January 2015 - lac-discuss-en

RV: LAST CALL - Opportunity for ALSes to serve as Hub at ICANN52
by asoto＠ibero-americano.org Jan. 26, 2015

Jan. 26, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: RV: LAST CALL - Opportunity for ALSes to serve as Hub at ICANN52 From: asoto(a)ibero-americano.org Dear, is the last call, ends today. I think ACUI in Colombia has already completed your application. Best Regards Alberto Soto From: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] On behalf of ICANN At-Large Staff Posted on: Monday, January 26, 2015 5:07 pm To: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [ALAC-Announce] LAST CALL - Opportunity for ALSes to serve as Hub at ICANN52 [Inglés] Dear All, We are pleased to announce That 52 for the ICANN Meeting scheduled to take place in Singapore Between 08-12 February 2015, At-Large Structures (ALS) will be reliable to apply to serve as hubs for remote participants. Important points include: - Types of hubs - There will be two types of hubs, 1) Listen only hubs (no limit on numbers) and 2) Two-way hubs. - Multi-lingual technical assistance - Technical assistance will be available in Inglés, French and Spanish to the approved hubs. - Date of Operation - Hubs will be in operation on Monday 09 February, Wednesday 11 February, and Thursday 12 February 2015. - Reimbursement - ICANN will offer reimbursement to selected ALSes serving as hubs. Additional details will be posted Shortly. If your ALS is interested in Applying to serve as a Hub, Please follow the following steps: - Ensure your ALS will be reliable to meet the technical requirements: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Complete the online survey by 26 January 2015 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q Additional Information May be found on the At-Large Remote Workspace Hub for ICANN 52: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [FRANÇAISE] Bonjour à tous, Nous sommes heureux d'annoncer that pour l'ICANN's meeting of 52 qui aura lieu à Singapour between 08-12 Février 2015, At-Large Structures (ALS) seront in mesure pour servir d'appliquer Hubs (tournantes plaques) pour les participants à distance. Les points importants sont les suivants: - Types of hubs - Il y aura deux types of plates-formes, 1) Hubs écouter pour seulement (pas sur limit its name) et 2) Hubs à double sens (écouter et parler) - Support technique Multi - support technique will be available in anglais, français et anglais dans les Hubs agréés. - Date de l'opération - Hubs will be in fonctionnement that jeudi 09 Février 11 Février et 12 February 2015. - Remboursement - ICANN will remboursement des couts offrir will pour les ALS sélectionnés Hubs servant. Des détails supplémentaires seront available sous peu. If ALS est votre intéressé pour servir à postuler Hub, veuillez suivre les étapes ci-dessous suivantes: - Vérifiez that you seront ALS in mesure de répondre aux exigences techniques: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Remplissez sondage en ligne le 26 Janvier 2015 avant le 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q Peuvent être des informations supplémentaires trouvées sur l'espace de travail pour wiki At-Large hub to pour l'distance ICANN 52: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [SPANISH] Dear all, We are pleased to announce that the structures of Scope (ALS) may apply to serve as "hubs" to facilitate remote participation during the ICANN 52 meeting in Singapore to take place between February 8 to 12, 2015. The following are important details: - Types of hubs - There will be two types of hubs, 1) Hubs to listen only (unlimited numbers Hubs) and 2) Hubs two-way - Multilingual support - Technical assistance will be available in English, French and Spanish for Hubs approved. - Dates of Operation - The Hubs will be operating only one day, February 9, 11 of February and 12 February. - Reimbursement - ICANN will provide reimbursement selected to serve as Hubs ALSes. Additional details on this subject will be published shortly. If your ALS is interested in applying to serve as Hub, please follow these steps: - Make sure your ALS may qualify: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Complete the online survey until January 26, 2015, 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q You can find additional information on the Remote Hub ICANN At-Large 52 in the following WIKI: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [中文版] 亲爱的朋友们, 我们高兴的宣布在新加坡举办的ICANN52届大会期间，网络普通用户组织（ALS）可以申请成为远程参与中心。要点如下: -远程参与者中心有两种类型：1）收听中心（没有数量限制）和2）双向中心。 - 获批准的远程参与中心将会得到英语, 法语和西班牙语的技术支持. - 远程参与中心将在 2 月 9 日, 2 月 11 日和 2 月 12 日投入运营. - ICANN将会为被选中作为远程参与中心的普通用户组织（ALS）提供津贴。其他详情将于稍后公布。 ALS 如果您的有兴趣成为远程参与者中心, 请按以下步骤申请: - 确保您的 ALS 能够达到技术要求: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - 在 2015 年 1 月 26 日以前提交申请表: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q 其他信息请见普通用户群体 ICANN52 远程参与中心工作区: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7-B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi%20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20Gisella%20Gruber,%20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy%20Staff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge < https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> Twitter:ICANN_AtLarge < https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge> --- Avast antivirus software scanned this email for viruses. http://www.avast.com [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/078e03b34a.html --]]

1 0

LAST CALL - Opportunity for ALSes to serve as Hub at ICANN52
by staff＠atlarge.icann.org Jan. 26, 2015

Jan. 26, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: LAST CALL - Opportunity for ALSes to serve as Hub at ICANN52 From: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org [Inglés] Dear All, We are pleased to announce That 52 for the ICANN Meeting scheduled to take place in Singapore Between 08-12 February 2015, At-Large Structures (ALS) will be reliable to apply to serve as hubs for remote participants. Important points include: - Types of hubs - There will be two types of hubs, 1) Listen only hubs (no limit on numbers) and 2) Two-way hubs. - Multi-lingual technical assistance - Technical assistance will be available in Inglés, French and Spanish to the approved hubs. - Date of Operation - Hubs will be in operation on Monday 09 February, Wednesday 11 February, and Thursday 12 February 2015. - Reimbursement - ICANN will offer reimbursement to selected ALSes serving as hubs. Additional details will be posted Shortly. If your ALS is interested in Applying to serve as a Hub, Please follow the following steps: - Ensure your ALS will be reliable to meet the technical requirements: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Complete the online survey by 26 January 2015 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q Additional Information May be found on the At-Large Remote Workspace Hub for ICANN 52: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [FRANÇAISE] Bonjour à tous, Nous sommes heureux d'annoncer that pour l'ICANN's meeting of 52 qui aura lieu à Singapour between 08-12 Février 2015, At-Large Structures (ALS) seront in mesure pour servir d'appliquer Hubs (tournantes plaques) pour les participants à distance. Les points importants sont les suivants: - Types of hubs - Il y aura deux types of plates-formes, 1) Hubs écouter pour seulement (pas sur limit its name) et 2) Hubs à double sens (écouter et parler) - Support technique Multi - support technique will be available in anglais, français et anglais dans les Hubs agréés. - Date de l'opération - Hubs will be in fonctionnement that jeudi 09 Février 11 Février et 12 February 2015. - Remboursement - ICANN will remboursement des couts offrir will pour les ALS sélectionnés Hubs servant. Des détails supplémentaires seront available sous peu. If ALS est votre intéressé pour servir à postuler Hub, veuillez suivre les étapes ci-dessous suivantes: - Vérifiez that you seront ALS in mesure de répondre aux exigences techniques: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Remplissez sondage en ligne le 26 Janvier 2015 avant le 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q Peuvent être des informations supplémentaires trouvées sur l'espace de travail pour wiki At-Large hub to pour l'distance ICANN 52: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [SPANISH] Dear all, We are pleased to announce that the structures of Scope (ALS) may apply to serve as "hubs" to facilitate remote participation during the ICANN 52 meeting in Singapore to take place between February 8 to 12, 2015. The following are important details: - Types of hubs - There will be two types of hubs, 1) Hubs to listen only (unlimited numbers Hubs) and 2) Hubs two-way - Multilingual support - Technical assistance will be available in English, French and Spanish for Hubs approved. - Dates of Operation - The Hubs will be operating only one day, February 9, 11 of February and 12 February. - Reimbursement - ICANN will provide reimbursement selected to serve as Hubs ALSes. Additional details on this subject will be published shortly. If your ALS is interested in applying to serve as Hub, please follow these steps: - Make sure your ALS may qualify: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Complete the online survey until January 26, 2015, 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q You can find additional information on the Remote Hub ICANN At-Large 52 in the following WIKI: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [中文版] 亲爱的朋友们, 我们高兴的宣布在新加坡举办的ICANN52届大会期间，网络普通用户组织（ALS）可以申请成为远程参与中心。要点如下: -远程参与者中心有两种类型：1）收听中心（没有数量限制）和2）双向中心。 - 获批准的远程参与中心将会得到英语, 法语和西班牙语的技术支持. - 远程参与中心将在 2 月 9 日, 2 月 11 日和 2 月 12 日投入运营. - ICANN将会为被选中作为远程参与中心的普通用户组织（ALS）提供津贴。其他详情将于稍后公布。 ALS 如果您的有兴趣成为远程参与者中心, 请按以下步骤申请: - 确保您的 ALS 能够达到技术要求: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - 在 2015 年 1 月 26 日以前提交申请表: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q 其他信息请见普通用户群体 ICANN52 远程参与中心工作区: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7-B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi%20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20Gisella%20Gruber,%20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy%20Staff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge < https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> Twitter:ICANN_AtLarge < https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge> _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es http://www.lacralo.org [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/34de7196a5.html --]]

1 0

LAST CALL - Opportunity for ALSes to serve as Hub at ICANN52
by ICANN At-Large Staff Jan. 26, 2015

Jan. 26, 2015

[English] Dear All, We are pleased to announce that for the ICANN 52 Meeting scheduled to take place in Singapore between 08-12 February 2015, At-Large Structures (ALS) will be able to apply to serve as Hubs for remote participants. Important points include: - Types of hubs - There will be two types of hubs, 1) Listen only hubs (no limit on numbers) and 2) Two-way hubs. - Multi-lingual technical assistance - Technical assistance will be available in English, French and Spanish to the approved hubs. - Date of Operation - Hubs will be in operation on Monday 09 February, Wednesday 11 February, and Thursday 12 February 2015. - Reimbursement - ICANN will offer reimbursement to selected ALSes serving as hubs. Additional details will be posted shortly. If your ALS is interested in applying to serve as a Hub, please follow the following steps: - Ensure your ALS will be able to meet the technical requirements: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Complete the online survey by 26 January 2015, 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q Additional Information may be found on the At-Large Remote Hub for ICANN 52 Workspace: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [FRANÇAISE] Bonjour à tous, Nous sommes heureux d'annoncer que, pour la réunion de l'ICANN 52 qui aura lieu à Singapour entre 08-12 Février 2015, At-Large Structures (ALS) seront en mesure d'appliquer pour servir de Hubs (plaques tournantes) pour les participants à distance. Les points importants sont les suivants: - Types de hubs - Il y aura deux types de plates-formes, 1) Hubs pour écouter seulement (pas de limite sur le nombre) et 2) Hubs à double sens (écouter et parler) - Support technique multilingue – le support technique sera disponible en anglais, français et espagnol dans les Hubs agréés. - Date de l'opération - Hubs sera en fonctionnement que le jeudi 09 Février, 11 Février et 12 February 2015. - Remboursement - ICANN va offrir le remboursement des couts pour les ALS sélectionnés servant de Hubs. Des détails supplémentaires seront disponibles sous peu. Si votre ALS est intéressé à postuler pour servir de Hub, veuillez suivre les étapes suivantes ci-dessous: - Vérifiez que vos ALS seront en mesure de répondre aux exigences techniques: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Remplissez le sondage en ligne avant le 26 Janvier 2015 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q Des informations supplémentaires peuvent être trouvées sur l’espace de travail wiki pour At-Large hub a distance pour l'ICANN 52: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** [ESPAÑOL] Estimados todos, Estamos complacidos en anunciar que las estructuras de Alcance (ALS) podrán postular para servir como “Hubs” para facilitar la participación remota durante la reunión de ICANN 52 en Singapur a llevarse a cabo entre el 08-12 Febrero 2015. Los siguientes son detalles importantes: - Tipos de hubs – Habrán dos tipos de hubs, 1) Hubs para escuchar solamente (sin límites de números de Hubs ) y 2) Hubs de dos vías - Asistencia Multilingüe - Asistencia técnica será disponible en Inglés, Francés y Español para los Hubs aprobados. - Fechas de operación – Los Hubs estarán en operación solo un día, el 09 de Febrero, 11 de Febrero y 12 de Febrero. - Reembolso - ICANN ofrecerá reembolso a ALSes seleccionadas que sirvan como Hubs. Detalles adicionales sobre este punto serán publicados en breve. Si vuestra ALS está interesada en postular para servir como Hub, por favor siga los siguientes pasos: - Asegúrese que su ALS podrá cumplir con los requisitos: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - Complete la encuesta online hasta el 26 de Enero 2015, 23:59 UTC: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q Puede encontrar información adicional sobre los Hub Remotos At-Large de ICANN 52 en el siguiente WIKI: https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg ** ［中文版］亲爱的朋友们, 我们高兴的宣布在新加坡举办的ICANN52届大会期间，网络普通用户组织（ALS）可以申请成为远程参与中心。要点如下： - 远程参与者中心有两种类型：1）收听中心（没有数量限制）和2）双向中心。 - 获批准的远程参与中心将会得到英语、法语和西班牙语的技术支持。 - 远程参与中心将在2月9日，2月11日和2月12日投入运营。 - ICANN将会为被选中作为远程参与中心的普通用户组织（ALS）提供津贴。其他详情将于稍后公布。如果您的ALS有兴趣成为远程参与者中心，请按以下步骤申请： - 确保您的ALS能够达到技术要求： https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg - 在2015年1月26日以前提交申请表： https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WMXTQ3Q 其他信息请见普通用户群体ICANN52远程参与中心工作区： https://community.icann.org/x/IyjxAg Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7-B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi%20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20Gisella%20Gruber,%20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy%20Staff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge>

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] Fwd: NSA and monitoring of DNS
by leonardot＠internauta.org.ar Jan. 26, 2015

Jan. 26, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Fwd: NSA and monitoring of DNS From: leonardot(a)internauta.org.ar Thanks for sharing! In summary, the paper reports that the NSA uses the DNS network surveillance (And monitoring without judicial intermediation is an abuse) and although the current DNS has weaknesses known for their operation scheme centralized, does not appear that the NSA estatentando count integrity system, although could do with the information collected. It is an indictment of sistemtico and illegal spying, but this time there is involved a software failure ... is another issue to raise a better alternative to DNS, which I think needs to be done as soon as possible because a change of this magnitude llevaraos to complete (as is taking years to go from IPV4 to IPV6 for instance) Best regards! On January 24, 2015 4:06 pm <josefranciscoarce(a)gmail.com> i wrote > > [[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] > > Asunto: Fwd: NSA y la vigilancia de DNS > Desde: josefranciscoarce(a)gmail.com > > Fyi > ---------- Mensaje reenviado ---------- > De: "Milton Mueller L" <mueller(a)syr.edu> > Fecha: ene 24, 2015 14:12 > Asunto: [NCSG-Opinar] NSA y la vigilancia de DNS > Para: <NCSG-DISCUSS(a)listserv.syr.edu> > Cc: > > > Hay un nuevo papel en base a las revelaciones de Snowden sobre cómo el > NSA utiliza consultas DNS para la vigilancia. > > > No he leído aún, estoy en el proceso de hacerlo, pero quería enviar > esto para aquellos de ustedes que también estaría interesado antes que me > olvide. > > > https://gnunet.org/sites/default/files/mcb-en.pdf > > > > > > > "[En] un nuevo conjunto de documentos de alto secreto vistos por > Heise, se revela que > el programa MORECOWBELL (MCB) de la agencia de espionaje estadounidense > NSA vigila DNS > como fuente de información sobre el Internet (Figura 2).MORECOWBELL de la > NSA > programa utiliza una infraestructura de vigilancia encubierta dedicada > para consultar activamente > Servidores DNS > > > y realizar peticiones HTTP para obtener meta información acerca de los > servicios y para > comprobar su disponibilidad (Figura 1). " > > > > > > > Esto sólo se podría automatizar la recolección de datos de Internet de la > clase que > que los académicos y operadores de redes involucramos en forma rutinaria, > sólo la NSA es > hacerlo - de nuevo, hay que ver. > > > > > > > Milton Mueller L > > > Laura J. y L. Douglas Meredith Profesor > > > Escuela de Estudios de la Información de la Universidad de Siracusa > > > http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/ > > > Proyecto de Gobernanza de Internet > > > http://internetgovernance.org > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en lista de correo > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en > > > [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/bf5d2ba860.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management
by asoto＠ibero-americano.org Jan. 25, 2015

Jan. 25, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management From: asoto(a)ibero-americano.org Perfect !!! Regards Alberto Soto ----- Original Message ----- From: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] On behalf of Humberto Carrasco Posted on: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:20 a.m. To: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management Alberto, Aida sent me another classification proposal might be more appropriate. The copy for your review. Regards Possible risk classification for question number A) Financial risks: 1,2,3, 7, 9, 15, 23, 27, 30,. 1, 2, Accountability: (Fallas to the mechanism or the demonstration and transparency) with respect to material resources and / or human (with respect to money and / or activities) are referred also to operational risks relating to human resources. B) Legal Risks: 4,5,12,14, 26 can also prepare financial losses. Therefore they can also pose risks of economic losses C) Operational risks, management or operation: (ante measures ex and ex post). There are two situations: C) 1: those caused by the activities already performed in ICANN and C) 2: the derivatives of the new features caused by transfer functions and new IANA ideas on Internet Governance (new global players. C) 1 These should also be modified given the transfer and new citadas.27,28,29,31 conditions C) 2 In this line are the risks referred to following numbers: 6,8,9, 14, 16, 17, (18), 19, 25, 32 12.15 expected. Improve the efforts currently underway. provide new managements. . Prevention regarding new x New gTLDs and assumption new transfer functions given IANA functions. You can classify the risk regarding your assessment, or the importance of risk to ICANN. Minor, serious or catastrophic. This classification is useful for the purposes to prioritize measures to combat the risk, prioritizing alos measures considered catastrophic and serious risks, rather than minor risks. According to this important possible actions are: eliminate, reduce, seize or transfer risk. On 01/25/2015 at 01:59 pm, Alberto Soto wrote: > Humberto, aquí una división de riesgos muy genérica, también discutible porque hay temas que pueden estar en distintas divisiones. Pero hacer más divisiones puede complicar la encuesta. Dejé los números iniciales por si querías hacer algún cambio. > Saludos cordiales > > Alberto Soto > > Accountability - Transparencia > 1) Failure to adequately maintain and adhere to existing accountability mechanisms. > > Fracaso en mantener y adherirse adecuadamente a los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas existentes. > > 2) Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency of organization. > > Fracaso en demostrar suficiente rendición de cuentas y transparencia de la organización. > > > 8) Potential issues for New gTLD Program related to accountability mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism/process. > > Posibles problemas para el Programa de los Nuevos gTLD relacionados con los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas debido a posible decisión adversa o falla del mecanismo/proceso. > > 11) Possible perception that ICANN has poor global engagement, transparency, policy, coordination and communication. > > Posible percepción de que ICANN tiene compromiso global, transparencia, política, coordinación y comunicación pobres. > > 22) Lack of improving trust in the multi-stakeholder model. > > Falta de la mejora de confianza en el modelo de múltiples partes interesadas. > > 27) Failure of the community accountability process to adequately address ICANN accountability in light of its changing historical relationship with the USG. > > Fracaso del proceso de rendición de cuentas de la comunidad para abordar adecuadamente la rendición de cuentas de ICANN a la luz del cambio de su relación histórica con el gobierno de Estados Unidos. > > 29) Inconsistent communication and messaging to stakeholders, leading to confusion and lack of understanding. > > Comunicación y mensajería inconsistente para los actores interesados, llevando a la confusion y falta de entendimiento. > > Costs - Costos > > 3) Lower revenues than forecasted. > > Ingresos menores a los previstos. > > 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, including possible related penalties, fees and costs. > > Resolución judicial u otra resolución de disputas adversa, incluyendo posibles sanciones, honorarios y costos relacionados. > > 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated revenues (e.g., fraud, investment loss, etc.). > > Pérdidas financieras significativas, con excepción de los ingresos más bajos previstos (por ejemplo, fraude, pérdida de inversión, etc.). > > 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. > > Costos operacionales sin financiación o gastos no planificados. > > 15) Significant revenue reduction (e.g., reduced domain name volume, reduced ccTLD contributions, reduced registrar fees, etc.). > > Reducción significativa de los ingresos (por ejemplo, volumen reducido de nombres de dominio, contribuciones de ccTLD reducidas, honorarios reducidos de los registradores, etc.). > > 24) Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. > > Falla en facilitar efectivamente la participación internacional en la Coordinación Técnica del DNS ante eventos de incidentes significativos a la seguridad, estabilidad o resiliencia de Internet. > > Administration - Administración > > 5) Failure to sufficiently manage and enforce the hundreds of contracts with TLD operators. > > Fracaso en gestionar y hacer cumplir de manera suficiente, cientos de contratos con operadores de TLD. > > 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder proposal and other relevant deliverables for a successful NTIA stewardship transition of the IANA Functions. > > Entrega sin éxito de una propuesta de los actores interesados y otros entregables relevantes para una exitosa transición desde la NTIA de la supervisión de las funciones de IANA. > > 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. > > El proceso de desarrollo de políticas es demasiado lento, los participantes disminuyen o se estancan, o incapacidad para atraer a nuevos actores interesados dentro del modelo. > > 16) Perception of failure to implement and help achieve a global multi-stakeholder distributed IG ecosystem according to the widely accepted Net Mundial Principles. > > Percepción de falta de implementación y ayuda para lograr un ecosistema distribuido de gobernanza de Internet de múltiples partes interesadas de acuerdo con los Principios de NetMundial ampliamente aceptados. > > 17) Possibility that current supporting organization and advisory committee > (SO/AC) structures cannot scale to include and support new global entrants and participants. > > Posibilidad de que las actuales organizaciones de soporte y los comité asesores (SO/AC) no puedan escalar para incluir y apoyar a los nuevos participantes globales. > Progreso insuficiente hacia la implementación de importantes proyectos (por ejemplo, gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). > > 18) Unsuccessful implementation of adopted recommendation resulting from various Affirmation of Commitment reviews. > > Implementación sin éxito de la recomendación adoptada como resultado de las revisiones de la Afirmación de Compromisos. > > 19) Insufficient progress towards major project implementation (e.g., gTLD, IDN fast track, DNSSEC, etc.). > > Progreso insuficiente hacia la implementación de importantes proyectos (por ejemplo, gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). > > > 20) Inability to deliver commitments (mission, operational objectives, strategic initiatives) due to limited resources, budget, or prioritization. > > Incapacidad para cumplir con los compromisos (misión, objetivos operativos, iniciativas estratégicas) debido a los recursos limitados, al presupuesto o al establecimiento de prioridades. > > 30) Poor fiscal policy-making or gross mis-management. > > Elaboración de una política presupuestaria pobre o mala administración. > > 33) One or more governments' policy changes that negatively affect different sectors of a stakeholder or regional work and current functionality of SO/AC model. > > Cambios de las políticas de uno o más gobiernos que afectan negativamente a diferentes sectores de un grupo de interesados o el trabajo regional y la funcionalidad actual del modelo de SO/AC. > > Legal - Legales > > 10) Potential perception that not all conflicts of interests are identified during decision-making process. > > Potencial percepción de que no todos los conflictos de intereses son identificados durante el proceso de toma de decisiones. > > 14) Potential legal actions from parties that believe that they have been injured resulting from New gTLD Program. > > Acciones legales potenciales desde partes que creen que han sido dañadas como resultado del Programa de los Nuevos gTLDs. > > 28) Ineffective contractual compliance approach, process, and audits (registries, registrars, others). > > Enfoque ineficaz del cumplimiento contractual, del proceso y de las auditorías (registros, registradores, otros). > > Operability - Operatividad > > 12) Significant increase in legal or other dispute resolution filings that could challenge staff capacity, distract leadership and disrupt operations. > > Aumento significativo de los registros de resoluciones judiciales o de otro tipo de resolución de disputas que podrían ser un desafío para la capacidad del Personal, distraer a los líderes e interrumpir las operaciones. > > 21) Key skills depart ICANN (consultants or staff) without clear succession plan for continuation of operating functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. > > Habilidades clave surgen desde ICANN (consultores o personal) sin un plan de sucesión claro para la continuación de las funciones operativas o el intercambio de conocimiento y documentación. > > 24) Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. > > Falla en facilitar efectivamente la participación internacional en la Coordinación Técnica del DNS ante eventos de incidentes significativos a la seguridad, estabilidad o resiliencia de Internet. > > 25) DNS vulnerability to attacks (root) causing disruption to Internet operability (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). > > Vulnerabilidad a los ataques del DNS (raíz) causando la interrupción de la operatividad de Internet (Ataques DDoS, Cache Poisoning, etc.). > > 26) Potential data breach of personal or confidential data from ICANN systems; confidential data made public. > > Violación potencial de datos personales o confidenciales desde los sistemas de ICANN; datos confidenciales hechos públicos. > > 31) Potential for ineffective technical business continuity management given an event occurs (e.g., data back-up, disaster recover planning, data outage, etc.). > > Técnica de gestión de continuidad de negocios potencialmente ineficaz frente al acaecimiento de un evento (por ejemplo, copia de seguridad de datos, planeamiento de recuperación de desastres, corte de datos, etc.). > > 32) Potential lack of operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due to lack of internal collaboration and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. > > Falta de eficiencia operacional potencial, de excelencia y disciplina debido a la falta de colaboración interna y de los roles y responsabilidades claramente definidos. > > > > > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: hcarrascob [mailto:hcarrascob@gmail.com] > Enviado el: domingo, 25 de enero de 2015 05:58 a.m. > Para: ALBERTO SOTO; Fatima Cambronero; 'Alejandro Pisanty' > CC: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Asunto: Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] ICANN's risk management > > Gracias Fatima, > > Procrederé a confeccionar la encuesta. > > Saludos > > > > Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> escribió: > >> Gracias Fátima. Es increíble que con un poquito de cada uno de >> colaboración, se avance tan rápidamente. >> Solo que sería mucho mejor si no fueran siempre los mismos, nuestra >> Región crecería muchísimo. >> Saludos cordiales >> >> Alberto Sotol >> >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> [mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de >> Fatima Cambronero Enviado el: sábado, 24 de enero de 2015 09:25 p.m. >> Para: Alejandro Pisanty >> CC: LACRALO Español >> Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] ICANN's risk management >> >> Humberto, Alejandro, >> >> Para colaborar con esta actividad propuesta por Alejandro, que me >> parece una iniciativa muy buena, adjunto la tabla de riesgos que >> afectan a ICANN como empresa y que han sido incluidos en el documento >> que envió Alejandro, con cada uno de los ítems en sus dos versiones: inglés y español. >> Como se que a la lista de discusión en inglés no llegan los documentos >> adjuntos, copio debajo el mismo contenido que está incluido en la tabla >> adjunta. >> Por favor, revisar si hay algún error en la traducción. >> >> Saludos cordiales, >> Fatima Cambronero >> >> >> *ICANN Enterprise-Wide Risks list* >> >> >> 1) Failure to adequately maintain and adhere to existing accountability >> mechanisms. >> >> Fracaso en mantener y adherirse adecuadamente a los mecanismos de >> rendición de cuentas existentes. >> >> >> >> 2) Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency of >> organization. >> >> Fracaso en demostrar suficiente rendición de cuentas y transparencia de >> la organización. >> >> >> >> 3) Lower revenues than forecasted. >> >> Ingresos menores a los previstos. >> >> >> >> 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, including possible >> related penalties, fees and costs. >> >> Resolución judicial u otra resolución de disputas adversa, incluyendo >> posibles sanciones, honorarios y costos relacionados. >> >> >> >> 5) Failure to sufficiently manage and enforce the hundreds of contracts >> with TLD operators. >> >> Fracaso en gestionar y hacer cumplir de manera suficiente, cientos de >> contratos con operadores de TLD. >> >> >> >> 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder proposal and other relevant >> deliverables for a successful NTIA stewardship transition of the IANA >> Functions. >> >> Entrega sin éxito de una propuesta de los actores interesados y otros >> entregables relevantes para una exitosa transición desde la NTIA de la >> supervisión de las funciones de IANA. >> >> >> >> 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated >> revenues (e.g., fraud, investment loss, etc.). >> >> Pérdidas financieras significativas, con excepción de los ingresos más >> bajos previstos (por ejemplo, fraude, pérdida de inversión, etc.). >> >> >> >> 8) Potential issues for New gTLD Program related to accountability >> mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism/process. >> >> Posibles problemas para el Programa de los Nuevos gTLD relacionados con >> los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas debido a posible decisión >> adversa o falla del mecanismo/proceso. >> >> >> >> 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. >> >> Costos operacionales sin financiación o gastos no planificados. >> >> >> >> 10) Potential perception that not all conflicts of interests are >> identified during decision-making process. >> >> Potencial percepción de que no todos los conflictos de intereses son >> identificados durante el proceso de toma de decisiones. >> >> >> >> 11) Possible perception that ICANN has poor global engagement, >> transparency, policy, coordination and communication. >> >> Posible percepción de que ICANN tiene compromiso global, transparencia, >> política, coordinación y comunicación pobres. >> >> >> >> 12) Significant increase in legal or other dispute resolution filings >> that could challenge staff capacity, distract leadership and disrupt operations. >> >> Aumento significativo de los registros de resoluciones judiciales o de >> otro tipo de resolución de disputas que podrían ser un desafío para la >> capacidad del Personal, distraer a los líderes e interrumpir las operaciones. >> >> >> >> 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants >> decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. >> >> El proceso de desarrollo de políticas es demasiado lento, los >> participantes disminuyen o se estancan, o incapacidad para atraer a >> nuevos actores interesados dentro del modelo. >> >> >> >> 14) Potential legal actions from parties that believe that they have >> been injured resulting from New gTLD Program. >> >> Acciones legales potenciales desde partes que creen que han sido >> dañadas como resultado del Programa de los Nuevos gTLDs. >> >> >> >> 15) Significant revenue reduction (e.g., reduced domain name volume, >> reduced ccTLD contributions, reduced registrar fees, etc.). >> >> Reducción significativa de los ingresos (por ejemplo, volumen reducido >> de nombres de dominio, contribuciones de ccTLD reducidas, honorarios >> reducidos de los registradores, etc.). >> >> >> >> 16) Perception of failure to implement and help achieve a globa > > --- > El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus. > http://www.avast.com > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es http://www.lacralo.org --- Avast antivirus software scanned this email for viruses. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es http://www.lacralo.org [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/350c297e4e.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management
by hcarrascob＠gmail.com Jan. 25, 2015

Jan. 25, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management From: hcarrascob(a)gmail.com Alberto, Aida sent me another classification proposal might be more appropriate. The copy for your review. Regards Possible risk classification for question number A) Financial risks: 1,2,3, 7, 9, 15, 23, 27, 30,. 1, 2, Accountability: (Fallas to the mechanism or the demonstration and transparency) with respect to material resources and / or human (With respect to money and / or activities performed) They refer also to operational risks relating to human resources. B) Legal Risks: 4,5,12,14, 26 can prepare economic damage addition. Therefore they can also pose risks of economic losses C) Operational risks, management or operation: (ante measures ex and ex post). There are two situations: C) 1: those caused by the activities already performed in ICANN and C) 2: the derivatives of the new features caused by transfer functions and new IANA ideas on Internet Governance (new global players. C) 1 These should also be modified given the transfer and new citadas.27,28,29,31 conditions C) 2 In this line are the risks referred to following numbers: 6,8,9, 14, 16, 17, (18), 19, 25, 32 12.15 expected. Improve the efforts currently underway. provide new managements. . Prevention regarding new x New gTLDs and assumption new transfer functions given IANA functions. You can classify the risk regarding your assessment, or the importance of risk to ICANN. Minor, serious or catastrophic. This classification is useful for the purposes to prioritize measures to combat the risk, prioritizing alos measures considered catastrophic and serious risks, rather than minor risks. According to this important possible actions are: eliminate, reduce, seize or transfer risk. On 01/25/2015 at 01:59 pm, Alberto Soto wrote: > Humberto, aquí una división de riesgos muy genérica, también discutible porque hay temas que pueden estar en distintas divisiones. Pero hacer más divisiones puede complicar la encuesta. Dejé los números iniciales por si querías hacer algún cambio. > Saludos cordiales > > Alberto Soto > > Accountability - Transparencia > 1) Failure to adequately maintain and adhere to existing accountability mechanisms. > > Fracaso en mantener y adherirse adecuadamente a los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas existentes. > > 2) Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency of organization. > > Fracaso en demostrar suficiente rendición de cuentas y transparencia de la organización. > > > 8) Potential issues for New gTLD Program related to accountability mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism/process. > > Posibles problemas para el Programa de los Nuevos gTLD relacionados con los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas debido a posible decisión adversa o falla del mecanismo/proceso. > > 11) Possible perception that ICANN has poor global engagement, transparency, policy, coordination and communication. > > Posible percepción de que ICANN tiene compromiso global, transparencia, política, coordinación y comunicación pobres. > > 22) Lack of improving trust in the multi-stakeholder model. > > Falta de la mejora de confianza en el modelo de múltiples partes interesadas. > > 27) Failure of the community accountability process to adequately address ICANN accountability in light of its changing historical relationship with the USG. > > Fracaso del proceso de rendición de cuentas de la comunidad para abordar adecuadamente la rendición de cuentas de ICANN a la luz del cambio de su relación histórica con el gobierno de Estados Unidos. > > 29) Inconsistent communication and messaging to stakeholders, leading to confusion and lack of understanding. > > Comunicación y mensajería inconsistente para los actores interesados, llevando a la confusion y falta de entendimiento. > > Costs - Costos > > 3) Lower revenues than forecasted. > > Ingresos menores a los previstos. > > 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, including possible related penalties, fees and costs. > > Resolución judicial u otra resolución de disputas adversa, incluyendo posibles sanciones, honorarios y costos relacionados. > > 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated revenues (e.g., fraud, investment loss, etc.). > > Pérdidas financieras significativas, con excepción de los ingresos más bajos previstos (por ejemplo, fraude, pérdida de inversión, etc.). > > 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. > > Costos operacionales sin financiación o gastos no planificados. > > 15) Significant revenue reduction (e.g., reduced domain name volume, reduced ccTLD contributions, reduced registrar fees, etc.). > > Reducción significativa de los ingresos (por ejemplo, volumen reducido de nombres de dominio, contribuciones de ccTLD reducidas, honorarios reducidos de los registradores, etc.). > > 24) Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. > > Falla en facilitar efectivamente la participación internacional en la Coordinación Técnica del DNS ante eventos de incidentes significativos a la seguridad, estabilidad o resiliencia de Internet. > > Administration - Administración > > 5) Failure to sufficiently manage and enforce the hundreds of contracts with TLD operators. > > Fracaso en gestionar y hacer cumplir de manera suficiente, cientos de contratos con operadores de TLD. > > 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder proposal and other relevant deliverables for a successful NTIA stewardship transition of the IANA Functions. > > Entrega sin éxito de una propuesta de los actores interesados y otros entregables relevantes para una exitosa transición desde la NTIA de la supervisión de las funciones de IANA. > > 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. > > El proceso de desarrollo de políticas es demasiado lento, los participantes disminuyen o se estancan, o incapacidad para atraer a nuevos actores interesados dentro del modelo. > > 16) Perception of failure to implement and help achieve a global multi-stakeholder distributed IG ecosystem according to the widely accepted Net Mundial Principles. > > Percepción de falta de implementación y ayuda para lograr un ecosistema distribuido de gobernanza de Internet de múltiples partes interesadas de acuerdo con los Principios de NetMundial ampliamente aceptados. > > 17) Possibility that current supporting organization and advisory committee > (SO/AC) structures cannot scale to include and support new global entrants and participants. > > Posibilidad de que las actuales organizaciones de soporte y los comité asesores (SO/AC) no puedan escalar para incluir y apoyar a los nuevos participantes globales. > Progreso insuficiente hacia la implementación de importantes proyectos (por ejemplo, gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). > > 18) Unsuccessful implementation of adopted recommendation resulting from various Affirmation of Commitment reviews. > > Implementación sin éxito de la recomendación adoptada como resultado de las revisiones de la Afirmación de Compromisos. > > 19) Insufficient progress towards major project implementation (e.g., gTLD, IDN fast track, DNSSEC, etc.). > > Progreso insuficiente hacia la implementación de importantes proyectos (por ejemplo, gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). > > > 20) Inability to deliver commitments (mission, operational objectives, strategic initiatives) due to limited resources, budget, or prioritization. > > Incapacidad para cumplir con los compromisos (misión, objetivos operativos, iniciativas estratégicas) debido a los recursos limitados, al presupuesto o al establecimiento de prioridades. > > 30) Poor fiscal policy-making or gross mis-management. > > Elaboración de una política presupuestaria pobre o mala administración. > > 33) One or more governments' policy changes that negatively affect different sectors of a stakeholder or regional work and current functionality of SO/AC model. > > Cambios de las políticas de uno o más gobiernos que afectan negativamente a diferentes sectores de un grupo de interesados o el trabajo regional y la funcionalidad actual del modelo de SO/AC. > > Legal - Legales > > 10) Potential perception that not all conflicts of interests are identified during decision-making process. > > Potencial percepción de que no todos los conflictos de intereses son identificados durante el proceso de toma de decisiones. > > 14) Potential legal actions from parties that believe that they have been injured resulting from New gTLD Program. > > Acciones legales potenciales desde partes que creen que han sido dañadas como resultado del Programa de los Nuevos gTLDs. > > 28) Ineffective contractual compliance approach, process, and audits (registries, registrars, others). > > Enfoque ineficaz del cumplimiento contractual, del proceso y de las auditorías (registros, registradores, otros). > > Operability - Operatividad > > 12) Significant increase in legal or other dispute resolution filings that could challenge staff capacity, distract leadership and disrupt operations. > > Aumento significativo de los registros de resoluciones judiciales o de otro tipo de resolución de disputas que podrían ser un desafío para la capacidad del Personal, distraer a los líderes e interrumpir las operaciones. > > 21) Key skills depart ICANN (consultants or staff) without clear succession plan for continuation of operating functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. > > Habilidades clave surgen desde ICANN (consultores o personal) sin un plan de sucesión claro para la continuación de las funciones operativas o el intercambio de conocimiento y documentación. > > 24) Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. > > Falla en facilitar efectivamente la participación internacional en la Coordinación Técnica del DNS ante eventos de incidentes significativos a la seguridad, estabilidad o resiliencia de Internet. > > 25) DNS vulnerability to attacks (root) causing disruption to Internet operability (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). > > Vulnerabilidad a los ataques del DNS (raíz) causando la interrupción de la operatividad de Internet (Ataques DDoS, Cache Poisoning, etc.). > > 26) Potential data breach of personal or confidential data from ICANN systems; confidential data made public. > > Violación potencial de datos personales o confidenciales desde los sistemas de ICANN; datos confidenciales hechos públicos. > > 31) Potential for ineffective technical business continuity management given an event occurs (e.g., data back-up, disaster recover planning, data outage, etc.). > > Técnica de gestión de continuidad de negocios potencialmente ineficaz frente al acaecimiento de un evento (por ejemplo, copia de seguridad de datos, planeamiento de recuperación de desastres, corte de datos, etc.). > > 32) Potential lack of operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due to lack of internal collaboration and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. > > Falta de eficiencia operacional potencial, de excelencia y disciplina debido a la falta de colaboración interna y de los roles y responsabilidades claramente definidos. > > > > > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: hcarrascob [mailto:hcarrascob@gmail.com] > Enviado el: domingo, 25 de enero de 2015 05:58 a.m. > Para: ALBERTO SOTO; Fatima Cambronero; 'Alejandro Pisanty' > CC: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Asunto: Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] ICANN's risk management > > Gracias Fatima, > > Procrederé a confeccionar la encuesta. > > Saludos > > > > Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> escribió: > >> Gracias Fátima. Es increíble que con un poquito de cada uno de >> colaboración, se avance tan rápidamente. >> Solo que sería mucho mejor si no fueran siempre los mismos, nuestra >> Región crecería muchísimo. >> Saludos cordiales >> >> Alberto Sotol >> >> >> -----Mensaje original----- >> De: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> [mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de >> Fatima Cambronero Enviado el: sábado, 24 de enero de 2015 09:25 p.m. >> Para: Alejandro Pisanty >> CC: LACRALO Español >> Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] ICANN's risk management >> >> Humberto, Alejandro, >> >> Para colaborar con esta actividad propuesta por Alejandro, que me >> parece una iniciativa muy buena, adjunto la tabla de riesgos que >> afectan a ICANN como empresa y que han sido incluidos en el documento >> que envió Alejandro, con cada uno de los ítems en sus dos versiones: inglés y español. >> Como se que a la lista de discusión en inglés no llegan los documentos >> adjuntos, copio debajo el mismo contenido que está incluido en la tabla >> adjunta. >> Por favor, revisar si hay algún error en la traducción. >> >> Saludos cordiales, >> Fatima Cambronero >> >> >> *ICANN Enterprise-Wide Risks list* >> >> >> 1) Failure to adequately maintain and adhere to existing accountability >> mechanisms. >> >> Fracaso en mantener y adherirse adecuadamente a los mecanismos de >> rendición de cuentas existentes. >> >> >> >> 2) Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency of >> organization. >> >> Fracaso en demostrar suficiente rendición de cuentas y transparencia de >> la organización. >> >> >> >> 3) Lower revenues than forecasted. >> >> Ingresos menores a los previstos. >> >> >> >> 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, including possible >> related penalties, fees and costs. >> >> Resolución judicial u otra resolución de disputas adversa, incluyendo >> posibles sanciones, honorarios y costos relacionados. >> >> >> >> 5) Failure to sufficiently manage and enforce the hundreds of contracts >> with TLD operators. >> >> Fracaso en gestionar y hacer cumplir de manera suficiente, cientos de >> contratos con operadores de TLD. >> >> >> >> 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder proposal and other relevant >> deliverables for a successful NTIA stewardship transition of the IANA >> Functions. >> >> Entrega sin éxito de una propuesta de los actores interesados y otros >> entregables relevantes para una exitosa transición desde la NTIA de la >> supervisión de las funciones de IANA. >> >> >> >> 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated >> revenues (e.g., fraud, investment loss, etc.). >> >> Pérdidas financieras significativas, con excepción de los ingresos más >> bajos previstos (por ejemplo, fraude, pérdida de inversión, etc.). >> >> >> >> 8) Potential issues for New gTLD Program related to accountability >> mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism/process. >> >> Posibles problemas para el Programa de los Nuevos gTLD relacionados con >> los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas debido a posible decisión >> adversa o falla del mecanismo/proceso. >> >> >> >> 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. >> >> Costos operacionales sin financiación o gastos no planificados. >> >> >> >> 10) Potential perception that not all conflicts of interests are >> identified during decision-making process. >> >> Potencial percepción de que no todos los conflictos de intereses son >> identificados durante el proceso de toma de decisiones. >> >> >> >> 11) Possible perception that ICANN has poor global engagement, >> transparency, policy, coordination and communication. >> >> Posible percepción de que ICANN tiene compromiso global, transparencia, >> política, coordinación y comunicación pobres. >> >> >> >> 12) Significant increase in legal or other dispute resolution filings >> that could challenge staff capacity, distract leadership and disrupt operations. >> >> Aumento significativo de los registros de resoluciones judiciales o de >> otro tipo de resolución de disputas que podrían ser un desafío para la >> capacidad del Personal, distraer a los líderes e interrumpir las operaciones. >> >> >> >> 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants >> decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. >> >> El proceso de desarrollo de políticas es demasiado lento, los >> participantes disminuyen o se estancan, o incapacidad para atraer a >> nuevos actores interesados dentro del modelo. >> >> >> >> 14) Potential legal actions from parties that believe that they have >> been injured resulting from New gTLD Program. >> >> Acciones legales potenciales desde partes que creen que han sido >> dañadas como resultado del Programa de los Nuevos gTLDs. >> >> >> >> 15) Significant revenue reduction (e.g., reduced domain name volume, >> reduced ccTLD contributions, reduced registrar fees, etc.). >> >> Reducción significativa de los ingresos (por ejemplo, volumen reducido >> de nombres de dominio, contribuciones de ccTLD reducidas, honorarios >> reducidos de los registradores, etc.). >> >> >> >> 16) Perception of failure to implement and help achieve a globa > > --- > El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus. > http://www.avast.com > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es http://www.lacralo.org [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/1e74d864e6.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management
by asoto＠ibero-americano.org Jan. 25, 2015

Jan. 25, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management From: asoto(a)ibero-americano.org Humberto, aquuna very GenRich risk division, also moot because there are issues that can be in different divisions. But do more divisions can complicate the survey. Dejlos initial numbers if eries make sb change. Best Regards Alberto Soto Accountability - Transparency 1) Failure to Maintain and adhere to it adequately Existing accountability-mechanisms. Failure to properly maintain and adhere to existing mechanisms rendicin accounts. 2) Failure to Demonstrate accountability and transparency of Sufficient organization. Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency of the organization. 8) Potential for New gTLD Program issues related to accountability-mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism / process. Possible problems for the New gTLD Program related to the mechanisms of accountability due to possible adverse decision or failure of the mechanism / process. 11) Possible That perception ICANN has overall poor engagement, transparency, policy, coordination and communication. Possible perception that ICANN has global commitment, transparency, politics, poor communication coordinaciny. 22) Lack of Improving trust in the multi-stakeholder model. Lack of improving confidence in the model of multiple stakeholders. 27) Failure of the community accountability process to address it adequately ICANN accountability in light of changing historical relationship STI With The USG. Failure of the process of accountability of the community to adequately address the accountability of ICANN in the light of changing your histrica relationship with the US government. 29) Inconsistent communication and messaging to stakeholders, leading to confusion and falta de understanding. Communication and inconsistent messenger to stakeholders, leading to confusion and misunderstanding. Costs - 3) Lower than forecasted revenues. Lower revenues than expected. 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, treats including possible related penalties, fees and costs. -Resolution court or other adverse resolution of disputes, including any penalties, fees and related costs. 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated revenues (eg, fraud, investment loss, etc.). Significant financial losses, with exception of the most low-income expected (eg, fraud, loss of investment, etc.). 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. Operational costs without financiacino unplanned expenses. 15) Significant revenue reduction (eg, domain name reduced volume, reduced ccTLD contributions Issue, reduced registration fees, etc.). Significant reduction of income (eg reduced volume of domain names, ccTLD contributions reduced, reduced fees recorders, etc.). 24) Failure to Effectively Facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in the Co-ordination Technique DNS significant events to the security, stability or resiliency of Internet incidents. Administration - Administration 5) Failure to sufficiently It manage and enforce THE HUNDREDS of Contracts With TLD operators. Failure to manage and enforce sufficiently, hundreds of contracts with TLD operators. 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder and other Relevant deliverables Proposal for a Successful transition NTIA stewardship of the IANA Functions. Delivery unsuccessfully a proposal from stakeholders and other relevant deliverables for a successful transition from the NTIA to the supervision of the IANA functions. 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. The process of developing policies is too slow, participants diminish or stagnate, or inability to attract new stakeholders within the model. 16) Perception of failure and help in Place to Achieve a global multi-stakeholder ecosystem IG distributed según the World Net Widely accepted Principles. Perceptions implementaciny lack of support for a distributed Internet governance of multiple stakeholders in accordance with widely accepted principles NetMundial ecosystem. 17) Possibility That current supporting organization and advisory committee (SO / AC) structures can not scale to include and support new entrants and participants overall. Possibility that current support organizations and comitasesores (SO / AC) can not scale to include and support new global players. Implementacin insufficient progress towards major projects (eg gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). 18) Unsuccessful ADOPTED Implementation of recommendation from various RESULTING Affirmation of Commitment reviews. Implementacin unsuccessfully for the recommendation adopted as a result of revisions to the affirmation of commitments. 19) Insufficient progress Project Implementation Towards major (eg, gTLD, IDN fast track, DNSSEC, etc.). Implementacin insufficient progress towards major projects (eg gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). 20) Inability to deliver Commitments (mission, operational objectives To, strategic Initiatives) due to limited resources, budget, or prioritization. Inability to meet commitments (mission, operational objectives, initiatives estratgicas) due to limited resources, budget or setting priorities. 30) Poor Fiscal policy-making or gross mis-management. Working out of a poor fiscal policy or bad administration. 33) One or more Governments' policy Changes That Negatively Affect the industries of a stakeholder different regional or work and current functionality of SO / AC model. Changes in government policies oms one that negatively affect different sectors of a stakeholder group or regional work and the actual functionality of the model SO / AC. Legal - Legal 10) That perception Potential Conflicts of Interests not all are Identified During decision-making process. Perception that not all potential conflicts of interest are identified during the process of decision making. 14) Potential legal actions from parties believe That That They Have Been injured RESULTING from New gTLD Program. Potential legal action from parties who believe they have been daadas as a result of the New gTLD Program. 28) Ineffective contractual compliance approach, process, and audits (registries, registrars, others). Ineffective approach to contractual compliance, process and auditing (registries, registrars, etc.). Operability - Operability 12) Significant Increase in legal filings or other dispute resolution That Could staff capacity challenge, distract and disrupt operations leadership. Significant increase in the records of judgments or other resolution of disputes will be able to be a challenge for the capacity of staff, leaders distract and disrupt operations. 21) Key skills depart ICANN (consultants or staff) without clear succession plan for continuation of operating functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. Key Skills arise from ICANN (consultants or staff) without a clear plan of succession for the continuation of operational functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. 24) Failure to Effectively Facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in the Co-ordination Technique DNS significant events to the security, stability or resiliency of Internet incidents. 25) DNS vulnerability to attacks (root) Causing disruption to Internet operability (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). Vulnerability to attack DNS (root) causing the interruption of the operation of the Internet (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). 26) Potential breach of personnel confidential data or data from ICANN systems; confidential data made public. Violation potential personal or confidential data from ICANN systems; confidential data pblicos facts. 31) Potential for business continuity management ineffective technical Given an event OCCURS (eg, data back-up, disaster recover planning, data outage, etc.). Technique of management continuity potentially ineffective against the occurrence of an event (eg, data backup, disaster recovery planning, cutting data, etc.) business. 32) Potential falta de operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due to internal collaboration and falta de última Clearly defined. Lack of potential operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due to the lack of internal collaboration and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. ----- Original Message ----- From: hcarrascob [mailto: hcarrascob(a)gmail.com] Posted on: Sunday, January 25, 2015 5:58 a.m. To: ALBERTO SOTO; Fatima Cambronero; 'Alejandro Pisanty' CC: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN's risk management Thanks Fatima, Procredera make the survey. Regards Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> i wrote: > Thanks Ftima. It is incredible that with a little of each > Collaboration, is advancing so quickly. > Only to be much better if they were not always the same, our > Regin will grow muchsimo. > Best Regards > > Alberto Sotol > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of > Fatima Cambronero Posted on: I saturday, January 24, 2015 09:25 pm > To: Alejandro Pisanty > CC: LACRALO Espaol > Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN's risk management > > Humberto, Alejandro, > > To contribute to this activity proposed by Alexander I > Seems a very good initiative, Deputy risks table > Affect ICANN as a company and have been included in the document > That enviAlejandro with each tems in two versions: inglsy Spanish. > As to the list of discussion in English do not get documents > Attachments, I copy below the same content as in Table I estincluido > Attached. > Please check for sb error in translation. > > Best regards, > Fatima Cambronero > > > * Enterprise-Wide Risks ICANN list * > > > 1) Failure to Maintain and adhere to it adequately Existing accountability >-Mechanisms. > > Failure to properly maintain and adhere to the mechanisms of > Rendicin existing accounts. > > > > 2) Failure to Demonstrate accountability and transparency of Sufficient > Organization. > > Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency > The organization. > > > > 3) Lower than forecasted revenues. > > Lower revenues than expected. > > > > 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, treats including possible > Related penalties, fees and costs. > > Judicial-resolution or other adverse resolution of disputes, including > Possible penalties, fees and related costs. > > > > 5) Failure to sufficiently It manage and enforce THE HUNDREDS of Contracts > With TLD operators. > > Failure to manage and enforce sufficiently, hundreds of > Contracts with TLD operators. > > > > 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder Proposal and other Relevant > Deliverables for a Successful transition NTIA stewardship of the IANA > Functions. > > Delivery unsuccessfully a proposal from stakeholders and other > Significant deliverables for a successful transition from the NTIA > Supervision of the IANA functions. > > > > 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated > Revenues (eg, fraud, investment loss, etc.). > > Significant financial losses, with exception of revenue ms > Low expected (eg, fraud, loss of investment, etc.). > > > > 8) Potential for New gTLD Program issues related to accountability >-Mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism / process. > > Possible problems for the New gTLD Program related > Mechanisms of accountability because of possible decision > Adverse or failure mechanism / process. > > > > 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. > > Operational costs without financiacino unplanned expenses. > > > > 10) That perception Potential Conflicts of Interests not all are > Identified During decision-making process. > > Perception that not all potential conflicts of interest are > Identified during the process of decision making. > > > > 11) Possible That perception ICANN has poor overall engagement, > Transparency, policy, coordination and communication. > > Possible perception that ICANN has global commitment, transparency, > Policy, coordinaciny poor communication. > > > > 12) Significant Increase in legal filings or other dispute resolution > That Could staff capacity challenge, distract and disrupt operations leadership. > > Significant increase in the records of judgments or > Other resolution of disputes will be able to be a challenge for the > Personal capacity, distract leaders and disrupt operations. > > > > 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants > Decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. > > The process of developing policies is too slow, the > Participants decrease or stagnate, or inability to attract > New stakeholders within the model. > > > > 14) Potential legal actions from parties believe That They Have That > Been injured RESULTING from New gTLD Program. > > Potential legal action from parties who believe they have been > Daadas as a result of the New gTLD Program. > > > > 15) Significant revenue reduction (eg, reduced volume domain name, > Reduced ccTLD contributions Issue, reduced registration fees, etc.). > > Significant reduction of income (eg reduced volume > Domain Name, reduced ccTLD contributions, fees > Reduced recorders, etc.). > > > > 16) Perception of failure and help in Place to Achieve a globa --- Avast antivirus software scanned this e-mail for viruses. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/45c42dcabc.html --]]

1 0

Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management
by hcarrascob＠gmail.com Jan. 25, 2015

Jan. 25, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management From: hcarrascob(a)gmail.com Thanks Fatima, Procredera make the survey. Regards Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org> i wrote: > Thanks Ftima. It is incredible that with a little of each collaboration, > Is advancing so quickly. > Only to be much better if they were not always the same, our Regin > Muchsimo will grow. > Best Regards > > Alberto Sotol > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Fatima > Cambronero > Sent: I saturday, January 24, 2015 9:25 pm > To: Alejandro Pisanty > CC: LACRALO Espaol > Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN's risk management > > Humberto, Alejandro, > > To contribute to this proposal by Alejandro activity, which seems a > Very good initiative, accompanying table risks to ICANN as > Company and have been included in the document enviAlejandro with > Each tems in two versions: espaol inglsy. > As to the list of discussion in English do not get documents > Attachments, I copy below the same content as in Table I estincluido > Attached. > Please check for sb error in translation. > > Best regards, > Fatima Cambronero > > > * Enterprise-Wide Risks ICANN list * > > > 1) Failure to Maintain and adhere to it adequately Existing accountability >-Mechanisms. > > Failure to properly maintain and adhere to the mechanisms of rendicin > Existing accounts. > > > > 2) Failure to Demonstrate accountability and transparency of Sufficient > Organization. > > Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency > Organization. > > > > 3) Lower than forecasted revenues. > > Lower revenues than expected. > > > > 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, treats including possible > Related penalties, fees and costs. > > Judicial-resolution or other adverse resolution of disputes, including > Possible penalties, fees and related costs. > > > > 5) Failure to sufficiently It manage and enforce THE HUNDREDS of Contracts With > TLD operators. > > Failure to manage and enforce sufficiently, hundreds of > Contracts with TLD operators. > > > > 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder Proposal and other Relevant > Deliverables for a Successful transition NTIA stewardship of the IANA > Functions. > > Delivery unsuccessfully a proposal from stakeholders and other > Significant deliverables for a successful transition from the NTIA > Supervision of the IANA functions. > > > > 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated revenues > (Eg, fraud, investment loss, etc.). > > Significant financial losses, with exception of low income ms > Provided (for example, fraud, loss of investment, etc.). > > > > 8) Potential for New gTLD Program issues related to accountability >-Mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism / process. > > Possible problems for the New gTLD Program related > Accountability mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure > Mechanism / process. > > > > 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. > > Operational costs without financiacino unplanned expenses. > > > > 10) That perception Potential Conflicts of Interests not all are Identified > During decision-making process. > > Perception that not all potential conflicts of interest are > Identified during the process of decision making. > > > > 11) Possible That perception ICANN has poor overall engagement, transparency, > Policy, coordination and communication. > > Possible perception that ICANN has global commitment, transparency, > Policy, coordinaciny poor communication. > > > > 12) Significant Increase in legal filings or other dispute resolution That > Could staff capacity challenge, distract and disrupt operations leadership. > > Significant increase in the records of judgments or other > Kind of resolution of disputes will be able to be a challenge for the capacity > Staff, distract leaders and disrupt operations. > > > > 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants > Decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. > > The process of developing policies is too slow, participants > Diminish or stagnate, or inability to attract new players > Interested in the model. > > > > 14) Potential legal actions from parties believe That That They Have Been > RESULTING injured from New gTLD Program. > > Potential legal action from parties who believe they have been daadas > As a result of the New gTLD Program. > > > > 15) Significant revenue reduction (eg, domain name reduced volume, reduced > CcTLD contributions Issue, reduced registration fees, etc.). > > Significant reduction of income (eg volume reduced > Domain name ccTLD contributions reduced, reduced fees > Recorders, etc.). > > > > 16) Perception of failure and help in Place to Achieve a globa _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/7e6f550d81.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN's risk management
by asoto＠ibero-americano.org Jan. 25, 2015

Jan. 25, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management From: asoto(a)ibero-americano.org Thanks Ftima. It is incredible that with a little of each collaboration, is advancing so quickly. Only you will be much better if they were not always the same, our Regin muchsimo will grow. Best Regards Alberto Sotol ----- Original Message ----- From: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Fatima Cambronero Posted on: saturday, January 24, 2015 9:25 pm To: Alejandro Pisanty CC: LACRALO Espaol Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN's risk management Humberto, Alejandro, To contribute to this proposal by Alejandro activity, which seems a very good initiative, attached table risks to ICANN as company and have been included in the document enviAlejandro with each tems in two versions: espaol inglsy. As to the list of discussion in English do not get documents attachments, I copy below the same content as in Table I estincluido attached. Please check for sb error in translation. Best regards, Fatima Cambronero * Enterprise-Wide Risks ICANN list * 1) Failure to Maintain and adhere to it adequately Existing accountability -mechanisms. Failure to properly maintain and adhere to the mechanisms of rendicin existing accounts. 2) Failure to Demonstrate accountability and transparency of Sufficient organization. Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency organization. 3) Lower than forecasted revenues. Lower revenues than expected. 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, treats including possible related penalties, fees and costs. -Resolution court or other adverse resolution of disputes, including any penalties, fees and related costs. 5) Failure to sufficiently It manage and enforce THE HUNDREDS of Contracts With TLD operators. Failure to manage and enforce sufficiently, hundreds of contracts with TLD operators. 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder Proposal and other Relevant NTIA deliverables for a Successful transition stewardship of the IANA Functions. Delivery unsuccessfully a proposal from stakeholders and other relevant deliverables for a successful transition from the NTIA supervision of the IANA functions. 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated revenues (Eg, fraud, investment loss, etc.). Significant financial losses, with exception of low income ms provided (for example, fraud, loss of investment, etc.). 8) Potential for New gTLD Program issues related to accountability -mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism / process. Possible problems for the New gTLD Program related accountability mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure mechanism / process. 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. Operational costs without financiacino unplanned expenses. 10) That perception Potential Conflicts of Interests not all are Identified During decision-making process. Perception that not all potential conflicts of interest are identified during the process of decision making. 11) Possible That perception ICANN has poor overall engagement, transparency, policy, coordination and communication. Possible perception that ICANN has global commitment, transparency, politics, poor communication coordinaciny. 12) Significant Increase in legal filings or other dispute resolution That Could staff capacity challenge, distract and disrupt operations leadership. Significant increase in the records of judgments or other type of resolution of disputes will be able to be a challenge for the capacity Staff, distract leaders and disrupt operations. 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. The process of developing policies is too slow, participants decline or stagnate, or inability to attract new players stakeholders within the model. 14) Potential legal actions from parties believe That That They Have Been RESULTING injured from New gTLD Program. Potential legal action from parties who believe they have been daadas as a result of the New gTLD Program. 15) Significant revenue reduction (eg, domain name reduced volume, reduced ccTLD contributions Issue, reduced registration fees, etc.). Significant reduction of income (eg reduced volume reduced domain name ccTLD reduced contributions, fees recorders, etc.). 16) Perception of failure and help in Place to Achieve a global IG distributed multi-stakeholder ecosystem según the Widely accepted Principles World Net. Perceptions lack of implementaciny helps to achieve an ecosystem Distributed Internet Governance of multiple stakeholders According to widely accepted principles NetMundial. 17) Possibility That current supporting organization and advisory committee (SO / AC) structures can not scale to support comprehensive and include new entrants and participants. Possibility that current support organizations and committee advisors (SO / AC) can not scale to include and support new global players. 18) Unsuccessful Implementation of ADOPTED RESULTING recommendation from various Affirmation of Commitment reviews. Implementacin unsuccessfully for the recommendation adopted as a result of revisions to the affirmation of commitments. 19) Insufficient progress Project Implementation Towards major (eg, gTLDs, IDN fast track, DNSSEC, etc.). Insufficient progress towards implementacin major projects (for example, gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). 20) Inability to deliver Commitments (mission, operational objectives To, Strategic Initiatives) due to limited resources, budget, or prioritization. Inability to meet commitments (mission, operational objectives, estratgicas) initiatives due to limited resources, budget or prioritization. 21) Key skills depart ICANN (consultants or staff) without clear succession plan for continuation of operating functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. Key Skills arise from ICANN (consultants or staff) without a plan of succession clear to the continuation of operational functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. 22) Lack of Improving trust in the multi-stakeholder model. Lack of improving confidence in the model of multiple parts interested. 23) Contracted party non-payment or non-performance service provider (eg, register, registry, and vendors). Failure to pay the contracted party or breach of provider services (eg, recorder, recording and suppliers). 24) Failure to Effectively Facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in the Technique coordination of the DNS to events of significant incidents to the security, stability and resilience of the Internet. 25) DNS vulnerability to attacks (root) Causing disruption to Internet operability (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). Vulnerability to attack DNS (root) causing the interruption of the operation of the Internet (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). 26) Potential breach of personnel confidential data or data from ICANN systems; confidential data made public. Violation potential personal or confidential data from systems ICANN; confidential data pblicos facts. 27) Failure of the community accountability process to address it adequately ICANN accountability in light of changing historical relationship STI With the USG. Failure of the process of accountability to the community to address properly the accountability of ICANN in the light of changing its histrica relationship with the US government. 28) Ineffective contractual compliance approach, process, and audits (Registries, registrars, others). Ineffective approach to contractual compliance, process and audit (registries, registrars, etc.). 29) Inconsistent communication and messaging to stakeholders, leading to falta de confusion and understanding. Communication and inconsistent messenger to stakeholders, leading to confusion and misunderstanding. 30) Poor Fiscal policy-making or gross mis-management. Working out of a poor fiscal policy or bad administration. 31) Potential for business continuity management ineffective technical Given an event OCCURS (eg, data back-up, disaster recover planning, data outage, etc.). Technique of business continuity management potentially ineffective against the occurrence of an event (eg backup data, disaster recovery planning, cutting data, etc.). 32) Potential falta de operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due to falta de internal collaboration and Clearly defined roles and responsabilidades. Lack of potential operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due the lack of internal collaboration and the roles and responsibilities clearly defined. 33) One or more Governments' policy Changes That Negatively Affect different the industries of a regional stakeholder or work and current functionality of SO / AC model. Changes in government policies oms one that adversely affect different sectors of a stakeholder group or regional labor and Current functionality of the model SO / AC. ----------- On January 24, 2015, 18:54, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty(a)gmail.com> i wrote: > Humberto, > > o pedir el apoyo de voluntarios/as. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > 2015-01-24 15:45 GMT-06:00 Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)gmail.com>: > > > Alejandro, > > > > Es posible crear esta encuesta, pero tomara algunos días para lanzarla. > La > > encuesta debe hacerse en ambos idiomas lo que implica traducir al > español. > > > > Saludos > > > > > > Enviado desde mi iPad > > > > > El 24/01/2015, a las 21:35, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty(a)gmail.com> > > escribió: > > > > > > Alberto, > > > > > > gracias por adoptar esta iniciativa. En abono de tu oferta, anexo > > > el documento en que ya he convertido pdf a rtf, rtf a docx, y > > > texto a > tabla. > > > Lo comparto con todos/as por si alguien ofrece apoyarlos a ti y a > > Humberto > > > con la creación de la encuesta. > > > > > > En cuanto a la muy buena propuesta de Fátima, quizás sea útil que > > > los colegas del Caribe organicen una discusión interna y a través > > > de un > > vocero > > > comuniquen el resultado y puedan integrarlo con lo que entre todos > > > determinemos. Por supuesto que creo que Roosevelt King sería una > > > contraparte para ello, ya que ha demostrado tener tiempo y energía > > > suficientes para participar. > > > > > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > > > > 2015-01-24 15:16 GMT-06:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org>: > > > > > >> Alejandro, muy buena idea. También leí algo hoy sobre el trabajo > > >> del > > IETF > > >> (calificado como no suficiente) respecto de uno de los riesgos > > >> que es seguridad DNSs. Y los ataques sobre ese sistema. Es > > >> factible separar > > estos > > >> riesgos para preparar la encuesta. > > >> > > >> Si bien no hay méritos en trabajar o sugerir cosas buenas para > trabajar, > > >> de haberlos, serían tuyos. > > >> > > >> Me pongo a trabajar y ver qué herramientas podemos utilizar. > > >> Esperemos > > que > > >> todos colabores luego. La encuesta sobre capacidades de nuestra > Región, > > >> está casi en el 50% de nuestra organizaciones. > > >> > > >> Saludos cordiales > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Alberto soto > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> *De:* Alejandro Pisanty [mailto:apisanty@gmail.com] *Enviado el:* > > >> sábado, 24 de enero de 2015 05:48 p.m. > > >> *Para:* Alberto Soto > > >> *CC:* LACRALO Español > > >> *Asunto:* Re: [lac-discuss-es] ICANN's risk management > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Alberto, > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> he leído con cuidado este documento. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Si quisiéramos ser proactivos y producir al menos un sondeo de > > >> opinión > > es > > >> fácil producir una versón en doc o xls de este documento y aislar > > >> como tabla la lista de riesgos; hecho eso, crear una encuesta de > > surveymonkey o > > >> una herramienta que tenga licenciada ICANN para calificar > > >> Típicamente sería una iniciativa de la Presidencia o la > > >> Secretaría. Yo > > con > > >> gusto hago parte del trabajo técnico si tú y Humberto toman la > > iniciativa. > > >> Apelaría a que tú hagas una división de las preguntas por los > > >> tipos de riesgo a que corresponden ya que están mezclados. Esta > > >> herramienta > > simple > > >> ayudaría a la participación de todas las subregiones. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Alejandro Pisanty > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> 2015-01-24 8:04 GMT-06:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org>: > > >> > > >> Estimados, el Board Risk Committee comparte este documento con el > > >> CCWG > > >> Accountability: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/summary-risk-management-pr > ocess- > > >> 23jan15-en.pdf > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Saludos cordiales > > >> > > >> Alberto Soto > > >> > > >> > > >> --- > > >> El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo > > >> electrónico en busca de virus. > > >> http://www.avast.com > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> lac-discuss-es mailing list > > >> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > >> > > >> http://www.lacralo.org > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > > >> Facultad de Química UNAM > > >> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > > >> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > > >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > > >> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > > >> http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > > >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > > >> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > > >> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> <http://www.avast.com/> > > >> > > >> El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo > > >> electrónico en busca de virus. > > >> www.avast.com > > > > > > > > > -- > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > > > Facultad de Química UNAM > > > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > > > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > > > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > > > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > > > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > > <ICANN_summary-risk-management-process-23jan15-en_APB.docx> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > lac-discuss-es mailing list > > > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > > > > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > > > -- > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > * Fatima Cambronero * Attorney-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter:facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero --- Avast antivirus software scanned this e-mail for viruses. http://www.avast.com _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/b4dd725b7b.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-en] ICANN's risk management
by fatimacambronero＠gmail.com Jan. 25, 2015

Jan. 25, 2015

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: ICANN's risk management From: fatimacambronero(a)gmail.com Humberto, Alejandro, To contribute to this activity proposed by Alexander, who seems a very good initiative, accompanying table risks to ICANN as a company and have been included in the document I enviAlejandro, with each tems in two versions: espaol inglsy. As to the list of discussion in English do not get documents attachments, I copy below the same content as in Table I estincluido attached. Please check for sb error in translation. Best regards, Fatima Cambronero * Enterprise-Wide Risks ICANN list * 1) Failure to Maintain and adhere to it adequately Existing accountability -mechanisms. Failure to properly maintain and adhere to the mechanisms of rendicin existing accounts. 2) Failure to Demonstrate accountability and transparency of Sufficient organization. Failure to demonstrate sufficient accountability and transparency organization. 3) Lower than forecasted revenues. Lower revenues than expected. 4) Adverse legal or other dispute resolution ruling, treats including possible related penalties, fees and costs. -Resolution court or other adverse resolution of disputes, including any penalties, fees and related costs. 5) Failure to sufficiently It manage and enforce THE HUNDREDS of Contracts With TLD operators. Failure to manage and enforce sufficiently, hundreds of contracts with TLD operators. 6) Unsuccessful delivery of a stakeholder Proposal and other Relevant NTIA deliverables for a Successful transition stewardship of the IANA Functions. Delivery unsuccessfully a proposal from stakeholders and other relevant deliverables for a successful transition from the NTIA supervision of the IANA functions. 7) Significant financial loss, other than lower-than-anticipated revenues (Eg, fraud, investment loss, etc.). Significant financial losses, with exception of the most revenue low expected (for example, fraud, loss of investment, etc.). 8) Potential for New gTLD Program issues related to accountability -mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure of mechanism / process. Possible problems for the New gTLD Program related accountability mechanisms due to possible adverse decision or failure mechanism / process. 9) Unfunded operational costs or unplanned expenses. Operational costs without financiacino unplanned expenses. 10) That perception Potential Conflicts of Interests not all are Identified During decision-making process. Perception that not all potential conflicts of interest are identified during the process of decision making. 11) Possible That perception ICANN has poor overall engagement, transparency, policy, coordination and communication. Possible perception that ICANN has global commitment, transparency, politics, poor communication coordinaciny. 12) Significant Increase in legal filings or other dispute resolution That Could staff capacity challenge, distract and disrupt operations leadership. Significant increase in the records of judgments or other type of resolution of disputes will be able to be a challenge for the capacity Staff, distract leaders and disrupt operations. 13) Policy development process is too slow or ineffective, participants decrease or stagnate, or failure to bring new stakeholders into the model. The process of developing policies is too slow, participants decline or stagnate, or inability to attract new players stakeholders within the model. 14) Potential legal actions from parties believe That That They Have Been RESULTING injured from New gTLD Program. Potential legal action from parties who believe they have been daadas as a result of the New gTLD Program. 15) Significant revenue reduction (eg, reduced volume domain name, ccTLD contributions Issue reduced, reduced registration fees, etc.). Significant reduction of income (eg reduced volume reduced domain name ccTLD reduced contributions, fees recorders, etc.). 16) Perception of failure and help in Place to Achieve a global IG distributed multi-stakeholder ecosystem según the Widely accepted Principles World Net. Perceptions lack of implementaciny helps to achieve an ecosystem Distributed Internet Governance of multiple stakeholders According to widely accepted principles NetMundial. 17) Possibility That current supporting organization and advisory committee (SO / AC) structures can not scale to support comprehensive and include new entrants and participants. Possibility that current support organizations and committee advisors (SO / AC) can not scale to include and support new global players. 18) Unsuccessful Implementation of ADOPTED RESULTING recommendation from various Affirmation of Commitment reviews. Implementacin unsuccessfully for the recommendation adopted as a result of revisions to the affirmation of commitments. 19) Insufficient progress Project Implementation Towards major (eg, gTLDs, IDN fast track, DNSSEC, etc.). Insufficient progress towards implementacin major projects (for example, gTLD, IDN Fast Track, DNSSEC, etc.). 20) Inability to deliver Commitments (mission, operational objectives To, Strategic Initiatives) due to limited resources, budget, or prioritization. Inability to meet commitments (mission, operational objectives, estratgicas) initiatives due to limited resources, budget or prioritization. 21) Key skills depart ICANN (consultants or staff) without clear succession plan for continuation of operating functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. Key Skills arise from ICANN (consultants or staff) without a plan clear succession to the continuation of operational functions or exchange of knowledge and documentation. 22) Lack of Improving trust in the multi-stakeholder model. Lack of improving confidence in the model of multiple parts interested. 23) Contracted party non-payment or non-performance service provider (eg, register, registry, and vendors). Failure to pay the contracted party or breach of provider services (eg, recorder, recording and suppliers). 24) Failure to Effectively Facilitate international participation in DNS Technical Coordination in the event of significant Internet security, stability or resiliency incident. Failure to effectively facilitate international participation in the Technique coordination of the DNS to events of significant incidents to the security, stability and resilience of the Internet. 25) DNS vulnerability to attacks (root) Causing disruption to Internet operability (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). Vulnerability to attack DNS (root) causing the interruption of the operation of the Internet (DDoS Attacks, Cache Poisoning, etc.). 26) Potential breach of personnel confidential data or data from ICANN systems; confidential data made public. Violation potential personal or confidential data from systems ICANN; confidential data pblicos facts. 27) Failure of the community accountability process to address it adequately ICANN accountability in light of changing historical relationship STI With the USG. Failure of the process of accountability to the community to address properly the accountability of ICANN in the light of changing its histrica relationship with the US government. 28) Ineffective contractual compliance approach, process, and audits (Registries, registrars, others). Ineffective approach to contractual compliance, process and audit (registries, registrars, etc.). 29) Inconsistent communication and messaging to stakeholders, leading to falta de confusion and understanding. Communication and inconsistent messenger to stakeholders, leading to confusion and misunderstanding. 30) Poor Fiscal policy-making or gross mis-management. Working out of a poor fiscal policy or bad administration. 31) Potential for ineffective technical business continuity management Given an event OCCURS (eg, data back-up, disaster recover planning, data outage, etc.). Technics management of business continuity potentially ineffective against the occurrence of an event (eg, data backup, disaster recovery planning, cutting data, etc.). 32) Potential falta de operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due to falta de internal collaboration and Clearly defined roles and responsabilidades. Lack of potential operational efficiency, excellence and discipline due to the lack of internal collaboration and the roles and clearly defined responsibilities. 33) One or more Governments' policy Changes That Negatively Affect the industries of a stakeholder different regional or work and current functionality of SO / AC model. Changes in government policies oms one that adversely affect different sectors of a stakeholder group or regional labor and Current functionality of the model SO / AC. ----------- On January 24, 2015, 18:54, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty(a)gmail.com> i wrote: > Humberto, > > o pedir el apoyo de voluntarios/as. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > 2015-01-24 15:45 GMT-06:00 Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)gmail.com>: > > > Alejandro, > > > > Es posible crear esta encuesta, pero tomara algunos días para lanzarla. > La > > encuesta debe hacerse en ambos idiomas lo que implica traducir al > español. > > > > Saludos > > > > > > Enviado desde mi iPad > > > > > El 24/01/2015, a las 21:35, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty(a)gmail.com> > > escribió: > > > > > > Alberto, > > > > > > gracias por adoptar esta iniciativa. En abono de tu oferta, anexo el > > > documento en que ya he convertido pdf a rtf, rtf a docx, y texto a > tabla. > > > Lo comparto con todos/as por si alguien ofrece apoyarlos a ti y a > > Humberto > > > con la creación de la encuesta. > > > > > > En cuanto a la muy buena propuesta de Fátima, quizás sea útil que los > > > colegas del Caribe organicen una discusión interna y a través de un > > vocero > > > comuniquen el resultado y puedan integrarlo con lo que entre todos > > > determinemos. Por supuesto que creo que Roosevelt King sería una > > > contraparte para ello, ya que ha demostrado tener tiempo y energía > > > suficientes para participar. > > > > > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > > > > 2015-01-24 15:16 GMT-06:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org>: > > > > > >> Alejandro, muy buena idea. También leí algo hoy sobre el trabajo del > > IETF > > >> (calificado como no suficiente) respecto de uno de los riesgos que es > > >> seguridad DNSs. Y los ataques sobre ese sistema. Es factible separar > > estos > > >> riesgos para preparar la encuesta. > > >> > > >> Si bien no hay méritos en trabajar o sugerir cosas buenas para > trabajar, > > >> de haberlos, serían tuyos. > > >> > > >> Me pongo a trabajar y ver qué herramientas podemos utilizar. Esperemos > > que > > >> todos colabores luego. La encuesta sobre capacidades de nuestra > Región, > > >> está casi en el 50% de nuestra organizaciones. > > >> > > >> Saludos cordiales > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Alberto soto > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> *De:* Alejandro Pisanty [mailto:apisanty@gmail.com] > > >> *Enviado el:* sábado, 24 de enero de 2015 05:48 p.m. > > >> *Para:* Alberto Soto > > >> *CC:* LACRALO Español > > >> *Asunto:* Re: [lac-discuss-es] ICANN's risk management > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Alberto, > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> he leído con cuidado este documento. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Si quisiéramos ser proactivos y producir al menos un sondeo de opinión > > es > > >> fácil producir una versón en doc o xls de este documento y aislar como > > >> tabla la lista de riesgos; hecho eso, crear una encuesta de > > surveymonkey o > > >> una herramienta que tenga licenciada ICANN para calificar prioridades. > > >> Típicamente sería una iniciativa de la Presidencia o la Secretaría. Yo > > con > > >> gusto hago parte del trabajo técnico si tú y Humberto toman la > > iniciativa. > > >> Apelaría a que tú hagas una división de las preguntas por los tipos de > > >> riesgo a que corresponden ya que están mezclados. Esta herramienta > > simple > > >> ayudaría a la participación de todas las subregiones. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Alejandro Pisanty > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> 2015-01-24 8:04 GMT-06:00 Alberto Soto <asoto(a)ibero-americano.org>: > > >> > > >> Estimados, el Board Risk Committee comparte este documento con el CCWG > > >> Accountability: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/summary-risk-management-process- > > >> 23jan15-en.pdf > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Saludos cordiales > > >> > > >> Alberto Soto > > >> > > >> > > >> --- > > >> El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en > > >> busca de virus. > > >> http://www.avast.com > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> lac-discuss-es mailing list > > >> lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > >> > > >> http://www.lacralo.org > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > > >> Facultad de Química UNAM > > >> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > > >> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > > >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > > >> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > > >> http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > > >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > > >> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > > >> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------ > > >> <http://www.avast.com/> > > >> > > >> El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en > > >> busca de virus. > > >> www.avast.com > > > > > > > > > -- > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > > > Facultad de Química UNAM > > > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > > > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > > > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > > > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > > > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > > <ICANN_summary-risk-management-process-23jan15-en_APB.docx> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > lac-discuss-es mailing list > > > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > > > > > http://www.lacralo.org > > > > > > -- > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-es mailing list > lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es > > http://www.lacralo.org > * Fatima Cambronero * Attorney-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter:facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/d3a6ad5687.html --]]

1 0