[NCSG-PC] NCPH day 0 ICANN86 / meeting with board

[Tomslin Samme-Nlar]

AI (from the NCPH perspective)

Curious, how do they/we intend to come up with a whole-of NCPH perspective
on AI's impact on DNS?

Remain blessed,
Tomslin

On Mon, 18 May 2026, 13:42 Rafik Dammak via NCSG-PC, <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> For day 0 in ICANN87, CSG is suggesting :
>
> A. State of the DNS from the Commercial Stakeholders view
>
>
> 1. Accuracy of Registrant Data
>
> 2. Access to Registration Data
>
> 3. Registrar non-compliance with RDP
>
> 4. DNS Abuse
>
>
> B. State of the DNS for Non-Commercial Stakeholders Stakeholders view
>
>
> 1. [TBD]
>
> 2.
>
> 3.
>
>
>
> C. Future issues impacting the DNS (Jointly covered)
>
>
> 1. AI (from the NCPH perspective)
>
> 2. ICANN structural review requirements
>
> 3. Government intervention
>
>
> Any comment on this?what we want to present  from our side ?
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2026, 10:01 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> thanks Peter, taking notes of your suggestion.
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> Le mer. 13 mai 2026 à 13:48, Akinremi Peter Taiwo <compsoftnet at gmail.com>
>> a écrit :
>>
>>> Thanks, Rafik,
>>>
>>> My suggestion would be to have something where we could look at an overview
>>> of NCPH's current and upcoming policy work, especially where board
>>> input or awareness would be valuable
>>>
>>> I recommend framing it as strengthening stakeholder balance rather than
>>> just matching CPH's engagement.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 6:41 PM Rafik Dammak via NCSG-PC <
>>> ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Any comments on this?
>>>> If not, I will share my response with CSG.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>> Le ven. 8 mai 2026 à 19:09, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> To secure the regular day 0 for NCPH prior to ICANN86, I submitted
>>>>> with John from CSG the request to Russ. It also included a request to meet
>>>>> with the board, something we couldn't secure before.
>>>>> So Russ is asking what we envision or request time with the board for
>>>>> in this case with CSG. They want to know in order to see if it fits their
>>>>> agenda during the board workshop
>>>>> Any suggestion will be helpful.
>>>>> For some context, one reason here is to have same level of engagement
>>>>> the board had with CPH in the contracted party summit just a few days ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> *Taiwo Peter Akinremi*
>>> ------ ------ -------  ------ ------ -------  ------ ------ ------- ------
>>> ------ -------  ------ ------
>>> *Phd Candidate | Principal & Executive Consultant, CSN*
>>> *Email:* compsoftnet at gmail.com, p-taiwo at compsoftnet.com.ng
>>> <peterexecute at gmail.com>
>>> ___________________________________________
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20260521/7a05c260/attachment.htm>