A call for topics for the ICANN73 GAC-ALAC bilateral meeting
Dear all, In line with the long-standing tradition of bilateral GAC/ALAC meetings, the next opportunity to meet with the GAC is scheduled for March 10th. Planning for that event together with the GAC Liaison to the GAC we are reaching out with a kind request for your suggestions of issues to be discussed. The proposal for a topic that has been received from the GAC is: "Public Interest Processes to be discussed in light of the plenary session". As a reminder, the standing agenda items thus far have included * DNS Abuse, * Public Interest, * EPDP and * SubPro, whereas we might want to review this list for any topics to be added or replaced. We are also looking to set up the small WG on the "Joint White Paper on recommendations of concrete and enforceable contract provisions regarding the DNS Abuse mitigation between ICANN and Contracted parties," with a first working meeting happening ahead of ICANN 73. It might be recommended to keep this WG small and focused, hence recommendations for due process in identifying its members would be most welcome. I would be happy to further discuss these items in the coming CPWG call, but equally comfortable with following up in this e-mail thread. Thank you for considering and kind regards, Joanna Kulesza <https://email.kisa.or.kr:8443/mail/PutAck.jsp?ack_args=c2VudF9maWxlPXN5Y2hh bmdAa2lzYS5vci5rci8uU2VudC8xNjQzMDk4NTQ1NjY1Ljc3NTExLmtpc2Emc2VuZF9kYXRlPTIw MjIwMTI1MTcxNTQ1JnN1YmplY3Q9QWJvdXQgSUNBTk43MyBBTEFDLUdBQyBCaWxhdGVyYWwgTWVl dGluZy4=&to_email=jkuleszaic>
re: "public interest processes" does this refer to the Global Public Interest Framework" the board is trying to instill in board and community deliberations -- narrowly defined as the public interest as it relates to ICANN by-laws and other governance documents. Or is these an intention here to speak about the public interest generally. That would a much wider discussion. Marita On 2022-01-27 5:11 a.m., jkuleszaicann--- via CPWG wrote:
Dear all,
In line with the long-standing tradition of bilateral GAC/ALAC meetings, the next opportunity to meet with the GAC is scheduled for March 10th. Planning for that event together with the GAC Liaison to the GAC we are reaching out with a kind request for your suggestions of issues to be discussed.
The *proposal for a topic that has been received from the GAC* is: "*Public Interest Processes* to be discussed in light of the plenary session”.
As a reminder, the standing agenda items thus far have included
* DNS Abuse, * Public Interest, * EPDP and * SubPro,
whereas we might want to *review this list for any topics to be added or replaced*.
We are also looking to set up *the small WG on the “Joint White Paper on recommendations of concrete and enforceable contract provisions regarding the DNS Abuse* *mitigation* between ICANN and Contracted parties," with a first working meeting happening ahead of ICANN 73. It might be recommended to keep this WG small and focused, hence recommendations for due process in identifying its members would be most welcome.
I would be happy to further discuss these items in the coming CPWG call, but equally comfortable with following up in this e-mail thread.
Thank you for considering and kind regards,
Joanna Kulesza
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@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.
Dear Marita, Yes, indeed, I believe the former to be the case with the internet of directly referencing the GPIF. All best wishes, Joanna From: Marita Moll <mmoll@ca.inter.net> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 4:39 PM To: jkuleszaicann@gmail.com; cpwg@icann.org Subject: Re: [CPWG] A call for topics for the ICANN73 GAC-ALAC bilateral meeting re: "public interest processes" does this refer to the Global Public Interest Framework" the board is trying to instill in board and community deliberations -- narrowly defined as the public interest as it relates to ICANN by-laws and other governance documents. Or is these an intention here to speak about the public interest generally. That would a much wider discussion. Marita On 2022-01-27 5:11 a.m., jkuleszaicann--- via CPWG wrote: Dear all, In line with the long-standing tradition of bilateral GAC/ALAC meetings, the next opportunity to meet with the GAC is scheduled for March 10th. Planning for that event together with the GAC Liaison to the GAC we are reaching out with a kind request for your suggestions of issues to be discussed. The proposal for a topic that has been received from the GAC is: "Public Interest Processes to be discussed in light of the plenary session”. As a reminder, the standing agenda items thus far have included 1. DNS Abuse, 2. Public Interest, 3. EPDP and 4. SubPro, whereas we might want to review this list for any topics to be added or replaced. We are also looking to set up the small WG on the “Joint White Paper on recommendations of concrete and enforceable contract provisions regarding the DNS Abuse mitigation between ICANN and Contracted parties," with a first working meeting happening ahead of ICANN 73. It might be recommended to keep this WG small and focused, hence recommendations for due process in identifying its members would be most welcome. I would be happy to further discuss these items in the coming CPWG call, but equally comfortable with following up in this e-mail thread. Thank you for considering and kind regards, Joanna Kulesza _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@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.
Dear all, As you probably know, we have entered the UN International Decade of Indigenous Languages - see for instance https://en.unesco.org/news/upcoming-decade-indigenous-languages-2022-2032-fo.... I wonder whether we can discuss with the GAC whether we can take joint actions in support of the multilingualism on the Internet, as this seems to me a domain in which we have common interests. This is a very wide area, and there is the serious risk of dispersing our scarce resources to cover a too large footprint, but maybe we can identify one or two specific items to start working on. As an example, we can discuss whether we can take joint actions in support of the Universal Acceptance. You have heard me several times arguing that UA is not a sufficient tool to guarantee universal and meaningful access to the internet, but it is surely a necessary one. Now we have an ALAC Liaison to UASG - congratulations Satish!!! - and maybe it is a good time to check whether we can discuss with the GAC some common objectives and coordinate actions. Cheers, Roberto On 27.01.2022, at 11:11, jkuleszaicann--- via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Dear all, In line with the long-standing tradition of bilateral GAC/ALAC meetings, the next opportunity to meet with the GAC is scheduled for March 10th. Planning for that event together with the GAC Liaison to the GAC we are reaching out with a kind request for your suggestions of issues to be discussed. The proposal for a topic that has been received from the GAC is: "Public Interest Processes to be discussed in light of the plenary session”. As a reminder, the standing agenda items thus far have included * DNS Abuse, * Public Interest, * EPDP and * SubPro, whereas we might want to review this list for any topics to be added or replaced. We are also looking to set up the small WG on the “Joint White Paper on recommendations of concrete and enforceable contract provisions regarding the DNS Abuse mitigation between ICANN and Contracted parties," with a first working meeting happening ahead of ICANN 73. It might be recommended to keep this WG small and focused, hence recommendations for due process in identifying its members would be most welcome. I would be happy to further discuss these items in the coming CPWG call, but equally comfortable with following up in this e-mail thread. Thank you for considering and kind regards, Joanna Kulesza _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@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.
Dear all, Thank you for a productive CPWG call today. Please kindly see attached a list of topics to considered for the GAC/ALAC bilateral meeting with a kind request to <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> @ICANN At-Large Staff to upload it onto the Wiki in a format similar to the one proposed by Justine: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186778158 . <mailto:justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> @justine.chew.icann@gmail.com as per your suggestion, I added the issues raised for the GNSO meeting, feel free to specify which would be most relevant also for the GAC meeting. @All, please share comments on the list by the end of the week. Thank you and best wishes, Joanna From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano via CPWG Sent: Wednesday, February 2, 2022 8:32 AM To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] A call for topics for the ICANN73 GAC-ALAC bilateral meeting Dear all, As you probably know, we have entered the UN International Decade of Indigenous Languages - see for instance https://en.unesco.org/news/upcoming-decade-indigenous-languages-2022-2032-fo.... I wonder whether we can discuss with the GAC whether we can take joint actions in support of the multilingualism on the Internet, as this seems to me a domain in which we have common interests. This is a very wide area, and there is the serious risk of dispersing our scarce resources to cover a too large footprint, but maybe we can identify one or two specific items to start working on. As an example, we can discuss whether we can take joint actions in support of the Universal Acceptance. You have heard me several times arguing that UA is not a sufficient tool to guarantee universal and meaningful access to the internet, but it is surely a necessary one. Now we have an ALAC Liaison to UASG - congratulations Satish!!! - and maybe it is a good time to check whether we can discuss with the GAC some common objectives and coordinate actions. Cheers, Roberto On 27.01.2022, at 11:11, jkuleszaicann--- via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > wrote: Dear all, In line with the long-standing tradition of bilateral GAC/ALAC meetings, the next opportunity to meet with the GAC is scheduled for March 10th. Planning for that event together with the GAC Liaison to the GAC we are reaching out with a kind request for your suggestions of issues to be discussed. The proposal for a topic that has been received from the GAC is: "Public Interest Processes to be discussed in light of the plenary session”. As a reminder, the standing agenda items thus far have included * DNS Abuse, * Public Interest, * EPDP and * SubPro, whereas we might want to review this list for any topics to be added or replaced. We are also looking to set up the small WG on the “Joint White Paper on recommendations of concrete and enforceable contract provisions regarding the DNS Abuse mitigation between ICANN and Contracted parties," with a first working meeting happening ahead of ICANN 73. It might be recommended to keep this WG small and focused, hence recommendations for due process in identifying its members would be most welcome. I would be happy to further discuss these items in the coming CPWG call, but equally comfortable with following up in this e-mail thread. Thank you for considering and kind regards, Joanna Kulesza _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> CPWG@icann.org <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg> 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> https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service ( <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos> 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.
On 02/02/2022 14:43, jkuleszaicann--- via CPWG wrote:
Dear all,
Thank you for a productive CPWG call today.
Please kindly see attached a list of topics to considered for the GAC/ALAC bilateral meeting with a kind request to @ICANN At-Large Staff <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> to upload it onto the Wiki in a format similar to the one proposed by Justine: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186778158 <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186778158> .
@justine.chew.icann@gmail.com <mailto:justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> as per your suggestion, I added the issues raised for the GNSO meeting, feel free to specify which would be most relevant also for the GAC meeting.
@All, please share comments on the list by the end of the week.
Sorry for missing the meeting today. Just some comments on that EU DNS Abuse study linked in the Word document. 1. The definition of DNS Abuse is too wide and seems to include IP issues which are not DNS Abuse (they are Content Abuse issues rather than DNS) and are covered by UDRP and URS in gTLDs with ccTLDs having their own versions. 2. The CENTR estimate of web usage is inaccurate. This is not an accurate measurement of web usage and development. It is highly misleading because web usage across TLDs varies. I also don't rate the methodology as adequate. Usage in the top 100 gTLDs varies considerably and some are nowhere near as developed as the CENTR estimate claims. The ccTLDs also have their own quirks and complexities. 3. The economics of DNS Abuse seems to be missing. The heavy discounting model used by some of the new gTLDs to drive registration volume has changed the economic model of some kinds of DNS abuse. (There was a Dutch study a few years ago that established that there was a major switch of problematic registrations from the legacy gTLDs to the new gTLDs that was linked to the costs of registration. The mention, in this EU DNS Abuse document, of problem registrations being one year registrations was semed lacking a clue on the economics of abusive registrations. The abusive registrant simply lets the existing abusive registration drop and simply registers another discounted domain name. It may seem obvious to those of us in the domain name business but to those outside it, it is obviously a bit of a mystery. 4. It is rather ironic to see the born again hard attitude about .EU and speculative and abusive registrations considering that the incompetence of those forming the regulations for the .EU ccTLD left the ccTLD open to being completely plundered when it launched. It never quite became the European Union's alternative to the .COM gTLD as a direct result. The reality is that .EU is not even a third choice TLD for most registrants in the EU as they tend to register in their local ccTLD first, .COM second and then, perhaps, .NET or .ORG gTLDs. Some movement on abusive registrations in the .EU is a good thing even if it is about 17 years too late. 5. The ICANN definition of DNS Abuse is superior to this rather muddled attempt at a definition that blurs the line between DNS Abuse and Content Abuse. It is an IP community wishlist to save money on UDRP actions. 6. DNS Abuse is a moving target. Those doing the abuse adapt and change their behaviour. The problem with many of the approaches is that the are trying to solve problems from last year or the year before and are often unaware of current threats. 7. The NIS2 Directive is a poorly reasoned disaster in how it defines the DNS chain as critical infrastructure. 8. The technical appendix is interesting and worth reading. Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com ********************************************************** -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com
On 02/02/2022 18:34, John McCormac via CPWG wrote:
On 02/02/2022 14:43, jkuleszaicann--- via CPWG wrote: 3. The economics of DNS Abuse seems to be missing. The heavy discounting
The technical appendix is much better in this regard than the main report as it does mention the economics and the potential for free and heavily discounted TLDs to be used for abusive registrations. One aspect of the compromised websites is that they are often used for blackhat SEO purposes with links to Pharing websites injected into the websites database (typically Wordpress or Joomla that has insecure plug-ins). This, however, may be Content Abuse rather than DNS abuse. Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com ********************************************************** -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com
participants (4)
-
jkuleszaicann＠gmail.com -
John McCormac -
Marita Moll -
Roberto Gaetano