April 2024 - CPWG - lists.icann.org

Re: [CPWG] Are Blockchain Domains within the Mission of ICANN - WAS RE: Questions to the board about distributed DNS
by Chokri Ben Romdhane Oct. 18, 2024

Oct. 18, 2024

Dear Friends, Please find the record of the Emerging Identifier Technologies <https://icann.zoom.us/rec/play/4ZhSDuzFnVqw66kYgnTuHdDzi_RH0IFCKqKuAzmmcFy7…> session , held during the ICANN75 meeting, it provides some use cases of the emerging identifiers technologie. Thank you @MOULOUD KHELIF <kelif(a)hotmail.com> for the reminder. Friendly regards Chokri Le sam. 27 août 2022 à 19:17, Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> a écrit : > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 5:39 AM Chokri Ben Romdhane <chokribr(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> But be aware if you confirm that the collision issues is/will never >> happened , as you have mentioned in your previous mail, and cross your >> finger that the regular DNS market will continue to attract more customers, >> compared to those NFT, Blockchain TLDs considering the ease of DNS >> management and security they are conferred to end users. >> > > Hi again, > > You made one fatal error in your assessment above: Internet end-users are > not registrants. > > End users don't care about DNS management, and the security THEY seek is > access to registrant details in the case of domains used for abuse. > The "security" you mention protects registrants and works against the > interests of end-users. > > It's totally possible that the hubris of DNS alternatives may lead to > collisions, but end-users will never see the effect of that, Browsers > continue to use the ICANN root and to date have never seen the benefit of > pointing to alternames. Plus, two of the biggest browser makers, Google and > Microsoft, have a deep vested interest in obstructing any alternative DNS. > Any alternate DNS hoping to be successful would need to create its own > browser, which is what the TOR project did. > > So even if alternative DNSs create TLDs that duplicate ICANN's they will > never present any collision or confusion to end-users. The only losers will > be registrants in the alternate systems. I have zero pity for them and they > are certainly not ALAC's concern or even ICANN's. > > Cheers, > - Evan > >

11 33

Meeting invitation: At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call on Wednesday, 01 May 2024 at 14:00 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff May 1, 2024

May 1, 2024

**If you require a dial out or need to state an apology, please contact At-Large staff at staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> with your preferred number*** Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 01 May 2024 at 14:00 UTC for 90 mins, For other times: https://tinyurl.com/3rwhehps<http://tinyurl.com/bdcm479f> The agenda (to be updated) and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/jACVEw<https://community.icann.org/x/cABkEw> Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566?pwd=UTJCdWRSZVdJNEhOYW02OVBqQVQ1Zz09 / Passcode: #CPWG2345* Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN ADIGO Conference Bridge: (subject to availability) EN, ES & FR: 3535 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind Regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 1

ATTENTION: IGF Call for Session Proposals open until TUESDAY 30 April 2024
by Silvia Vivanco April 25, 2024

April 25, 2024

Dear all, Kindly note that the deadline for IGF Session proposals is Tuesday 30 April 23:59 UTC. For further information see : https://www.intgovforum.org/en/content/igf%C2%A02024-call-for-session-propo… <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Activities+at+the+2024…>See the workspace at your disposal: At-Large Activities at the 2024 IGF<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Activities+at+the+2024…> Thank you very much! Silvia Silvia Vivanco Senior Manager, At-Large Regional Affairs Website: atlarge.icann.org<http://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icannatlarge<http://facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge> [signature_1784185100]

1 0

At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG)
by ICANN Policy Calendar April 25, 2024

April 25, 2024

**If you require a dial out or need to state an apology, please contact At-Large staff at staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> with your preferred number*** Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 01 May 2024 at 14:00 UTC for 90 mins, For other times: https://tinyurl.com/3rwhehps<http://tinyurl.com/bdcm479f> The agenda (to be updated) and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/jACVEw<https://community.icann.org/x/cABkEw> Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566?pwd=UTJCdWRSZVdJNEhOYW02OVBqQVQ1Zz09 / Passcode: #CPWG2345* Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN ADIGO Conference Bridge: (subject to availability) EN, ES & FR: 3535 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind Regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

1 0

Re: [CPWG] REMINDER / Meeting invitation: At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call on Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 17:30 UTC
by Tijani April 25, 2024

April 25, 2024

Good morning I missed this call as well as the othr call that conflited with this one because of a health issue Not sure I will participate in the upcoming calls I apologize tijani De : CPWG <cpwg-bounces(a)icann.org> au nom de ICANN At-Large Staff via CPWG <cpwg(a)icann.org> Répondre à : ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date : mercredi 24 avril 2024 à 11:02 À : CPWG <cpwg(a)icann.org>, na-discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" <euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, APAC-Discuss <apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, AFRI-Discuss <afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, lac-discuss-en <lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Objet : [CPWG] REMINDER / Meeting invitation: At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call on Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 17:30 UTC **If you require a dial out or need to state an apology, please contact At-Large staff at staff(a)atlarge.icann.org with your preferred number*** Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 17:30 UTC for 90 mins, For other times: https://tinyurl.com/ebuk8a57 The agenda and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/dQJyEw Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566?pwd=UTJCdWRSZVdJNEhOYW02OVBqQVQ1Zz09 / Passcode: #CPWG2345* Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN ADIGO Conference Bridge: (subject to availability) EN, ES & FR: 3535 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org Thank you. Kind Regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org Facebook: facebook.com/icannatlarge Twitter: @ICANNAtLarge _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

1 0

REMINDER / Meeting invitation: At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call on Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 17:30 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff April 24, 2024

April 24, 2024

**If you require a dial out or need to state an apology, please contact At-Large staff at staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> with your preferred number*** Dear All, The next At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call is scheduled for Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 17:30 UTC for 90 mins, For other times: https://tinyurl.com/ebuk8a57 The agenda and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/dQJyEw Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566?pwd=UTJCdWRSZVdJNEhOYW02OVBqQVQ1Zz09 / Passcode: #CPWG2345* Real time transcription (RTT) available at (subject to availability): https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN ADIGO Conference Bridge: (subject to availability) EN, ES & FR: 3535 Toll-free access number (US and Canada): 800 550 6865 Other toll-free numbers: https://www.adigo.com/icann At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Wiki Space: https://community.icann.org/x/jYDpB If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> Thank you. Kind Regards, At-Large Staff ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/> Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge> Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

2 1

Additional Alternative Statement on .XXX Registry Renewal
by Andrew Chen April 24, 2024

April 24, 2024

Dear CPWG members, Please see linked below a proposed draft on the Proposed Renewal of the Registry Agreement for the .XXX top-level domain (TLD) public comment statement recently submitted by Jonathan Zuck. This draft, along with additional draft statements, will be discussed during the upcoming CPWG meeting. Draft Proposed Compromise: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NBrt_yXez2ExkQmfKisJs5flFe_it6-JTm-WOoq… Sincerely, Andrew -- Andrew Chen Policy Development Support Sr. Specialist, Policy Development Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) https://www.icann.org/ Skype: atchen122

1 0

Alternative Statement on .XXX Registry Renewal
by Evan Leibovitch April 23, 2024

April 23, 2024

As we get closer to the submission deadline, Carlton and I have reviewed the draft of the proposed ALAC response to the .XXX agreement renewal. In response to the .XXX registry wishing to simplify its contract obligations and bring them inline with those of other gTLDs, ALAC's comment counter-proposes five *new* requirements, including a third-party auditor for provisions not demanded of others. It is outrageous and unabashedly punitive in nature. I consider both the results and rationale of the draft ALAC comment to be as far from a true end-user perspective as could possibly be. So irreconcilable are our own views with it that we have crafted our own response for submission rather than try to word-tune the existing one. As a courtesy and to inform the next GPWG meeting, a draft of our response is available here <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oDRSATHcjC-hDW9KrOheBLo497Y63DuZtHM4n0O…>. We welcome comments and co-signatories. -- Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56

1 0

On adult websites, inertia, and basic fairness
by Evan Leibovitch April 22, 2024

April 22, 2024

Hi all, On Wednesday, among other topics was a presentation suggesting the position that ALAC should take regarding renewal of the contract for the .XXX TLD. The presentation offered was a dissection of the substance of changes proposed by the ICM registry for its new contract. Responses to the assertion that the CPWG was engaging in mission-creep were, IMO, confused and disturbing. Some of the counter-arguments made were that the registry was reneging on previous commitments and that it was somehow breaking the rules. Now, if during the run of its contract to date the registry did not keep true to its commitments, that is a serious issue and, as Carlton said in the call, as much a matter for ICANN compliance as for the registry. But that's not what was presented. What I saw was the registry taking the opportunity of the contract renewal to request a change in its terms and it is totally legitimate of them to do so. This renegotiation, on its face, is not an abuse of process, but exactly how the process is supposed to work. If the concern is that ICM has proposed contract changes, especially to remove safeguards, then let's examine those requests on their merits, and *strictly* through the lens of end-user impact. Specifically, I find the notion that provisions in the previous contract that are the subject of change request should be rejected primarily because they existed in the previous contract is ... ill-considered. "Because we've always done things that way" is broadly considered to be a dangerous <https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeslacouncil/2019/01/28/the-most-dangerous-…> and regressive basis for decision-making. If there is a change request that specifically impacts end-users, absolutely bring it forward. I found little of that, mainly because there was such a broad scattering of out-of-scope complaints that legitimate ones were surely buried. Complaining that the registry wants to enable the use of the TLD by registrants that are not part of the adult industry, for instance, does not serve the interest of end-users. That is a choice for would-be registrants to make. The approach taken demonstrates quite well the mission-creep pervasive within ALAC and this committee. Such overreach reflects poorly on us and diminishes the likelihood that our advice will be heeded. Legitimate concerns risk being rejected alongside the extraneous ones. Recall that this is a particular case of a TLD application made under very charged and political circumstances. I was at the 2011 San Francisco meeting where it was up for delegation and saw the street protests up-close. And while ICANN likes to say that it doesn't regulate^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcontract based on content, any controversy about .XXX at the time concerned nothing EXCEPT content. As a result I'm not surprised if the registry had to make extraordinary promises that have proven to be unsustainable in the dozen years that have passed. And now we have the benefit of hindsight. As it turns out, .XXX did not become the porn ghetto whose mass-blockage could keep the Internet clean by decree. A survey of the industry today reveals that NONE, not one, of the top 20 adult Internet destinations worldwide use .XXX. As a consequence, the singling out of .XXX for attention regarding sexual or child exploitation (etc), and insisting that it meet requirements not demanded of TLDs where the actual adult industry can be found, is the height of hypocrisy and political posturing. Either let's advocate to raise the mandatory standards of other TLDs to those demanded of .XXX, or allow it to relax its standards to the levels of other TLDs. What was ultimately most noteworthy to me about the debate was the use of "trust" to justify both the hypocrisy and the resistance to change. Indeed, this weaponization of "trust" on display was more obscene than anything found in the websites under .XXX. But that's a separate topic, best kept for another day. Cheers, Evan

6 10

Input Requested - Draft Public Comment Statement - Proposed Renewal of the Registry Agreement for the .XXX top-level domain (TLD)
by Andrew Chen April 22, 2024

April 22, 2024

Dear CPWG Members, In preparation for the Public Comment Statement submission for the Proposed Renewal of the Registry Agreement for the .XXX top-level domain (TLD)<https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/proposed-renewal-of-the-…>, please see linked below the Draft Public Comment Statement for the Proposed Renewal of the Registry Agreement for the .XXX top-level domain (TLD) Public Comment Proceeding. Please have all comments submitted by Wednesday, 24 April no later than 15:00 UTC. The Public Comment Statement may be further discussed during the 24 April CPWG call. Voting is scheduled to take place between 25 April and 28 April 2024. Draft Public Comment Statement: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C04oyYcUDLlKRC4fGoQNUc2f45cAcEC5jYDTCcg… Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Andrew -- Andrew Chen Policy Development Support Sr. Specialist, Policy Development Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) https://www.icann.org/ Skype: atchen122

1 0