[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] opening a point I believe we need to think about.

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Thu Apr 5 21:34:29 UTC 2018


Dear Vanda,
Thank  you for yr message
You stated that


*"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".*

Question
Which software and in what area ??
has anyone else raised it before?
If yes; what actions were taken?
If not , why ?
Who are these  techy groups as staff inside ICANN + techy community ?
What are these  some previous study related to what can be done?
If done  by whom?
Estimated cost? When can be started?
Good questions
You also indicated
"*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"*
Has this being raised by ICANN formally ?
If not why?
"*It was stated that this cost can not be covered because will need to
involve staff people*."
 You did also state that
" *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.*
What do you mean by BIG Brands?
 Regards
Kavouss

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:16 PM, Vanda Scartezini <vanda at scartezini.org>
wrote:

> 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.
> Suggestion:
> 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
> Vanda Scartezini
> 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:
>
>     Hi everyone,
>
>     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-.
>
>     Kind regards,
>
>     Sylvia
>
>
>     ---------
>
>     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
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20180405/c2058585/attachment.html>


More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list