[Ssr2-review] [EXT] Re: ACTION NEEDED: Input to SO/AC response note
eosterweil at verisign.com
Tue Nov 7 18:32:47 UTC 2017
I support these changes as well.
From: <ssr2-review-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Denise Michel <denisemichel at fb.com>
Date: Saturday, November 4, 2017 at 2:08 AM
To: SSR2 <ssr2-review at icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ssr2-review] [EXT] Re: ACTION NEEDED: Input to SO/AC response note
Thank you for your edits, Kerry-Ann. I support all of your suggestions and think they improve the letter.
Domain Name System Strategy & Management
denisemichel at fb.com<mailto:denisemichel at fb.com>
From: <ssr2-review-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of "Barrett, Kerry-Ann" <KABarrett at oas.org>
Date: Friday, November 3, 2017 at 4:03 PM
To: 'Boban Krsic' <krsic at denic.de>, SSR2 <ssr2-review at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ssr2-review] [EXT] Re: ACTION NEEDED: Input to SO/AC response note
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.
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
kabarrett at oas.org
Register to our distribution list here!
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
I have no comments or additions - it looks good to me.
Thanks and many greetings to Abu Dhabi.
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”.
> 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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_download_attachments_64076120_SSR2-2DTermsofReference-2DCLEAN-2520v4.0-2520ET.docx-3Fversion-3D1-26modificationDate-3D1493887766000-26api-3Dv2&d=DwMGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=MWVuq3jZIw5gwhGdDf-HWNL4CEWIsdUnt9gOgplCArM&m=GuYVWuSmXCi8i1YOSYp319mDaTfjl_1uvgqC3qhe8CQ&s=X9v8F6AIuaPUp2s83GmyNlVwAuwToPtZFb8lJdAdLAg&e=>> 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.
> 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
> Ssr2-review mailing list
> Ssr2-review at icann.org<mailto:Ssr2-review at icann.org>
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
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...
More information about the Ssr2-review