July 2014 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] [lac-discuss-es] Quick, Say Sony Online,
by Alberto Soto July 17, 2014

July 17, 2014

Parece que conocen lo que es el débito automático... Y la buena administración interna. Los avisos de vencimiento seguro iban a un mail que nadie leía. Saludos cordiales Alberto Soto -----Mensaje original----- De: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com Enviado el: jueves, 17 de julio de 2014 02:23 p.m. Para: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org CC: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; At-Large Worldwide Asunto: [lac-discuss-es] Quick, Say Sony Online, [[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Quick, Say Sony Online, De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com .. Así que se olvidaron de pagar. Y, era tarde en respuesta. Así NS recuperó el dominio [s] y se desató el infierno. Va a mostrar ... http://eq2wire.com/2014/07/15/sonyonline-net-domain-expires-shenanigans-ensu e-for-all-soe-games-websites/ -Carlton ============================== Carlton Un Samuels Móvil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y Turnaround * ============================= _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/d08d35699f.html --]]

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC] Fwd: A million domains taken down by email checks
by Alan Greenberg July 17, 2014

July 17, 2014

The registrars are asking for data from law enforcement, and rightfully so. However, before I would charge off and recommend that the ALAC takes a position, I would like to see some data from registrars. 800,000 is a large number. But it is also just 0.5% of all gTLD registrations. In the past when the ALAC has raised issues related to similar problems (such as loss of registrations after accidental expiration), one of the replies from registrars has been that the number is only a tiny fraction of the registrations that are not lost. In my mind, the issue was not the percentage but the absolute number of people suffering problems, and it still is in this case. When we were looking at expiration issues, and how to alert a registrant that a name had expired, the PDP WG came to the conclusion that the best way to wake up a registrant who is either ignoring e-mails, or has e-mails directed to an invalid or dead e-mail box, it to take down the domain. Not working does catch people's attention! Yes, it is a harsh way to do this, but very effective. The first reports that we are getting from Contractual Compliance is that with these new measures in place, complaints are way down, as much as 50% for some expiration-related complaints. So I would want to understand something about where this 800,000 number comes from, and how it is broken down. Examples of questions that come to mind and should be explored are: - how many of those 800,000 result in the registrant correcting the data and the domain goes live again - how many are not due to bad registrant contact information, but bad contact information for the a privacy/proxy service or web hosting company I'm sure a bit of discussion would raise other questions as well. So I am all for the ALAC making a statement, But the content of that statement should be based on a better understanding of what is going on here. Alan Postscript: One of the issues that came up during the expiration renewal PDP was that many registrations use the domain in question for the contact e-mail. For example, the domain example.com might had a contact e-mail address of webmaster(a)example.com. If the domain stops working for any reason, the contact address is by definition useless. Registrant need to be educated to NOT use the domain being registered for its own contact address. The PDP recommended that registrars warn registrants about this. Perhaps it is being done, but I have not seen it. At 03/07/2014 06:36 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote: >Dear ALAC, > >In reference to Joly MacFie's mail to the At-Large (see forwarded), the >topic was also raised by Registrars during their meeting with the ICANN >Board in London. > >Fadi posed a question to the Registrars on whether they have engaged with >the At-Large on the matter. Fadi then raised the issue to the At-Large >during his ATLASII Fayre speech. > >It would be important that the At-Large articulates its position on the >issue (possibly via an ALAC statement) as it is being presented as a >problem for Internet users. > >Best regards, > >Rinalia >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From: "Joly MacFie" ><<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>joly at punkcast.com> >Date: Jun 26, 2014 1:00 AM >Subject: [At-Large] A million domains taken down by email checks >To: "At-Large Worldwide" ><<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>at-large >at atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Cc: > >Fwd over from the NCSG list. I underdtand that this would have been > > discussed in today's EWG and privacy sessions. Any comments? > > > > > > > <http://domainincite.com/16963-a-million-domains-taken-down-by-email-checks>http://domainincite.com/16963-a-million-domains-taken-down-by-email-checks > > > > A million domains taken down by email checks > > < > > > <http://domainincite.com/16963-a-million-domains-taken-down-by-email-checks>http://domainincite.com/16963-a-million-domains-taken-down-by-email-checks > > > > > Kevin Murphy > <<http://domainincite.com/about>http://domainincite.com/about>, > June 24, 2014, 14:34:25 > > (UTC), Domain Registrars > > > <<http://domainincite.com/category/domain-registrars>http://domainincite.com/category/domain-registrars> > > > > *Over 800,000 domain names have been suspended since the beginning of the > > year as a result of Whois email verification rules in the new ICANN > > Registrar Accreditation Agreement.* > > > > Thats according to the Registrars Stakeholder Group, which collected > > suspension data from registrars representing about 75% of all registered > > gTLD domain names. > > > > The actual number of suspended domains could be closer to a million. > > > > The 2013 RAA requires registrars to verify the email addresses listed in > > their customers Whois records. If they dont receive the verification, > > they have to suspend the domain. > > > > The RrSG told the ICANN board in March that these checks were doing more > > harm than good > > < > > > <http://domainincite.com/16375-are-whois-email-checks-doing-more-harm-than-g…>http://domainincite.com/16375-are-whois-email-checks-doing-more-harm-than-g… > > > > > and today Tucows CEO Elliot Noss presented, as promised, data to back up > > the claim. > > > > There have been over 800,000 domains suspended, Noss said. We have > > stories of healthcare sites that have gone down, community groups whose > > sites have gone down. > > > > I think we can safely say millions of internet users, he said. Those are > > real people just trying to use the internet. They are our great > > unrepresented core constituency. > > > > The RrSG wants to see contrasting data from law enforcement agencies and > > governments which pushed hard for Whois verification showing that the > > RAA requirement has had a demonstrable benefit. > > > > Registrars asked at the Singapore meeting in March that law enforcement > > agencies (LEA) be put on notice that they cant ask for more Whois controls > > until theyve provided such data and ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade said > > < > > > <http://domainincite.com/16375-are-whois-email-checks-doing-more-harm-than-g…>http://domainincite.com/16375-are-whois-email-checks-doing-more-harm-than-g… > > > > > It shall be done by London. > > > > Noss implied that the majority of the 800,000 suspended names belong to > > innocent registrants, such as those who had simply changed email addresses > > since registering their names. > > > > What was a lovely political win that we said time and time again in > > discussion after discussion was impractical and would provide no benefit, > > has demonstrably has created harm, Noss said. > > > > He was received with cautious support by ICANN board members. > > > > Chair Steve Crocker wonder aloud how many of the 800,000 suspended domains > > are owned by bad guys, and he noted that LEA dont appear to gather data in > > the way that the registrars are demanding. > > > > We were subjected, all of us, to heavy-duty pressure from the law > > enforcement community over a long period of time. We finally said, Okay, > > we hear you and well help you get this stuff implemented,, he added. > > That creates an obligation as far as Im concerned on their part. > > > > Were in a at least from a moral position in a strong position to say, > > You must help us understand this. Otherwise, youre not doing your part of > > the job, he said. > > > > Chehade also seemed to support the registrars position that LEA needs to > > justify its demands and offered to take their data and concerns to the LEA > > and the Governmental Advisory Committee. > > > > They put restrictions on us that are causing harm, according to these > > numbers, he said. Lets take this back at them and say, hey, you ask for > > all these things, this is what happened. > > > > If you cant tell me what good this has done, be aware not to come back > > and ask for more, he said. Im with you on this 100%. Im saying lets > > use the great findings you seem to have a found and well-package them in a > > case and I will be your advocate. > > > > Director Mike Silber also spoke in support of the RrSGs position. > > > > My view is if what you are saying is correct, the LEAs have blown their > > credibility, he said. Theyre going to have to do a lot of work before we > > impose similar disproportional requirements on actors that are not proven > > to be bad actors. > > > > So what does this all mean for registrants? > > > > I dont think theres any ongoing process right now to get the Whois > > verification requirements overturned that would require a renegotiation > > of the RAA but it does seem to mean demands from governments and police > > are going to have to be much more substantiated in future. > > > > Noss attempted to link the problem to the recommendations of the Whois > > Expert Working Group (EWG), which propose a completely revamped, > > centralized Whois system with much more verification > > > <<http://domainincite.com/16855-whois-killer-is-a-recipe-for-a-clusterfuck>http://domainincite.com/16855-whois-killer-is-a-recipe-for-a-clusterfuck> > > and not much to benefit registrants. > > > > To paraphrase: if email verification causes so much harm, what harms could > > be caused by the EWG proposal? > > > > The EWG was not stuffed with LEA or governments, however, so it couldnt > > really be characterized as another set of unreasonable demands from the > > same entities. > > > > > > -- > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > > WWWhatsup NYC - <http://wwwhatsup.com>http://wwwhatsup.com > > http://pinstand.com - <http://punkcast.com>http://punkcast.com > > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - <http://isoc-ny.org>http://isoc-ny.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > - > > _______________________________________________ > > At-Large mailing list > > > <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>At-Large > at atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > > > At-Large Official Site: <http://atlarge.icann.org>http://atlarge.icann.org

16 29

Fwd: IANA Functions Stewardship Transition Updates
by Carlton Samuels July 16, 2014

July 16, 2014

Note you can join the London meeting via the Adobe Room Starting tomorrow. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org> Date: Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 1:17 PM Subject: ICANN News Alert -- IANA Functions Stewardship Transition Updates To: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com [image: ICANN] <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-07-16-en ------------------------------ IANA Functions Stewardship Transition Updates 16 July 2014 On 14 March 2014, the NTIA announced <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition…> its intention to transition its stewardship role of IANA functions, and called upon ICANN to launch and facilitate a process with the community to derive a proposal to transition the IANA functions to the global multistakeholder community, meeting the criteria set out by the NTIA. Following community dialogue, the process <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/process-next-steps-2014-06-06-en> for developing a proposal for this transition was posted on 6 June 2014. As a part of this process, a Coordination Group will be responsible for preparing a transitional proposal respective of the differing needs of the various affected parties of the IANA functions. See here for a full list of the Coordination Group Representatives <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/coordination-group-2014-06-17-en>. The first face-to-face meeting of the Coordination Group will take place in London from 08:00-17:00 UTC on 17-18 July at the Hilton London Metropole Hotel <http://www3.hilton.com/en/hotels/united-kingdom/hilton-london-metropole-LON…> . The global multistakeholder community will be able to follow the Coordination Group's first meeting through the Virtual Meeting Room <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/coordinationgroup/> and through audio translations into these languages: - English <http://stream.icann.org:8000/coordinationgroup-en.m3u> - French <http://stream.icann.org:8000/coordinationgroup-fr.m3u> - Spanish <http://stream.icann.org:8000/coordinationgroup-es.m3u> - Chinese <http://stream.icann.org:8000/coordinationgroup-zh.m3u> - Russian <http://stream.icann.org:8000/coordinationgroup-ru.m3u> - Arabic <http://stream.icann.org:8000/coordinationgroup-ar.m3u> - Portuguese <http://stream.icann.org:8000/coordinationgroup-pt.m3u> In addition, the community is encouraged to join the conversation through use of the online discussion forum <http://discuss-stewardship.icann.org/> or ICANN's dedicated IANA Transition mailing list <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition> to discuss the transition process. For more information about the Coordination Group and the IANA Function's Stewardship Transition, please visit the NTIA IANA Functions' Stewardship Transition microsite <https://www.icann.org/stewardship>.

1 0

WEBCAST TODAY: Internet Governance Forum – USA (IGF-USA) 2014
by Joly MacFie July 16, 2014

July 16, 2014

This has just begun. There are 3 separate channels to cover the breakout sessions. Not mentioned in the main agenda is that, in the afternoon, we will be doing a remote breakout in NYC. That will be on Channel 3. If in the area, drop by, More info: http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6811 [image: IGF USA]Today *Wednesday July 16 2014* the *Internet Governance Forum – USA (IGF-USA) 201*4 <http://www.igf-usa.us/page/igf-usa-2014> is a full day conference at George Washington University in Washington, DC. The IGF-USA 2014 will bring together thought leaders from across the Internet multistakeholder community to highlight and engage in discussions about key issues that will drive the future of the Internet, and formulate consensus to bring to the global *IGF in Istanbul* <http://www.igf2014.org.tr/> in September. The format is *OPENING PLENARY – MORNING BREAKOUTS – LUNCH – PLENARY PANEL – AFTERNOON BREAKOUTS – CLOSING PLENARY.* All sessions will be webcast live via the *Internet Society’s Livestream service*, where comments/questions may be posted in chat. *What*: Internet Governance Forum - USA (IGF-USA) 2014 <http://www.igf-usa.us/page/igf-usa-2014> *Where*: George Washington University in Washington, DC. *When*: Wednesday July 16 2014 8:45am-5:30pm EDT | 12:45-21:30 UTC *Agenda*: http://www.igf-usa.us/page/igf-usa-2014 *Webcasts*: Plenary and Breakout 1: https://new.livestream.com/internetsociety/igf-usa-2014 Breakout 2: https://new.livestream.com/internetsociety2/igf-usa-2014 Breakout 3: https://new.livestream.com/internetsociety3/igf-usa-2014 *Twitter*: #IGFUSA <https://twitter.com/hashtag/igfusa?f=realtime&src=hash> Comment <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6811#respond> See all comments <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6811#comments> *Permalink* http://isoc-ny.org/p2/6811 -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

What happens next re: IANA Stewardship (was: Re: [ALAC-Announce] VOTE RESULT: Candidate Endorsement: NTIA IANA Functions' Stewardship Transition Coordination Group)
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond July 15, 2014

July 15, 2014

Dear At-Large members, as you know, the ALAC has endorsed the selection of Mohamed El Bashir and Jean-Jacques Subrenat as its representatives on the NTIA IANA Functions' Stewardship Transition Coordination Group. The Coordination Group will meet in London on Thursday 17 and Friday 18 July 2014. I would like to thank all of the candidates who sent their Expression of Interest to the Selection Committee. The choice was hard to make because all candidates had the qualities we were looking for in candidates - but the selected candidates were the most suitable for the task for various factors. I would also like to thank the members of the Selection Committee ( https://community.icann.org/x/QpDhAg ) for taking the time so soon after an ICANN meeting to read through all of the Expressions of Interest, debate on-line and actively take part in the conference call to make the final selection. Having corresponded with Mohamed and Jean-Jacques since their selection, they are booked to come to London and have read through all of the currently available data to be fully prepared for the two days. They have assured me that they are also reading other (non-ICANN) fora to be fully aware of the proposals and mood of the first meeting. I also invite you to read the IANA stewardship micro-site: https://www.icann.org/stewardship Now the work re: NTIA Functions starts for the ALAC and the At-Large Community. The Coordination Group is a group that will coordinate the work of all of the communities involved in the putting together of a proposal (or a set of proposals) for the replacement of the NTIA role in the stewardship of the IANA functions. This will need to be fed with the consensus positions of the At-Large Community - and we therefore need to work in our community to reach consensus on all of the points that will be raised. We might also need to think creatively to make proposals of our own. Most of all, we will have to, as a community, be very vigilant in making sure that proposals brought forward by the other stakeholders at the Coordination Group are fair and serve the public interest. Our "Ambassadors" Jean-Jacques & Mohamed will need to be our ears but also our voice in this Coordination Group and I hope that we will all be able to work closely with them. The ALAC has created an ad-hoc working group to focus on these issues and in order to keep our main mailing lists free from what is likely to be a high clutter of discussions, starting in the next few days. https://community.icann.org/x/OYThAg This working group and its mailing list is open for all At-Large members to join. You may join the mailing list through: https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iana-issues Its purpose will be to articulate the At-Large positions that will then be made available to our representatives on the Coordinating Group & other fora. There are other parallel threads that will take place simultaneously. One of them is the creation of a Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) on the IANA Functions' Stewardship Transition. This is in the process of being created by the various component organisations of ICANN. Leon Sanchez & Tijani Ben Jemaa are our current representatives helping with the drafting of the charter of this working group (with Julie Hammer, our SSAC Liaison also being part of the Charter Drafting Team). Once the Charter will be drafted, the ALAC will, like other component parts of ICANN, need to ratify it and then will need to send participants to the CCWG. I expect that in addition to Jean-Jacques and Mohamed whom I will encourage to join this group simply for them to be well aware of its work, we will need candidates to *drive* the values of our community in the CCWG. It is thought that the CCWG on IANA Functions will probably focus on a proposal for the stewardship of the "Names" function of IANA - but this is yet to be established or discussed. Aside from this process, there is also a process of an ICANN-wide ICANN accountability working group (currently in formation). In London, the Board has resolved to implement the Accountability & Transparency Review Team (ATRT2) recommendations and this working group is very likely to be a driving factor for a follow-up on ICANN accountability that is likely to exceed the limits of the ATRT2. As a reminder, the ATRT2 was limited in scope to the markers in the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC). So this new working group is likely to be very important indeed and I have already received emails from several of you who would like to take part in its deliberations. Question: How will we feed this ICANN-wide working group? By creating our own accountability working group or should we hand the work to one of our already established working groups? As of today, it is still unclear how the ICANN Accountability & the IANA Functions working groups will interface. I expect there will be an overlap in membership and there is likely to be a strong link between the two topics. Yet, they are taken as two separate threads, as I am told that both will require plenty of work. But I fully support that there should be strong communication and coordination between the two topics. The ICANN Accountability working group is a bit late on its original schedule and SO/AC Chairs have sent an email to the Staff person in charge of the process to obtain clarification on progress. Expect news in the next few days! If you are a little confused about all of these things happening at once, then please have a look at the diagram displayed on which can give you a better picture of how all of the working groups function together: How all the IANA Functions Stewardship and Accountability working groups relate to each other (PDF) <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/48333881/ICANN%20working%2…> How all the IANA Functions Stewardship and Accountability working groups relate to each other (JPG) <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Ad-hoc+WG+on+the+Trans…> This is not meant to be a flow chart. It is not meant to be an accurate flow of information or how these groups will function. It is just an overall representation of how many groups there are, which ones are ICANN community only, which ones are At-Large, which ones are Internet-wide. Things have moved so quickly in the past few weeks that this diagram might soon be obsolete anyway, but hopefully we'll be able to understand more once the first meeting of the Coordination Group has taken place. Right now, think about joining the At-Large ad-hoc working group on https://community.icann.org/x/OYThAg I'll keep you all up to date as soon as we learn more about this exciting and historical process. Kindest regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair On 15/07/2014 15:31, ICANN At-Large Staff wrote: > Dear All, > > The ALAC vote regarding the endorsement of ALAC Representatives to > the NTIA IANA Functions' Stewardship Transition Coordination Group has > been completed, with 15 out of the 15 ALAC members casted their ballots. > > *** > QUESTION: Should the advice from the At-Large Sub-Committee on the > Selection of Members for the NTIA IANA Functions' Stewardship > Transition Coordination Group > <https://community.icann.org/x/QpDhAg> be accepted? The advice is as > follows: > > Factoring in a point scoring system (i.e. a straw ballot) based on > applicants' Expression of Interest, discussion on the Sub-Committee's > mailing list (iana-steering-sc(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org) and a > conference call on 11 July 2014 to make the decision on the > candidates, it is recommended that the ALAC endorse the following two > (2) individuals as ALAC Representatives to the NTIA IANA Functions' > Stewardship Transition Coordination Group via immediate vote (in > surname alphabetical order): > > * Mohamed El Bashir > * Jean-Jacques Subrenat > > The recommendations are based on a high level of confidence that the > two candidates: 1) are qualified to access the principles and > mechanism for the transitioning of NTIA's stewardship of the IANA > functions; 2) can work effectively as a team; 3) have the widest range > of contacts, languages and experiences to engage the largest number of > Coordination Group participants; and 4) can do so from the > perspective/viewpoint of the ALAC, the At-Large Community, and the > global Internet endusers. > > > Candidate Endorsement: NTIA IANA Functions' Stewardship > Transition Coordination Group > > > As at Poll close: Tuesday 15 July 2014 11:51 UTC > Number of voters: 15 · Group size: 15 · Percentage voted: 100.00 > Ranked by votes > *Rank* *Candidate* *Votes* *%* > 1 Yes 14 93.33 > 2 Abstain 1 6.67 > 3 No 0 0.00 > > > *** > > To confirm: the ALAC has endorsed the selection of Mohamed El Bashir > and Jean-Jacques Subrenat as the ALAC representatives to the NTIA IANA > Functions' Stewardship Transition Coordination Group. > > You may review the results independently > under: https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=41023PQdzrDKvXf4WQufWHjd > > Regards, > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie > Peregrine and Terri Agnew > ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> > Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge > <https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> > Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge <https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC-Announce mailing list > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0

Fwd: [soac-discussion] How long can the ICANN model take the pressure?
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond July 15, 2014

July 15, 2014

Interesting reading... if you have time! Olivier -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [soac-discussion] How long can the ICANN model take the pressure? Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:16:35 +0200 From: William Drake <william.drake(a)uzh.ch> To: soac-discussion(a)icann.org Hi Probably many have seen this short article but some may not have, and it seems germane to the focus of the proposed SOAC gathering. https://centr.org/article/how-long-can-icann-model-take-pressure Bill *********************************************** William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, ICANN, www.ncuc.org william.drake(a)uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake(a)gmail.com (lists), www.williamdrake.org ***********************************************

1 0

Re: [At-Large] A million domains taken down by email checks
by Mike O'Connor July 12, 2014

July 12, 2014

hi Roberto, one advantage of using an IMAP client rather than POP is that the spam filtering is done at the server end. so only the filtered mail travels across the wire to your client when you’re on the road. i’m with John L. on the public WHOIS records and spam. info for this haven2.com domain is out there for all to see and spam isn’t really an issue these days what with all the filtering options. i’m down to about 500 spam messages a week and the filters are wicked accurate. mikey > > From: Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano(a)hotmail.com> > Subject: [At-Large] R: [ALAC] Fwd: A million domains taken down by email checks > Date: July 11, 2014 at 3:44:58 PM CDT > To: "'John Levine'" <john.levine(a)cauce.org>, "'RJ Glass'" <jipshida2(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > One of the problems that the spam filters does not solve, unless there is a way that I am ignorant about, is that even if the incoming messages are put in a separate folder, I still have to pay for the connection time while the junk is downloaded. > This is not a problem when I am at home, or when I have a WiFi connection, but is a problem indeed when I am travelling to places with slow or/and expensive connection. > Cheers, > R. > > >> -----Messaggio originale----- >> Da: at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- >> bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] Per conto di John Levine >> Inviato: martedì 8 luglio 2014 21:53 >> A: RJ Glass >> Cc: at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Oggetto: Re: [At-Large] [ALAC] Fwd: A million domains taken down by email >> checks >> >>> Registrants pay money for a service, yet is required to go through >>> EVERYONE having access to the records. So now, the domain owner is >>> spammed by EVERYONE because they can. >> >> Aw, come on. I have put real e-mail addresses on all my domains for over >> 20 years, and those addresses remain completely usable. Feel free to write >> to me at my WHOIS contact addresses if you don't believe me. >> >> I certainly believe that your mail provider has crummy spam filters, but that's >> not an argument for anything other than finding a more competent mail >> provider. >> >> Regards, >> John Levine, john.levine(a)cauce.org >> CAUCE North America > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC] Fwd: A million domains taken down by email checks
by Alan Greenberg July 11, 2014

July 11, 2014

Evan, one point. It is unclear to me whether the issue is 100% invalid addresses, or as some people have implied, valid addresses where the registrant has not replied in 15 days. The two situations are substantively different, and we need to get a handle on which is the cause of these suspensions, or if mixed, what percentage. If ssomeone on this list *knows* definitively what the answer is, it would be much appreciated. Alan At 06/07/2014 11:57 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >I was actually surprised to hear Fadi's comments about this at the Fayre. > >I was both dismayed at the stance he took (I recall him saying the incident >diminished the standing of "law enforcement") and his choice of venues (one >of too many speeches delivered at a social event when many of the >participants were winding down after a day of exhaustion). > >Had the issue been raised at a time where genuine interaction and >thoughtfulness were called for, I suspect Fadi may not have received the >anticipated response, as this incident clearly indicates how out of touch >ICANN is with the rest of the world,. > >*Inside the ICANN bubble:* > >* "We are appalled that 800,000 domains were taken down for having >non-responsive contact info" * >*The rest of the world:* *"Did you just say that 800,000 domains have >non-responsive contact info?"* > > >The methods of verification and the speed of takedown could be tweaked to >ensure that good actors with minor access problems (such as mail going into >spam filters, increasing time to respond, forget to change after moving, >etc) would not be adversely affected. But the end objective is absolutely >welcomed from the non-registrant end-user point of view. > >So I personally have zero ethical qualms about the suspensions, noting that >the issue has already been inflated for dramatic effect. A claim of 800,000 >domains becomes a million in the headlines. And then there was this gem: > >*"We have stories of healthcare sites that have gone down,"*, chimes Elliot >Noss in the CircleID article ><http://domainincite.com/16963-a-million-domains-taken-down-by-email-checks> >. > >I don't know about the rest of you ... but given the sensitivity of >information at healthcare sites regarding privacy and accuracy, that >category of site is amongst those *most* in need of accurate contact info >IMO. So if such sites have non-functional contact info, frankly, I couldn't >suspend them fast enough until things are fixed. This attempt at media >manipulation backfires. > >The salient point is that a contact address is just that, a way to make >contact. If it won't work from the registrant's own registrar or registry >-- a body with which whom the registrant has a contractual and financial >relationship -- it certainly won't work if someone from the public has a >question, complaint, or warrant to serve. If policy indicates that contact >info must be accurate and current, then that is what needs to be enforced. > >When the interests of ICANN and contracted parties are hurt by inaction of >registrants -- notably non-payment -- enforcement such as suspension is >immediate, automated and non-controversial. (Indeed, it was even once gamed >by some contracted parties, which is what led to the PEDNR ><http://icannwiki.com/index.php/PEDNR> debate.) But here, the inaction >indicates harm to the public interest while enforcement threatens financial >loss to ICANN and contracted parties, so all hell breaks loose and Fadi >lectures us at the Fayre. > >This isn't just a matter of law enforcement, and I am puzzled why that >community is being singled out for recrimination. Sure, some chunk of those >800,000 are bad actors in the sense of intending to have unusable contact >info. But how many of the others have bad contact info because the domains >themselves are neglected and unused, squatted or speculated names that >their registrants have just locked away and forgotten? How does that serve >the interest of end users to have so many extant but useless domains? > >So, by all means, let's engage in a proper dialogue -- not one initiated, >almost in passing, at a social event more than halfway into the ICANN >meeting. We may all look at this incident and see within it a deep problem, >but the problems At-Large identifies may be far different from those seen >by the registrars. > >Be careful what you wish for. While registrars complaining loudly may score >power points inside the bubble (at the expense of public-interest >advocacy), outside it just reinforces ICANN's detachment from the rest of >the Internet-using world. If news broke that there were 800,000 cars on the >road with unusable contact info related to their license plates, public >reaction would be loud and ugly no matter what proportion of those cars >belonged to criminals. > >I look forward to any debate going forward on the issue in At-Large's >Regulatory Issues Working Group, which is where I believe any future ALAC >stance must be discussed and first formulated. > >- Evan >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)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+(AL…

11 18

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten July 11, 2014

July 11, 2014

Total of 59 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jul 11 00:53:03 EDT 2014 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 8.47% | 5 | 12.65% | 78522 | aidanoblia at gmail.com 11.86% | 7 | 8.55% | 53084 | john.levine at cauce.org 10.17% | 6 | 8.92% | 55393 | michele at blacknight.com 8.47% | 5 | 7.03% | 43655 | evan at telly.org 6.78% | 4 | 5.90% | 36640 | cdel at firsthand.net 5.08% | 3 | 5.67% | 35206 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 5.08% | 3 | 4.32% | 26824 | brainstreetceo at gmail.com 3.39% | 2 | 5.59% | 34712 | h.raiche at internode.on.net 3.39% | 2 | 4.63% | 28734 | derek at aa419.org 3.39% | 2 | 3.05% | 18959 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 3.39% | 2 | 2.99% | 18545 | vb at bertola.eu 1.69% | 1 | 3.27% | 20327 | cw at christopherwilkinson.eu 1.69% | 1 | 2.95% | 18334 | jipshida2 at yahoo.com 1.69% | 1 | 2.69% | 16709 | raf at sasiconsult.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.99% | 12359 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.89% | 11761 | nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.70% | 10563 | lianna at magic.am 1.69% | 1 | 1.65% | 10220 | kerry at kdbsystems.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.60% | 9928 | mail at christopherwilkinson.eu 1.69% | 1 | 1.58% | 9789 | b.schombe at gmail.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.51% | 9404 | huelsmann at datenschutzverein.org 1.69% | 1 | 1.51% | 9344 | salgueiro.jo at gmail.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.37% | 8531 | ajp at glocom.ac.jp 1.69% | 1 | 1.32% | 8173 | director at icfoss.in 1.69% | 1 | 1.24% | 7671 | narten at us.ibm.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.21% | 7518 | roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com 1.69% | 1 | 1.09% | 6754 | leonfelipe at sanchez.mx 1.69% | 1 | 1.06% | 6602 | avri at acm.org 1.69% | 1 | 1.05% | 6514 | icann-list at sorehands.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 59 |100.00% | 620775 | Total

1 0

Fwd: [IDN-WG] CALL FOR COMMENTS: ALAC Statement on the Universal Acceptance of TLDs Draft Roadmap
by Satish Babu July 9, 2014

July 9, 2014

For information and action... satish ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date: Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 6:52 PM Subject: [IDN-WG] CALL FOR COMMENTS: ALAC Statement on the Universal Acceptance of TLDs Draft Roadmap To: "ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" < ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: "idn-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <idn-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Dear All, Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC, has asked that a call for comments be made on the draft ALAC Statement on the Universal Acceptance of TLDs Draft Roadmap<https://community.icann.org/x/FrDhAg> in preparation for the start of the ALAC ratification process. The current drafts, as well as additional information on the Public Comment, can be found on the At-Large Universal Acceptance of TLDs Draft Roadmap Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/FrDhAg>. Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 16 July 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org%3cmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7-B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi%20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20Gisella%20Gruber,% 20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy%20Staff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org > Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge< https://www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge> Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge> _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg IDN WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+IDN+Policy

1 0