- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Fw: Re: [ga] .xxx Registry Files for Independent Review
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 17, 2008

June 17, 2008

All, FYI thanks to Danny. Read and weap or rejoice, depending on your particular bent. -----Forwarded Message----- >From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com> >Sent: Jun 17, 2008 4:28 PM >To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org, denise.michel(a)icann.org, ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov, stacy.burnette(a)icann.org >Cc: aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov, jeffrey(a)icann.org, twomey(a)icann.org, robert(a)privaterra.org, vb(a)bertola.eu >Subject: Re: [ga] .xxx Registry Files for Independent Review > >Danny and all, > > Well, well, well... My how the worm turns, eh? > > I for one am not surprised at this perfictly reasonable >filing and the reasons given by ICM, even though I personally >am against their original patition for .XXX. As to competition >in this "Space", no pun intended, I believe that there is >"Plenty" of competition, if you'll pardong the pun, all be >it that in this Market segment that competition is not >as substancial ( Exceptions .org, .com, .info, .ws, .it, >.tk, and the always popular .sl, for somwhat obvious >reasons )at the TLD level, so to speek. > > I am also sure that the Domain Name speculators were >and remain disappointed that .XXX was shot down for >moral reasons, contrary to ICANN's stated reasons >as Danny's provided links falsely indicate. The >permiations for domain names in the proposed .XXX >have rather interesting cultural and denoted meanings >as it were that might have some significant value to >future interested parties. > > However making money in the explotation of persons >of dubious behaviors is not reasonably exceptable, >and should not be. Yet ICANN's reason for rejecting >the patition should have been a completely honest one >from the onstart, which is telling in how ICANN determins >what is and what is not acceptable for a TLD of sTLD in >this case. > > So either ICANN abides by it's own bylaws and policies >or it doesn't. Can we say, "Hoist on it's own patard" >again? > >-----Original Message----- >>From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >>Sent: Jun 17, 2008 10:11 AM >>To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org >>Subject: [ga] .xxx Registry Files for Independent Review >> >> >>http://www.icmregistry.com/IRP/Request.pdf >>http://www.icmregistry.com/press.html >> >> >> > >Regards, > >Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) >"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - > Abraham Lincoln > >"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is >very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt > >"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; >liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by >P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." >United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] >=============================================================== >Updated 1/26/04 >CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. >div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. >ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail >jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com >My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Article on anonymous domains and spam
by Derek Smythe June 17, 2008

June 17, 2008

Hi All The following article appeared in the Washington Post: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2008/06/anonymous_domain_sales_a… Regards Derek

1 0

france@large press release (in French)
by JFC Morfin June 17, 2008

June 17, 2008

It seems that this PR did not make it to the lists. I send it again. It clarifies the france@large/ALAC relations. jfc ---- Versailles, le 16 juin 2008. france@large est la plus ancienne organisation mondiale d'"Internet @larges" ou d'"internautes ad largum", c'est à dire libres de toute contrainte, de ce fait considérés dans leur diversité comme représentatifs des besoins de toute la communauté des internautes sans distinction d'origine ou d'orientation d'aucune sorte. Formée en association 1901 en 2000 par les candidats français au Conseil d'Administration de l'ICANN, elle se compose d'un secrétariat coopté supportant une libre de diffusion de membres, ses sites et outils communs, de multiples Centres d'eXpertise et leur coopération avec divers projets. http://franceatlarge.org. france@large diffuse le communiqué de presse suivant. En tant que gestionnaires et propriétaires de nos propres internets, et par là co-propriétaires de l'internet général, nous sommes soucieux d'un fonctionnement efficace et harmonieux des protocoles, de l'adressage, du nommage et des référentiels nécessaires à sa technologie numérique et à l'émergence des solutions et services de facilitation sémantiques, dans le cadre d'un support multilinguistique robuste. A ce titre nous sommes attentifs à l'interopérabilité de nos choix techniques avec ceux de la communauté ICANN/IETF. Nous avons donc fait beaucoup pour aider à un accueil convenable de l'ICANN à Paris et pour la coopération de nos projets. Dans le but de leur montrer qu'il n'y avait pas que les Etats-Unis dans l'Internet et que nous étions prêts à travailler ensemble, pour autant que l'on adopte, dans le respect de chacune des cultures et avec le souci de chacun des intérêts nationaux, des valeurs plus françaises et moins mercantiles. Nous avons donc proposé notre coopération à un effort d'interopérabilité avec l'Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) auprès du Groupe de Travail présidé par Vint Cerf sur le support linguistique dans le système des noms de domaine (DNS), et à l'effort d'intégration de l'ICANN auprès de nos collègues @large français, européens et mondiaux. Nous avons engagé l'initiative Multilinc à la frontière du DNS et du sémantique et trouvé un modus vivendi acceptable entre les projets IDNA de l'IETF et ML-DNS de france@large (qui visent à un support totalement indifférencié et égal des toutes les langues, écritures et cultures, ce à quoi la langue française et l'expérience de la francophonie nous prédisposent). Par contre, l'ICANN a dans un premier temps décliné notre coopération avant leur sommet européen de Paris où nous ne pourrons donc présenter nos positions, projets pour la communauté et accomplissements. france@large et l'assemblée de ses membres @large en prennent acte. Nous comprenons par là que l'ICANN poursuit des objectifs différents des nôtres et qu'elle veut nous amener à les adopter en préalable. Nos objectifs sont ceux des Déclarations unanimes du Sommet Mondial pour la Société de l'Information : l'engagement que notre société soit "people centric, à caractère humain, centrada en la persona". N'étant pas intéressée par un tel changement d'allégeance, france@large ne peut que suggérer aux @large français de participer à titre personnel à la Conférence de l'ICANN où ils peuvent nouer des liens avec des personnes soumises aux mêmes contraintes qu'eux et mieux comprendre leurs problèmes communs. france@large, ignorée par l'ICANN, entend n'avoir à cette conférence aucune présence officielle ou pro-active, et ignorer l'ICANN, évitant ainsi les risques de friction. Ce dont traite l'ICANN ne l'intéressant que par les contraintes qui en résultent pour la communauté Internet mondiale, elle reste toutefois ouverte à tout dialogue facilitant la transition du IANA vers une solution distribuée, dont certains de ses membres engagent l'expérimentation sur le terrain. Elle organise le 27 juin à 14 heures une réunion de débriefing de la venue de l'ICANN pour ceux qui le désirent, participe le 28 juin à l'InterCamp au Sommet de l'Arche de la Défense, et tient le 2 juillet une assemblée générale où ces Centres d'eXpertise discuteront d'un plan stratégique pour un Internet Sémantique et Multilingue, centré sur les personnes, dans le respect de leurs cultures et des nos valeurs. Elle reconstruit actuellement le dossier préparatoire à cette réunion. Elle organise ou participe à diverses autres réunions ou événements spécialisés tout au long de la Semaine de l'Internet Mondial de Paris qu'elle avait sucitée pour accompagner le travail engagé et accompli par Sébastien Bachollet et l'AGIFEM et où tous les Internet @larges présents à Paris sont très cordialement invités. Elle convie également le plus grand nombre des @larges français de participer à la manifestation EGENI, où nous escomptons tous fermement que M. Besson nous fera dire dans un contexte national interne les fondations de ce qu'il dira à l'ICANN dans un contexte international, et que nous verrons peut-être se dessiner avec les intervenants (Catherine Trautmann, Christopher Wilkinson, Bertrand de la Chapelle, etc.) les contours de l'Euro-FGI et des débats prioritaires au sein du FGI-FR (liste élargie et ouverte des Priorités Numériques). Toutes les informations sont sur le site de grance@large ou y seront dans les jours qui viennent au fur et à mesure de la reconstruction de l'agenda. http://egeni.org http://fr-fgi.fr http://assisesdunumerique.fr http://isoc.fr http://franceatlarge.org DIC 103 - Priorités Numériques http://wikifgi-fr.org/index.php?title=DIC_103_-_Priorit%C3%A9s_Num%C3%A9riq… _______________________________________________ diffusion mailing list diffusion(a)fgi-fr.org http://fgi-fr.org/mailman/listinfo/diffusion_fgi-fr.org

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Issues for Paris
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 17, 2008

June 17, 2008

Dominik and all, My response in interspersed below. -----Original Message----- >From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >Sent: Jun 16, 2008 3:06 AM >To: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com, Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> >Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Issues for Paris > >-----Original Message----- >From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of >Jacqueline A. Morris >Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 6:03 AM >To: Evan Leibovitch >Cc: NA Discuss >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Issues for Paris > >> Jacqueline Morris wrote: >> >> yes, the GAC is very powerful without any >> voting Board seat. And one of the reasons >> that I consistently ask WHY it is necessary >> to have a voting seat to have influence. >> I think that there's a concept that the vote >> means something in and of itself - honestly, >> if we have 40% of the Board seats , we can >> still lose EVERY vote if we are not respected, >> and have no influence! Whereas as you see with >> the GAC, you don't need to vote if you can >> persuade the people who have votes to vote your way. > >Jacqueline, do you mean this seriously or is this just a joke? The GAC >as an official governmental body and as such IMHO it has by its nature >an exclusively unique status within ICANN. If At-Large had 40% of the >Board seats and still lost every vote then it would be solely the >problem of At-Large from which it could still recover after making some >necessary internal changes. Without any seat At-Large can be doing its >best and there is no guarantee to achieve anything, that is a >second-class status. I didn't get the impression that Jacque was joking at all, nor was she IMO far off the mark either, dominik. However your point is also well taken as a matter of transparency, openness and accountability as such relates to ICANN and the ICANN bod in particular. Without the majority of the ICANN bod seats populated by user determined/voted upon representatives, ICANN will never achieve it's mandate and government entities independantly will legislate and regulate the Internet as they see fit. Some of this is already underway. So yes, the ALAC and the ALS'es are indeed in second class status. > >And what about to cancel all biased seats so that all the bodies are >given the same chance to persuade an independent group of people with >voting right. And what are the biased seats? The seats that, for >instance, voted for the Verisign agreement, or for the degradation of >the At-Large status to a second-class advisory body. Well from where I and our members sit, as users and user-registrants, we can no only vote with our $$ and business relationship choices. Our members are actively doing so, and will continue to do so until we are fully represented as one voice, one vote per user AND a majority on the ICANN bod. We will continue to oppose abuses as we and the law define them via the court systems if and when necessary or appropriate as some of our members have done in respect to the IPC's RIAA and the EU equivelents. > >A bit shocking for me, Jacqueline > >Dominik > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 16, 2008

June 16, 2008

Bret and all, I know our members will never agree to proportional representation model nor representatives appointed instead of elected to represent their interests and/or issues/concerns. Such a model is by design non-representative and undemocratic. So I myself agree with some of your concerns here Bret. The history of ICANN and so far the ALAC/ALS'es "Appointments" of representatives has been obismal and shown to be less than effectively representing actual user stated issues and concerns. -----Original Message----- >From: Bret Fausett <bfausett(a)internet.law.pro> >Sent: Jun 16, 2008 10:05 AM >To: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published > >> * Create two new ALAC positions, appointed by the Nominating >> Committee, both from Asia, to reflect that region's increased >> proportion of global Internet users > >I understand the thinking here, but I can see some downside to >"proportional representation," either by absolute population or >population of Internet users. > >First, are you going to take away a representative from Africa under >the same theory? > >Second, even within a region, the ALAC representatives aren't >distributed in accord with the population. If you have proportional >representation across the five regions, don't you then have to do it >within the regions? If the point of increasing the AP ALAC members is >to reflect the population, doesn't same principle dictate that of the >five proposed Asia-Pacific representatives, China always have at least >three and India at least one? I see no real way of making this work in >a manner that reflects the population. Five ALAC representatives from >English-speaking Australia and New Zealand wouldn't really address the >problems the Review Committee is trying to solve. > >Finally, has there been a complaint that some needs are being unmet by >the current representatives? What are those complaints? If there are >none, perhaps we're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. > >This is a subject I'd be interesting in hearing more about. > > Bret > > > > > > > > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Bad domains McAfee study
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 16, 2008

June 16, 2008

Roland and all, Thanks for chiming in Roeland. Good to have an old timer like yourself provide historic wisdom of which you are so well known for. I for one fully agree that censoring content itself is a slippery slope and should be avoided for the very reasons you so nicely stated. Additionally Registries and Registrars cannot adaquately oversee their registrants, and ICANN isn't willing to do so. This leaves Government LEA's to perform that function, which also isn't at times a very effective or wise idea. Yet FISA suggests doing just that in the US. And Canada as well as the UK have similar legislation and/or regulation nearing compleation to do likewise. ACTA for instance, a very recently negotiated in secret agreement between the US, Canada, and the EU countries is about to be considered for in part, the purposes of addressing content related issues, including IP interests and Child pornography content. If anyone want's some refrences on ACTA, please contact me off-list, I will be happy to forward them. -----Original Message----- >From: RoelandM(a)RoelandMeyer.Org >Sent: Jun 16, 2008 10:49 AM >To: "'Jeffrey A. Williams'" <jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com>, 'Wendy Seltzer' <wendy(a)seltzer.com>, "'Brendler,Beau'" <Brenbe(a)consumer.org>, aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov, ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov >Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide' <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca, bev(a)pcna.ca, icann-list(a)sorehands.com, namecritic(a)blogs.pn, bfausett(a)internet.law.pro, CWallace(a)cygnacom.com, carlton.samuels(a)uwimona.edu.jm, dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com, dave(a)farber.net, denise.michel(a)icann.org, derek(a)aa419.org, dpefeva(a)isoc.bg, dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk, elisabeth.porteneuve(a)cetp.ipsl.fr, enoss(a)tucows.com, frederic.teboul(a)icann.org, shearman(a)victoria.tc.ca, cgomes(a)verisign.com, jeffrey(a)icann.org, iza(a)anr.org, jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com, jefsey(a)club-internet.fr, baptista(a)publicroot.org, john-ietf(a)jck.com, jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net, Julie.myers(a)dhs.gov, matthias.langenegger(a)icann.org, mike(a)palage.com, michele(a)blacknight.ie, Jeff.Neuman(a)neustar.us, jnevett(a)networksolutions.com, nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org, twomey(a)icann.org, rguerra(a)privaterra.org, robert(a)privaterra.org, roberto(a)icann.org, ross(a)tucows.com, stacy.burnette(a)icann.org, sebastien.bachollet(a)isoc.fr, Thomas.E.Wrosch(a)STATE.OR.US, roessler(a)does-not-exist.org, DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA, vb(a)bertola.eu, joly(a)punkcast.com >Subject: RE: [At-Large] Bad domains McAfee study > >I have a difficult time believing that anyone would even consider registries responsible for content. This was a battle that we all fought long and hard over , in 1999. This skates perilously close to the edge of that slippery slope where we start denying domain registrations due to (perceived) content. When you start blocking any of them then the precedent is set and opens DNS registrations up to all sorts of insane censorship issues. The next thing you know, you will have some religious whacktard demanding that breastcancer.org be deleted because it contains the word "breast". > >What needs to happen is that bot-farmers and phishing racketeers need to start doing some serious jail time. International alliances need to be setup to do this, not forcing the registry operators to become unpaid "police". They should not be allowed to volunteer for that role either. > >We can find the bot farmers and we can catch the racketeers. What we can't seem to do is get them to spend more than three months in jail. > >For most of you on this list, yes I am the same rmeyer(a)mhsc.com that was on the IFWP and DNSO. I am currently a director of the TLDA with Joe Baptista. > > >--- >R O E L A N D M J M E Y E R >Nyon, CH >mailto: RoelandM(a)RoelandMeyer.Org >http://www.RoelandMeyer.Org >Mob: +41 79 295 14 68 > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com] >> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 11:11 PM >> To: Wendy Seltzer; Brendler,Beau; aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov; >> ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov >> Cc: At-Large Worldwide; alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca; bev(a)pcna.ca; icann- >> list(a)sorehands.com; namecritic(a)blogs.pn; Brenbe(a)consumer.org; >> bfausett(a)internet.law.pro; CWallace(a)cygnacom.com; >> carlton.samuels(a)uwimona.edu.jm; dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com; >> dave(a)farber.net; denise.michel(a)icann.org; derek(a)aa419.org; >> dpefeva(a)isoc.bg; dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk; >> elisabeth.porteneuve(a)cetp.ipsl.fr; enoss(a)tucows.com; >> frederic.teboul(a)icann.org; shearman(a)victoria.tc.ca; >> cgomes(a)verisign.com; jeffrey(a)icann.org; iza(a)anr.org; >> jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com; jefsey(a)club-internet.fr; >> baptista(a)publicroot.org; john-ietf(a)jck.com; jpalmer@american- >> webmasters.net; Julie.myers(a)dhs.gov; matthias.langenegger(a)icann.org; >> mike(a)palage.com; michele(a)blacknight.ie; Jeff.Neuman(a)neustar.us; >> jnevett(a)networksolutions.com; nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org; >> twomey(a)icann.org; rguerra(a)privaterra.org; robert(a)privaterra.org; >> roberto(a)icann.org; roelandm(a)roelandmeyer.org; ross(a)tucows.com; >> stacy.burnette(a)icann.org; sebastien.bachollet(a)isoc.fr; >> Thomas.E.Wrosch(a)STATE.OR.US; roessler(a)does-not-exist.org; >> DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA; vb(a)bertola.eu; wendy(a)seltzer.com; >> joly(a)punkcast.com >> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Bad domains McAfee study >> >> Wendy and all, >> >> I agree. Registries should not be held accountable for >> "Content". They are in part at least responsible for >> DNS configuration as such is a safty and security issue. >> Which was what this Mcafee study was all about. >> >> From my and our members experiance and to a great extent, >> our independant study, your accurate in that older DN's >> "Tend", but are all not necessarly less "infested" or >> "Dangerous" than newer DN's. Dot info domain names are far >> too often more "Dangerous" from a DNS configuration stand >> point than most, other than .cn .hu, .ca, .it, .co.uk, >> com.za, .com.au, .in and .ru, and more recently, .us. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy(a)seltzer.com> >> >Sent: Jun 9, 2008 12:23 PM >> >To: "Brendler, Beau" <Brenbe(a)consumer.org> >> >Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] Bad domains McAfee study >> > >> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> >Hash: SHA1 >> > >> >I'm not Afilias, but I'd tend to say that domain name doesn't equal >> >content, and a registry is not and should not be responsible for >> >domains' uses. >> > >> >I'm not sure this study is any more representative or useful than >> "older >> >sites tend to be less infested than newer ones" or "URLs that start >> with >> >WWW differ from those that don't." >> > >> >- --Wendy >> > >> >Brendler, Beau wrote: >> >> Thanks, Jaqueline, that's interesting. I'd also be really interested >> to >> >> hear Afilias' response to this characterization of .info. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Jacqueline A. Morris [mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com] >> >> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 1:33 PM >> >> To: Brendler, Beau >> >> Cc: At-Large Worldwide >> >> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Bad domains McAfee study >> >> >> >> Hi Beau >> >> There's been some discussion on the cc lists about this as you can >> >> imagine. >> >> Here's the .hk response to the media: >> >> >> >> We are very surprised to learn about the research findings from >> McAfee. >> >> In fact, in a meeting organized by Anti-Phishing Working Group last >> week >> >> in Tokyo Japan, Hong Kong Domain Name Registration (HKDNR) was >> invited >> >> to present its best practice in combating suspicious websites. We >> are >> >> trying to get in touch with the research author to gain more >> insights >> >> into this research and the findings. The research report shows the >> >> figures and analysis of the whole of last year. In particular, the >> >> report claimed that 9.9 million websites have been tested. It is >> >> suspected that most of the malicious sites were tested several >> months >> >> ago and no long exist. >> >> >> >> HKDNR is committed to providing a safe Internet environment for the >> >> community and has put in place various measures against suspicious >> >> websites. We have been working closely with Office of the >> >> Telecommunications Authority (OFTA), Hong Kong Police and Hong Kong >> >> Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Centre (HKCERT) to >> monitor >> >> and control the situation. In August last year, in conjunction with >> the >> >> list of suspicious domains provided by OFTA, we suspended over >> 10,000 >> >> domains in regard. Following that initiatives, the situation with >> '.hk' >> >> related suspicious websites has been greatly improved. >> >> >> >> We actively review our systems and domain name registration >> procedures >> >> and policies. Particularly, we have more stringent documentary >> >> requirements to combat suspicious websites registered overseas in >> order >> >> to catch up with the fast-changing Internet world. We also want to >> call >> >> for the general community to be aware of the issue and report to >> related >> >> authorities whenever they have queries accessing a web site. >> >> >> >> >> >> Brendler, Beau wrote: >> >>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24966835?GT1=43001 >> >>> >> >>> "McAfee found the most dangerous domains to navigate to are ".hk" >> >>> (Hong Kong), ".cn" (China) and ".info" (information)." >> >>> >> >>> Apologies if you've seen this already. >> >>> >> >>> BB >> >>> >> > >> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) >> >Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org >> > >> >iD8DBQFITYNEuuui10VsrVERAqc+AJ96GWQ9v+NDJWId5c8LWCLnZopX2gCfbMuT >> >bnubsA10ZEEcJI2Fcvya3D8= >> >=q+cj >> >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >ALAC mailing list >> >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge- >> lists.icann.org >> > >> >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > > >-- >All messages scanned with ClamWin anti-virus. >http://www.roelandmeyer.org >Complaints mailto:abuse@roelandmeyer.org > Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 16, 2008

June 16, 2008

Eduardo and all, I believe strongly that we know what the most important issues that users are concerned about. No. 1. on the list is Internet safty. This issue has several parts to it of course, one is DNS security which falls directly withing ICANN perview and remains largely unaddressed presently. The second most inportant issue that users are concerned about, and rightly so, is lack of compliance to the RAA's by registries and registrars as well as recomendations and suggestions put forth as a matter of the RAA-WG. Again and unfortunately according to Roberto the ICANN bod is seemingly unwilling to address those defined suggestions/recomendations vis a vi the RAA contracts. -----Original Message----- >From: Eduardo Diaz <ediaz(a)prtc.net> >Sent: Jun 16, 2008 11:47 AM >To: 'Evan Leibovitch' <evan(a)telly.org>, 'NA Discuss' <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published > >All: > >I have read the document. It seems that the ALAC structure is becoming and >going but there is still much work to do. Count us in for working in >developing the strategic/operational plans for next year. Hopefully , we'll >learn enough about the issues at hand (what's is important and what is not) >and be able to participate more actively. > >-ed > >-----Original Message----- >From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan >Leibovitch >Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:46 AM >To: NA Discuss >Subject: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published > >Well, folks, here it is. > >Summary of recommendations: >http://icann.org/reviews/alac/alac-draft-summary-recommendations-13jun08.pdf > >Full report: >http://icann.org/reviews/alac/alac-independent-review-final-draft-13jun08.pd >f > >Highlights: > > * Create two new ALAC positions, appointed by the Nominating > Committee, both from Asia, to reflect that region's increased > proportion of global Internet users > * No other structural changes to ALAC composition > * Give the existing structure a chance to work, but review the > effectiveness of the RALO/ALS structure at the next ALAC review > * Status quo regarding Board representation -- liaison with no vote > * ALAC should establish an annual Statement of Intent as well as > Strategic and Operational Plans > * Increase in dedicated staff to one person per region > * Increase the public comment period to allow ALAC more time to > adequately respond to issues > * More effective use of web-based tools to increase user > participation; specifically, preference of wikis over mailing lists > * Staff control over said web-based tools > * Regular ALS compliance reviews > >There will be a workshop on the ALAC review held in the Paris meeting, >and four people (Robert, Beau, Darlene and myself) will be representing >NARALO there. While Wendy and Alan are not specifically there to >represent us, they can still help advance our region's view. > >Comments -- especially specific "deal-breaking" issues -- are not only >welcomed, they're _needed_ for us to play our role in shaping the future >of ALAC. I urge you to read the report -- at very least the summary -- >and at least understand the rationale for their recommendations before >you state your case against them. :-) > >Please... even if you do not contribute regularly here, this is one of >those pivotal times when we really do need to hear from everyone. Love >it, hate it, mixed or neutral, we need your feedback this week! > >- Evan > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica >nn.org > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG. >Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1505 - Release Date: 6/16/2008 >7:20 AM > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Morality Police
by Danny Younger June 16, 2008

June 16, 2008

A significant discussion has emerged on the LACRALO list regarding the New gTLD Evaluation Process. LACRALO members are rightfully concerned about the GNSO recommendations that pertain to Morality and Public Order -- see the thread that begins here: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.or… For those of you with New gTLD policy and implementation concerns, please consider joining the GTLD-WG -- signup details are here: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg_atlarge-lists.icann…

3 3

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Issues for Paris
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 16, 2008

June 16, 2008

John and all, I fully agree with Evan's statement that full compliance with the RAA's is necessary and that ICANN hasn't seen to that unless after the fact. Further, I as Danny, Wendy, and others as part of the RAA-WG pointed out time an time again, that several new clauses to address glaring problems/issues need to be added to amend the RAA's as well. These should be well known as to what they are by now. John, no offense personally to you but it would seem obvious that the GAC reps. also represent users/citizens in a broad and somewhat removed sense as well, although they are appointed not elected representatives. So as pleasing or displeasing as this may be, we should all bare this in mind in respect to the GAC. The GAC is also part of DOC/NTIA's oversight responsibilities as well... -----Original Message----- >From: John Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com> >Sent: Jun 15, 2008 10:38 PM >To: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> >Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Issues for Paris > >> I suspect -- though others here with more background can confirm or deny >> -- that proper enforcement of the existing RAA would solve many >> problems. I found Stacy's response to Danny's last emailed question ... > >Completely agree. > >> that the GAC -- although, like ALAC has no direct Board seat, wields >> enormous power within ICANN. I would appreciate if some people here with >> some background could confirms or deny, and offer opinions on the >> organizational differences between the two advisory groups. > >They represent organizations with the ability to deliver thermonuclear >warheads. We don't. > >R's, >John > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Draft Final Report IDNC WG v1.pdf
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 15, 2008

June 15, 2008

All, Be advised isoc-au.org.au DNS is mis configured. Accepting Email from this Domain name my be fraudulent, has not Abuse email contact information, and has no postmaster Email contact address. Additionally there is no SPF record defined. All of which are violations or inconsistant with IETF standards or standards track. See: http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=isoc-au.org.au&token=… FWIW, if self regulation is ever going to work and work well, mis configured DNS for Domain Names cannot be allowed to be acceptable. -----Original Message----- >From: Siavash Shahshahani <shahshah(a)irnic.ir> >Sent: Jun 15, 2008 6:08 AM >To: cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au >Cc: 'ALAC internal list' <alac-internal(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, iamems(a)isoc-au.org.au, alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >Subject: Re: [At-Large] Draft Final Report IDNC WG v1.pdf > >Hi Cheryl, Hong, et al >Here's something in the draft I don't understand: On page 5 >(Introduction), in the paragraph beginning with "The IDNC WG >recommends...", the penultimate sentence reads: >------------------------------------------------ >It is suggested that the information will be collected on a confidential >basis by ICANN. >---------------------------------------------------- >Why the secrecy? We read everywhere else that all the stakeholders in >the territory will have to agree on both the TLD and the TLD manager. >I'm afraid the 'confidentiality' may become a cover for rejecting >proposals ICANN may be uncomfortable with for extraneous reasons. Could >somebody explain? >Siavash > > >Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote: >> Please find attached the Draft FINAL Report for Fast Track ccTLD IDN's >> >> >> >> This will be discussed in Paris at the 23-26 June, ICANN Meeting and your >> comments regarding this draft are welcome, please forward this onto your >> relevant communities of interest and respond to the list you received this >> from and Hong and I will ensure your comments are entered into the >> discussions being held. >> >> >> >> Kindest regards, >> >> >> >> Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0