Hi everyone,

As you must have read from the update Wisdom shared a while back, some questions were asked during an outreach by the small team and though our community didn't provide any feedback to Wisdom's email, I think it will be a good idea for us to provide some sort of official response to those questions back to the small team.

N.B: I went to observe the small teams meeting last week and realised that all other SGs have or are planning to provide responses to those questions.

I have taken the liberty to draft a few responses, which I hope you all can make changes to it as well to better reflect our position on DNS abuse. The Google doc is here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hg468obYDwylFQ6q-3AX6m7UxZvNY1EXGpBFJ-WVd_0/edit?usp=sharing

The Questions again are:

What specific problem(s) would policy development in particular be expected to address and why do you believe that policy development is the right mechanism to solve those problems?

Proposed Response: The NCSG does not believe there are any problems discussed in the community that require policy development effort. Moreover, a common definition of DNS abuse which is in alignment with ICANN’s bylaws and technical remit first needs to be adopted by the community.

What do you believe are the expected outcomes if policy development would be undertaken, taking into account the remit of ICANN and more specifically GNSO policy development in this context?

Proposed Response: None, since we do not see any problem requiring policy development.

Do you (or your community group) have any expectations with regards to possible next steps the GNSO Council could or should undertake in the context of policy development?

Proposed Response: Our expectation of next steps is for a common community definition of DNS abuse which is in alignment with ICANN’s bylaws and technical remit.