[NCAP-Discuss] NCAP DG Agenda: 12 of January

Wed Jan 12 21:31:52 UTC 2022

This is a very cool idea!

tom

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 3:27 PM Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lewisroca.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Re Agenda Item # 5, thanks for adding further discussion about this
> question to the meeting agenda for next week.
>
>
>
> I do think that Warren’s suggestion at the end of our Zoom call today
> makes sense – in other words, if we are recommending a risk analysis system
> be implemented by ICANN, perhaps it would make sense to test the exact
> process we will be recommending against known problematic strings from the
> 2012 round, in particular those where there are applications which have not
> been withdrawn.  (I think based on Sub Pro policy work, these applications
> that have not been withdrawn would be given priority in the next round.)
>
>
>
> I think there are at least two of these strings involved, i.e. .home and
> .mail.  I know that Jim has stated more than once that the DG will not be
> making recommendations as to particular strings (although the Board
> questions may be calling for responses like that in some cases).  It does
> seem that based on the Board’s specific questions to the SSAC re .corp,
> .home, and .mail, it would make sense to know how the process we are
> recommending in the slides previously presented by Jim and Matt might apply
> to the name collision risk analysis of those strings.  Perhaps if we apply
> that process as a Discussion Group, these may serve as examples to the
> Board as to how the risk analysis can be conducted by an internal ICANN.org
> Technical Review Committee going forward?  So we would be saying, here’s he
> process and here are a couple of examples we are putting through that
> process.
>
>
>
> Anne
>
>
>
> *Anne E. Aikman-Scalese*
>
> Of Counsel
>
> AAikman at lewisroca.com
>
> D. 520.629.4428
>
>
>
> *From:* NCAP-Discuss <ncap-discuss-bounces at icann.org> * On Behalf Of *Corina
> Ferrer
> *Sent:* Monday, January 10, 2022 10:17 AM
> *To:* ncap-discuss at icann.org
> *Subject:* [NCAP-Discuss] NCAP DG Agenda: 12 of January
>
>
>
> *[EXTERNAL]*
> ------------------------------
>
> Dear NCAP DG members,
>
>
>
> Hope you had a nice holiday season and New Year!
>
>
>
> Here is the agenda for the next meeting, Wednesday 12 January @ 11:00 PST.
>
>
>
>
>    1. Welcome and roll call
>    2. Update from the Technical Investigator – Casey
>    3. Current status of the NCAP project – Jennifer
>    4. Discuss feedback and finalize the draft Data Sensitivity Analysis
>    <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sLPrBn8T6ym7gumySHeWG9THSGSRoEeKldv3uRMMy6Y/edit#heading=h.xv8v542ztejv>
>     – Matt Thomas
>       1. Decision required: Data sensitivity analysis and case studies
>       ready to be published for Public Comment – scheduled for posting 19 January
>    5. Anne’s question per 15 December email
>    <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/2021-December/000662.html>:
>    “Is it possible that the DG should be recommending that ICANN test the
>    system of controlled interruption we are endorsing on strings that were
>    previously applied-for in 2012 and not delegated due to Name Collision
>    issues?” *(time permitting or push to next week?)*
>    6. AOB
>
>
>    1. Reminder – volunteers wanted for the NCAP DG ‘design team’
>    1. Confirm action items and decisions reached – Jennifer
>
>
>
> A special thanks to Jennifer for assistance!
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Corina
>
> ------------------------------
>
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> NCAP-Discuss mailing list
> 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.

-- 
Thomas Barrett
President
EnCirca, Inc
+1.781.942.9975 (office)
400 W. Cummings Park, Suite 1725
Woburn, MA 01801 USA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20220112/7f8fbaf5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2031 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20220112/7f8fbaf5/image003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 209 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20220112/7f8fbaf5/image004.png>