[Area 4] [off-list] Re: [CCWG-Accountability] WS4 Initial Scenarios

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

Steve,

I commented on the BC "stress tests" several weeks ago ... Do you think 
the best course of action is to ignore comment and just paste into the 
draft?

Eric

On 1/9/15 2:29 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote:
> Thanks to eric for first draft and the updates below. Starting with 
> Mathieu’s markup version, I added several of the scenarios that the BC 
> submitted in its stress tests <http://bizconst.org/stresstests> in 
> May-2014 (attached markup).
>
> Best,
> Steve DelBianco
> Executive Director
> NetChoice
>
>
> From: Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr 
> <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>
> Reply-To: Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr 
> <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>
> Date: Friday, January 9, 2015 at 4:05 AM
> To: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net 
> <mailto:ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net>>, 
> "accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org> >> 
> 'accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:%27accountability-cross-community at icann.org>'" 
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>, Thomas Rickert 
> <rickert at anwaelte.de <mailto:rickert at anwaelte.de>>, 
> "\"leonfelipe at sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> >> León Felipe 
> Sánchez Ambía\"" <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe at sanchez.mx>>
> Cc: ccwg-accountability4 <ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-Accountability] WS4 Initial Scenarios
>
> Thanks Eric,
>
> The clarifications are useful to me. Maybe they could be added in the 
> document ? This would be useful in the perspective of publishing this 
> beyond our group as part of an interim report for example.
>
> regarding #1 and #2, I would request the support of Eberhard to ensure 
> our use of vocabulary for these types of IANA requests is in harmony 
> with the ccNSO's framework of interpretation WG final report (I read 
> it but am still a bit unsure...).
>
> Best
> Mathieu
>
> Le 08/01/2015 19:59, Eric Brunner-Williams a écrit :
>> Dear Mathieu,
>>
>> Thank you for the revision.
>>
>> To respond to the comment re: clarification of the difference(s) 
>> between scenarios #1 and #2.
>>
>> Scenario #1 addresses the possibility that additions, modifications 
>> or deletions of strings within the IANA root zone are, for some 
>> reason, not accomplished. The zone is frozen. No TLDs added, no TLDs 
>> deleted.
>>
>> Scenario #2 addresses the possibility that changes to delegations 
>> are, for some reason, not accomplished. Delegations from the zone are 
>> frozen. No NS records are updated.
>>
>> They could be merged though I personally see freezing the zone as a 
>> different form of failure than refusing to make requested changes to 
>> delegations.
>>
>> To respond to the comment re: clarification of the difference(s) 
>> between scenarios #5 and #6.
>>
>> Hyperinflation (Weimar Republic, June 1921 to January 1924) or a 
>> global financial crisis (2007 - 2008) would have an effect on the 
>> corporation's reserves, which a domain-industry-specific collapse 
>> would not. Both would reduce recurring revenues, but the latter would 
>> not necessarily compromise the reserve fund, and the former would. So 
>> #5 is survivable, until the reserve is exhausted, #6 is not.
>>
>> Please let me know your thoughts. I'll review the comments of others 
>> today and tomorrow and post a revision on Saturday. The revision will 
>> include a first "cook book recipes" for designing, conducting and 
>> analyzing each scenario hypothetically.
>>
>> The capture and abuse of accountability scenarios are welcome additions.
>>
>> Best,
>> Eric
>>
>> On 1/8/15 8:56 AM, Mathieu Weill wrote:
>>> Dear Eric,
>>>
>>> Once again thank you for this very useful first list. I find it is 
>>> already quite advanced. I attach a revised version with several 
>>> personal comments and proposals, including a couple of additional 
>>> scenarios around capture on the one side, the ability for a minority 
>>> of stakeholders to abuse accountability mechanisms to effectively 
>>> paralyze Icann.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Mathieu
>>>
>>> Le 06/01/2015 07:45, Eric Brunner-Williams a écrit :
>>>> Colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> Attached please find an initial set of scenarios, in two pages, in 
>>>> .pdf and .docx formats.
>>>>
>>>> Feedback via email please, either to me directly 
>>>> (ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net) or to the WS4 sublist 
>>>> (ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>> Eric Brunner-Williams
>>>> Eugene, Oregon
>>>
>>
>
> -- 
> *****************************
> Mathieu WEILL
> AFNIC - directeur général
> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
> Twitter : @mathieuweill
> *****************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability4/attachments/20150109/99acfb5a/attachment.html>