Hi All, Thank you Tijani for sharing a summary about the proposed topics, this is really helpful. Apologies for not being able to join the call. I listened to part of it and intend to continue listening to the rest today or tomorrow at most. So, I would like to share my view in relation to the three proposed topics from a different aspect. I would like to look at the three proposals not in relation to how much consensus the community has in relation to any of them or how much the topic is controversial. At some point we need as a community to start discussing controversial topics. We cannot continue avoiding them, just because we think we cannot reach some kind of consensus. Having said that, I would like to look at the three topics in terms of current benefit to decision making in relation to ICANN's policy development. So, DNS Abuse: This is indeed an important topic and no matter how controversial it is, we need at some point to start discussing it. However, it is not pressing nor urgent right now. New gTLD subsequent procedures final report: This is also an important topic, but as Amr mentions the public comment period is over and the council has already adopted the report on its last call. Providing guidelines in relation to implementation is important, but doing this after the Board adopts the report makes more sense. I would simply say this is not the right timing for this topic, our statement would neither have an impact on the policy nor the implementation. EPDP Phase 2 final recommendations: An important topic as well, but more importantly it is a timely issue. The report is out for public comment and our statement can have an impact on decision making. It does not matter if we cannot agree on some of the issues discussed in the report. In the end we can submit what we agree on and support as a community. As Amr mentions we do not need to discuss every aspect of the report, we could even discuss the idea itself of having the SSAD. For sure we shall find aspects to which we all agree and can present. To that end, and reading Amr's thoughts in relation to all three topics, I support EPDP phase 2 final recommendations to be our topic. Again, I do not think there is a reason for us to avoid putting out an opinion in relation to a current policy under development. I have always thought that having meaningful impact is what should matter most. Thanks again Tijani for all your support to this group and your extensive work and effort and thank you all for your thoughts. Kind regards Hadia From: Middle-East [mailto:middle-east-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Amr Elsadr via Middle-East Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2021 9:53 PM To: Tijani BEN JEMAA; middle-east@icann.org Cc: rolla hassan Subject: Re: [ME ICANN] Topic selection: deadline extended Hi, I watched the recording of yesterday’s call, and pretty much agree with most of what was expressed by others. Thanks for sharing the link, Tijani. Here’s my personal take on these 3 topics: 1. Agree that the topic of DNS Abuse is not the ideal one. In general, I believe it might be helpful for the designations commonly used to be revised. DNS Abuse itself should be (as others have said) defined narrowly in the technical scope of ICANN mandate. “Content Abuse” is a term that strikes me as strange. Something more like “illegal content” seems more appropriate to me. I’m not sure how content may be abused in the way the DNS can be. Content can be abusive, but describing it as illegal seems to more accurately describe it. There are more nuances to this, imo. Abusive material or behavior (for lack of a better word or description) like malware or phishing (and spam associated with both) even strike me as content delivered using the DNS. There’s much work that needs to be done on this and I’m not sure we (as a community) might be able to address it to the satisfaction of all parties in the time we have. 2. The EPDP Phase 2 Final Report and Recommendations is likely the most divisive topic we can hope to tackle. In fact, multiple members of the Middle East Space have been involved in this effort and we have disagreed on issues more often than we have agreed. I find it unlikely that we will have a consensus position on the Final Report. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continue to discuss it among ourselves, but issuing some kind of statement might be challenging. I don’t mind engaging in an attempt to do so, if the Middle East Space decides to tackle it, but we should probably manage our expectations on what we might achieve over the next month if we do. Also noteworthy that this topic is just as substantively complex as any other we may wish to tackle. The Standardized System for Access and Disclosure (SSAD) is the subject of the Phase 2 report. All the recommendations coming out of Phase 2 essentially address features of the SSAD. So limiting our input on this topic to the SSAD doesn’t mean we only need to address a small part of the Report. If we do choose this as a topic, we don’t necessarily need to address every aspect of the SSAD. We can always choose which ones we wish to comment on, but everything in that Report is about the SSAD, and how it is expected to function, how the different parties may use it, how it is expected to be financed, etc… 3. New gTLD Subsequent Procedures is the topic I believe we should focus on. As Tijani suggested, we don’t need to address the entire 400-page report. There are several topics in this Final Report that we can focus on, and which may have a direct impact on our region. IDNs is one. Applicant Support is another. The Sub Pro PDP Working Group also made recommendations on how ICANN should conduct its communication strategy to inform potential applicants. This is something I believe might be relevant to our region if there are to be successful applications for new gTLDs coming out of it. It is important to note, however, that if we do develop a statement with the intent of submitting it as part of the current public comment period that we keep in mind that this is an ICANN Board public comment period. That means that it would be largely pointless to suggest amendments to the recommendations. The Board may not amend or create new recommendations, but can always send some back to the GNSO for review, if it chooses to do so. What we might want to do is provide guidance on how best to implement the recommendations that have been adopted by the GNSO, taking into consideration how the implementation method would be of benefit to the MEAC region. These are just some thoughts I had in reaction to this week’s call, but am happy to discuss further. I hope this helps. Thanks. Amr From: Middle-East <middle-east-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Tijani BEN JEMAA via Middle-East <middle-east@icann.org> Reply-To: Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> Date: Tuesday, 2 March 2021 at 11:35 PM To: "middle-east@icann.org" <middle-east@icann.org> Cc: "rollah@tra.gov.eg" <rollah@tra.gov.eg> Subject: Re: [ME ICANN] Topic selection: deadline extended Dear all, The ME Space community met (virtually) this afternoon to discuss the best topic to be addressed in the ME Space session at ICANN70. After a constructive debate, 3 topics were supported with different degree of support: · DNS Abuse · New gTLD subsequent Procedure · EPDP phase 2 final policy recommendations It was proposed to extend the deadline for topic selection to give those who couldn't attend the call to give their preference. Please give your preferred topic among the 3 above topics by Friday 5 March 2021. To help you understand the context of the proposed topics, here are elements that were raised during the call: · DNS Abuse It’s meant to be Domain Name System abuse only out of any content consideration which is out of ICANN remit. The contracted parties have issued a paper about this topic and we can invite one of them to explain their opinion. Also, “Internet & Jurisdiction” Policy Network is working on this issue trying to give practical ways to address the DNS Abuse. We can also invite either the chair of the group “Domain and Jurisdiction” or the Executive Director of the “Internet & Jurisdiction” Policy Network as a whole. · New gTLD Subsequent Procedure final report There are several parts of this huge report (hundreds of pages) that can be addressed separately. Those who support this topic should identify which part shall we address. · EPDP Phase 2 Final Policy Recommendations The proposal was to give the consensus position of our region about the System for Standardized Access/Disclosure to non-public registration information ("SSAD") which is today under public comment. Best Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn<mailto:tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn>> a écrit : Dear all, Please find below the link to the today call recording. https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/lNnzHuG0860f5kBXfcSXIA5PUDPSnDso2HXtdqw3MMgF... Passcode: +#Fy9!PT?4 If you were unable to to attend, you can listen to this recording. Best ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tijani BENJEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Telephone: +216 52 385 114 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tijani BENJEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Telephone: +216 52 385 114 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------