[NPOC-EC] Fwd: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] ICANN66 High Interest Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this Friday 2 August
Joan Kerr
joankerr at fbsc.org
Fri Aug 2 13:47:14 UTC 2019
Hi Everyone,
This is in regards to the high interest planning topics, I think the DNS
Abuse one is definitely what we want to support. This is a little outside
of the planning session so far, but a good one.
Let me know what you think.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
Date: Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] ICANN66 High Interest
Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this Friday 2 August
To: Mark Svancarek (CELA) <marksv at microsoft.com>, Steve DelBianco <
sdelbianco at netchoice.org>, Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>, Fabien
Betremieux <fabien.betremieux at icann.org>, Cathrin Bauer-Bulst <
Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu>, Kapin, Laureen <LKAPIN at ftc.gov>, Maureen
Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
Cc: <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
All,
I am a little concerned that we are now working outside of the meeting
planning group. I think we should make sure that the planning group remains
in the loop as we attempt to converge our ideas.
That seems consistent with the plan that Mary circulated on July 17th.
Looking over the thread, I propose we focus first on the desired outcomes
which we seem to have good common ground on. I’d also like to highlight the
requirement for a high-quality moderator / facilitator which seems critical.
Do we agree on these?
*Desired Outcomes from the Session*
A common understanding of:
· what is within ICANN’s mission and scope.
· what is done by contracted parties to mitigate and respond to DNS
abuse/security threats
· what is the basis of the community concerns about DNS
abuse/security threats
· what are the residual issues that need to be dealt with
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:* Mark Svancarek (CELA) [mailto:marksv at microsoft.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, August 1, 2019 12:41 AM
*To:* jrobinson at afilias.info; 'Steve DelBianco' <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>;
'Manal Ismail' <manal at tra.gov.eg>; 'Fabien Betremieux' <
fabien.betremieux at icann.org>; 'Cathrin Bauer-Bulst' <
Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu>; 'Kapin, Laureen' <LKAPIN at ftc.gov>;
'Maureen Hilyard' <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
*Cc:* 'Mary Wong' <mary.wong at icann.org>; 'Brian Winterfeldt'
<Brian at Winterfeldt.law>; 'Robert Hoggarth' <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>;
'Graeme Bunton' <gbunton at tucows.com>; kdrazek at verisign.com
*Subject:* RE: ICANN66 High Interest Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this
Friday 2 August
I understand the sensitivity of CPs to unfunded mandates, but I don’t see
why we’d limit a HIT to ICANN’s remit, particularly if it resulted in only
half a discussion. I didn’t think the DoH and DoT HIT discussions in
Marrakech were limited to ICANN’s remit; sorry if I am confused about that.
However, if the session were titled “ICANN’s role in mitigating DNS Abuse”
then such a restriction would certainly make sense. AFAIK, that is not the
intended title for the session.
I request clarification from GAC regarding the intent of the HIT session,
so that this can be resolved.
/marksv
*From:* Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
*Sent:* Wednesday, July 31, 2019 2:51 PM
*To:* 'Steve DelBianco' <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>; 'Manal Ismail' <
manal at tra.gov.eg>; 'Fabien Betremieux' <fabien.betremieux at icann.org>;
'Cathrin Bauer-Bulst' <Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu>; 'Kapin, Laureen' <
LKAPIN at ftc.gov>; 'Maureen Hilyard' <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
*Cc:* 'Mary Wong' <mary.wong at icann.org>; 'Brian Winterfeldt' <
Brian at Winterfeldt.law>; 'Robert Hoggarth' <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>;
'Graeme Bunton' <gbunton at tucows.com>; kdrazek at verisign.com; Mark Svancarek
(CELA) <marksv at microsoft.com>
*Subject:* RE: ICANN66 High Interest Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this
Friday 2 August
Thanks Steve,
Your response is thoughtful and it was our original concept to work along
the lines you suggest below.
The concern we have with discussing the DNS Abuse / Security threats
upfront is that we open up the topic to well beyond ICANN’s remit.
Therefore, unless we appropriately constrain the problem within the logical
limits (i.e. ICANN’s remit) we have an open ended discussion without
relevant parameters.
There is no intention to have an abstracted discussion about the bylaws but
rather a targeted look at where the relevant boundaries are.
Indeed, this is ideally not the substance of the discussion but a framing
of the substantive discussion to follow within the relevant parameters.
Can you see a way where we can ensure the discussion is appropriately
framed at the outset in terms of the relevant limits of ICANN’s bylaws?
If we can do this effectively and efficiently (hence the need for a
well-qualified moderator), we can then move to the substantive discussion
on community concerns.
Jonathan
*From:* Steve DelBianco [mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org
<sdelbianco at netchoice.org>]
*Sent:* Wednesday, July 31, 2019 8:53 PM
*To:* jrobinson at afilias.info; 'Manal Ismail' <manal at tra.gov.eg>; 'Fabien
Betremieux' <fabien.betremieux at icann.org>; 'Cathrin Bauer-Bulst' <
Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu>; 'Kapin, Laureen' <LKAPIN at ftc.gov>;
'Maureen Hilyard' <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
*Cc:* 'Mary Wong' <mary.wong at icann.org>; 'Brian Winterfeldt' <
Brian at Winterfeldt.law>; 'Robert Hoggarth' <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>;
'Graeme Bunton' <gbunton at tucows.com>; kdrazek at verisign.com; Mark Svancarek <
marksv at microsoft.com>
*Subject:* Re: ICANN66 High Interest Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this
Friday 2 August
The contract parties have posed a relevant question in “ What is within
ICANN’s mission and scope?”.
However, we’ve seen what happens when we begin a discussion at ICANN with
that question. It invariably occupies too much time as we argue about
abstractions such as what issues affect the security, stability, and
resiliency of the internet identifiers, and what obligations are in the
bylaws section on reviews, etc.
I think it would be better to re-arrange the order of your suggested
format, so that we do it this way:
1. General discussion of community concerns about DNS abuse/security
threats. This identifies actual abuse issues – not abstractions.
2. What is done by registries and registrars to mitigate and respond to
DNS abuse/security threats? This allows contract parties to talk about
what they do to protect their customers’ interests, their own interests,
and what ICANN requires them to do.
1. What is within ICANN’s mission and scope to address? Now we assess
whether ICANN’s remit permits asking the contract parties to do more than
they already are.
*From: *Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
*Organization: *Afilias
*Reply-To: *"jrobinson at afilias.info" <jrobinson at afilias.info>
*Date: *Wednesday, July 31, 2019 at 1:43 PM
*To: *Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>, 'Fabien Betremieux' <
fabien.betremieux at icann.org>, Steven DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>,
Cathrin Bauer-Bulst <Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu>, "'Kapin, Laureen'" <
LKAPIN at ftc.gov>, 'Maureen Hilyard' <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
*Cc: *Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>, Brian Winterfeldt <
Brian at Winterfeldt.law>, Rob Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>, Graeme
Bunton <gbunton at tucows.com>, Keith Drazek <kdrazek at verisign.com>
*Subject: *RE: ICANN66 High Interest Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this
Friday 2 August
Thank-you All,
Please see below for the work product from the Contracted Parties. A key
point for us is to establish a baseline in order to ensure a common
understanding of the current position. Without a level set of information,
we run the risk of having an under-informed community discussion.
Look forward to further refinement. Looping Graeme and Keith in as well.
Jonathan
--
*ICANN 66 Montreal*
*Plenary Session Proposal*
*Proposer Details*
RySG
*Session Description*
This session approaches the currently "hot topic" of DNS Abuse by first
looking at the key practical issues followed by a facilitated community
discussion. First we'll take a focused look at ICANN's bylaws and remit and
next, explore how registry and registrar operators mitigate and address DNS
Abuse/security threats in that context. Third, the community will be
invited to discuss issues arising and proposed solutions.
*Session Rationale*
Given the considerable interest surrounding DNS abuse within the community,
we believe an effective discussion requires a good foundation and so will
benefit from a common understanding of the following:
● What is within ICANN’s mission and scope to address;
● What is done by contracted parties to mitigate and address security
threats; and
● What are the community concerns and what are the problems that need
to be solved?
Establishing a common foundation or baseline will allow for the most
productive community-wide discussion about DNS abuse. A discussion that is
focussed on addressing the problem rather than one which is focused on
unspecified and /or potentially unsubstantiated claims of DNS abuse.
*Desired Outcomes from the Session*
A common understanding of:
· what is within ICANN’s mission and scope.
· what is done by contracted parties to mitigate and respond to DNS
abuse/security threats
· what is the basis of the community concerns about DNS
abuse/security threats
· what are the residual issues that need to be dealt with
*Session format and participation*
An independent and skilled moderator/facilitator will explore the following
with representatives from the ICANN community and ICANN org:
1. What is within ICANN’s mission and scope to address?
2. What is done by registries and registrars to mitigate and respond to
DNS abuse/security threats?
1. General discussion of community concerns about DNS abuse/security
threats
The meeting room layout should encourage interactive (“back and forth”)
participation by a representative set of participants – as opposed to a
small number of panelists facing the large room and then comments at the
microphone.
*From:* Manal Ismail [mailto:manal at tra.gov.eg <manal at tra.gov.eg>]
*Sent:* Wednesday, July 31, 2019 3:54 PM
*To:* Fabien Betremieux <fabien.betremieux at icann.org>; Steve DelBianco <
sdelbianco at netchoice.org>; Cathrin Bauer-Bulst <
Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu>; Kapin, Laureen <LKAPIN at ftc.gov>; Maureen
Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>; 'jrobinson at afilias.info' <
jrobinson at afilias.info>
*Cc:* Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>; Brian Winterfeldt <
Brian at Winterfeldt.law>; Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>
*Subject:* RE: ICANN66 High Interest Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this
Friday 2 August
Thanks a million Fabien triggering this ..
While awaiting Cathrin’s and Steve’s confirmation, allow me also to loop in
Maureen and Jonathan, both cc’d to this email .. Maureen confirmed ALAC’s
interest in the topic in order to provide end-users perspective and
Jonathan stated that registries and registrars are working on input and
will be sharing this input shortly ..
Kind Regards
--Manal
*From:* Fabien Betremieux <fabien.betremieux at icann.org>
*Sent:* Tuesday, July 30, 2019 10:58 PM
*To:* Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>; Manal Ismail <
manal at tra.gov.eg>; Cathrin Bauer-Bulst <Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu>;
Kapin, Laureen <LKAPIN at ftc.gov>
*Cc:* Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>; Brian Winterfeldt <
Brian at Winterfeldt.law>; Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>
*Subject:* ICANN66 High Interest Topic on DNS Abuse - Deadline this Friday
2 August
Dear Steve, Dear Manal,
Please allow me to loop in the co-chairs of the PSWG for potential
contributions on this matter (noting that Laureen is not be available at
this moment).
My understanding is that the GAC PSWG may be interested in using this
opportunity (an ICANN66 HIT Session) for driving progress on the
implementation of relevant CCT-RT recommendations, some of which are
currently pending “*I**CANN org facilitating community efforts to develop a
definition of “abuse” to inform further action*”, and more generally to
discuss actions the ICANN Community can already take (examples include
leveraging existing definition of DNS Abuse, lessons to be learned from the
DNS Infrastructure Abuse audits, sharing the DAAR data with contracted
parties, negotiating amendments to Registry Agreements, etc.).
To reflect the above, and subject to Cathrin’s review, may I suggest the
following edits to the session description you suggested:
*DNS Abuse takes a variety of forms, and thus mitigation of the abuse can
be based in policy, in civil and criminal legal actions, in technology, or
permutations of these. (EPDP Phase 2 is focusing on the policy
considerations related to a subset of DNS Abuse, and will be discussed
elsewhere.) This session will include discussion of how evolving legal and
regulatory frameworks put DNS Abuse investigations and mitigations
performed by 3rd parties at risk, how aware lawmakers and regulators of
these risks, and how governments are working together to bring clarity to
these issues, and actions the ICANN Community can take based on the
experience it has accumulated on this matter over time and most recently
through several processes including the CCT Review, the Domain Abuse
Activity Reporting and the DNS Infrastructure Abuse Audits.*
[135 words out of the 250 allowed]
In terms of « Rationale/Desired Outcomes » (another required piece of
information in the form to be submitted by this Friday), may I suggest for
your consideration and editing as appropriate:
*This session aims to identify measures that are being or should be taken
to address ongoing issues in the identification and mitigation of DNS
Abuse.*
Best Regards
Fabien
*From: *SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <
soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Steve
DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>
*Date: *Tuesday 30 July 2019 at 18:38
*To: *Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>, Mary Wong <mary.wong at icann.org>,
Brian Winterfeldt <Brian at Winterfeldt.law>, "'
soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org'" <
soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] High Interest Topics
for Cross Community Dialogue in ICANN66 in Montreal ..
Thanks, Manal. The BC is keenly interested in the GAC’s DNS Abuse session,
and suggests this text as a description:
DNS Abuse takes a variety of forms, and thus mitigation of the abuse can be
based in policy, in civil and criminal legal actions, in technology, or
permutations of these. (EPDP Phase 2 is focusing on the policy
considerations related to a subset of DNS Abuse, and will be discussed
elsewhere.) This session will include discussion of how evolving legal and
regulatory frameworks put DNS Abuse investigations and mitigations
performed by 3rd parties at risk, how aware lawmakers and regulators of
these risks, and how governments are working together to bring clarity to
these issues.
--Steve DelBianco
BC Policy Coordinator
*From:* SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning [
mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org
<soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Mary
Wong
*Sent:* Wednesday, July 17, 2019 11:51 PM
*To:* Brian Winterfeldt; 'soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org'
*Subject:* Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] High Interest Topics
for Cross Community Dialogue in ICANN66 in Montreal ..
Dear community leaders,
Thank you all for the suggestions and feedback. If I may respond on the
staff team’s behalf, we’ve discussed various ways in which we think we can
best support your deliberations and planning. We would like to propose the
following:
- Community leaders may wish to immediately *socialize the three
suggestions that have been put forward by the GAC* (below) with their
community groups, to gauge the level of likely support and to determine
whether any community group is already considering putting in a similar
proposal.
- Staff will create a *Google Doc/Sheet to record all plenary topic
proposals* that are received between 22 July and 3 August. We’ll make
sure that the format facilitates real-time feedback and collaborative
discussion (e.g. the ability to comment, indicate support (or otherwise) as
well as volunteer to co-organize a session, etc.). We will also prepopulate
the document with the three suggestions from the GAC.
- To the extent that one or more community groups support (or wish to
put forward similar) proposals aligned with the GAC’s suggestions, we
suggest that community leaders *encourage the group(s) to refrain
from putting in a separate proposal*. Instead, the relevant community
leader(s) should insert comments and support directly into the Google
Doc/Sheet.
- Staff will generate a brief *status report before 8 August*, to
facilitate your determining whether a call to prioritize and decide on the
plenary topics is necessary.
- For example, if it becomes clear that (say) three proposals have
widespread support, you may be able to agree on these without
the need for
additional discussion or calls.
Please note that the form which Tanzanica sent out with her note (below)
includes mandatory sections for the proposer to fill out regarding
description, rationale and desired outcomes. As noted in the staff paper
outlining this new planning process, we plan to *reject all topic proposals
that do not include these details*.
Finally, staff will create a separate *informational resource page*
(perhaps a wiki space) for your and the community’s easy reference that
will house the Production Calendar, Block Schedule (when that is ready),
dates and records of production calls as well as links to other
informational pages as may be needed.
We hope these tools and the staff support we will provide to help manage
them will facilitate a more effective and efficient planning process for
the plenary sessions in Montreal. Should this approach meet with your
satisfaction, we will look toward improving and refining them further for
future use as part of the ICANN Meetings planning process.
Thanks and cheers
Tanzanica, Carlos & Mary
*From: *SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning <
soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Brian
Winterfeldt <Brian at Winterfeldt.law>
*Date: *Wednesday, July 17, 2019 at 16:10
*To: *"'soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org'" <
soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] High Interest Topics
for Cross Community Dialogue in ICANN66 in Montreal ..
Dear Fellow SO and AC Leaders,
I also agree it would be very helpful to understand the quantity of
cross-collaboration slows and then ask our respective
stakeholder/constituency groups to provide input that includes
objectives/goals of each proposed session for ICANN66.
Tanzanica, would you be able to help with this request?
Best regards,
Brian
------------------------------
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.winterfeldt.law%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C00baf65b47714f3426a508d716013a57%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637002066853342620&sdata=6PXz1QPoY9fX5Fne4CKMUek6LJs%2BsFaa3KW13s50tx8%3D&reserved=0>
*Brian J. Winterfeldt*
Principal
Winterfeldt IP Group
1200 17th St NW, Ste 501
Washington, DC 20036
brian at winterfeldt.law
+1 202 903 4422
-----Original Message-----
From: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning [
mailto:soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org
<soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Fred
Baker
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 1:25 PM
To: Rod Rasmussen <rod at rodrasmussen.com>
Cc: soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org
Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] High Interest Topics for
Cross Community Dialogue in ICANN66 in Montreal ..
Similar thoughts.
What I might suggest is that we agree/are told how many cross-collaboration
slots there are (it represents a hard upper bound), and invite people to
(1) write a headline, (2) list a constituency, and (3) write a paragraph
about the goals and agenda of their proposed meeting. We will likely still
have to force-fit a few together, but we have the option of having people
edit the paragraph and add themselves as constituents of a proposal. When
it comes to choosing among them, meetings with the shortest list of
constituents are an obvious place to start deleting or force-fitting.
> On Jul 17, 2019, at 10:16 AM, Rod Rasmussen <rod at rodrasmussen.com> wrote:
>
> I like the idea of using a consolidated worksheet to drive this, as it
also solves the timezone problems we face in trying to get everyone
together.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rod
>
>> On Jul 17, 2019, at 6:52 AM, Katrina Sataki <katrina at nic.lv> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> While I fully support the idea to coordinate and discuss topic
submission as proposed by Manal and supported by Jonathan, I have to note
that we have tried this before, but for some reason it did not work well –
we still ended up with similar session proposals being submitted and had to
discuss the ways to consolidate them.
>>
>> I suspect that this good idea failed because we tried to do it over
emails. Not everyone always has time to follow lengthy email exchanges and
therefore inevitably something gets lost in the process. Emails are not
designed to foster collaboration - we need another tool for that. Unless
somebody can suggest a better way, maybe we can use Google doc to write
down all the ideas, note support (or objection), add comments, etc.? And a
wiki page to keep all the information/links in one place.
>>
>> Thank you, Tanzanica, for the timeline – it works for us!
>>
>>
>> From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal at tra.gov.eg <manal at tra.gov.eg>]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 8:50 AM
>> To: Tanzanica S. King <tanzanica.king at icann.org>;
>> jrobinson at afilias.info; soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org
>> Subject: RE: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] High Interest Topics
for Cross Community Dialogue in ICANN66 in Montreal ..
>>
>> Many thanks Tanzanica .. Two quick points ..
>>
>> First, to clarify that I did not intend to summarize our discussion in
Marrakech .. I meant to share only topics proposed by the GAC, highlighting
feedback received from other constituencies on those topics ..
>>
>> Second, I proposed, and thought there was support, to share the topics
first with a sentence or two on each in order to trigger initial comments,
withdrawals and mergers, before we start completing a full form for each ..
The intension is to shortlist our topics and allow early coordination and
mergers of topics of common interest, including filling one form by all
interested parts of the community and consequently avoiding confusion at
the time of voting ..
>> Is my understanding right?
>>
>> Kind Regards
>> --Manal
>>
>> From: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning
>> <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of
>> Tanzanica S. King
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 5:10 AM
>> To: jrobinson at afilias.info;
>> soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] High Interest Topics
for Cross Community Dialogue in ICANN66 in Montreal ..
>>
>> Dear Community Leaders:
>>
>> The revised production calendar for ICANN66 is attached. Please take a
moment to review the schedule in full and make sure the deadlines fit with
your expectations. Per your feedback in Marrakech, strict adherence to
deadlines is a must. Therefore, as of 22 July 2019, these dates will be
locked in and closely observed. If you have any deadline concerns, please
let us know by the end of the week (20 July).
>>
>> The official submission period to propose plenary session topics is from
22 July - 2 August. However, the form is now open for anyone who wants to
get a head start!
>>
>> Plenary Session Topic Proposal Form:
>> https://icann.wufoo.com/forms/plenary-session-topic-proposal-form
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ficann.wufoo.com%2Fforms%2Fplenary-session-topic-proposal-form&data=02%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C00baf65b47714f3426a508d716013a57%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637002066853352626&sdata=BNPjkQnf4wwCy76HyGMEnz%2FnIUNoSrLKoREDuXVMTlU%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> Submission Deadline: 2 August 2019 @ 23:00 UTC
>>
>> We will share a link to the online report of proposals as soon as it
becomes available. We’re also working to put together a collaborative wiki
workspace for the group. I hope to have more details in the next day.
>>
>> As a reminder, Manal sent out a communication earlier this month with a
very useful summary of the topics identified during the Kick-off in
Marrakech. Details are copied below for your reference.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Tanzanica
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tanzanica S. King
>> Sr. Manager, Meeting Strategy and Design ICANN
>>
>> Office +1 310 301 5800
>> Mobile +1 310 995 3038
>> www.icann.org
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org&data=02%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7C00baf65b47714f3426a508d716013a57%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637002066853362616&sdata=CDdRezrSc93TLjadZNNUi%2F3r2yM2vrYhn0Zxz8zcXf8%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>
>> From: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning
>> <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of
>> Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>
>> Date: Monday , 1 July 2019 at 07:06
>> To: SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning
>> <soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning at icann.org>
>> Subject: [SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning] High Interest Topics for
Cross Community Dialogue in ICANN66 in Montreal ..
>>
>> Dear All ..
>>
>> Hope you have all arrived safely by the time you read this ..
>>
>> Reference to our Montreal planning meeting in Marrakech, kindly note
that, as flagged during the meeting, the GAC would be interested in
co-organizing cross community sessions on the following topics:
>>
>> • DNS Abuse Mitigation (I note interest expressed by the RySG
and
>> SSAC during the meeting),
>>
>> • EPDP Phase 2 (I note interest expressed by GNSO during the
>> meeting), and
>>
>> • Human Rights (I already know this request is coordinated
with CCWP HR-CSR) and have received the below elaboration to help identify
any further potential interest:
>>
>> The GAC Human Rights and International Law Working Group (GAC HRILWG)
together with the Cross Community Working Party on ICANN’s Corporate and
Social Responsibility to Respect Human Rights (CCWP HR-CSR) are working
together to organize a cross-community session in Montreal which, regarding
the HR Core Value, will:
>>
>> (1) offer a brief introduction to the subject of HR in connection with
ICANNs mission;
>> (2) briefly introduce the work so far in the community in this regard,
including the development of the Core Value and the FoI, and the work that
has been done on Human Right Impact Assessments in pursuance of the FOI
(one already conducted and another intended by ICANN66);
>> (3) focus on an open exchange on how ICANN as a community and its
component parts (ICANN Org, SO/ACs) approach the implementation of this HR
Core Value – including information on preparatory steps taken so far, inter
alia, by CCWP and HRILWG;
>> (4) consider follow-up as appropriate
>>
>> Hope you find this useful ..
>>
>> Kind Regards
>> --Manal
>>
_______________________________________________
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning mailing list
SOAC-Leaders-ICANNMeeting-Planning at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-leaders-icannmeeting-planning
_______________________________________________
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.
--
Joan Kerr, Entrepreneur, Artist, Humanitarian
_____________________________________
Chair, Climate Smart Victory Garden Team
Chair, ICANN, Not for Profit Operations Constituency
Chair, IEEE Sustainable Agriculture Working Group
Chair, Science for Peace, Climate Smart Victory Gardens
Advisor, IEEE Humanitarian Initiatives Committee
Advisor, Climate Smart Agriculture Youth Network, (CSAYN) Canada
UN WSIS Award Recipient, for Content & Creativity
Durham Region Recipient, Community Partnership Award
Founder, Foundation for Building Sustainable Communities
www.joankerr.ca, www.fbsc.org
Skype: joankerr_fbsc
1-416-907-0783
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/npoc-ec/attachments/20190802/d4e20a6b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 26135 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/npoc-ec/attachments/20190802/d4e20a6b/image003-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18098 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/npoc-ec/attachments/20190802/d4e20a6b/image002-0001.png>
More information about the NPOC-EC
mailing list