[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] opening a point I believe we need to think about.
vanda at scartezini.org
Thu Apr 5 16:16:50 UTC 2018
Thank you Sylvia Cadena, for your thoughts.
Let me put something new over the table, for your considerations:
During some discussion among former board members and the running board itself, due to some issues raised by Steve Crocker, I have thought in a point that I would like to share with all, regarding Auction amount of resources.
The point raised by Steve and followed by other techy members, is related to challenges on security we are seeing will demand new software solutions, not yet available, and may be new technologies for DNS environment to guarantee ICANN long term mission.
My point is:
The lack of security in some software, nowadays working in the DNS infrastructure, can bring key problems to the DNS and hence, to ICANN itself.
These discussions are gaining strength and any probable solution will not show up from one day to another to fix when some problems shows up.
Why not separate some of auction money now, as we have thought in have some separate amount to Reserve, and why not by our own decision take part of this reserve to start to be used right now, to allow techy groups as staff inside ICANN + techy community to deeply study and suggest remedies to be developed in order to go ahead in the preventive side and had solution ready to avoid surprises?
(Certainly this will demand some previous study related to what can be done? by whom? Estimated cost? When can be started? But this can be demanded to staff and other techy members of our community to present a proposal).
There is no enough budget inside ICANN to software/solution development included into the normal budget and we believe this kind of project is quite urgent and cannot wait for auction regular process (from my view, more than 1 year from now on, due my own experience as granting $ and/or receiving grant $ - to have some of this project as approved one - even if possible - and have the gran $ in hands.).
Furthermore, one of our requisites for future grants will not allow to cover such Key mission project, because will need to involve staff people.
I put this over the table since I believe that “prevention” is better than “correction”.
To think about.
New solutions for our security will need to be developed as soon as possible. Can be a work together with big brands to reduce the cost, but as we understand, needs to be addressed and will take some time to get it done.
In time: I am not an interested part other than be interested in our security, as ICANN long time community member and as internet user.
Kisses to all
Polo Consultores Associados
Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004
01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253
Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464
Sorry for any typos.
On 4/4/18, 21:10, "Ccwg-auctionproceeds on behalf of Sylvia Cadena" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org on behalf of sylvia at apnic.net> wrote:
First of all apologies for the radio silence. I am sorry I was not able to join you in Puerto Rico and that I have missed the last couple of meetings, as they were at times were I was on planes or during a public holiday. I am glad to see progress on the discussions and would like to make a few comments.
1. I think we finally found the right wording. "In service of ICANN's mission" gives real meaning to what the auction proceeds funds can support. Great!
2. I think the suggestion from the board about programming disbursement based in tranches (3-4 years period) is common practice among many donors and agencies and supports the overall need of fine-tunning processes and procedures as the mechanism kicks off. Having ways to identify when things might not be working and ways to tackle them and incorporate corrective measurements is key. Another benefit of this is that those tranches could be aligned with ICANN's strategic planning/focus. It will be a good idea to try to align those tranches with whatever cycles ICANN normally goes through, so that it is easier to be "in service of ICANN"s mission".
3. The evaluation of the mechanism itself and the projects it will support should also be sync and aligned with those programming cycles. Assessing impact on a 3 to 4 years framework makes a lot more sense than assessing projects only during their implementation period and final reporting requirements. Revisiting projects/organizations supported after a while and track how funds allocated supported their growth and development is a key part of assessing the real impact, and it is also a very good mechanism to build community, strengthen collaboration and have an understanding of the issues on the field. I just have a cautionary word of advice when defining those mechanisms, so that there is balance between the quantitative and the qualitative information collected. Anecdotal information about how "god" or "bad" something is will certainly not be enough, but focusing only on quantitative indicators is also an incomplete view of the work done. A key element on that evaluation/monitoring strategy is to identify the individuals that are behind projects /organizations supported. Most organization/projects that are successful are so because of the team behind them. Putting a face to the dollars invested, also helps to support leadership development, build capacity and a support network of peers.
4. Regarding the question about what is better... if funding few large projects or more smaller projects, I think that it will really depend on the areas of focus and the activities provided. There may be projects that will not be successful if they do not have the necessary budget commitment, so they might be at a disadvantage from the beginning. My suggestion will be that out of the first tranches to be explored, the mechanism allocates funding across both options, so that their effectiveness can also be compared -to a certain extent-.
Sylvia Cadena | APNIC Foundation - Head of Programs | sylvia at apnic.net | http://www.apnic.foundation
ISIF Asia, WSIS Champion on International Cooperation 2018 | http://www.isif.asia | FB ISIF.asia | @ISIF_Asia | G+ ISIFAsia |
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD, 4101 Australia | PO Box 3646 | +10 GMT | skypeID: sylviacadena | Tel: +61 7 3858 3100 | Fax: +61 7 3858 3199
* Love trees. Print only if necessary.
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds