Re: RES: [ispcp] ISPCP Comments on the ICANN Strategic Plan

[Mark McFadden <mcf@xxxxxxx>]

Here is the presentation I prepared on the ICANN Strategic Plan and presented at
the ISPCP meeting on Wednesday of this week.

mark
--
Mark McFadden
Secretariat, ISPCP


Quoting Antonio Tavares <atavares@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> Dear Mark
>
> Would you please send us the powerpoint presentation you have made during
> our constituency meeting about comments on ICANN Strategic Plan?
> Thanks
> Antonio Tavares
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Em nome
> de Mark McFadden
> Enviada em: sexta-feira, 3 de dezembro de 2004 06:21
> Para: Mansourkia, Magnolia
> Cc: 'Mark McFadden'; ispcp@xxxxxxxxx; ispcp-activities@xxxxxxxxx
> Assunto: RE: [ispcp] ISPCP Comments on the ICANN Strategic Plan
>
> Hi Maggie!
> We miss you here in Cape Town.
>
> The issue of >3 character TLDs came up in the constituency again.  But I
> believe
> that there is a general realization that the ISPs are not responsible for
> filtering those names at this point.  In an answer to a question on this
> topic
> I said that I saw no evidence that ISPs were filtering DNS resolutions nor
> were
> they filtering outbound SMTP traffic based on names.  It's tragic, but the
> problem is much more difficult than this.  Instead, there are software
> developers and applications builders that seem to think that TLDs are always
> either two or three characters in length.
>
> That's a much more difficult community to reach through education and
> outreach.
> What I think is happening is that there is a gradual realization that
> blaming
> the ISP community for the problem is a very easy, but not very effective
> approach to the problem.
>
> mark
> Secretariat
> ISPCP Constituency, gNSO
>
>
> Quoting "Mansourkia, Magnolia" <Maggie.Mansourkia@xxxxxxx>:
>
> > Hi guys. How are the meetings going? I think what you've come up with
> below
> > is great and have nothing further to add.  Also, I'm curious-any further
> > discussions from registries re the alleged filtering of newer TLDs?
> > Cheers,
> > Maggie
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> > Behalf Of Mark McFadden
> > Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:39 AM
> > To: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: ispcp-activities@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [ispcp] ISPCP Comments on the ICANN Strategic Plan
> >
> > The ISPCP would like to make the following remarks in support of the
> > strategic plan and raise a few issues.  Whilst the strategic plan is seen
> as
> > a welcome step forward, we have concerns that the proposals still lack
> > measurable objectives and detailed timelines.
> >
> > ï&#65533;²	The Strategic Plan is unclear as to whether the relationship
> between
> > ICANN and the Root Server Operators will be formalized to the extent of a
> > contractual relationship.  The ISPCP supports the formalization of
> > relationships with the Root Server Operators.  The precise nature of that
> > relationship is a matter that we reserve comment upon.  Whatever that
> > relationship ends up being, those providing Root Server functionality must
> > be accountable to ICANN.
> > ï&#65533;²	We support the five key suggestions for IANA including:
> improving
> > IANA request tracking and responsiveness; providing more reliable
> operating
> > capacity; doing better reporting from IANA on operations issues; making
> root
> > zone management professional; and, making root servers themselves more
> > robust.  We especially support the move towed project management
> orientation
> > for request tracking and crucial IANA transactions.
> > ï&#65533;²	We believe that the reference made to the ASO Community
> â&#8364;&#339;building
> > global consensus policy governing IP addressesâ&#8364;&#65533; is not
> supported by the
> > demise of an independent ASO and the assertion of global address policy
> > development by the RIR CEOs through the NRO.
> > ï&#65533;²	The ISPCP welcomes the appointment of the ombudsman and the
> role in
> > helping to educate consumers â&#8364;&#8220; a task, which in the past,
> has
> often been
> > left to ISPs.
> > ï&#65533;²	We are also glad to see more emphasis placed on compliance
> so that
> > policy work developed within the gNSO becomes more meaningful.
> > ï&#65533;²	It is essential that all ICANN activities result from a
> bottom-up
> > process and the PDP process needs to be flexible and tailored to meet the
> > demands of individual policy opportunities.
> > ï&#65533;²	We seek more information with regard to the proposed
> regional
> > meetings: whether they will be focused on outreach and education
> activities,
> > or part of the formal policy development process.  If the latter, then the
> > ISPCP questions how this will be integrated into the discussions necessary
> > at full, global ICANN meetings.
> > ï&#65533;²	Whilst we have commented on some of the issues raised by the
> ISPCP
> > consideration of the strategic plan it is apparent that far more
> discussion
> > and consultation is required.  Therefore, the ISPCP requests that the
> ICANN
> > Board of Directors acknowledge this requirement and seek to address it in
> a
> > manner that meets with the full acceptance of the ICANN community.
> > ï&#65533;²	The ISPCP also notes with dismay that the Supporting
> Organizations
> > were not consulted prior to the public dissemination of the document.
> While
> > the intent may be to craft a plan for operation and management of ICANN,
> it
> > is clear that the plan has far-reaching consequences for
> ICANNâ&#8364;&#8482;s
> delivery
> > of
> > services and thus, its policy.  This process needs to change so that
> > Supporting Organizations have a meaningful way to have input at an earlier
> > stage in the plan development.
> >
> > Mark McFadden
> > ispcp-activities@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Secretariat
> > ISPCP Constituency, ICANN
> >
>
>
>

Attachment: ISPCP Meeting - Cape Town - Strategic Plan Overview.ppt
Description: MS-Powerpoint presentation