >> meetings virtually between 10am and 3pm Seattle local time, due to timezone >> differences. As a result, I would need help on the ground chairing the PC >> meetings. >> >> Warmly, >> Tomslin >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 wisdom.dk at gmail.com Tue Feb 25 11:26:38 2025 From: wisdom.dk at gmail.com (Wisdom Donkor) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 09:26:38 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] My flight to Seattle In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Great news. See you soon. *Wisdom Donkor* (CASP+, CISM, CEH Certified,) President & CEO Africa Open Data and Internet Research Foundation (AODIRF) | Africa Geospatial Data and Internet Conference (AGDIC) P.O. Box CT 2439, Cantonments, Accra | www.aodirf.org / www. agdic.info Tel: +233 20 812 8851 Skype: wisdom_dk | Facebook: kwasi wisdom | Twitter: @wisdom_dk _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ICANN GNSO Council Member | ICANN transfer policy review working group Member | Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous Improvement (CCOICI) | UN IGF MAG Member | IGF Support Fund Association Executive Committee Member, World Bank Independent Consultant | AU AFIGF Member | Ghana OGP Advisory Committee member | GSS SDGs Advisory Committee Member ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Specialization: E-government Network Infrastructure and E-application, Internet Governance, Open Data policies platforms & Community Development, Cyber Security, Geospatial Technologies, Open Source Technologies, Domain Name Systems, Human Resource Planning and Development, Software Engineering, Event Planning & Management, On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 1:38?AM Tomslin Samme-Nlar wrote: > Hi Rafik, all, > > There has been a development on this. I have advised ICANN Travel that my > per diem will be used to pay for the flight change difference, to which > they have agreed. So, I will be coming to Seattle after all. > > Thanks for helping to get me a proxy. > > Warmly, > Tomslin > > On Sat, 22 Feb 2025, 00:43 Rafik Dammak, wrote: > >> Hi Tomslin, >> >> Thanks for letting us know. >> Let me know when you need a proxy for GNSO council meetings. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025, 21:57 Tomslin Samme-Nlar >> wrote: >> >>> Hi PC, >>> >>> I wanted to inform you that I requested to change my travel date to >>> arrive on Saturday 8th, from Thursday 6th for the SO/AC Chairs meeting due >>> to a change in personal circumstances from when the tickets were booked in >>> early December. >>> >>> While I haven't received a final formal response yet from ICANN Travel, >>> I have been informed there is a cost to the change and since I can't afford >>> it, the ticket might be cancelled. So, I wanted to keep you informed. >>> >>> If the ticket is indeed cancelled, I might only be able to attend the >>> meetings virtually between 10am and 3pm Seattle local time, due to timezone >>> differences. As a result, I would need help on the ground chairing the PC >>> meetings. >>> >>> Warmly, >>> Tomslin >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 rafik.dammak at gmail.com Thu Feb 27 15:03:01 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 22:03:01 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Follow up: Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hi all, some updates about the "how to meet" proposal. it seems we will have to submit again. it can be an opportunity to elaborate more but it also indicates that reaching common ground might be challenging (and expectations to complete earlier unrealistic). I think there will be a session in ICANN82 about the proposal. Best, Rafik ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> Date: mer. 26 f?vr. 2025 ? 23:57 Subject: [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Follow up: Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group To: gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org Dear SG/C Chairs, I wanted to follow up with a status update on this work. Your feedback has been passed onto ICANN. However, it seems that ICANN?s proposals will not be materially altered before being presented at ICANN 82. The rationale here is that different groups within the GNSO (and other SO/ACs) had conflicting opinions on the proposals and it seems worthwhile to get the Community?s feedback on all questions presented. This means your groups will likely need to reiterate your views on these proposals in an upcoming public comment. On a more constructive note, I think the feedback illustrated to ICANN that most proposals will take further analysis, and deeper dives are required on several areas (e.g., most of you noted that ICANN should be more creative about sponsorship opportunities and other options for fundraising). Happy to discuss further. Thanks, Greg *From:* DiBiase, Gregory via GNSO-SG-C-Leadership < gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org> *Sent:* Friday, January 17, 2025 7:53 AM *To:* gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org *Subject:* [GNSO-SG-C-Leadership] Feedback Requested: How We Meet Community Group - *Attachments protected by Amazon: * - Updated Cost Data Related To ICANN Pu...copy.pdf | - How We Meet - Summary of Input from C...copy.pdf | - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & ...copy.pdf | - 2022 - 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN In...copy.pdf | - Final - Charter for the Community Gro...tegy.pdf | - DRAFT - How We Meet Community Group R...Docs.pdf | - ICANN | - ATT00001.txt | Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links. Downloads will be available until February 16, 2025, 15:53 (UTC+00:00). Tell us what you think For more information click here Dear SG/C Chairs, I am hoping for your help gathering feedback on ICANN?s proposals for ?How We Meet? (a.k.a. how to make ICANN?s meetings more cost effective). As GNSO Chair, I?ve been tasked with gathering feedback on potential recommendations that will go out to the Community for public comment. Attached are a number of documents breaking down the cost of ICANN meetings, but I think the most pertinent is one titled ?How We Meet Community Group Report?. ICANN has labeled this document as a ?draft strawman proposal? but it?s really a menu of options for reducing cost. I think a good first step is for each SG/C to review these options and provide feedback on: 1. What options are missing? 2. What options are unacceptable/problematic? (i.e., should not be put out for public comment). 3. Do you have more granular feedback on the options provided? I think this could give me a starting point for giving feedback to ICANN. I have already flagged to ICANN that the GNSO is a diverse body and will likely have disagreements, so a broader public comment on the ?strawman? will be necessary. Please provide any other thoughts you may have as this group starts their work. Thank You! Greg *From:* Alperen Eken via How-we-meet-2025 *Sent:* Tuesday, January 7, 2025 1:46 PM *To:* how-we-meet-2025 at icann.org *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [How-We-Meet-2025] Agenda and Documents - Meeting #1 - How We Meet Community Group *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. Dear all, Happy New Year! I hope this message finds you well and that you?ve had a wonderful start to 2025. Next week, we will hold our first meeting to discuss updates to the ICANN Meetings Strategy. This meeting is scheduled for: Date: 13 January 2024 Time: 1700-1800 UTC We?re looking forward to your participation and valuable contributions. Please find attached the meeting agenda, some documents we prepared for this group, and background documents that were previously shared with SOAC Chairs: 1. Meeting invitation ICS file 2. Agenda 3. Final - Charter for the Community Group for the Meeting Strategy 4. Draft - How We Meet Community Group Report Background Documents: 5. How We Meet - Summary of Input from Community Groups 6. Updated Cost Data Related to ICANN Public Meetings 7. 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Travel & Meetings 8. 2022 ? 2024 Cost Analysis of ICANN Intersessional Meetings We are aware that there are a lot of materials, therefore we are keeping a drive folder for you where you can find all these documents, meeting agendas, and notes of our future meetings in addition to any document that we will be collaborating on. Here is the link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-IGp5C4QAZjj5OJlkYRARnpsg2HBgtV_?usp=drive_link Your input is essential as we will be working within a tight timeline. I will serve as the project manager for this work, if you have any questions, additional topics to propose for the agenda, or any other issue please feel free to reach out at alperen.eken at icann.org . We appreciate your participation and look forward to seeing everyone at the meeting! Kind regards, Alp Eken Policy Development Support Senior Specialist Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) ------------------------------ NOTICE: This communication from Perkins Coie LLP may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you. _______________________________________________ GNSO-SG-C-Leadership mailing list -- gnso-sg-c-leadership at icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-sg-c-leadership-leave at icann.org _______________________________________________ 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 rafik.dammak at gmail.com Fri Feb 28 02:31:18 2025 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:31:18 +0900 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hi all, to summarize current draft agenda for the joint sessions: - Meeting with CPH: - Current Policy Topics - DNS Abuse - DNS Abuse and HRIA - Code of Conduct (RySG) - Accuracy - Next Steps/Future Coordination Let me know if you have any comments for those proposed topics. - Meeting with GAC - Introduction of the NCSG and its work (5 mins) - Discussion on (25 mins) : - HRIA on DNS - gTLD Applicant Support - NCPH meeting - Administrative matters (Rafik and Mason) - Membership system and mailing list follow-up - Regular quarterly house meetings - Board seat 14 procedures (review of the incumbent) (Paul) - Further Day 0 event planning (perhaps for Muscat) for NCPH(Rafik and Mason) - Providing NCPH input to ICANN CEO regarding ICANN - priorities / follow up on CEO Town Hall (Rafik and Mason) - DNS abuse positions and plan going forward (Mason) - WSIS + 20 (NCSG) - for ALAC agenda, it is still not confirmed yet 1- Opening remarks 2- Human Rights Impact Assessment on DNS Abuse 3- Next Round/Applicant Support Program 4- Continuous Improvement Program 5- Update to Operating Standards for Specific Reviews 6- Ethics Policy and Community Participant Code 7- AOB and conclusion We need to decide on the leads for some of the topics and if we need to prepare some slides to help. Best, Rafik Le ven. 7 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a ?crit : > 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 > can share from his side. For the NCSG issue > forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you > share more about the selected topic and agenda? > > So please give me your input about the points above. > > Best, > > Rafik > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wisdom.dk at gmail.com Fri Feb 28 02:37:01 2025 From: wisdom.dk at gmail.com (Wisdom Donkor) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:37:01 +0000 Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG sessions draft agendas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No comments from me. *Wisdom Donkor* (CASP+, CISM, CEH Certified,) President & CEO Africa Open Data and Internet Research Foundation (AODIRF) | Africa Geospatial Data and Internet Conference (AGDIC) P.O. Box CT 2439, Cantonments, Accra | www.aodirf.org / www. agdic.info Tel: +233 20 812 8851 Skype: wisdom_dk | Facebook: kwasi wisdom | Twitter: @wisdom_dk _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ICANN GNSO Council Member | ICANN transfer policy review working group Member | Council Committee for Overseeing and Implementing Continuous Improvement (CCOICI) | UN IGF MAG Member | IGF Support Fund Association Executive Committee Member, World Bank Independent Consultant | AU AFIGF Member | Ghana OGP Advisory Committee member | GSS SDGs Advisory Committee Member ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Specialization: E-government Network Infrastructure and E-application, Internet Governance, Open Data policies platforms & Community Development, Cyber Security, Geospatial Technologies, Open Source Technologies, Domain Name Systems, Human Resource Planning and Development, Software Engineering, Event Planning & Management, On Fri, 28 Feb 2025, 12:31?am Rafik Dammak, wrote: > hi all, > > to summarize current draft agenda for the joint sessions: > - Meeting with CPH: > > - Current Policy Topics > - DNS Abuse > - DNS Abuse and HRIA > - Code of Conduct (RySG) > - Accuracy > - Next Steps/Future Coordination > > Let me know if you have any comments for those proposed topics. > - Meeting with GAC > > - Introduction of the NCSG and its work (5 mins) > - Discussion on (25 mins) : > - HRIA on DNS > - gTLD Applicant Support > > - NCPH meeting > > - Administrative matters (Rafik and Mason) > - Membership system and mailing list follow-up > - Regular quarterly house meetings > - Board seat 14 procedures (review of the incumbent) (Paul) > - Further Day 0 event planning (perhaps for Muscat) for NCPH(Rafik and > Mason) > - Providing NCPH input to ICANN CEO regarding ICANN > - priorities / follow up on CEO Town Hall (Rafik and Mason) > - DNS abuse positions and plan going forward (Mason) > - WSIS + 20 (NCSG) > > - for ALAC agenda, it is still not confirmed yet > 1- Opening remarks > 2- Human Rights Impact Assessment on DNS Abuse > 3- Next Round/Applicant Support Program > 4- Continuous Improvement Program > 5- Update to Operating Standards for Specific Reviews > 6- Ethics Policy and Community Participant Code > 7- AOB and conclusion > > We need to decide on the leads for some of the topics and if we need to > prepare some slides to help. > > Best, > > Rafik > > > Le ven. 7 f?vr. 2025 ? 17:29, Rafik Dammak a > ?crit : > >> 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 >> can share from his side. For the NCSG issue >> forum, @Pedro de Perdig?o Lana can you >> share more about the selected topic and agenda? >> >> So please give me your input about the points above. >> >> Best, >> >> Rafik >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: