ICANN POLICY UPDATE | Volume 13, Issue 9 – October 2013 Issue
PDF Version [518 KB]
- WHOIS Technical Survey Final Report Recommendations Adopted by GNSO Council
- Board Adopted Recommendations on Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings
- WHOIS Privacy & Proxy Abuse Study Published
- Update on Principles for Cross-Community Working Groups
- ALAC Submits Four Policy Advice Statements in mid-September and early October
- At-Large Structure Representatives Begin Process of Planning the Second At-Large Summit with Program Survey
- At-Large Community Members Prepare for Activities at 2013 IGF in Bali
Read in Your Preferred Language
ICANN Policy Update is available in all six official languages of the United Nations. Policy Update is posted on ICANN's web site and available via online subscription. To receive the Update in your Inbox each month, visit the ICANN subscriptions page, enter your e-mail address, and select "Policy Update" to subscribe. This service is free.
ICANN Policy Update statement of purpose
Send questions, comments and suggestions to: email@example.com.
Policy Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees
|Address Supporting Organization||ASO|
|Country Code Names Supporting Organization||ccNSO|
|Generic Names Supporting Organization||GNSO|
|At-Large Advisory Committee||ALAC|
|Governmental Advisory Committee||GAC|
|Root Server System Advisory Committee||RSSAC|
|Security and Stability Advisory Committee||SSAC|
1. Issues Currently Open for Public Comment
Numerous public comment periods are currently open on issues of interest to the ICANN community. Act now to share your views on such topics as:
Consultation on ccTLD Delegation and Redelegation User Instructions and Source of Policy and Procedures. A description of how IANA plans on handling country code top-level domain delegation and redelegation requests. Reply period closes 21 October.
Draft Final Report on Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs. How should certain international government and international non-government organizations be protected within gTLDs? Reply period closes 1 November.
Study on WHOIS Privacy & Proxy Service Abuse. Recent survey findings indicated that illicit businesses are more likely to use privacy/proxy services than lawful ones. Reply period closes 1 November.
Revised Public Interest Commitments Dispute Resolution Procedure (PICDRP). The procedure has been revised according to community input. Comment period closes 23 October; reply period closes 14 November.
For the full list of issues open for public comment, plus recently closed and archived public comment forums, visit the Public Comment web page.
The staff also populates a web page to help preview potential "upcoming" public comment opportunities. This page – "Public Comments – Upcoming" page – provides information about potential future public comment opportunities. The page is designed to be updated after every ICANN Public Meeting to help individuals and the community to set priorities and plan their future workloads.
2. ASO NomCom Representative Appointed
The ASO has appointed Hans Petter Holen of Norway and Address Council member representing RIPE to the ICANN Nominating Committee for 2014.
Barbara Roseman, Policy Director and Technical Analyst
3. ccNSO Council, Board Nominations Begin
At a Glance
ccNSO Council and Board nominations kick-off on 14 October!
The call for nominations to represent each region of the ccNSO Council and Board seat number 11 started on Monday, 14 October 2013.
All ccNSO members are entitled to nominate and second a ccNSO Council candidate from their region, as well as nominate and second any candidate they wish to represent the ccNSO on the ICANN Board.
The nomination period closes on 4 November 2013.
Once a year, the ccNSO membership is called to nominate a candidate from their region to represent them on the ccNSO Council. The Councilors, whose terms will expire at the ccNSO Annual General Meeting in March 2014 are:
- Souleymane Oumtanaga (Africa)
- Hirofumi Hotta (Asia-Pacific)
- Roelof Meijer (Europe)
- Victor Abboud (Latin America)
- Dotty Sparks de Blanc (North America).
Each of these candidates can stand for renomination, if they wish.
The ccNSO members are also called to nominate a candidate to the ICANN Board seat number 11. This seat is currently held by Chris Disspain, .AU and is expiring at the ICANN Annual General Meeting in 2014.
Chris is also entitled to stand for renomination to that position.
Information is also being distributed on the ccNSO members email list.
- Call for Nominations to ccNSO Council
- Call for Nominations for one Director to the Board of ICANN
- Current ccNSO Councillors
- Current ICANN Board Members
Gabriella Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat
4. Two New ccNSO Councilors WHOIS Technical Survey Final Report Recommendations Adopted by GNSO Council
At a Glance
The GNSO Council adopted the recommendations of the WHOIS Technical Survey Report on 10 October 2013.
Recent Developments and Next Steps
With the GNSO Council adopting the recommendations, ICANN staff is now tasked to deliver the survey results to other groups within the Internet community that are focused on Domain Name Registration Data. The report recommendations are as follows:
- Deliver the results of the WHOIS Technical Requirements Survey to the International Engineering Task Force (IETF) for their consideration in developing a new WHOIS protocol based on the RESTFUL platform.
- Deliver the results of the WHOIS Technical Requirements Survey to the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services, as formed by the ICANN Board in early 2013.
- Deliver the results of the WHOIS Technical Requirements Survey to the Thick WHOIS Working Group, as formed by the GNSO Council late 2012.
In May 2009 the GNSO Council asked ICANN staff to compile a comprehensive set of requirements for WHOIS that included known deficiencies in the current service and “any possible requirements that may be needed to support various policy initiatives that have been suggested in the past.” As a result, ICANN staff produced a report compiling an Inventory of WHOIS Service Requirements and delivered the report to the GNSO Council on 29 July 2010.
Subsequently, the GNSO Council, on 6 October 2011, convened a Working Group to draft, implement, and analyze the results of a survey measuring the level of support for various technical requirements as outlined in the Final Inventory of WHOIS Service Requirements Report. After eight months of work, the WG produced a draft version of the technical requirements survey and opened a public comment forum to solicit feedback from the community. After consideration of community input, a final survey document was made available from 13 September to 31 October 2012.
Nearly 250 people completed the survey. The survey was quite exhaustive – producing responses on a variety of topics including community opinions regarding the definition of a standard data structure for WHOIS responses and expansion of the existing defined set of standard WHOIS data elements.
- WHOIS Technical Survey Final Report [PDF, 1.4 MB]
5. Board Adopted Recommendations on Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings
At a Glance
At its meeting on 28 September, the ICANN Board adopted the GNSO Council Policy Recommendations on the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings.
The Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings Working Group reached full consensus on its recommendations and delivered its Final Report to the GNSO Council on 5 July. The Report contained 15 Recommendations and was unanimously adopted by the GNSO Council on 1 August. In adopting the Working Group recommendations, the ICANN Board found that the outcome will clarify and standardize the process for the locking of a domain name subject to UDRP Proceedings for all parties involved including complainants, respondents, registrars as well as UDRP Providers.
The Recommendation will now move to the implementation stage. The ICANN Board has directed the President and CEO to develop and complete an implementation plan for the Recommendations laid out in the Final Report and to continue communication with the community on this matter.
Currently there is no requirement to lock names in the period between filing of the complaint and commencement of proceedings, and no definition of 'status quo,' which has resulted in different interpretations and confusion of the policy. To address this issue, the GNSO Council decided to initiate a Policy Development Process (PDP) on 15 December 2011. As part of its deliberations, the WG considered five Charter questions and produced 15 recommendations that formed the core of the Final Report [PDF, 1.1 MB].
- Board Resolution
- Final Report on the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings [PDF, 1.1 MB]
Marika Konings, Senior Policy Director
6. WHOIS Privacy & Proxy Abuse Study Published
At a Glance
Between 2010 and 2011 the GNSO Council commissioned four studies on various aspects of the WHOIS system. One of the studies focused on the extent to which privacy and proxy services are used to register domain names for harmful or illegal activities. Conducted by the National Physical Laboratory of the United Kingdom (NPL), with a research team led by Dr. Richard Clayton of the University of Cambridge, the study has been completed and published for public comment.
Recent Developments and Next Steps
Dr. Clayton and NPL will conduct webinars in October 2013 to present their findings to the ICANN community, after which a final report will be prepared. It is expected that the results of the study will be of assistance to a GNSO Working Group to be formed shortly, which will be working on a Policy Development Process (PDP) on issues relating to privacy and proxy services that were not covered during the recent negotiations for the new 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). The PDP work and this study are also intended to inform the development of a Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Program by ICANN.
In 2011 NPL was commissioned to examine the hypothesis that "a significant percentage of the domain names used to conduct illegal or harmful Internet activities are registered via privacy or proxy services to obscure the perpetrator's identity." To provide empirical data of use to WHOIS policy-making, NPL set out to measure whether the percentage of privacy/proxy use among domains engaged in various kinds of illegal or harmful Internet activities is greater than among domain names used for lawful Internet activities. Additionally, because privacy/proxy policy changes could prompt malicious registrants to elude contact in other ways, NPL also measured other methods used to obscure perpetrator identity – notably, invalid WHOIS phone numbers.
The research team gathered large representative samples of domain names implicated in various illegal or harmful online activities, ranging from unsolicited phishing, typosquatting, and malware distribution to hosting child abuse sexual images, advanced fee fraud (also known as "419 scams"), and online sale of counterfeit pharmaceuticals. By examining sampled incidents and WHOIS data associated with domain names across the top five gTLDs – .BIZ, .COM, .INFO, .NET and .ORG – this study measured how often privacy or proxy services were abused by perpetrators (alleged and confirmed). Additionally, these results were compared to privacy/proxy use among domains engaged in lawful and harmless activities (e.g., banks and legal pharmacies), chosen to mirror studied illegal/harmful activities. Finally, researchers attempted to call registrants for a subset of these domain names not using privacy or proxy services, to determine whether they could in fact be contacted with only WHOIS data.
NPL's draft report summarizes project activities, methodology, sampled data and findings, including statistical analysis of differences observed by the research team. These study findings will help the community understand the role that privacy and proxy service abuse plays in obscuring the identities of parties engaged in illegal or harmful Internet activities.
- NPL Study on WHOIS Privacy & Proxy Abuse [PDF, 639 KB]
- GNSO WHOIS Studies
Mary Wong, Senior Policy Director
7. Update on Principles for Cross-Community Working Groups
At a Glance
In March 2012, the GNSO Council approved a set of draft principles intended to govern the operation of cross-community working groups (CWGs). The Council, solicited feedback from other ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees (SO/ACs). The ccNSO gave feedback including additional questions for discussion, The GNSO Council is now moving to form a cross-community drafting team.
Recent Developments & Next Steps
At its most recent meeting, the GNSO Council adopted a resolution calling for the formation of a new cross-community drafting team, to consist of representatives from other interested SO/ACs and co-chaired by the GNSO and ccNSO, to work on an updated set of principles that would provide an effective framework for the operation of CWGs.
In October 2011, the GNSO Council approved the formation of a Drafting Team (DT) to be responsible for developing a proposed framework under which working groups jointly chartered by other SO/ACs along with the GNSO can effectively function and produce meaningful and timely reports and recommendations on topics that are of interest of such SO/ACs. The DT published a set of draft principles that were approved by the GNSO Council in March 2012. The GNSO Council also sought feedback on the draft principles from the other ICANN SO/ACs. The ccNSO provided detailed comments and suggestions that, among other things, highlighted some additional issues that might be relevant to the development of a uniform framework across SO/ACs with differing rules and procedures. The DT considered the ccNSO feedback, and recommended to the GNSO Council that in light of the additional issues, a new drafting team consisting of representatives from the GNSO, the ccNSO and other interested SO/ACs be convened.
The new drafting team is expected to be formed shortly after the upcoming ICANN meeting in Buenos Aires.
- Draft Principles for CWGs [PDF, 48 KB]
- ccNSO Comments on Draft CWG Principles [PDF, 139 KB]
Mary Wong, Senior Policy Director
8. ALAC Submits Four Policy Advice Statements in mid-September and early October
At a Glance
The ALAC continues its high rate of preparing statements in response to ICANN public comments periods as well as comments and communications. Between mid-September and early October, the ALAC submitted four statements. The ALAC is currently developing several additional policy advice statements.
The four ALAC Policy Advice Statements and communications submitted between mid-September and early October are summarized below.
Rights Protection Mechanism (RPM) Requirements
- The At-Large community appreciates the improvements made by ICANN in the revised Rights Protection Mechanism Requirements (RPM) released on 6 August [PDF, 235 KB].
- The ALAC has emphasized in its previous Policy Advice that the At-Large Community firmly believes, "ICANN's Rights Protection Measures should treat the trademarks in any language or character set equally, the principle being that Internet users in any language community should be equally protected against confusion."
- Noting the SSAC opinion that, "centralizing variant generation and checking would bring consistency to the variants generated," [PDF, 707 KB] ALAC advised ICANN to require the Trademark Clearinghouse to implement IDN variant policies itself to ensure the integrity and consistency of user experience across new gTLDs and across scripts.
- The ALAC advises the Board to revisit the issue of new TLD strings, which are singular and plural versions of the same word, and ensure that ICANN does not delegate strings that are virtually certain to create confusion among Internet users and therefore result in loss of faith in the DNS.
- The ALAC advises the Board to review the objection decision system with multiple panels that leads to inconsistency and not only review the obvious case of .CAM/.COM where conflicting objection decisions have forced such review.
- The ALAC advises the Board to determine a viable way forward that will not create unwarranted contention sets nor delegate multiple TLDs destined to ensure user confusion and implicit loss of faith in the DNS.
DNS Risk Management Framework Report
- The fact that a risk management framework exists and is utilized to force rigor into the consideration of risk would be an important outcome.
- However, the ALAC deplores that the framework that is proposed is the proprietary and business-oriented Risk Management methodology ISO31000 framework whilst the DNS Security and Stability Analysis (DSSA) Working Group had proposed the use of the Open Standard NIST 800-30 methodology.
- The ALAC also questions the use of a business methodology applied to the DNS.
- The ALAC deplores that at this point in time, the proposed Framework is far from being detailed at a more granular level.
- The ALAC is disappointed that the Framework as proposed in the Final Report has not built in any substantial way on the work undertaken by the DSSA Working Group apart from mentioning its work.
Consultation on ccTLD Delegation and Redelegation User Instructions and Source of Policy and Procedures
- ALAC says reference should be now made in this documentation to IDN ccTLDs outside of the Fast Track Process (such as at paragraph 5 and in any other appropriate reference to IDN ccTLDs). Making this reference would allow for the likelihood of the ICANN Board, in a reasonably short time frame, in dealing with the recently received 'ccNSO Member Endorsed Report' from the ccTLD IDN PDP Work Group. It will also help in dealing with the ccNSO Council's Recommendations regarding the report and its identification of feasible policy for the selection and delegation of IDN ccTLDs associated with the territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 (IDN ccTLDs) within the framework of the IDNcc PDP.
- In addition to the 'usual' ICANN announcements, webinars and fora at appropriate meeting venues (including but not limited to ICANN Meetings) as well as appropriate press releases, specific advice and presentations could be made to key stakeholder groups in ICANN (GAC, ALAC, ccNSO Membership, ISOC and I* Communities, etc.,) and these groups should be provided with materials to encourage and facilitate outreach through their networks to use for local outreach via engagement centers' outreach programs, etc.
Matt Ashtiani, Policy Specialist
9. At-Large Structure Representatives Begin Process of Planning the Second At-Large Summit with Program Survey
At a Glance
In preparation of the second At-Large Summit (ATLAS II), scheduled to take place during the ICANN 50th Meeting in June 2014 in London, England, At-Large Structure (ALS) representatives are completing an online ATLAS II survey to assist in the development of the ATLAS II series of meetings. The ATLAS II Organizing Committee will analyze the survey results in order to ensure the ATLAS II covers topics of interests to global end-users. ALS representatives have until 23:59 UTC on 25 October to complete the survey.
The ATLAS II survey was developed as a joint effort of the At-Large ATLAS II Organizing Committee Survey Group and the At-Large Capacity Building Working Group.
Survey questions cover the types of activities that At-Large representatives may wish to partake in during the Summit, issues of most concern to global Internet end-users, challenges that ALSes have in participating in At-Large, and capacity building and education needs.
The ATLAS II Organizing Committee will work with the At-Large Capacity Building Working Group and the Regional At-Large Organization Leaders to develop an interesting, useful and lively series of meetings during the ATLAS II.
10. At-Large Community Members Prepare for Activities at 2013 IGF in Bali
At a Glance
Members of the At-Large community are coordinating their activities at the 2013 Internet Governance Forum scheduled to take place in Bali, Indonesia 22-25 October with both other At-Large members as well as across ICANN.
The African At-Large Regional Organization (AFRALO) and the Asia-Pacific At-Large Organization (APRALO) will hold individual workshops on the following topics:
- AFRALO: How can the Internet be an engine for development and growth – on 23 October between 14:30-16:00 in Room 2
- APRALO: Next in IDNs: Linguistic Diversity in the Internet Root – on 23 October between 14:30-16:00 in Room 1
Several other At-Large members will be participating in many other workshops as well as ICANN-related activities.
At-Large community members will also be volunteering at the ICANN information booth to assist in outreach activities.
11. GAC Finalizes Advice on .WINE and .VIN
At a Glance
At the ICANN Public Meeting in Durban, the GAC issued advice regarding the applied-for new gTLD strings .WINE and .VIN stating that the GAC would take 30 days to further consider additional safeguard advice for these strings. On 9 September 2013 the GAC sent a letter [PDF, 64 KB] to the ICANN Board stating that there was no GAC consensus on additional safeguards and advised the ICANN Board that the strings should proceed through the normal evaluation process. For further information see the GAC Register of Advice.
ICANN receives input from governments through the GAC. The GAC's key role is to provide advice to ICANN on issues of public policy, and especially where there may be an interaction between ICANN's activities or policies and national laws or international agreements. The GAC usually meets three times a year in conjunction with ICANN meetings, where it discusses issues with the ICANN Board and other ICANN Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees and other groups. The GAC may also discuss issues between times with the Board either through face-to-face meetings or by teleconference.
Olof Nordling, GAC Liaison
Jeannie Ellers, Manager, GAC Coordination
12. RSSAC Appoints NomCom Member
RSSAC has appointed Bill Manning to the ICANN Nominating Committee for 2014. This is his fourth time serving in this capacity.
Barbara Roseman, Policy Director and Technical Analyst
13. Recent SSAC Publication
At a Glance
The SSAC has published a report commenting on several areas of the Initial Report of the Expert Working Group formed to comment Next Generation Directory Service.
update-oct13-en.pdf [517 KB]