April 2017 - Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4

Work Track 4 agenda for 4 May 2017
by Rubens Kuhl May 9, 2017

May 9, 2017

Dear WT4 members, The next call for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 4 - IDNs/Technical & Operations will take place for 60 minutes on Thursday, 4 May 2017 at 03:00 UTC, 04:00 London, 05:00 Brussels; Wednesday, 3 May 2017 20:00 Los Angeles, 23:00 Washington. For other times: http://migre.me/wwanH The proposed agenda is as follows: 1. Welcome 2. SOIs 3. Recap of name collision definitions and advices prior to 2012 application window 4. Recap of 2012-round collision measures (provisional and final) 5. Description of possible policy options expressed in CC2 questions 6. Differences between 2012 implementation and SAC066 SSAC Advice (time permitting) 7. AOB Adobe Connect room: https://participate.icann.org/newgtldsubteams/ You can connect your audio by following instructions in the pop up in the AC room, or use the Connect Me option that will be sent in the calendar invitation. Best, CLO & Rubens

3 6

Recording, AC Chat & Attendance from New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team Track 4 IDNs/Technical & Operations call on Thursday, 20 April 2017 20:00 UTC
by Michelle DeSmyter April 20, 2017

April 20, 2017

Dear All, Please find the attendance and recording of the call attached to this email. The Adobe Connect recording and AC Chat are below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 4 – IDNs/Technical & Operations held on Thursday, 20 April 2017 at 20:00 UTC. Adobe Connect recording: https://participate.icann.org/p6q3q59ksr6/ The recordings of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4 Agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/ILHRAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 20 April 2017 Michelle DeSmyter:Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 4 – IDNs/Technical & Operations call on Thursday, 20 April 2017 at 20:00 UTC Michelle DeSmyter:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_… avri doria:not quite completely here yet. Jennifer Chung:Thanks for the welcome Cheryl, glad to be on the call Rubens Kuhl:Sound is breaking up for me.... Rubens Kuhl:... is it a side effect of the AC changes ? Steve Chan:@Rubens, I'm on a phone and it's good for me. Steve Chan:Not sure if someone else might be able to comment on AC audio Emily Barabas:Draft CCT-RT comments are here for review: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume… Rubens Kuhl:One reference video on this type of collision is this DEFCON presentation: Rubens Kuhl:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbyDSvGasw Rubens Kuhl:Called "DEFCON 21 - DNS May Be Hazardous to Your Health - Robert Stucke" Julie Hedlund:Information from ICANN on Name Collisions: Here’s the ICANN guidance on it: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource… Rubens Kuhl:Emily/Julie: could we add the video above to the WT references ? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Julie does SSAC have yet to be published research on anything mentioned by Avri? Julie Hedlund:@ Cheryl: There is SAC090. I'll get the link. I don't think there is anything further. Steve Chan:SAC090: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste… Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):with us yes, but management must in my Biased view, be looked at and resolved Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):thus the importance of this and similar conversations Julie Hedlund:Also, SAC062: SAC Advisory Concerning the Mitigation of Name Collision Risk (07 November 2013) at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_group… Julie Hedlund:SAC090 is SSAC Advisory on the Stability of the Domain Namespace (22 December 2016) Alan Greenberg:Middle ground is almost certainly where we will end up. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):personal view is that I suspect so Alan avri doria:Alan, we often stick with status quo. avri doria:mitigation is a good middle postion in many things Alan Greenberg:Agreed. Just hazarding a guess. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):yes indeed Avri Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):or data yet unpublished Alan Greenberg:Where can we find reports of those 37 occurrences? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Time check 12 min in call ⌚ and Rubens and I have another call starting at top of the hour Rubens Kuhl:CLO, I have to make the same call. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):yes I noted that my friend :-) Alan Greenberg:I do understand what collisions mean. But examples of what the identified problems were is, in my opinion, important.\ Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):Thank you Cheryl and everyone. Emily Barabas:Thursday 4 May at 3:00 UTC avri doria:bye

1 0

Actions/Discussion Notes: Work Track 4 SubTeam Meeting 20 April
by Julie Hedlund April 20, 2017

April 20, 2017

Dear Sub Team Members, Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 20 April. These high-level notes are designed to help Work Track Sub Team members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant to be a substitute for the recording. Please also see the recording on the meetings page at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/Work+Track+4+Meetings. Note also that the referenced slides for today’s meeting are attached and excerpts from the chat room are included. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Action Items/Discussion Notes 20 April 1. Full Work Group Update -- Spent the last meeting working on the CCT-RT issues. -- Put together a response to the CCT-RT open comment that is up for review. See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LC-1-Z2auN2XTSJXyW34eWnGgNuuDInIOeJ1TcZ…. -- Next meeting talk through sending off the comment. -- Getting ready for the Geo Names at the top level 25 April at two different times. Everyone is invited and please sign up in advance. -- Drafting Teams on the open issues working. Staff has provided initial documents to work from. -- CC2 comment: Got a formal request for an extension. Looks like we can offer an extension of 3 weeks and still meet the document deadline for ICANN59. Out for discussion in case there are objections -- none yet. If comments are done people should send them in an not wait. 2. Name collisions in legacy gTLDs (.com, .net, .org, etc.) Slide 6: Name Collisions: New Name, Old Phenomena (1/2) -- End user expecting the DNS to work in one way and it works in a different names. -- No policy allowing those problems to be addressed by Contracted Parties. -- ICANN does not hold itself as the DNS police. -- Adopting a policy could be somewhat unprecedented. For discussion: Contracted Parties should be forced or could be allowed to take collision domains away from users (policy change) -- Possible threats does not warrent policy changes; no new policy required. Discussion: -- How many names are we talking about? Not clear what is the set of collision domains. SAC090 report and JAS report. -- One of the problems in defining a policy is such domains are generated by software bugs so we can't anticipate. Not knowing the scope is one of the things that makes it hard to have a policy on this. -- Question: How does this area relate to the APB reports issued with the new round? Is there a relationship? Answer: No connect. -- When we are talking about the SSAC and JAS report we are talking about collisions at the top level, but here we are talking about lower levels. For the last round they did devise certain mitigations. -- Have there been any studies on second level collisions? Do we have any follow on data on the mitigation strategies used in the previous round. Any suggestions as to their being a yellow track in this that perhaps we aren't changing the policy but nor are we forcing any behavior, but coming up with a recommendation for greater study of mitigation -- how inform, how educate, etc. -- Discussion in Copenhagen with Board on name space and coordination with the IETF. -- Shouldn't we be getting a presentation from the SSAC on name space/name collisions? Get advice and input from the SSAC. -- Need to make some recommendations out of this WG. -- Mark this as a topic to bring in external expertise. >From the chat: Steve Chan: SAC090: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-090-en.pdf Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): with us yes, but management must in my Biased view, be looked at and resolved Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): thus the importance of this and similar conversations Julie Hedlund: Also, SAC062: SAC Advisory Concerning the Mitigation of Name Collision Risk (07 November 2013) at https://www.icann.org/en/groups/ssac/documents/sac-062-en.pdf Julie Hedlund: SAC090 is SSAC Advisory on the Stability of the Domain Namespace (22 December 2016) Alan Greenberg: Middle ground is almost certainly where we will end up. Slide 7: Name collisions: New Name, Old Phenomena (2/2) For Discussion: Expired Domain Deletion and Expired Registration Recovery policies should be revised and changed? -- Possible threats does not warrant policy changes? Discussion: -- Are these policies enough? -- Seems like there is a lack of data. -- Note sure we are missing data and need to do studies. -- Still a lot of issues that are hard to digest and not every word in them is gospel. The studies that have been done are old. There doesn't seem to be new data. Find out if there is new data. >From the chat: Alan Greenberg: Middle ground is almost certainly where we will end up. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): personal view is that I suspect so Alan avri doria: Alan, we often stick with status quo. avri doria: mitigation is a good middle postion in many things Alan Greenberg: Agreed. Just hazarding a guess. 3. Name Collisions Framework in 2012 Round (slide 9) -- Requirement to pass a controlled interruption period. -- Current number of collision reports is 37 -- 0 life threatening. -- ICANN has not published the collision reports. For discussion: 2012-round registries should extend such support beyond the 2-year period (implementation change) -- Occurrence experience does not warrant creation of policy to override what is in the agreements (keep as is)? -- Is the current 2012-round process enough? -- No idea of how close occurrences came to being life threatening. Can't make an informed decision. Need to understand what the collisions were. -- Need to err on the side of caution but not to such an extent that it impacts the industry. You do have instances where you can analyze risk and the cost of mitigations compared to the cost of something going wrong. -- Just because something hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't. Need to know the consequences if it does.

1 0

WT4 Meeting Agenda
by Rubens Kuhl April 20, 2017

April 20, 2017

Dear WT4 members, Today's (April 20 2017) call for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 4 - IDNs/Technical & Operations will take place in a few minutes (20:00 UTC). The proposed agenda is as follows, since we agreed in the last call to revisit the same themes: 1. Welcome 2. SOIs 3. Full WG update (if any) 4. Name collisions in legacy gTLDs 5. Name collisions in 2012-round gTLDs 6. AOB Adobe Connect room: https://participate.icann.org/newgtldsubteams/ You can connect your audio by following instructions in the pop up in the AC room, or use the Connect Me option that was sent in the calendar invitation. Best, CLO & Rubens

1 0