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.
هذا المحتوى متوفر فقط باللغة (أو اللغات)
If no, please explain
On behalf of the SSAC, please find SAC130: SSAC Comments on Name Collision Guidelines in the Proposed Language for the Draft Next Round Applicant Guidebook at the following link: < https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/security-and-stability-advisory-committee-ssac-reports/sac-130-22-07-2025-en.pdf > . In SAC130, the SSAC identifies four areas where the proposed AGB language could be further clarified to align more closely with the framework detailed in the Name Collision Analysis Project Study 2 Report (NCAP2). The SSAC makes four recommendations intended to clarify the role and authority of the Technical Review Team (TRT) regarding: its involvement in the initial name collision risk assessment; its authority to act on high-risk strings prior to temporary delegation; the scope of its assessment, including the use of external data sources; and its discretion to adapt its testing and analysis framework over time.