Logo
ICANN
ICANN
Filtered Search

Are you sure you want to sign out from https://www.icann.org?

If you want to sign out from both https://www.icann.org and ICANN Account, click here.

Public Comment

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

  • English

Name: SSAC Staff
Date: 23 Jul 2025
Affiliation: Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC)
Email: [email protected]
Original Public Comment: Final Proceeding for Proposed Language for the Draft Next Round Applicant Guidebook (AGB)
6) Is the language in draft Module 6: String and Application Evaluation Procedures consistent with Board-approved recommendations, and are the concepts introduced therein consistent across the AGB? Please note that comments should be made on issues that have not been previously addressed via Public Comment or in discussions with the IRT.
No

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.