Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions
Curious this. A study results in another study in order to develop a management framework for name collisions. Why not just go from one study to the management framework? Can someone explain it to me so that I understand the situation better? Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Date: Oct 9, 2013 11:41 PM Subject: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions To: "alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org" < alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08oct13-en.htm ________________________________ NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions 8 October 2013 At its 18 May 2013 meeting, the ICANN Board adopted a resolution to commission a study to identify the levels of potential impact posed by each applied-for new gTLD on the use of TLDs that are not currently delegated at the root level of the public DNS. The study, "Name Collision in the DNS," together with a proposal to manage the risks identified in the study, was published for public comment from 5 August 2013 to 17 September 2013. During the public comment period, 75 comments were received. Based on the public comments, staff updated the proposal to manage the risks identified in the study. The report of these public comments is available at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-name-collision-05aug13/. The ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) met on 28 September 2013< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-28sep13-...> to review and discuss a proposal on how to deal with name collisions. On 7 October 2013< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-07oct13-...>, the NGPC met again and approved an updated proposal, titled "New gTLD Collision Occurrence Management Plan< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-...>," [PDF, 840 KB] to mitigate the risks of potential name collisions caused by the introduction of new gTLDs. The Collision Occurrence Management Plan directs staff to undertake an additional study to develop a name collision occurrence management framework. The framework will include appropriate parameters and processes to assess both probability and severity of harm resulting from the occurrence of name collisions. Examples of the parameters might include number of DNS requests, type of DNS requests, type of queries, diversity of query source and appearances in internal name certificates. The framework will specify a set of collision occurrence assessments and corresponding mitigation measures, if any, that ICANN or TLD applicants may need to implement per second level domain name (SLD) seen in the "day in the life of the Internet" (DITL) dataset. Additionally, the plan provides a registry operator with the option to proceed to delegation prior to receiving its SLD collision occurrence assessment report (subject to established processes and procedures). If the registry operator chooses this alternative path to delegation, it must initially block all SLDs that appear in the DITL dataset while the assessment is conducted. An additional feature of the plan requires establishment of a process by each TLD operator to enable an affected party(ies) to report and request the blocking of an SLD that causes demonstrably severe harm as a consequence of name collision occurrences. This process is intended to mitigate the risk that collision occurrences from additional SLDs not observed in the study dataset could have severe impact. The plan also includes an outreach campaign targeted to potentially affected parties to help them identify and manage the origins (causes) of name collision occurrences in their networks. As part of the outreach campaign, ICANN, under the direction of the President and CEO, will invite and collaborate with relevant parties and members of the community that share the same interest in making progress in this issue. At its 7 October meeting, the NGPC also recommended to the ICANN Board that the issue of name collisions be monitored by the Board's Risk Committee and reviewed periodically, and that ICANN work with the community in developing a long-term plan to retain and measure root-server data. For more information about the NGPC, please visit: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/new-gtld. _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
Oh, standard bureaucratic response when the results you get don't fit with expectations!! ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim < rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote:
Curious this. A study results in another study in order to develop a management framework for name collisions. Why not just go from one study to the management framework? Can someone explain it to me so that I understand the situation better?
Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Date: Oct 9, 2013 11:41 PM Subject: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions To: "alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org" < alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc:
[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert
http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08oct13-en.htm
________________________________ NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions
8 October 2013
At its 18 May 2013 meeting, the ICANN Board adopted a resolution to commission a study to identify the levels of potential impact posed by each applied-for new gTLD on the use of TLDs that are not currently delegated at the root level of the public DNS.
The study, "Name Collision in the DNS," together with a proposal to manage the risks identified in the study, was published for public comment from 5 August 2013 to 17 September 2013. During the public comment period, 75 comments were received. Based on the public comments, staff updated the proposal to manage the risks identified in the study. The report of these public comments is available at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-name-collision-05aug13/.
The ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) met on 28 September 2013<
http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-28sep13-...
to review and discuss a proposal on how to deal with name collisions. On 7 October 2013<
http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-07oct13-...
, the NGPC met again and approved an updated proposal, titled "New gTLD Collision Occurrence Management Plan<
http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-...
," [PDF, 840 KB] to mitigate the risks of potential name collisions caused by the introduction of new gTLDs.
The Collision Occurrence Management Plan directs staff to undertake an additional study to develop a name collision occurrence management framework. The framework will include appropriate parameters and processes to assess both probability and severity of harm resulting from the occurrence of name collisions. Examples of the parameters might include number of DNS requests, type of DNS requests, type of queries, diversity of query source and appearances in internal name certificates. The framework will specify a set of collision occurrence assessments and corresponding mitigation measures, if any, that ICANN or TLD applicants may need to implement per second level domain name (SLD) seen in the "day in the life of the Internet" (DITL) dataset.
Additionally, the plan provides a registry operator with the option to proceed to delegation prior to receiving its SLD collision occurrence assessment report (subject to established processes and procedures). If the registry operator chooses this alternative path to delegation, it must initially block all SLDs that appear in the DITL dataset while the assessment is conducted.
An additional feature of the plan requires establishment of a process by each TLD operator to enable an affected party(ies) to report and request the blocking of an SLD that causes demonstrably severe harm as a consequence of name collision occurrences. This process is intended to mitigate the risk that collision occurrences from additional SLDs not observed in the study dataset could have severe impact.
The plan also includes an outreach campaign targeted to potentially affected parties to help them identify and manage the origins (causes) of name collision occurrences in their networks. As part of the outreach campaign, ICANN, under the direction of the President and CEO, will invite and collaborate with relevant parties and members of the community that share the same interest in making progress in this issue.
At its 7 October meeting, the NGPC also recommended to the ICANN Board that the issue of name collisions be monitored by the Board's Risk Committee and reviewed periodically, and that ICANN work with the community in developing a long-term plan to retain and measure root-server data.
For more information about the NGPC, please visit: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/new-gtld. _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce
At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Hi Rinalia, I have not had a chance yet to read these documents in depth but have had a cursory look at them. The Interisle study had a short time frame to deliver its findings and only looked at one possible measure of risk, namely the number of queries at the root level for the new gTLD. The study itself acknowledged that this only provides one perspective of the potential risk. In fact, this was also mentioned in our ALAC STATEMENT ON ICANN PROPOSAL TO MITIGATE NAME COLLISION RISKS: "...the study, its conclusions, and ICANN's risk mitigation recommendations are based on analysis of a limited data set of query volume metrics ie how many times queries occur for a proposed new gTLD. As acknowledged in the study, such metrics are only one perspective of risk and do not reflect other risk that may arise through complex interactions between the DNS and applications at the root level." This new study is tasked to come up with additional measures of risk and the associated severity of their consequences and formulate them into a 'name collision occurrence management framework' to allow a more realistic risk assessment and to propose corresponding risk mitigation strategies. Hope this helps. Apologies if you already understood all this. Cheers, Julie On 10/10/2013, at 2:18 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote: Curious this. A study results in another study in order to develop a management framework for name collisions. Why not just go from one study to the management framework? Can someone explain it to me so that I understand the situation better? Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Date: Oct 9, 2013 11:41 PM Subject: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions To: "alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org" < alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08oct13-en.htm ________________________________ NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions 8 October 2013 At its 18 May 2013 meeting, the ICANN Board adopted a resolution to commission a study to identify the levels of potential impact posed by each applied-for new gTLD on the use of TLDs that are not currently delegated at the root level of the public DNS. The study, "Name Collision in the DNS," together with a proposal to manage the risks identified in the study, was published for public comment from 5 August 2013 to 17 September 2013. During the public comment period, 75 comments were received. Based on the public comments, staff updated the proposal to manage the risks identified in the study. The report of these public comments is available at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-name-collision-05aug13/. The ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) met on 28 September 2013< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-28sep13-...> to review and discuss a proposal on how to deal with name collisions. On 7 October 2013< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-07oct13-...>, the NGPC met again and approved an updated proposal, titled "New gTLD Collision Occurrence Management Plan< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-...>," [PDF, 840 KB] to mitigate the risks of potential name collisions caused by the introduction of new gTLDs. The Collision Occurrence Management Plan directs staff to undertake an additional study to develop a name collision occurrence management framework. The framework will include appropriate parameters and processes to assess both probability and severity of harm resulting from the occurrence of name collisions. Examples of the parameters might include number of DNS requests, type of DNS requests, type of queries, diversity of query source and appearances in internal name certificates. The framework will specify a set of collision occurrence assessments and corresponding mitigation measures, if any, that ICANN or TLD applicants may need to implement per second level domain name (SLD) seen in the "day in the life of the Internet" (DITL) dataset. Additionally, the plan provides a registry operator with the option to proceed to delegation prior to receiving its SLD collision occurrence assessment report (subject to established processes and procedures). If the registry operator chooses this alternative path to delegation, it must initially block all SLDs that appear in the DITL dataset while the assessment is conducted. An additional feature of the plan requires establishment of a process by each TLD operator to enable an affected party(ies) to report and request the blocking of an SLD that causes demonstrably severe harm as a consequence of name collision occurrences. This process is intended to mitigate the risk that collision occurrences from additional SLDs not observed in the study dataset could have severe impact. The plan also includes an outreach campaign targeted to potentially affected parties to help them identify and manage the origins (causes) of name collision occurrences in their networks. As part of the outreach campaign, ICANN, under the direction of the President and CEO, will invite and collaborate with relevant parties and members of the community that share the same interest in making progress in this issue. At its 7 October meeting, the NGPC also recommended to the ICANN Board that the issue of name collisions be monitored by the Board's Risk Committee and reviewed periodically, and that ICANN work with the community in developing a long-term plan to retain and measure root-server data. For more information about the NGPC, please visit: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/new-gtld. _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Thanks, Julie. Appreciate the explanation. Any idea/info/guess as to how long a study with a more comprehensive view of risks would take (how long did the Interisle study take?) and when one can expect a management framework to be in place? Rinalia On Oct 10, 2013 8:06 AM, "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> wrote:
Hi Rinalia,
I have not had a chance yet to read these documents in depth but have had a cursory look at them.
The Interisle study had a short time frame to deliver its findings and only looked at one possible measure of risk, namely the number of queries at the root level for the new gTLD. The study itself acknowledged that this only provides one perspective of the potential risk.
In fact, this was also mentioned in our *ALAC STATEMENT ON **ICANN PROPOSAL TO MITIGATE NAME COLLISION RISKS*<https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Proposal+to+Mitig...> :
"...the study, its conclusions, and ICANN's risk mitigation recommendations are based on analysis of a limited data set of query volume metrics ie how many times queries occur for a proposed new gTLD. As acknowledged in the study, such metrics are only one perspective of risk and do not reflect other risk that may arise through complex interactions between the DNS and applications at the root level."* *
This new study is tasked to come up with additional measures of risk and the associated severity of their consequences and formulate them into a 'name collision occurrence management framework' to allow a more realistic risk assessment and to propose corresponding risk mitigation strategies.
Hope this helps. Apologies if you already understood all this.
Cheers, Julie
On 10/10/2013, at 2:18 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim < rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote:
Curious this. A study results in another study in order to develop a management framework for name collisions. Why not just go from one study to the management framework? Can someone explain it to me so that I understand the situation better?
Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Date: Oct 9, 2013 11:41 PM Subject: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions To: "alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org" < alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc:
[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert
http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08oct13-en.htm
________________________________ NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions
8 October 2013
At its 18 May 2013 meeting, the ICANN Board adopted a resolution to commission a study to identify the levels of potential impact posed by each applied-for new gTLD on the use of TLDs that are not currently delegated at the root level of the public DNS.
The study, "Name Collision in the DNS," together with a proposal to manage the risks identified in the study, was published for public comment from 5 August 2013 to 17 September 2013. During the public comment period, 75 comments were received. Based on the public comments, staff updated the proposal to manage the risks identified in the study. The report of these public comments is available at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-name-collision-05aug13/.
The ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) met on 28 September 2013<
http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-28sep13-...
to review and discuss a proposal on how to deal with name collisions. On 7 October 2013<
http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-07oct13-...
, the NGPC met again and approved an updated proposal, titled "New gTLD Collision Occurrence Management Plan<
http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-...
," [PDF, 840 KB] to mitigate the risks of potential name collisions caused by the introduction of new gTLDs.
The Collision Occurrence Management Plan directs staff to undertake an additional study to develop a name collision occurrence management framework. The framework will include appropriate parameters and processes to assess both probability and severity of harm resulting from the occurrence of name collisions. Examples of the parameters might include number of DNS requests, type of DNS requests, type of queries, diversity of query source and appearances in internal name certificates. The framework will specify a set of collision occurrence assessments and corresponding mitigation measures, if any, that ICANN or TLD applicants may need to implement per second level domain name (SLD) seen in the "day in the life of the Internet" (DITL) dataset.
Additionally, the plan provides a registry operator with the option to proceed to delegation prior to receiving its SLD collision occurrence assessment report (subject to established processes and procedures). If the registry operator chooses this alternative path to delegation, it must initially block all SLDs that appear in the DITL dataset while the assessment is conducted.
An additional feature of the plan requires establishment of a process by each TLD operator to enable an affected party(ies) to report and request the blocking of an SLD that causes demonstrably severe harm as a consequence of name collision occurrences. This process is intended to mitigate the risk that collision occurrences from additional SLDs not observed in the study dataset could have severe impact.
The plan also includes an outreach campaign targeted to potentially affected parties to help them identify and manage the origins (causes) of name collision occurrences in their networks. As part of the outreach campaign, ICANN, under the direction of the President and CEO, will invite and collaborate with relevant parties and members of the community that share the same interest in making progress in this issue.
At its 7 October meeting, the NGPC also recommended to the ICANN Board that the issue of name collisions be monitored by the Board's Risk Committee and reviewed periodically, and that ICANN work with the community in developing a long-term plan to retain and measure root-server data.
For more information about the NGPC, please visit: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/new-gtld. _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce
At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Hi Rinalia, The Interisle study was announced by ICANN on 28May13 and was based on existing 2012 and 2013 DITL* data that was already to hand. The Report is dated 2Aug13. Sorry, no idea how long this new study will take. Cheers, Julie * DITL = Day in the Life of the internet On 10/10/2013, at 10:27 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote: Thanks, Julie. Appreciate the explanation. Any idea/info/guess as to how long a study with a more comprehensive view of risks would take (how long did the Interisle study take?) and when one can expect a management framework to be in place? Rinalia On Oct 10, 2013 8:06 AM, "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> wrote: Hi Rinalia, I have not had a chance yet to read these documents in depth but have had a cursory look at them. The Interisle study had a short time frame to deliver its findings and only looked at one possible measure of risk, namely the number of queries at the root level for the new gTLD. The study itself acknowledged that this only provides one perspective of the potential risk. In fact, this was also mentioned in our ALAC STATEMENT ON ICANN PROPOSAL TO MITIGATE NAME COLLISION RISKS: "...the study, its conclusions, and ICANN's risk mitigation recommendations are based on analysis of a limited data set of query volume metrics ie how many times queries occur for a proposed new gTLD. As acknowledged in the study, such metrics are only one perspective of risk and do not reflect other risk that may arise through complex interactions between the DNS and applications at the root level." This new study is tasked to come up with additional measures of risk and the associated severity of their consequences and formulate them into a 'name collision occurrence management framework' to allow a more realistic risk assessment and to propose corresponding risk mitigation strategies. Hope this helps. Apologies if you already understood all this. Cheers, Julie On 10/10/2013, at 2:18 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote: Curious this. A study results in another study in order to develop a management framework for name collisions. Why not just go from one study to the management framework? Can someone explain it to me so that I understand the situation better? Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Date: Oct 9, 2013 11:41 PM Subject: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions To: "alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org" < alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-08oct13-en.htm ________________________________ NGPC Resolution for Addressing the Consequences of Name Collisions 8 October 2013 At its 18 May 2013 meeting, the ICANN Board adopted a resolution to commission a study to identify the levels of potential impact posed by each applied-for new gTLD on the use of TLDs that are not currently delegated at the root level of the public DNS. The study, "Name Collision in the DNS," together with a proposal to manage the risks identified in the study, was published for public comment from 5 August 2013 to 17 September 2013. During the public comment period, 75 comments were received. Based on the public comments, staff updated the proposal to manage the risks identified in the study. The report of these public comments is available at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-name-collision-05aug13/. The ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) met on 28 September 2013< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-28sep13-...> to review and discuss a proposal on how to deal with name collisions. On 7 October 2013< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-07oct13-...>, the NGPC met again and approved an updated proposal, titled "New gTLD Collision Occurrence Management Plan< http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-...>," [PDF, 840 KB] to mitigate the risks of potential name collisions caused by the introduction of new gTLDs. The Collision Occurrence Management Plan directs staff to undertake an additional study to develop a name collision occurrence management framework. The framework will include appropriate parameters and processes to assess both probability and severity of harm resulting from the occurrence of name collisions. Examples of the parameters might include number of DNS requests, type of DNS requests, type of queries, diversity of query source and appearances in internal name certificates. The framework will specify a set of collision occurrence assessments and corresponding mitigation measures, if any, that ICANN or TLD applicants may need to implement per second level domain name (SLD) seen in the "day in the life of the Internet" (DITL) dataset. Additionally, the plan provides a registry operator with the option to proceed to delegation prior to receiving its SLD collision occurrence assessment report (subject to established processes and procedures). If the registry operator chooses this alternative path to delegation, it must initially block all SLDs that appear in the DITL dataset while the assessment is conducted. An additional feature of the plan requires establishment of a process by each TLD operator to enable an affected party(ies) to report and request the blocking of an SLD that causes demonstrably severe harm as a consequence of name collision occurrences. This process is intended to mitigate the risk that collision occurrences from additional SLDs not observed in the study dataset could have severe impact. The plan also includes an outreach campaign targeted to potentially affected parties to help them identify and manage the origins (causes) of name collision occurrences in their networks. As part of the outreach campaign, ICANN, under the direction of the President and CEO, will invite and collaborate with relevant parties and members of the community that share the same interest in making progress in this issue. At its 7 October meeting, the NGPC also recommended to the ICANN Board that the issue of name collisions be monitored by the Board's Risk Committee and reviewed periodically, and that ICANN work with the community in developing a long-term plan to retain and measure root-server data. For more information about the NGPC, please visit: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/new-gtld. _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
participants (3)
-
Carlton Samuels -
Julie Hammer -
Rinalia Abdul Rahim