[NCAP-Discuss] Report Changes Based on Public Comments

[Michael Monarrez Puckett]

Hello team!

Here’s a link to the completed Annex of public comments received, NCAP DG
responses, and report changes adopted.

Please review the responses in column 4 (NCAP DG Response) and leave a
comment in the document should you have any concerns or suggestions.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QXc6giTfSRsfLtvxJjzrHzFT1aCPuJgALFVPWZUbVtw/edit

I’m currently in the process of editing the report based upon the DG’s
responses to public comments. I will share those edits with the group as
soon as possible—by tomorrow or Wednesday at the very latest.

Having the report edits reviewed and approved (or else modified based on
feedback) prior to next week’s meeting would be ideal.

Thanks!
Michael
———

Focal points for report edits:
- Operationalization of TRT and implementation of Name Collision Risk
Assessment Framework should be expeditious, for which ICANN org would need
to provide sufficient resources.
- TRT should have the responsibility to remove a string from the String
Collision List upon finding that the risk of collision has been
appropriately mitigated.
- All strings should be subject to a typical technical evaluation process
without preferential review treatment for any grouping of strings. The
implementation of special procedures for certain types of strings based
upon policy adoption is out of scope for this report.
- Further research by the ICANN community will be necessary based on
evolutions in the DNS and name resolution issues.
- The data collection methods proposed for the TRT are a small sampling of
known and tested methods. Other methods may be used, but they remain
untested and are out of scope within this report. Ultimately, which methods
to use should be critically considered during the operationalization of the
TRT.
- The NCAP DG deliberated on the proposed data collection methods as a
sample of possible and available methods based upon careful consideration
and balance of data privacy risks and potential benefits.
- Data that is presently available to the public, which applicants could
use to self-assess their applications is constrained.
- The data to be made publicly available to applicants should be
recommended by the TRT during its implementation based upon critical focus
of data sources that would strengthen applications.
- The TRT should distribute time frames to the public as early as possible
for stages of the Name Collision Risk Assessment Framework based on
implementation details.
- Updated the agreed-upon definition of “name collision” within the report
based on the response from ICANN org.
- The NCAP DG does not find it within its remit to provide specific
guidance on elements of the operationalization of the Technical Review Team
and the Name Collision Risk Assessment Framework, including what data to
collect, how to assess this data, and how to maintain compliance with data
privacy and risk management standards. The intent of not prescribing
implementation details is for ICANN org to have broadly lateral oversight.
- The ICANN org would need to implement a data privacy and protection
policy, along with appropriate risk mitigation measures for legal
compliance.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20240318/b5531087/attachment.html>