[NCAP-Discuss] Revised draft of NCAP Study 1 report

Thu Feb 6 17:56:57 UTC 2020

Danny - I am responding in part for Karen's benefit since other panelists may already be aware of deliberations in Sub Pro on the name collisions topic.

I think you are correct that the data referenced in Work Track 4 of Sub Pro was not conclusive.   NCAP is in a position to be more thorough.   I applaud the Sub Pro Work Track 4 work led by Jeff and Rubens related to a possible recommendation to create a "DO NOT APPLY" list and to develop a method for identifying levels of risk in the low, medium, and high categories for strings not designated as "DO NOT APPLY".  I am not sure how these categories discussed in Sub Pro would relate to a possible recommendation to allow registrants to submit mitigation plans to be analyzed by ICANN on a "String-by-string" basis.  (That seems a bit unwieldy and expensive and no mention was made of a possibility for public comment on such individualized mitigation proposals.)

Although Sub Pro has not yet considered the language of its Final Report, some in Sub Pro Leadership have said that since no Consensus appears to exist on adopting a new Name Collision Framework, the Sub Pro WG is required to fall back to the 90-day Controlled Interruption practice used in the 2012 round,   However,  numerous public commenters filed comment on the Sub Pro Initial Report stating that Sub Pro should "defer to the SSAC".  I assume the Sub Pro Final Report will note the "deference to SSAC" but it appears possible that Leadership may not feel comfortable designating that as a Consensus opinion.  (I am sure Jeff and Rubens will advise when that discussion occurs - and may even send the proposed text of  the Final Report to the NCAP if we establish a way to work together.)

Thanks to Jim for adding the note about "consider the work of Sub Pro" to the Discussion notes on answering the Board's questions.     Notably, Sub Pro has no jurisdiction over policy recommendations in relation to the .HOME, .CORP, or .MAIL.  applications made in 2012 that have not been withdrawn.  But it's reasonable to assume that if the GNSO recommends (and the Board approves) submission of individual mitigation proposals relative to future applied-for strings on a case-by-case basis, those 2012 applicants would be quite likely to press for similar consideration.

Anne

Anne E. Aikman-Scalese

Of Counsel

520.629.4428 office

520.879.4725 fax

AAikman at lrrc.com<mailto:AAikman at lrrc.com>

_____________________________

[cid:image002.png at 01D5DCDC.257A3720]

Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP

One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000

Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611

lrrc.com<http://lrrc.com/>

[cid:image004.jpg at 01D5DCDC.257A3720]

Because what matters

to you, matters to us.(tm)

-----Original Message-----
From: NCAP-Discuss <ncap-discuss-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Danny McPherson
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 7:34 PM
To: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br>
Cc: ncap-discuss at icann.org
Subject: Re: [NCAP-Discuss] Revised draft of NCAP Study 1 report

[EXTERNAL]

On 2020-02-05 20:14, Rubens Kuhl wrote:

>>> On Feb 5, 2020, at 2:56 PM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br<mailto:rubensk at nic.br>> wrote:

>>>

>>> Actually, the 2012 data suggests that 60 days would be enough.

>>

>> Can you provide a pointer to that analysis?

>

> Transcripts of Subsequent Procedures PDP, specifically Work Track 4.

Ahh, that.  So nothing anywhere near conclusive.

-danny

_______________________________________________

NCAP-Discuss mailing list

NCAP-Discuss at icann.org<mailto:NCAP-Discuss at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ncap-discuss

_______________________________________________

By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

________________________________

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. ?2510-2521.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20200206/560def19/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6528 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20200206/560def19/image002-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2461 bytes
Desc: image004.jpg
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20200206/560def19/image004-0001.jpg>