Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.
本内容仅提供以下语言版本
Camila Galvan Salvador
Network Engineer | Global ICT Competition Winner
I am aware that Specific Reviews are mandatory for ICANN to demonstrate transparency to its stakeholders. In addition, I understand the community's effort to improve the review process and reduce fatigue due to overlapping cycles. However, I believe that the proposed sequencing in Section 27.6 (c)(ii) fails to protect the risk landscape of the DNS. As stated in the SSR2 Final Report in 2021, the audit classified 20 out of 24 recommendation groups as medium or high priority, focusing on urgent matters such as DNS abuse mitigation and internal security management of ICANN. Indeed, this fact underscores the need for another SSR review in the near future.
To prioritize the ATR over the SSR even for more than a year, I do not think this is the right approach. I consider SSR should be decoupled from ATR dependency; instead, it should have an independent path during the pause. While the administrative transparency is vital, security issues require continuous technical monitoring and not administrative pauses. I truly believe that ICANN must ensure security, interoperability, stability and flexibility of the internet ecosystem.