- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Summit participation - Possible regrets
by Robert Guerra Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

At this moment I don't know if I will be able to attend the upcoming Mexico meeting make it due to work commitments. I hope I can make it, but in the case I can not attend - let me make at least take this opportunity to wish you all success for a engaging meeting - one where I hope constructive discussion, dialogue, agenda setting and strategic planning can take place. May bottom-up issues be the main focus. En estos moments no estoy seguro si podré asistir a la reunion de Mexico el mes que viene. Por tanto, quisiera compartir lo siguiente con vosotros - Ojala salga exitosa, donde se pueda avanzar temas de agenda, metas, estrategia . Que temas de la base lleguen a ser el enfoque principal. suerte a todos / luck to all. Robert

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ga] Re: Network Solutions Under Large Scale DDoS Attack
by Joe Baptista Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204(a)yahoo.com>wrote: > Sorry Joe, > > I guess I was unclear. My question is this: When this inevitable failure > occurs where will we go to get what we want? > You don't get what you want - most likely. A failure in the resolution of the .com zone would result in failures in every other zone where all the name servers use .com host names. I've tested this before and it could be up to 60% of the Internet would be difficult to resolve. cnn.com would go poof - because it exclusively uses aol.com name servers. a lot of sites out side .com would also disappear. So there is really nothing you can do. Maybe Jeffs suggestion to visit the ICANN mens room is not so bad an option worth considering after all. Now the way to prevent it is to simply distribute domain name server across many hosts using different TLDs. This would make the domain less vulnerable but only if the domain was not .com. If it is in the .com zone there is nothing you can do - under this sort of attack it simply won't resolve. regards joe baptista > > --- On *Sun, 1/25/09, Joe Baptista <baptista(a)publicroot.org>* wrote: > > From: Joe Baptista <baptista(a)publicroot.org> > Subject: Re: [ga] Re: [At-Large] Network Solutions Under Large Scale DDoS > Attack > To: hdierker2204(a)yahoo.com > Cc: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "Ga" < > ga(a)gnso.icann.org> > Date: Sunday, January 25, 2009, 6:43 AM > > > > > On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204(a)yahoo.com>wrote: > >> So then following out your so wisened scenario; What would we migrate >> to then? >> Or would we just go for walks, read books and watch Network TV shows? >> > > To prevent resolution failure you need name servers having host names from > zones NOT .com. And this only works for NON .com domains. If the .com > servers are successfully attacked then all of .com is effected. > > The problem is .com is so pervasive in its popularity and so many name > server hosts use .com in their host names that this sort of attack is > inevitable. > > regards > joe baptista > > > >> >> >> --- On *Sat, 1/24/09, Joe Baptista <baptista(a)publicroot.org>* wrote: >> >> From: Joe Baptista <baptista(a)publicroot.org> >> Subject: [ga] Re: [At-Large] Network Solutions Under Large Scale DDoS >> Attack >> To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> Cc: "Ga" <ga(a)gnso.icann.org> >> Date: Saturday, January 24, 2009, 6:39 PM >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 1:56 PM, John R. Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: >> >>> Hate to say it folks - but I told you so a long time ago this was going >>>> to >>>> happen. If you want to attack the Internet - you don't attack the root >>>> servers - you attack .com name space. Once .com name space is offline a >>>> lot >>>> of the net just twinkles out of existence. >>>> >>> >>> Network Solutions is not Verisign, and hasn't been for about a decade. >>> >>> Perhaps you might want to update your bookmarks or something. >> >> >> Don't bother telling me that - email the journalist who wrote the article. >> >> The issue here is that a successful attack against the .com servers would >> take out most of the internet since the technical infrastructure is so >> heavily dependent on the the .com zone. Any dummy should understand that. >> >> It's irrelevant who runs the .com zone - the problem here is its >> popularity as a tld label also makes it vulnerable to attack because so many >> name space objects - ns hosts - are technically dependent on the zone. >> >> The day .com goes off line - and this day is inevitable - most of the >> internet will simply disappear for so many folks. I look forward to that >> day - will give me an excuse to take the day off and enjoy an Internet free >> day.. >> >> regards >> joe baptista >> >> -- >> Joe Baptista >> www.publicroot.org >> PublicRoot Consortium >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative >> & Accountable to e Internet community @large. >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) >> Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 >> >> >> > > > -- > Joe Baptista > www.publicroot.org > PublicRoot Consortium > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative > & Accountable to the Internet community @large. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) > Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 > > > -- Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium ---------------------------------------------------------------- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ga] Re: Network Solutions Under Large Scale DDoS Attack
by Joe Baptista Jan. 25, 2009

Jan. 25, 2009

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204(a)yahoo.com>wrote: > So then following out your so wisened scenario; What would we migrate to > then? > Or would we just go for walks, read books and watch Network TV shows? > To prevent resolution failure you need name servers having host names from zones NOT .com. And this only works for NON .com domains. If the .com servers are successfully attacked then all of .com is effected. The problem is .com is so pervasive in its popularity and so many name server hosts use .com in their host names that this sort of attack is inevitable. regards joe baptista > > > --- On *Sat, 1/24/09, Joe Baptista <baptista(a)publicroot.org>* wrote: > > From: Joe Baptista <baptista(a)publicroot.org> > Subject: [ga] Re: [At-Large] Network Solutions Under Large Scale DDoS > Attack > To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Cc: "Ga" <ga(a)gnso.icann.org> > Date: Saturday, January 24, 2009, 6:39 PM > > > > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 1:56 PM, John R. Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: > >> Hate to say it folks - but I told you so a long time ago this was going >>> to >>> happen. If you want to attack the Internet - you don't attack the root >>> servers - you attack .com name space. Once .com name space is offline a >>> lot >>> of the net just twinkles out of existence. >>> >> >> Network Solutions is not Verisign, and hasn't been for about a decade. >> >> Perhaps you might want to update your bookmarks or something. > > > Don't bother telling me that - email the journalist who wrote the article. > > The issue here is that a successful attack against the .com servers would > take out most of the internet since the technical infrastructure is so > heavily dependent on the the .com zone. Any dummy should understand that. > > It's irrelevant who runs the .com zone - the problem here is its popularity > as a tld label also makes it vulnerable to attack because so many name space > objects - ns hosts - are technically dependent on the zone. > > The day .com goes off line - and this day is inevitable - most of the > internet will simply disappear for so many folks. I look forward to that > day - will give me an excuse to take the day off and enjoy an Internet free > day.. > > regards > joe baptista > > -- > Joe Baptista > www.publicroot.org > PublicRoot Consortium > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative > & Accountable to e Internet community @large. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) > Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 > > > -- Joe Baptista www.publicroot.org PublicRoot Consortium ---------------------------------------------------------------- The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084

1 0

TR: [gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08] Public Comment: Initial Report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (Part A)
by Sébastien Bachollet Jan. 25, 2009

Jan. 25, 2009

For information Sébastien Bachollet Président Isoc France sebastien.bachollet(a)isoc.fr www.egeni.org www.isoc.fr -----Message d'origine----- De : owner-gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08@icann.org] De la part de Glen de Saint Géry Envoyé : samedi 24 janvier 2009 15:55 À : Gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08(a)icann.org Objet : [gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08] Public Comment: Initial Report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (Part A) To: council[at]gnso.icann.org; liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] [To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org] Dear All, REMINDER: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-09jan09-en.htm Public Comment: Initial Report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (Part A) You are encouraged to submit comments on the Initial Report on the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (Part A) from 9 to 30 January 2009. Please note a summary report has been published in Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish on pages: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/ and can be accessed from the public comment section http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#irtp-report A public comment period opened on Friday 9 January 2009 for 21 days on an Initial Report into the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP). The IRTP Part A Policy Development Process is the first in a series of five planned PDPs to address areas for improvements in the existing Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy. http://www.icann.org/en/transfers/policy-12jul04.htm The IRTP Part A PDP concerns three 'new' issues: (1) the potential need for exchange of registrant email information between registrars, (2) the potential need for including new forms of electronic authentication to verify transfer requests and avoid 'spoofing', and (3) to consider whether the IRTP should include provisions for 'partial bulk transfers' between registrars. A Working Group, launched by the GNSO Council for this PDP, started its deliberations on 5 August 2008 and has now published an Initial Report. PLEASE NOTE: The Working Group will not make a final decision on which solution(s), if any, to propose to the GNSO Council before a thorough review of the comments received during the public comment period and in the final constituency statements has taken place. Following its deliberations, the Working Group has made some preliminary conclusions for each issue, which it hopes will inspire further comments from the public as well as the constituencies. These preliminary conclusions are as follows: Issue I - Is there a way for registrars to make Registrant E-mail Address data available to one another? The WG noted that WHOIS was not designed to support many of the ways in which it is currently used to facilitate transfers. Some members suggested that finding a way to make the Registrant e-mail address more readily available could be addressed as part of an overall technical modernization of the WHOIS protocol. This could be through updates to the existing protocol, modification of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) or adoption of the Internet Registry Information Service (IRIS) protocol. However, after review and discussion none of these options received broad agreement. The WG did note that, in the absence of a simple and secure solution for providing the gaining registrar access to the registrant email address, future IRTP working groups should consider the appropriateness of a policy change that would prevent a registrant from reversing a transfer after it has been completed and authorized by the admin contact. This option would not change the current situation whereby a losing registrar can choose to notify the registrant and provide an opportunity to cancel a transfer before the process is completed. Issue II - Whether there is need for other options for electronic authentication? Based on the discussion in the Working Group, there appears to be broad agreement that there is a need for other options for electronic authentication. However, opinions in the Working Group differ as to whether these options should be developed by means of GNSO policymaking or should be left to market solutions. Issue III - Whether the policy should incorporate provisions for handling partial bulk transfers between registrars? Based on the discussion in the Working Group, there appears to be broad agreement that there is no need to incorporate provisions for handling partial bulk transfers between registrars at this stage. The Working Group believes that these scenarios can be addressed either through the existing Bulk Transfer provisions, or through existing market solutions. As stated in the ICANN Bylaws, the Initial Report is posted for public comment for 20 days. The comments received will be analyzed and used for redrafting of the Initial Report into a Final Report to be considered by the GNSO Council for further action. The Working Group would like to encourage everyone to review the complete Initial Report http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-a-initial-report-08jan09.pdf [PDF, 383K] before submitting comments. Comments on the Initial Report should be sent to irtp-initial-report@xxxxxxxxxx Public comments received can be accessed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/irtp-initial-report/. The deadline for submission of comments is 30 January 2009. Related links: Part A Initial Report: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-a-initial-report-08jan09.pdf [PDF, 383K] Existing Transfer Policy: http://www.icann.org/en/transfers/policy-12jul04.htm Thank you for your cooperation. kind regards, Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Network Solutions Under Large Scale DDoS Attack
by Bill Silverstein Jan. 25, 2009

Jan. 25, 2009

> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 1:56 PM, John R. Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: > > Don't bother telling me that - email the journalist who wrote the article. > > The issue here is that a successful attack against the .com servers would take out most of the internet since the technical infrastructure is so heavily dependent on the the .com zone. Any dummy should understand that. He needs to tell you! It is the network solution name servers under attack, not the TLD servers for Verisign. This only effects the .com domains that are using Network Solutions' DNS. Or at least that is my read from the articles.

2 1

New gTLD Delays Purportedly Announced at ICANN Rome Gathering
by Danny Younger Jan. 24, 2009

Jan. 24, 2009

http://www.mailclub.info/article.php3?id_article=969

2 1

ICANN Accountability Update
by Danny Younger Jan. 23, 2009

Jan. 23, 2009

Stuart Lawley and the ICM Registry (proponents of the .xxx initiative) have filed a 522-page brief in the ongoing Independent Review Process that began last June. The document with supporting witness statements from Becky Burr and Dr. Liz Williams, along with expert testimonies from Milton Mueller and Prof. Jack Goldsmith, may be found here: http://www.icmregistry.com/irp.html Earlier filings (ICM & ICANN) are cited here: http://www.icann.org/en/irp/icm-v-icann.htm

1 0

Travel Problems - Summit ICANN Mexico
by Aislan Vargas Basilio Jan. 23, 2009

Jan. 23, 2009

Anyone of you had the same problem that I had? I didn´t receive feedback from BCD Travel agents. I´m quite worried, please I need help. Regards, Aislan Vargas Basilio AGEIA DENSI Brasil

2 1

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Jan. 23, 2009

Jan. 23, 2009

Total of 1 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jan 23 00:53:06 EST 2009 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 6722 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 6722 | Total

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Jan. 16, 2009

Jan. 16, 2009

Total of 43 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jan 16 00:53:03 EST 2009 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 11.63% | 5 | 10.26% | 36530 | jefsey at jefsey.com 11.63% | 5 | 8.65% | 30802 | johnl at iecc.com 9.30% | 4 | 8.86% | 31547 | evan at telly.org 9.30% | 4 | 6.68% | 23779 | bfausett at internet.law.pro 6.98% | 3 | 7.85% | 27943 | ajp at glocom.ac.jp 4.65% | 2 | 8.84% | 31497 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 4.65% | 2 | 5.57% | 19829 | brenbe at consumer.org 4.65% | 2 | 4.72% | 16828 | sebastien.bachollet at isoc.fr 4.65% | 2 | 4.48% | 15968 | fsylla at gmail.com 2.33% | 1 | 5.82% | 20724 | dthompson at gov.nu.ca 2.33% | 1 | 4.81% | 17129 | roberto at icann.org 2.33% | 1 | 2.78% | 9893 | vanda at uol.com.br 2.33% | 1 | 2.44% | 8705 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 2.33% | 1 | 2.08% | 7396 | email at hakik.org 2.33% | 1 | 2.04% | 7248 | carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com 2.33% | 1 | 2.02% | 7210 | plzak at arin.net 2.33% | 1 | 1.91% | 6820 | dogwallah at gmail.com 2.33% | 1 | 1.87% | 6668 | franck.martin at gmail.com 2.33% | 1 | 1.84% | 6564 | wendy at seltzer.com 2.33% | 1 | 1.83% | 6526 | icann-list at sorehands.com 2.33% | 1 | 1.73% | 6173 | narten at us.ibm.com 2.33% | 1 | 1.70% | 6070 | lists at privaterra.info 2.33% | 1 | 1.21% | 4311 | joly at punkcast.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 43 |100.00% | 356160 | Total

1 0