Hello all and thanks to Seb and Gaurav for getting the ball rolling.   I have to wonder if this is still too many topics for real substantive conversation.  I realize that Accuracy is an important discussion to have, but I wonder in light of issue priorities for this year if we should focus our time discussing the first three issues.

---

From: Gaurav Vedi via council <council@icann.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2026 10:55 PM
To: Sebastien Ducos <seb.ducos.icann@gmail.com>
Cc: GNSO Council <council@icann.org>; GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs@icann.org>
Subject: [council] Re: Topics for the up coming GNSO-GAC Bilateral

 

Hi Seb, Thank you for the reminder and sharing the proposed agenda for the upcoming GNSO-GAC bilateral. Based on the proposed five items and considering meaningful two-way engagement, I believe that the following four topics may be considered

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart

This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender

You have not previously corresponded with this sender.

 

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

Hi Seb, 

Thank you for the reminder and sharing the proposed agenda for the upcoming GNSO-GAC bilateral.

Based on the proposed five items and considering meaningful two-way engagement, I believe that the following four topics may be considered with priority.

1) DNS Abuse; Proposed questions for the GAC:

• What specific outcomes does the GAC expect beyond the current contractual and voluntary measures?
• Are there particular abuse vectors or jurisdictional concerns where the GAC sees remaining gaps?

2) RDRS / SSAD; Proposed questions for the GAC:

• Based on experience with the RDRS to date, does the GAC see a policy justification for proceeding with any SSAD-related elements?
• Any specific use-cases does the GAC believe are not adequately served today?
• Any specific thresholds (uptake, predictability, accuracy) that the GAC would consider sufficient to support next steps?

3) Urgent Requests / Law Enforcement Authentication; Proposed questions for the GAC:

• Any issues/concerns/gaps that the GAC believe remain unresolved under the current framework?
• Is the primary concern authentication, response timelines, or scope of requests?

4) Accuracy – Scope, Responsibility, and Feasibility; Proposed questions for the GAC:

• How does the GAC define “accuracy” in practical terms (syntactic, operational, or purpose-based)?
• Where does the GAC see primary responsibility resting (registrants, registrars, registries, ICANN compliance)?

From a prioritization perspective, I believe the above listed four topics seem more suitable for meaningful two-way engagement.   

Other items such as HRIA updates could be handled via email updates or other focused discussions, if needed.

Just my opinion !! 

inputs from other councillors are welcome :)

Regards,

Gaurav Vedi

GNSO CPH NCA

On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 6:23 AM Sebastien Ducos via council <council@icann.org> wrote:

Dear Council Members,

I did not want to further crowd our already packed SPS agenda in Barcelona, but it is time to look at our proposed agenda items for the next GNSO-GAC Bilateral meeting in Mumbai.

Before I reach out to Manal and Rida can you provide me with what you would like for me to propose as topics?

During our last meeting in Dublin we discussed:

1. RDRS
2. Urgent Requests / Law Enforcement Authentication
3. Accuracy
4. DNS Abuse
5. HRIA GAC-Side

In Mumbai I proposed:

1. DNS Abuse
   Depending on progress until then
2. RDRS/SSAD
   Next Steps : outcome of the SPS
3. Urgent Requests / Law Enforcement Authentication
   The GAC/PSWG should have updates. Are there questions we want to ask?
4. HRIA
5. Accuracy

As a reminder:

1. We normally try to limit ourselves to 4 topics to give each time for discussions. We have fit 5 in the past but find ourselves needing to close discussions early and continue via email, which defeats to a certain extent the purpose of a bilateral.
2. We want to promote 2-way discussions and move away from finding ourselves reporting to the GAC. We should have questions to the GAC and topic leaders are invited to interact with their peers GAC-Side to work on questions jointly.
3. Topics proposed will be discussed with our joint leaderships before we add them to the agenda. Priorities and time allotted to each topic is agreed then, please appreciate not all our suggestions might make the cut.

I will be meeting with my GAC peers on 4 February (this time next week), Please provide your inputs by Monday 2 February 2026 COB.

Kindly,

Seb

--

Sebastien Ducos

+49 172 690 8418
+33 6 1228 4445

_______________________________________________
council mailing list -- council@icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave@icann.org

_______________________________________________
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.

--

Regards,
Gaurav Vedi