[NCAP-Discuss] why enhanced controlled interruption - not legal

Mon Feb 21 20:28:38 UTC 2022

Thanks Jim.  I note the following statement has been an underlying premise of our discussions for quite some time now – I believe from the first review of the draft Workflow document.

"ECI exists because it is currently the only mechanism that has been proposed to obtain sufficient information to develop a mitigation or remediation plan.  We can certainly note the additional risks that the ICANN Board will need to consider, that are outside the technical scope of our work."

I support the approach taken by your email below in relation to identification of risks and corresponding legal issues that would have to be addressed.   I also note that getting to the bottom of these issues may be very important to being able to conduct Study 3, which is designed to develop mitigation strategies.   In other words, it looks to me as though appropriate mitigation strategies cannot be developed without ECI and that an inability to proceed to that step means more strings with high Impact (Volume and Diversity) will simply be ruled “not approved for delegation”.

Anne

Anne E. Aikman-Scalese

Of Counsel

AAikman at lewisroca.com

D. 520.629.4428

Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP

One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000

Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611

lewisroca.com

-----Original Message-----
From: NCAP-Discuss <ncap-discuss-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of James Galvin
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2022 12:45 PM
To: NCAP Discussion Group <ncap-discuss at icann.org>
Subject: [NCAP-Discuss] why enhanced controlled interruption - not legal

[EXTERNAL]

Speaking as co-Chair:

This discussion of the purpose and value of enhanced controlled interruption is essential.  As a group we need to understand all points of view, make sure to defend any choice we make, and mention relevant counterpoints so the community understands why we made our choice.

Toward that end I want to remind us that this is a technical group and we ultimately will make the best technical choice we can based on the data we have at hand.

There are legal questions associated with the use of enhanced controlled interruption.  There are related business, privacy, and liability questions.  These questions have very limited scope in our work.  It is appropriate for us to note the questions and suggest future study of them, but in general it is not within scope for us to resolve them.

Let’s remind ourselves as to why enhanced controlled interruption (ECI) is part of our currently proposed solution.

We have been asked to provide guidance on how to assess name collisions and consider what mitigation and remediation might be possible.  The data we have tells us the following.

1. Root servers do not have a full picture of name collisions by themselves.

2. What we do know from root servers is only from DNS queries and that information is waning as the DNS infrastructure evolves.

Those two facts alone tell us the development of a mitigation and remediation plan is problematic at best.

ECI exists because it is currently the only mechanism that has been proposed to obtain sufficient information to develop a mitigation or remediation plan.  We can certainly note the additional risks that the ICANN Board will need to consider, that are outside the technical scope of our work.

Or, if another mechanism or procedure manifests in our discussions, then we’ll certainly consider that.

I don’t want to repeat discussion we’ve already had.  As we develop text for our final work product all of this will get discussed again and captured appropriately.  Please do continue the discussion on the list as it will inform our final work product.

Thanks,

Jim

_______________________________________________

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: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20220221/46903e1a/attachment-0001.html>