[lac-discuss-en] =? Iso-8859-1? Q? Comentario_P = FAblico_de_AGEIA_DEN? == Iso-8859-1? Q? SI_sobre_SSR_RT_Draft_Report? =

Sun Apr 15 02:14:56 UTC 2012

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

 Subject: =? Iso-8859-1? Q? Comentario_P = FAblico_de_AGEIA_DEN? == Iso-8859-1? Q? SI_sobre_SSR_RT_Draft_Report? = 
 From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com

 (English Below) 

 * RT SSR Draft Report Comments Pblicos *** 

 * These comments are made pblicos in our individual capacity 
 on behalf of Juan Manuel Rojas, JosFrancisco Arce, Javier Pallero and 
 Fátima Cambronero of the chapters of AGEIA DENSI Argentina and Colombia. * 

 ** 

 First, we congratulate the team Reviewer Security 
 Stability and Resilience for the tremendous effort made and the large 
 work and special thanks to the Chair, Alexander 
 Pisanty, a member of our region from Latin America and the Caribbean. We would like 
 place special emphasis on the orderly presentation and especfica by subject 
 because that facilitque a topic with high level of complexity was 
 easily understood by the community, to be expressed with an order 
 lgico and structured, and concatenated each of the recommendations. 

 We support all the recommendations made, and although there is much room 
 to enlarge, left seated in this, some comments 
 individuals. 

 We consider it important that this party has addressed the RT 
 misintcnica limited scope of ICANN. We believe it is necessary 
 develop a unique document with clear terminology, where it may be 
 definiciny established scope of SSR as an objective 
 main within the framework of work on the SSR Plan for FY12, 
 Declaration incorporating the responsibility of SSR as it was 
 given by the review team. At the same time, we agreed to be 
 be clear relationships with ICANN groups and modems 
 relations with the RSSAC SSAC, so the recommendations are supported 
 from 1 to 6, since the only way to make procedures 
 transparent and can be best contribution is defined, as the 
 Recommendation to 3, clearly the nature of relationships. 

 Thus, ICANN will reach a greater number of involved 
 within the Internet ecosystem.Especially as members of a 
 regional organization of Internet users, we suggest having 
 particular regard to those who do not participate in ICANN. We agree 
 with the need to set as soon as possible SSR Plan 
 vinculacin As with other communities inside and outside of ICANN and the 
 development of an efficient mechanism working retroalimentacin 
 SSR. We share the statement with respect to publish information on 
 DNS threats and strategies mitigacin. 

 It will be important that there is to know the effectiveness or otherwise of the plan 
 current security ICANN has to meet and threats desafos 
 actual and potential, and what are the short-and long-term 
 to face future threats desafos and security, stability 
 and resilience of the DNS, in accordance with the Limited misintcnica 
 ICANN ascomo control the power to maintain the stability of the DNS 
 but with the limits that this entails.

 We stress the need for the Plan reflects the ICANN Estratgico 
 commitment to the goal and mission of ICANN to &quot;preserve and enhance 
 operational stability, reliability, security and interoperability 
 Global Internet. &quot; 

 It is important also that the SSR-RT does not focus exclusively on 
 fsicas issues because as we know, there are also other threats 
 may affect the stability and security of DNS. This should be 
 framed in a process of continuous improvement not only to do with 
 SSR but with the entire organization. 

 We agree with the comment Ayesha Hassan when he says that the team 
 of revision may examine how best practices are 
 incluirn in contracts as mentioned in the Recommendation to 12. 

 We stress the Recommendation to 23 in the need to equip 
 Working Groups and Advisory Comits, resources and certain freedoms for 
 to develop high quality findings. To this should RT 
 plan of quforma believe that ICANN can not guarantee this kind of 
 job.

 We agree with the comment from Mikey O'Connor audience about the 
 need to sharpen the meaning of &quot;under gestin of risk&quot; 
 document, and ALAC's comment regarding the need for ICANN 
 creaciny accelerate the publication of a formal framework and comprehensive 
 DNS Administration risk. Importantly, the target 
 to be focused on long-term risks, do not forget to pay 
 atencina short-term risks. 

 The design of the framework must be done in layers and from a mltiple 
 perspective to measure and manage the DNS level. This framework should 
 support the analysis of risks, likelihood and impact of 
 changes in the DNS infrastructure ascomo also the change in 
 creation of POLICIES.

 And we support the Recommendation to 28 to the end that ICANN continue 
 comprometindose in prevencin planificaciny incident, giving 
 difusiny educacin, involving all areas concerned to 
 preserve the model of multiple stakeholders, processes below 
 upwards, allowing also the end user participation 
 specialized. 

 The report refers to the absence of a comprehensive framework for 
 Risk gestin DNS. So are we to make of qumanera 
 can create this formal framework acting the SSAC, DSSA, Group 
 Risk Gestin work of the Board, CSO and with the participation of 
 specialized stakeholders. 

 * Juan Manuel Rojas - JosFrancisco Maple - Javier Pallero - Fatima 
 Cambronero - AGEIA DENSI chapters Argentina and Colombia. *** 

 ------ 

 * RT SSR Draft Report Public Comments *

 * These public comments are made on our personal capacity on Behalf of 
 Juan Manuel Rojas, Jose Francisco Arce, Javier Pallero and Fatima 
 Cambronero of Argentina and Colombia AGEIA DENSI Chapters. * 

 First, we want to Congratulate the Security, Stability and Resilience 
 Review Team for Their Enormous effort and we want to give a special 
 acknowledgment to the RT Chair, Alexander Pisanty, a member of our region. 
 We would like to make special emphasis on the ordered and subject-specific 
 That presentation provided an issue for high level of With A complexity to 
 Easily Understood be the community by, by Being Presented in a logical, 
 structured, and concatenated regarding Manner Each one of the 
 recommendations. 

 We support all of the recommendations That Were made, and although there is 
 not very much to add, we would like to state some comments in particular. 

 We believe it is Important That the RT started Addressing the ICANN's 
 limited technical mission.We believe it is NECESSARY to Develop a single 
 document, With A clear terminology, where 'the definition and scope of SSR 
 can be ESTABLISHED, as one of the main Objectives Within the framework on 
 the SSR Plan for FY12, Incorporating the statement of responsibility for 
 SSR as It Was Proposed by the RT. At the Same time, we agree That the 
 Relationships Between ICANN and other groups Should Be clear, as well as 
 Relationships among the RSSAC and SSAC, so in Consequence, we support 
 recommendations 1 to 6, since the only way for the Routines to be 
 be transparent and Contributions Properly Issued, is by Providing a clear 
 definition on the nature of Relationships, as the Recommendation 3 has 
 Expressed. 

 Malthus, ICANN will reach for a number of stakeholders within The Greater the 
 Internet ecosystem. Specially We, as members of a regional organization of 
 Internet users, particularly HAVING Suggest Regard to Those who do not 
 Participate in ICANN. We agree on the need to Have a defined plan as soon 
 as possible in terms of SSR linkage to other Communities Within and outside 
 of ICANN and the Development of an efficient feedback on SSR Mechanism 
 work.We share the statement on posting Information about DNS Threats and 
 Mitigation Strategies for them. 

 It would be Important to publicize the Effectiveness of the current 
 That plan has security ICANN Established or Potential to face current 
 Challenges and Threats, and what are the short-and long-term Objectives to 
 meet future Challenges and Threats to security, Stability and resilience of 
 DNS, Consistent With The limited technical mission of ICANN, and to monitoring 
 the power to Maintain Stability of the DNS With The limits due That this 
 entails. 

 We stress the need for the ICANN Strategic Plan to Reflect the Commitment 
 to STI Stated goal and mission as to &quot;preserve and Enhance the Operational 
 Stability, reliability, security and interoperability of the overall 
 Internet &quot;. 

 TambiÃ©n It Important That the SSR-RT does not focus exclusively on 
 Given That physical issues, as we know, there are other Threats That can 
 Affect the Stability and security of DNS. This Should Be framed in a 
 process of continuous improvement, not only on subjects related to SSR But 
 With The Entire organization. 

 We Agree with Ayesha Hassan's comment When She says the RT That Could 
 examine how best practices would be included in Contracts as Referred to in 
 Recommendation 12. 

 We stress the need regarding Recommendation 23 Working Groups to Provide 
 and Advisory Committees, of resources and Un certain freedoms in order to 
 Develop high quality conclusions. Because of this, the RT Should plan how 
 They believe ICANN can guarantee That This Way of working. 
 We agree with Mikey O'Connor's public comment regarding the need to sharpen 
 The Meaning of &quot;risk management framework&quot; in the document, and with ALAC's 
 comment about the need for ICANN to Accelerate the creation and publication 
 of a Comprehensive Framework for Formal and risk management of the DNS. It 
 That is the goal of Important focusing on long-term Risks does not Imply 
 paying less attention to short-term Risks. 

 The design framework Should Be Done in multiple layers and from a 
 perspective to measure and manage the DNS level. This framework Should 
 Risk Analysis support, the likelihood and Impact of Changes in the DNS 
 Infrastructure as well as the changes file in policy making.

 And we support Recommendation 28 for the purpose of ICANN to continue STI 
 engagement in the planning and prevention of incidents, Providing outreach 
 and education, all areas Involving concern concerned to preserve the 
 multi-stakeholder model, bottom-up Including Processes And Also Allowing 
 the participation of end-users Specialized Internet. 

 The report Refers to the Absence of a Comprehensive Framework for Risk 
 management of the DNS. So We Must Think About how this framework formally 
 ought to be created with the Involvement of the SSAC, DSSA, DNS Risk Board 
 Management Working Group, CSO and With The participation of Specialized 
 stakeholders. 

 * Juan Manuel Rojas - Jose Francisco Javier Arce Pallero - Fatima 
 Cambronero - AGEIA 
 Argentina and Colombia DENSI Chapters. * 

 - 
 * Fatima Cambronero * 
 Attorney-Argentina 
 Director of Research 
 * Argentina * AGEIA DENSI 
 http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ 

 * @ Facambronero * 

 * Join the LACRALO / ICANN discussions: * 
 https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es 

[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/d58b5cf6f3.html
--]]