December 2013 - ALAC-Announce

GNSO and At-Large next week calls
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 6, 2013

Dec. 6, 2013

Dear all, Please find hereafter the At-Large and GNSO calls for the week of 09 December. We will update this list as and when calls are added. Monday 09 December 1600 UTC: IRTP D WG - https://community.icann.org/x/B4JwAg 2000 UTC: Policy and Implementation Definition Sub Team - https://community.icann.org/x/_yifAg 2000 UTC: NARALO - https://community.icann.org/x/NyqfAg Tuesday 10 December 1200 UTC: Translation and Transliteration webinar- https://community.icann.org/x/HiqfAg 1500 UTC: Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues - https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg 1900 UTC: EURALO - https://community.icann.org/x/5imfAg Wednesday 11 December 1300 UTC: Metrics and Reporting - https://community.icann.org/x/myt-Ag 1800 UTC: Translation and Transliteration Webinar - https://community.icann.org/x/HiqfAg Thank you, Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

ICANN News Alert -- Launch of the Extended Process Similarity Review Panel in the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 5, 2013

Dec. 5, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-04dec13-en.htm ________________________________ Launch of the Extended Process Similarity Review Panel in the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process 4 December 2013 On 27 June 2013<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-27jun13-en.htm#2…> the ICANN Board approved an amendment to the Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) country code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD) Fast Track Process Final Implementation Plan (FIP). The amendment implements a two-panel process for string similarity review in the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process, and was proposed following the conclusion of the IDN Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) Policy Development Process (PDP)<http://ccnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-14aug13-en.htm> as well as a request from the ccNSO to implement the string similarity review process as recommended in the PDP within the Fast Track Process. The ccNSO work has taken into account the experiences and reviews of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process as well as the Governmental Advisory Committee's advice on the matter<https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Meeting+44%3A+Prague%2C+Czech+Repub…>. Following extensive public consultations, the ccNSO Council adopted in April 2013<http://beijing46.icann.org/meetings/beijing2013/minutes-ccnso-council-10apr…> [PDF, 118 KB] the Final Report on the IDN ccNSO PDP<http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idn-ccpdp-final-29mar13-en.pdf> [PDF, 376 KB]. In time, the proposed policy is expected to replace the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process. The ICANN Board also resolved on 27 June 2013<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-27jun13-en.htm#2…> that all pending and future IDN ccTLD Fast Track requesters whose strings are considered not valid per the string similarity assessment of the DNS Stability Evaluation, will have the option to request a second and final evaluation by the new Extended Process Similarity Review Panel (EPSRP). Today, ICANN is pleased to announce the appointment of the members of the Extended Process Similarity Review Panel as follows: Dr. Max Coltheart (chair), Emeritus Professor Department of Cognitive Science, Macquarie University Australia Dr. Jonathan Grainger, Directeur de recherches au CNRS Aix-Marseille Université France Dr. Kevin Larson United States With this announcement, ICANN is providing notice of publication of the updated Final Implementation Plan for the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/fast-track/idn-cctld-implementation-p…> [PDF, 879 KB] that includes the changes required for the implementation of the two-panel string similarity review process, as approved by the ICANN Board on 27 June 2013. ICANN will notify eligible IDN ccTLD Fast Track requesters about their eligibility to request an evaluation by the Extended Process Similarity Review Panel of the submitted IDN ccTLD string. The community should take note that the previous version of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process Implementation Plan<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/fast-track/idn-cctld-implementation-p…> [PDF, 887 KB] published on 4 June 2012 is now archived and is superseded by the revised Final Implementation for the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/fast-track/idn-cctld-implementation-p…> [PDF, 879 KB]. Archived documents remain available under the "IDN Resources" section of the IDN page: http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/more. In addition, ICANN is publishing the Guidelines for the Extended Process Similarity Review Panel<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/fast-track/epsrp-guidelines-04dec13-e…> [PDF, 86 KB], which now include the names of the panelists and, as foreseen in the guidelines, the name of the research institute and the leader of the research team: Leader: Dr. Shane T. Mueller Department of Cognitive and Learning Sciences, Michigan Technological University United States The IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process Implementation Plan<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/idn-cctld-implementation-plan…> [PDF, 498 KB] was approved by the ICANN Board at its meeting in Seoul, Republic of Korea in October 2009. ICANN has conducted two annual reviews of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process between its implementation in October 2010 and July 2012. Summary and analyses of each public comment process are available here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/archive>.

1 0

ICANN News Alert -- Bulk Transfer of Domain Names from Pacnames Ltd to Net-Chinese Co., Ltd.
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 5, 2013

Dec. 5, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-04dec13-en.htm ________________________________ Bulk Transfer of Domain Names from Pacnames Ltd to Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. 4 December 2013 ICANN has authorized the bulk transfer of gTLD domain names from Pacnames Ltd to Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. due to compliance actions taken by ICANN that resulted in the de-accreditation of Pacnames Ltd. The affected gTLD registries have processed the bulk transfers. Former registrant-customers of Pacnames Ltd should receive notices from Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. advising of the transfer. Customer questions about the transfer should be directed to Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. (for contact details see http://www.internic.net/registrars/registrar-1336.html or visit their website directly here: www.net-chinese.com.tw<http://www.net-chinese.com.tw>). Additional information about these bulk transfers is provided below. FAQs Q. Why were these transfers authorized by ICANN? A. The Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) of Pacnames Ltd was voluntarily terminated, effective 29 November 2013. As a result, Pacnames Ltd is no longer permitted to register or manage gTLD registrations. ICANN authorized bulk transfers pursuant to the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy to ensure that the registrant-customers of this registrar would not be harmed by their registrar's discontinued ability to manage the registrations. Q. How was the gaining registrar selected? A. ICANN followed its De-Accredited Registrar Transition Procedure (see http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/drt/dartp-11jul13-en.pdf [PDF, 129 KB]) to identify a gaining registrar for the gTLD names formerly managed by the de-accredited registrar. Through this process, Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. was identified. Q. Will Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. attempt to contact the affected registrants? What should customers of this de-accredited registrar do now? A. Former customers of Pacnames Ltd. should receive a notice of the transfer and instructions for continued management of their names from Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. Affected customers who do not receive notices from Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. should contact Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. by using the contact information provided at http://www.internic.net/registrars/registrar-1336.html. Q. Do registrants have to pay a fee for the bulk transfer? A. No, there is no cost to registrants for the bulk transfer. Unlike a normal inter-registrar transfer, the registration terms will not be extended by a year. Accordingly, it is important to contact Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. if your registration will expire soon in order to maintain your registration. Q. What if affected registrants want to select a different registrar? A. Registrants will continue to be able to transfer their registrations to other registrars under the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (see http://www.icann.org/en/transfers/) Note that Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. may deny transfers for the first 60 days following the bulk transfer, at its discretion. This 60-day period is permissible under the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy and is intended to help protect registrants. The registrant may need to renew names that will expire during the first 60 days following the transfer to Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. by using the details provided above. Q. How will Pacnames customers know if a message purportedly from Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. is legitimate? A. The message from Net-Chinese Co., Ltd. should direct you to its website or refer you to other contact information provided above. For general advice about avoiding phishing email messages, you may also wish to refer to the materials prepared by the Anti-Phishing Working Group (see http://www.antiphishing.org/resources/overview/avoid-phishing-scams)

1 0

GNSO Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Webinar Invitation
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 4, 2013

Dec. 4, 2013

GNSO Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Webinar Invitation Tuesday, 10 December 2013, 12 noon UTC; Wednesday, 11 December 18.00 UTC In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> You are invited to participate in an Introductory Webinar for the GNSO Working Group (WG) on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information Policy Development Process (PDP). This Webinar is run to provide potential Working Group volunteers with relevant information prior to the launch of this WG. The presentation will cover some background on the GNSO Policy Development Process, the general expectancy with read to WG workload and deliverables. In addition, it will provide background information on the issue of Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information and give an overview of the WG's Charter. In the final section, will also explain the content and purpose of the related, staff-initiated feasibility study, the result of which are expected to feed into the WG's deliberations. Please note that the two sessions, on Tuesday 10 December 12.00 UTC and Wednesday 11 December at 18.00 UTC, are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run for sixty (60) minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may also be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, the recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff is always available to answer any questions that you email to policy-staff(a)icann.org.<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org.> In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso.secs@icann.org>) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join on Tuesday 10 December 2013, 12.00-13.00UTC - local times: http://tinyurl.com/m2suev5, or Wednesday 11 December 2013, 18.00-19.00UTC - local times http://tinyurl.com/kyk5lej. We will send you an email reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please, DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff.

1 0

ICANN WHOIS MISUSE STUDY FINDINGS WEBINAR INVITATION
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 4, 2013

Dec. 4, 2013

ICANN WHOIS MISUSE STUDY FINDINGS WEBINAR INVITATION  In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>) to receive the call details. You are invited to participate in a webinar about the recently released Whois Misuse Study, conducted for ICANN by Carnegie Mellon University’s Cylab. This study has now been published for public comment, and community feedback is being invited in order to assist ICANN with evaluating potential changes to Whois policy. The study was commissioned by the GNSO to obtain objective and quantifiable information about the extent, nature, and impact of WHOIS public data misuse – that is, harmful actions taken using contact information obtained from WHOIS – through (1) analyzing reported misuse incidents and (2) conducting experiments to measure misuse and the effectiveness of anti-harvesting measures. CMU was engaged to perform the study using two complementary approaches: (1) a descriptive study to document and analyze WHOIS misuse incidents that have already occurred and (2) an experimental study to stimulate and record misuse to in order to measure more reliably the impact of making WHOIS data public and WHOIS query filters applied to deter data harvesting. CMU’s chief researchers on the study, Dr. Nicolas Christin and Mr. Nektarios Leontiadis, and ICANN staff will provide a briefing on Tuesday 17 December at 12.00 UTC and 19.00 UTC, summarizing their findings and conclusions based on the studies they performed and data they analyzed. Amongst other topics, Dr. Clayton will discuss: · CMU’s methodology for the study and the hypothesis tested; · The different project activities that were undertaken for the study; · CMU’s analysis of the data reported and sampled for the study; and · CMU’s conclusions based on the results of its analysis. The two sessions are duplicates, scheduled to accommodate different time zones. Each session, scheduled to run for sixty (60) minutes, will be conducted in English only. The meeting will be run in Adobe Connect with a slide presentation along with a dial-in conference bridge for audio. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end of each session. During the course of the webinar, questions may also be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you are not able to participate in either of the live sessions, the recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. The policy staff is always available to answer any questions that you email to policy-staff(a)icann.org<mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>. In order to participate, please RSVP via email to the GNSO Secretariat (gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>) to receive the call details. Please indicate which call you would like to join on Tuesday 17 December - at 12.00 UTC or at 19.00 UTC (to convert those times into your local time, see: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html) We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with log-in and dial-in details. Please DO NOT RSVP to any other ICANN staff member’s e-mail address.

1 0

ICANN News Alert -- New gTLD Collision Occurrence Management Plan Frequently Asked Questions
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 4, 2013

Dec. 4, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-03dec13-en.htm ________________________________ New gTLD Collision Occurrence Management Plan Frequently Asked Questions 3 December 2013 ICANN's mission and core values call for ICANN to preserve and enhance the operational stability, reliability, security, and global interoperability of the Internet's system of unique identifiers (names, IP numbers and protocol parameters). In pursuing these goals and following the direction of its Board of Directors as well as taking into consideration the advice of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee, ICANN commissioned a study on the potential security impacts of the applied-for new-gTLD strings. The study was to consider whether name collisions might occur between applied-for new gTLD strings and domain names that may be in use in private namespaces ("non-delegated TLDs"). The study was also to review the possibility of name collision occurrences arising from the use of internal names for which X.509 digital certificates have been issued. A name collision occurs when users unknowingly access a name that has been delegated in the public DNS when the user's intent was to access a resource identified by the same name in a private network. Circumstances like these, where the administrative boundaries of private and public namespaces overlap and name resolution yields unintended results, present concerns and should be avoided if possible. However, the collision occurrences themselves are not the concern, but whether such collisions cause unexpected behavior or harm, the nature of the unexpected behavior or harm and the severity of consequence. On 5 August 2013, ICANN published and made available a name collision study <http://www.icann.org/en/about/staff/security/ssr/name-collision-02aug13-en.…> [PDF, 3.34 MB] (the "Study") that identifies categories of strings according to the occurrences of queries, as observed in root server log samples obtained from the "Day in the Life of the Internet" (DITL) initiative from DNS-OARC. The Study used as input: 1) samples of DNS requests transmitted to root servers (from the DITL initiative), complemented with 2) information from Certificate Authorities regarding the issuance of internal name certificates (e.g., TLS/SSL certificates for non-delegated names). A full description of the methodology of the Study can be found in section 3.4 of the Study. The Study also included options to mitigate the risks; however, it did not make specific recommendations for each of the categories. Based on the Study, ICANN staff published for public comment from 5 August to 17 September 2013 <http://www.icann.org/en/about/staff/security/ssr/new-gtld-collision-mitigat…> [PDF, 166 KB] a proposal to manage the risk of name collision. On 7 October 2013, the ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee adopted a revised proposal <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-07oct13…> that describes a plan to manage name collision occurrences between new gTLDs and existing private uses of the same strings. The below are frequently issued questions that have been asked regarding the plan and ICANN's answers. 1. How did ICANN compile the list of Second-Level Domain Names (SLDs) to block for the Alternate Path to Delegation? For each TLD its list of SLDs to block is composed of the SLDs that were queried for the TLD during the DITL samples of 2006 to 2013, and the 2010 DNSSEC rollout datasets. 2. What were the criteria used to consider a new gTLD ineligible for the Alternate Path to Delegation? Those new gTLDs that showed an outlier behavior in terms of additions to their list of queried SLDs from year to year were considered ineligible. In other words, ICANN considers a new TLD ineligible for the Alternate Path to Delegation in cases where the list of SLDs changes frequently and widely. The sources of data used to compile the variation in SLD lists are composed of yearly captures of DNS query data from 2006 to 2012. The 2013 dataset was not included since the strings were already known by then (and various activities or studies conducted on the known strings might bias any analysis). For these strings, the year-over-year increase of the number of SLDs queried is an outlier as compared to the population of proposed gTLDs in: (a) at least one of the year-to-year comparisons, and (b) 2012 (indicates churn is currently occurring). For example, a TLD that only is an outlier in the 2006-2007 comparisons will still be considered eligible. However, a TLD that is an outlier in the 2009-2010 and in the 2011-2012 comparisons will not be eligible for the alternate path to delegation. 3. Will the second-level-domain-name (SLD) block list be amended as a result of using other datasets while working on the Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework? There is no plan to amend the SLD block list for new gTLDs as a result of the development of the Framework. However, if there were a new discovery during the development of the Framework it will be taken into consideration. 4. Is source code for the creation of the block lists available? The process to create the blocking list is explained in detail in each of the Alternate Path to Delegation reports for every new gTLD that has signed an agreement and is considered eligible. For example see http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/luxury/luxury-apd-repor… The code used to create the lists is based on the code published at https://github.com/JASdevteam/dns-oarc 5. How long should the SLDs in the block list be blocked? The blocking should be in effect until the mitigation measures described in the respective Name Collision Occurrence Assessment have been applied. 6. For a particular TLD, if the SLD "nic" appears in the DITL data (indicating that there might be a name collision issue there), why is "nic" allowed in the gTLD, and why is this risk more acceptable than the risk of any other name collision? The only name that is required to be used by contract is "whois.nic.<tld>" for the purpose of offering registry WHOIS service, i.e., "whois.nic.<tld>". Balancing the risk of using this name with the usability of having the WHOIS service available at a well-known location, ICANN decided to not include "nic" in the list of SLDs to be blocked by any new gTLD. However, the name collision response mechanism <http://www.icann.org/en/help/name-collision> is available to be used by an affected party to report significant harm caused by such domain name. Also note that the name is only available to the registry operator itself, which means that the registry has total control over the SLD. 7. Is ICANN going to update the list of blocked SLDs to include the year in which the names were queried? ICANN does not plan to update the list of blocked SLDs or to add the year in which the SLDs were queried. However, if there is interest from the community ICANN will consider adding this data when resources are available. 8. What should be done with the names in the SLD block list when they are released in regards to TMCH Sunrise and Claims? Names in the SLD block list for a TLD must be included in the Sunrise and Claims, subject to the registry's usual policies, but cannot be activated until the mitigation measures have been implemented. If a registry operator allocates names from the SLD block list during Sunrise or Claims period, it must inform the registrant that the name cannot be activated and may never be activated subject to the TLD's Name Collision Occurrence Assessment. This is a clarification to the language in section 3.2 of the Name Collision Occurrence Management Plan. The intention of the block list is to retain the behavior before a new gTLD is delegated (i.e., an NXDOMAIN response in DNS); that result is achieved by not activating the names in the list, irrespective of allocation. 9. What constitutes harm that warrants deactivation of a second-level domain name causing collisions? It is possible that name collision occurrences of some second-level names that did not appear in the dataset used for the SLD block list might occur after the applied-for gTLD begins operation. To mitigate this risk, ICANN has implemented a process to enable an affected party to report and request the temporary blocking of a recently activated domain name that causes demonstrably severe harm as a consequence of name collision. ICANN will act as the initial single point of contact for these reports, and will coordinate the notification with the relevant registry operator to ensure that the report is acted upon in an expedited manner. The assessment of harm will initially be done by ICANN in a case-by-case basis until the work on the Framework defines uniform criteria. 10. Is there going to be a name collision portal? ICANN is planning a portal to display the information available on this topic. 11. Are different types of trial delegations within the scope of the Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework? Yes, trial delegations at both TLD level (for the TLDs not eligible for the alternate path to delegation), and at the second level for SLDs under all new gTLDs, are going to be considered during the development of the Framework. If adopted, it is expected that the Framework will specify the trial delegation applicable for a particular type of collision. Additionally, during its meeting in Buenos Aires the ICANN Board passed a resolution directing staff to evaluate SSAC's SAC 062 recommendations, which explicitly asks for ICANN to consider trial delegations. 12. What is the process to consider the work being done to develop a Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework and decide whether to adopt it? The lead contractor is expected to work on a draft Framework in cooperation with the community as explained at <http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-11nov13-en.htm>. The draft Framework is then going to be published for public comment. After the public comment period has ended, comments will be summarized and the draft Framework will be updated based on public input. Finally, the New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board will consider the final Framework for adoption. 13. Where can people participate in the development of the Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework? Anyone is welcome to participate in the development of the Framework. The Framework will be discussed in the public mailing list at <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/collisions>. 14. Is the management of name collisions going to be extended to ccTLDs? The issue of name collisions was first reported to ICANN in reference to the new gTLD program. Given the number of new gTLDs that are expected, the priority of the work has been focused on new gTLDs. We recognize the issue is not unique to gTLDs; therefore ICANN is raising this issue with the Board Risk Committee to identify how to address this issue.

1 0

ICANN Newsletter -- 29 November 2013
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 3, 2013

Dec. 3, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> ICANN Weekly Newsletter News from the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers http://www.icann.org/ Week ending 29 November 2013 ________________________________ Announcements This Week Study on Whois Misuse<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-27nov13-en.htm> This study, conducted by Carnegie Mellon University's Cylab (CMU), examines the extent to which public Whois contact information for gTLD domain names is misused (i.e. harmful actions such as spam, phishing, identity theft or data theft are taken using gTLD registration data). 27 November 2013 Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs (PDP) Recommendations for Board Consideration<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27nov13-en.htm> To obtain community input on the recommendations recently adopted by the GNSO Council concerning the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs Policy Development Process prior to their consideration by the ICANN Board of Directors. 27 November 2013 ________________________________ Upcoming Events 23-27 March 2014: 49th International Public ICANN Meeting – Singapore<http://singapore49.icann.org/> About ICANN ICANN Bylaws<http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm> Our bylaws are very important to us. They capture our mission of security, stability and accessibility, and compel the organization to be open and transparent. Learn more at www.ICANN.org<http://www.icann.org/>. Strategic Plan, 2012 - 2015<http://www.icann.org/en/planning/> Adopted FY13 Operating Plan and Budget<http://www.icann.org/en/financials/budget-opplan.htm>

1 0

ICANN News Alert -- Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs (PDP) Recommendations for Board Consideration
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 3, 2013

Dec. 3, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27nov13-en.htm ________________________________ Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs (PDP) Recommendations for Board Consideration 27 November 2013 Forum Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 27 November 2013 Categories/Tags: * Contracted Party Agreements * Policy Processes Purpose (Brief): To obtain community input on the recommendations recently adopted by the GNSO Council concerning the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs Policy Development Process prior to their consideration by the ICANN Board of Directors. Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/igo-ingo-recommendations-27nov1…

1 0

ICANN News Alert -- Study on Whois Misuse
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 3, 2013

Dec. 3, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-27nov13-en.htm ________________________________ Study on Whois Misuse 27 November 2013 Forum Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 27 November 2013 Categories/Tags: Policy Processes Purpose (Brief): This study, conducted by Carnegie Mellon University's Cylab (CMU), examines the extent to which public Whois contact information for gTLD domain names is misused (i.e. harmful actions such as spam, phishing, identity theft or data theft are taken using gTLD registration data). The findings from the study provide empirical data needed by the ICANN community to assess community concerns about misused Whois contact information, identify the most common forms of misuse, and highlight the effectiveness of anti-harvesting measures in reducing misuse. The findings will also inform future policy development by ICANN and the GNSO in relation to improvements to the Whois system. Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/whois-misuse-27nov13-en.htm

1 0

Meeting invitation/ ALAC monthly - Tuesday 17 December at 1500 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 3, 2013

Dec. 3, 2013

Dear All, Due to the holiday season, the December ALAC Monthly call is scheduled on Tuesday 17 December at 1500 UTC for 2 hours. For other times: http://tinyurl.com/lc6pwkx The agenda (to be updated) and call details are available at: https://community.icann.org/x/ACqfAg Adobe Connect Room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/alac If you are unable to attend the call please send an email indicating your absence and we will note this information on the agenda. If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine, Julia Charvolen ICANN At-Large Staff E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0