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.