RE: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad
Paul, Setting apart what the role of ICANN and contracted parties are in this matter, we need to be aware that there are fundamental limitations that would prevent any of such entities to do what is described in the text. Currently, there is no Computer Science standard to define what is an abuse, its taxonomies or how to report them; it's not much different from the famous obscenity definition: "I know it when I see it.". So even if we somehow put ICANN in the role of making such standards, which would be unprecedented since standards in this area until now came from ISO, IETF, M3AAWG and APWG, it would fail miserably due to lack of a theoretical framework to base such standards on. That's why most of the work in the Information Security field refer to "practices"; this allow for not hardcoding a phenomena that is always fast evolving and be more effective by being more adaptable. I would even challenge the use of "best practices" in the context below since it would require a greater level adoption in the field, but this is a confusion that is already widely spread in a number of ICANN documents, unfortunately. Rubens
Em 12 de dez de 2016, à(s) 18:10:000, policy@paulmcgrady.com escreveu:
Hi All,
The IPC has had a chance to consider the draft language for Section 2 and propose the following (heavily) edited draft response:
___________________________ The GNSO Council would like to express concern that the list of questions set out in Annex 1 has been categorised as “advice”. In this context, the term “advice” ought to be given its ordinary dictionary meaning, and a request to the Board to provide various data and information does not constitute “GAC Advice”, as this term is used in the ICANN Bylaws. Since GAC Advice has a specific status and treatment under the under the ICANN Bylaws, precision of terminology is crucial to avoid any perception that there is an attempt to direct the Board, rather than making a request for information and attempting to impose a reasonable deadline for its provision. That said, the GNSO Council looks forward to reviewing ICANN’s responses to the questions listed in Annex 1 to the Communiqué. Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations. The issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC may also be dealt with by the GNSO in GNSO PDP Working Groups, producing relevant Consensus Policy recommendations then duly adopted by the Board. Further, the issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC is dealt with by the GNSO as the issue arises, whether it be various active and/or open projects on the Projects List <https://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/projects-list-28nov16-en.pdf>, or as part of GNSO Policy Activities <https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/policy>. ___________________________
I'm very happy to discuss the rationale for these proposed changes.
Best, Paul
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Date: Thu, December 08, 2016 11:48 am To: "council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>>
Dear All,
Please find attached for your review the proposed GNSO Review of the GAC Communique. This draft has been developed by the small drafting team that was formed at ICANN57 consisting of Donna Austin, James Bladel, Heather Forrest, Phil Corwin, Michele Neylon, Paul McGrady and Carlos Guttierez. Please share any comments and/or input you may have with the mailing list. Consideration of this document is also on the agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 15 December.
Best regards,
Marika
Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>
Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>.
Paul Notwithstanding your discussions with Michele and Rubens, I have received some suggested alternate text from the RySG for consideration, specifically as it relates to the following sentences: Paul McGrady text: Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations. RySG alternative text: Contracted parties, either through the respective Stakeholder Groups or other avenues, have or are in the process of developing a number of ‘best practice’ initiatives related registry and registrar operations. ICANN is not a regulator and, while it has responsibility to manage its contracts, it is not appropriate for one party to unilaterally define the standards for reporting enforcement. In addition, I also wonder whether it would be worthwhile raising your concerns about the use of the term “advice” as an overarching issue in the covering transmission letter to the Board? It seems important enough to warrant such elevation. Look forward to your response. Donna From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of policy@paulmcgrady.com Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 12:11 PM To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad Hi All, The IPC has had a chance to consider the draft language for Section 2 and propose the following (heavily) edited draft response: ___________________________ The GNSO Council would like to express concern that the list of questions set out in Annex 1 has been categorised as “advice”. In this context, the term “advice” ought to be given its ordinary dictionary meaning, and a request to the Board to provide various data and information does not constitute “GAC Advice”, as this term is used in the ICANN Bylaws. Since GAC Advice has a specific status and treatment under the under the ICANN Bylaws, precision of terminology is crucial to avoid any perception that there is an attempt to direct the Board, rather than making a request for information and attempting to impose a reasonable deadline for its provision. That said, the GNSO Council looks forward to reviewing ICANN’s responses to the questions listed in Annex 1 to the Communiqué. Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations. The issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC may also be dealt with by the GNSO in GNSO PDP Working Groups, producing relevant Consensus Policy recommendations then duly adopted by the Board. Further, the issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC is dealt with by the GNSO as the issue arises, whether it be various active and/or open projects on the Projects List<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_meetings_projects-2Dlist-2D28nov16-2Den.pdf&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=OnENUeYwFCPLqmH6BhL_VfSwze9IjfPBwZtjrj6smAM&e=>, or as part of GNSO Policy Activities<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_council_policy&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=DAh8dGjoP-HlunMGgxErthrt2L98OaFx7eNjhl28kT4&e=>. ___________________________ I'm very happy to discuss the rationale for these proposed changes. Best, Paul -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Date: Thu, December 08, 2016 11:48 am To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Dear All, Please find attached for your review the proposed GNSO Review of the GAC Communique. This draft has been developed by the small drafting team that was formed at ICANN57 consisting of Donna Austin, James Bladel, Heather Forrest, Phil Corwin, Michele Neylon, Paul McGrady and Carlos Guttierez. Please share any comments and/or input you may have with the mailing list. Consideration of this document is also on the agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 15 December. Best regards, Marika Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=dNjsiuWO3xdzLW4v1BH88xcBii9uiGCBDGesqG9gB7I&e=> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=gtfl9Z6dWYQL3zTtk15ezDF16TnJlbluKDGvMZg5xaE&e=>.
Paul, all Just a heads up that we had some discussion about this during an RySG call earlier today and as a result I will have some amendments to my revised language, which I will get to the list as soon as I can. Donna From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Austin, Donna Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 1:53 PM To: policy@paulmcgrady.com; Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>; council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad Paul Notwithstanding your discussions with Michele and Rubens, I have received some suggested alternate text from the RySG for consideration, specifically as it relates to the following sentences: Paul McGrady text: Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations. RySG alternative text: Contracted parties, either through the respective Stakeholder Groups or other avenues, have or are in the process of developing a number of ‘best practice’ initiatives related registry and registrar operations. ICANN is not a regulator and, while it has responsibility to manage its contracts, it is not appropriate for one party to unilaterally define the standards for reporting enforcement. In addition, I also wonder whether it would be worthwhile raising your concerns about the use of the term “advice” as an overarching issue in the covering transmission letter to the Board? It seems important enough to warrant such elevation. Look forward to your response. Donna From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of policy@paulmcgrady.com<mailto:policy@paulmcgrady.com> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 12:11 PM To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>>; council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad Hi All, The IPC has had a chance to consider the draft language for Section 2 and propose the following (heavily) edited draft response: ___________________________ The GNSO Council would like to express concern that the list of questions set out in Annex 1 has been categorised as “advice”. In this context, the term “advice” ought to be given its ordinary dictionary meaning, and a request to the Board to provide various data and information does not constitute “GAC Advice”, as this term is used in the ICANN Bylaws. Since GAC Advice has a specific status and treatment under the under the ICANN Bylaws, precision of terminology is crucial to avoid any perception that there is an attempt to direct the Board, rather than making a request for information and attempting to impose a reasonable deadline for its provision. That said, the GNSO Council looks forward to reviewing ICANN’s responses to the questions listed in Annex 1 to the Communiqué. Some contracted parties to ICANN have or are in the process of developing a number of “best practices” initiatives related to registry and registrar operations. ICANN is responsible for setting standards for abuse reporting and performance when determining compliance with contractual obligations. The issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC may also be dealt with by the GNSO in GNSO PDP Working Groups, producing relevant Consensus Policy recommendations then duly adopted by the Board. Further, the issue of DNS Abuse Mitigation raised by the GAC is dealt with by the GNSO as the issue arises, whether it be various active and/or open projects on the Projects List<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_meetings_projects-2Dlist-2D28nov16-2Den.pdf&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=OnENUeYwFCPLqmH6BhL_VfSwze9IjfPBwZtjrj6smAM&e=>, or as part of GNSO Policy Activities<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_council_policy&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=DAh8dGjoP-HlunMGgxErthrt2L98OaFx7eNjhl28kT4&e=>. ___________________________ I'm very happy to discuss the rationale for these proposed changes. Best, Paul -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] For your review - GNSO Review of GAC Communique Hyderabad From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Date: Thu, December 08, 2016 11:48 am To: "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Dear All, Please find attached for your review the proposed GNSO Review of the GAC Communique. This draft has been developed by the small drafting team that was formed at ICANN57 consisting of Donna Austin, James Bladel, Heather Forrest, Phil Corwin, Michele Neylon, Paul McGrady and Carlos Guttierez. Please share any comments and/or input you may have with the mailing list. Consideration of this document is also on the agenda for the GNSO Council meeting on 15 December. Best regards, Marika Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=dNjsiuWO3xdzLW4v1BH88xcBii9uiGCBDGesqG9gB7I&e=> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers&d=DgMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=b_o3-i0H2nKfE3BqYDYucWO1-3N1E4XVLXqlYXkqZ4Y&s=gtfl9Z6dWYQL3zTtk15ezDF16TnJlbluKDGvMZg5xaE&e=>.
participants (3)
-
Austin, Donna -
policy＠paulmcgrady.com -
Rubens Kuhl