[Ssr2-review] [EXT] Re: ACTION NEEDED: Input to SO/AC response note

Fri Nov 3 15:01:39 UTC 2017

Dear Team

Thank you for the dedicated work and please see some suggestions below to the language in red (which does not affect the essence of what was intended to be conveyed).  Please feel free to accept or reject suggestions.

Sincerely,

Kerry-Ann Barrett

Cyber Security Policy Specialist

Inter-American Committee against Terrorism

Secretariat for Multidimensional Security

Organization of American States

1889 F Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006

T. 202-370-4675

F. 202-458-3857

kabarrett at oas.org

www.oas.org/cyber

Register to our distribution list here!

-----Original Message-----
From: ssr2-review-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ssr2-review-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Boban Krsic
Sent: Friday, November 3, 2017 9:31 AM
To: ssr2-review at icann.org
Subject: [EXT] Re: [Ssr2-review] ACTION NEEDED: Input to SO/AC response note

Hi Folks,

I have no comments or additions - it looks good to me.

Thanks and many greetings to Abu Dhabi.

                - Boban.

Am 03.11.17 um 12:32 schrieb Jennifer Bryce:

> Hi all,

>

> The below draft note to SO/AC Chairs was developed by the RT members during the F2F meeting today. Please read, and share any edits or input by 23.59 UTC on Sunday 5 November.

>

>

> ------------------

>

> Dear SO/AC Chairs;

>

> Please find enclosed a description of the SSR2 Review Team’s perspective the Scope of this review.  As requested, the SSR2 is completing requested item to “[resolve] the issues identified and discussed before and during ICANN60 related to scope”.

>

> Scope

> The SSR2 RT has operated and conducted its work according to its adopted scope (detailed in its Terms of Reference<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64076120/SSR2-TermsofReference-CLEAN%20v4.0%20ET.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1493887766000&api=v2> document), which was adopted by consensus of the SSR RT on 4 May 2017.

>

> We would like to offer some general clarifications and comments about the choices in an overview on the overarching tenets that was adopted and guided the approach to the development of the scope that we hope will be helpful to the SO and AC chairs in considering the parameters associated with resuming this effort:

>

> Breadth vs. Depth: We believe in such a review, that it is more helpful to look at breadth and look at the broader aspects of security, stability and resiliency rather than dive into depth in just a small number of issues.  This approach we believe would lend itself to more informed conclusions that can be contextualized.  We have operated as a team that while we may review a plethora of documents, we have a fiduciary responsibility to the Community –at-Large to contribute to the stability of ICANN through sound conclusions and recommendations.

>

> Capability vs. Behaviours: We believe that it is more helpful in the context of this review to look at the capability of ICANN to manage issues related to security, stability and resilience rather than being overly prescriptive as to how ICANN should respond to particular circumstances that have arisen in the past or may arise in the future. In this context, our review will also include future threats for consideration and proactive planning .

>

> Perspective vs. Prescription: We believe that it is more helpful to review aspects of institutional awareness and capability of topics related to security, stability, and resiliency, rather than provide a detailed prescription of the appropriate responses to be used in particular cases.

>

> We hope this meets your requirements regarding the review team’s perspective on the scope of this review. The current working terms of references for the review team’s efforts up to the point of this pause in our actions, including a detailed view of the scope of the review, can be found in the reference document cited above.

>

> Please let us know if you require anything further.

>

> Regards,

>

> The Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency Review Team (SSR2 RT)

>

>

>

> --

> Jennifer Bryce

> Senior Reviews Coordinator

> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

>

> Email: jennifer.bryce at icann.org<mailto:jennifer.bryce at icann.org>

> Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann

> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Ssr2-review mailing list

> Ssr2-review at icann.org<mailto:Ssr2-review at icann.org>

> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review

>

--

Boban Kršić

Chief Information Security Officer

DENIC eG, Kaiserstraße 75-77, 60329 Frankfurt am Main, GERMANY

E-Mail: krsic at denic.de<mailto:krsic at denic.de>, Fon: +49 69 272 35-120, Fax: -248

Mobil: +49 172 67 61 671

https://www.denic.de

PGP Key-ID: 0x43C89BA9

Fingerprint: B974 E725 FEF7 CB3A E452 BEE0 5B80 73E9 43C8 9BA9

Angaben nach § 25a Absatz 1 GenG:

DENIC eG (Sitz: Frankfurt am Main)

Vorstand: Helga Krüger, Martin Küchenthal, Andreas Musielak, Dr. Jörg Schweiger Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Thomas Keller Eingetragen unter Nr. 770 im Genossenschaftsregister, Amtsgericht Frankfurt am Main

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ssr2-review/attachments/20171103/38fc3c85/attachment.html>