- ispcp - lists.icann.org

Fwd: [council] Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations
by Mike O'Connor Feb. 14, 2014

Feb. 14, 2014

Begin forwarded message: > From: "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson(a)afilias.info> > Subject: [council] Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT 2) Final Report & Recommendations > Date: February 14, 2014 at 11:21:22 AM CST > To: <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > > All, > > If you are not already, please be aware of the following: > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/atrt2-recommendations-09jan14-e… > > The opportunity to provide comments ends one week from today 23h59 UTC on 21 Feb 2014. > > The ATRT2 interacted with many in the community during the course of its work, including directly with the GNSO Council which was certainly appreciated. We now have an opportunity to comment on the final report. > If we do intend to comment, my opinion is that we should at least submit an indication of intent, if not the primary comment, in the initial comment period and not wait for the reply period. > > Given the tight time frame, I have taken the unusual step of drafting a council response for your consideration. The ATRT2 deals with some critical areas of GNSO work and function and so it seems to me that we should respond to the call for comments, specifically in so far as the report deals with GNSO Policy and directly related areas. > > I am aware that some of you were on the ATRT2 and others actively worked on Council interaction with the ATRT2. Therefore, you may well have strong views on the subject matter. > > I look forward to your input and any suggestions. > > Thanks, > > > Jonathan > > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

Fwd: ICANN News Alert -- Statement from the I* Leaders Coordination Meeting, Santa Monica, 14 February 2014
by Mike O'Connor Feb. 14, 2014

Feb. 14, 2014

Begin forwarded message: > > > > News Alert > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-14feb14-en.htm > > Statement from the I* Leaders Coordination Meeting, Santa Monica, 14 February 2014 > 14 February 2014 > Leaders of the organizations responsible for coordination of the Internet technical infrastructure (loosely referred to as "I* leaders") met last week in Santa Monica, California, USA. During the 2-day meeting, they discussed activities underway and exchanged views and updates on a range of topics including: > > IETF and W3C efforts to improve overall Internet privacy and security (http://www.ietf.org & http://w3.org) > > Globalization of the IANA functions (http://www.iana.org) > > The 1net initiative, website and new collaboration forum (http://1net.org) > > The "Netmundial" – Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (http://netmundial.br) > > ICANN strategy panels and globalization efforts (http://www.icann.org) > > Preparations for the 2014 ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (http://www.internetsociety.org/plenipotbackground) > > Web 25th anniversary and W3C 20th anniversary planning (http://w3.org) > > There was discussion of the significant progress and momentum that has developed since our last meeting, and as well as the need for continued engagement of all stakeholders in evolution of the Internet ecosystem. The leaders were encouraged by the progress made in many areas, and note that there is a lot of work happening in our respective communities, driven by the participants and handled with the usual community processes. > > The meeting also welcomed Kathy Brown, the incoming CEO of the Internet Society, and Carolina Aguerre as a representative of the ccTLD registry community. > > Participating I* Leaders – > > Adiel A. Akplogan, CEO African Network Information Center (AFRINIC) > > John Curran, CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > Paul Wilson, Director General Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) > > Russ Housley, Chair Internet Architecture Board (IAB) > > Fadi Chehadé, President and CEO Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > Jari Arkko, Chair Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) > > Kathy Brown, President and CEO Internet Society (ISOC) > > Raúl Echeberría, CEO Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) > > Axel Pawlik, Managing Director Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) > > Jeff Jaffe, CEO World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) > > Carolina Aguerre, General Manager, LACTLD (association of ccTLD registry operators in Latin America and Caribbean) > > > > This message was sent to mike(a)haven2.com from: > ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 > Email Marketing by > > Manage Your Subscription > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

REMINDER: Meeting Invitation/ ISPCP CALL
by Nathalie Peregrine Feb. 13, 2014

Feb. 13, 2014

Dear All, The next ISPCP call is scheduled on Monday 14 October 2013 at 1300 UTC. To check your local time: http://tinyurl.com/psxypoh Adobe Connect room: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/_a819976787/ispcp/?launcher=false Please find the dial-in details below: Participant Passcode: Participant: 3429 # Dial-in numbers: http://www.adigo.com/icann/ Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie

2 8

next meeting
by WUKnoben Feb. 13, 2014

Feb. 13, 2014

All, according to the doodle poll the next ISPCP conference call is scheduled for Wednesday 05 Mar at 12:00 UTC. I’ll send out an agenda in time. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich

1 0

Fw: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] For your review - revised PI Working Definitions
by WUKnoben Feb. 13, 2014

Feb. 13, 2014

High level overview of the frameworkFor those who like to comment at this stage I attach the draft definitions the Policy&Implementation WG (subteam) has provided so far for discussion. I am personally not fully satisfied with the result, in particular with the differentiation between a “capital p” Policy and a “lower case” policy. To my understanding this could be explained in written form only. But I’ve never heard talking people or “experts” in upper or lower cases. This document is still a draft until the WG shall have provided its report. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Marika Konings Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:26 PM To: gnso-policyimpl-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] For your review - revised PI Working Definitions Dear All, On behalf of the definitions sub-team, please find attached an updated version of the proposed working definitions in which the sub-team has aimed to address the comments and feedback provided by the Working Group during the last meeting. As you review this document, please take into account that these working definitions have been developed for the limited use by the PI Working group as a starting point to facilitate the discussions and deliberations outlined in the WG's charter. These definitions are expected to evolve during and as a result of the WG deliberations. At the end of the process, the WG is expected to review these definitions, add/update as deemed appropriate and include them in the Final Report. Should you have any comments, proposed edits and/or questions, you are strongly encouraged to share these in advance of the next meeting (Wednesday 19 February) with the mailing list. Best regards, Marika

1 0

[gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Board approves our recommendations
by Mike O'Connor Feb. 12, 2014

Feb. 12, 2014

hi all, the Board approved the transition to Thick Whois. yippee! mikey c. GNSO Thick Whois Policy Development Process Recommendations Whereas, on 14 March 2012, the GNSO Council launched a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the use of 'thick' Whois by all gTLD Registries, both existing and future (see PDP WG Charter, set forth at https://community.icann.org/x/vIg3Ag) Whereas the PDP followed the prescribed PDP procedures as stated in the Bylaws and due process resulting in a Final Report delivered on 21 October 2013. Whereas the Thick Whois PDP Working Group (WG) reached full consensus on the recommendations in relation to the issues outlined in the Charter. Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed and discussed the recommendations of the Thick Whois PDP WG, and adopted the Recommendations on 31 October 2013 by a Supermajority and unanimous vote (seehttp://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#20131031-1) Whereas the GNSO Council vote exceeded the required voting threshold set forth in the ICANN Bylaws to impose new Consensus Policies on ICANN contracted parties. Whereas the GNSO Council resolved to convene a Thick Whois Implementation Review Team to assist ICANN Staff in developing the implementation details for the new policy should it be approved by the ICANN Board. Whereas after the GNSO Council vote, a public comment period was held on the approved recommendations, and the comments received strongly supported the recommendations (http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/thick-whois-recommendations-06n…) Resolved (2014.02.07.08), the Board adopts the GNSO Council Policy Recommendations for a new Consensus Policy on Thick Whois as set forth in section 7.1 of the Final Report (see http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/thick-final-21oct13-en.pdf [PDF, 1.23 MB]). Resolved (2014.02.07.09), the Board directs the President and CEO to develop and execute on an implementation plan for the Thick Whois Policy consistent with the guidance provided by the GNSO Council. The President and CEO is authorized and directed to work with the Implementation Review Team in developing the implementation details for the policy, and to continue communication with the community on such work. PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

Fwd: [council] Request for Information on Registration Directory Service User Accreditation (Available Until 10 March 2014)
by Mike O'Connor Feb. 11, 2014

Feb. 11, 2014

Begin forwarded message: > From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> > Subject: [council] Request for Information on Registration Directory Service User Accreditation (Available Until 10 March 2014) > Date: February 11, 2014 at 5:25:31 AM CST > To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-10feb14-en.htm > Request for Information on Registration Directory Service User Accreditation (Available Until 10 March 2014) > > 10 February 2014 > ICANN is publishing Request for Information (RFI) [PDF, 787 KB] to identify any organizations capable of accrediting users of the new Registration Directory Service (RDS) now under consideration to replace the current WHOIS system. RDS users may include (but are not limited to) Registrants, Proxy Service Providers and Customers, Internet Technical Staff, On-Line Service Providers, Individual and Business Internet Users, Internet Researchers, Intellectual Property Owners, Law Enforcement Agencies, Operations/Security Incident Investigators, and others requesting gTLD domain name registration data for legitimate purposes. > > Purpose of RFI > > ICANN is releasing this Request for Information at the request of the Expert Working Group on Next Generation gTLD Directory Services (EWG). The EWG is now developing recommendations to identify a replacement to the current WHOIS system that could better meet global Internet community needs for domain name registration data while offering greater privacy, accuracy, and accountability. With this Request for Information, the EWG seeks to solicit responses from organizations that currently issue system access credentials to authorized members of their own community, using defined acceptance criteria. The EWG hopes to build upon existing membership or credentialing processes to fulfill RDS user accreditation needs, should ICANN pursue RDS implementation in the future. > > The purpose of this RFI is purely informational – that is, to inform the development of policies and procedures that may follow the EWG's Final Report. As a result, potential Respondents responding to any future RFP for the EWG Project will not be bound by the estimates, prices, or other information provided in response to this RFI. > > RFI Attributes > > RFI Availability Date: 10 February 2014 > The Requirements and Instructions are more fully described in the RFI [PDF, 787 KB] > RFI Close Date: 10 March 2014, 23:59 UTC > RFI Language: English only > Responses should be submitted via email to rfi-response(a)icann.org > The EWG greatly appreciates any insights on this topic from those organizations interested in sharing information about their services. > > Background on the EWG Project > > In December 2012, ICANN announced the creation of an Expert Working Group (EWG) on next-generation gTLD Registration Directory Services, as a first step in fulfilling the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data. The EWG's findings are expected to serve as a foundation to help the GNSO create a new global policy for the provision of gTLD registration data. > > A significant milestone was reached on 24 June 2013 with the publication of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (EWG)'s Initial Report and FAQs, opening a consultation period with the ICANN community. The Initial Report [PDF, 1.70 MB] enumerated the users, purposes, data elements, recommended principles and features, and proposed model to guide the development of a next generation Registration Directory Service (RDS) to replace WHOIS. > > Prior to the ICANN Meeting in Buenos Aires, the EWG published its Status Update Report [PDF, 2.26 MB] to highlight the EWG's thinking on these and many other key issues. It also provides a great deal more detail on the analysis that lay behind the Initial Report [PDF, 1.70 MB]. > > The EWG is currently in its research and information gathering phase. This RFI is one of several research efforts that the EWG is currently undertaking to ensure that its final recommendations are supported by facts and informed by current practices. > > The EWG expects to complete its recommendations in 2014, informed by Community feedback and in-depth analysis of selected areas, including the responses to this RFI. The EWG plans to reconvene in March 2014 to derive fact-based recommendations after carefully examining the results of its research, and expects to deliver its final report to the ICANN Board by June 2014. > > Questions > > If questions arise about this RFI regarding the EWG Project, please contact Margie Milam. Any such inquiries should be sent to: rfi-response(a)icann.org. > > > > Glen de Saint Géry > GNSO Secretariat > gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org > http://gnso.icann.org > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

Fwd: [council] RE: Resolutions from the Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee held in Los Angeles on 5 Feb 2014
by Mike O'Connor Feb. 9, 2014

Feb. 9, 2014

Begin forwarded message: > From: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au> > Subject: [council] RE: Resolutions from the Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee held in Los Angeles on 5 Feb 2014 > Date: February 8, 2014 at 6:27:37 PM CST > To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > See attached from: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-2… for an additional annex 2 that relates to GAC Category 1 strings. > PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

Fwd: [council] Resolutions from the Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee held in Los Angeles on 5 Feb 2014
by Mike O'Connor Feb. 9, 2014

Feb. 9, 2014

Begin forwarded message: > From: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au> > Subject: [council] Resolutions from the Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee held in Los Angeles on 5 Feb 2014 > Date: February 8, 2014 at 6:20:09 PM CST > To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> > > From: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-05feb14… > > > Approved Resolutions | Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee > > > 5 February 2014 > > > 1. Main Agenda > > a. Remaining Items from Beijing, Durban and Buenos Aires GAC Advice: Updates and Actions Rationale for Resolution 2014.02.05.NG01 > > b. Discussion of Report on String Confusion Expert Determinations Rationale for Resolution 2014.02.05.NG02 > > c. Staff Update on Reassignment of Registry Agreements > > d. Staff Update on Name Collision Framework > > > > 1. Main Agenda: > > a. Remaining Items from Beijing, Durban and Buenos Aires GAC Advice: Updates and Actions > > Whereas, the GAC met during the ICANN 46 meeting in Beijing and issued a Communiqué on 11 April 2013 ("Beijing Communiqué"). > > Whereas, the GAC met during the ICANN 47 meeting in Durban and issued a Communiqué on 18 July 2013 ("Durban Communiqué"). > > Whereas, the GAC met during the ICANN 48 meeting in Buenos Aires and issued a Communiqué on 20 November 2013 ("Buenos Aires Communiqué"). > > Whereas, the NGPC adopted scorecards to respond to certain items of the GAC's advice in the Beijing Communiqué and the Durban Communiqué, which were adopted on 4 June 2013, 10 September 2013, and 28 September 2013. > > Whereas, the NGPC has developed another iteration of the scorecard to respond to certain remaining items of GAC advice in the Beijing Communiqué and the Durban Communiqué, and new advice in the Buenos Aires Communiqué. > > Whereas, the NGPC is undertaking this action pursuant to the authority granted to it by the Board on 10 April 2012, to exercise the ICANN Board's authority for any and all issues that may arise relating to the New gTLD Program. > > Resolved (2014.02.05.NG01), the NGPC adopts the "GAC Advice (Beijing, Durban, Buenos Aires): Actions and Updates" (5 February 2014), attached as Annex 1 (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1…) to this Resolution, in response to open items of Beijing, Durban and Buenos Aires GAC advice as presented in the scorecard. > > > > b. Discussion of Report on String Confusion Expert Determinations > > Whereas, on 10 October 2013 the Board Governance Committee (BGC) requested staff to draft a report for the NGPC on String Confusion Objections "setting out options for dealing with the situation raised within this Request, namely the differing outcomes of the String Confusion Objection Dispute Resolution process in similar disputes involving Amazon 's Applied-for String and TLDH's Applied-for String." > > Whereas, the NGPC is considering potential paths forward to address the perceived inconsistent Expert Determinations from the New gTLD Program String Confusion Objections process, including implementing a review mechanism. The review will be limited to the String Confusion Objection Expert Determinations for .CAR/.CARS and .CAM/.COM. > > Whereas, the proposed review mechanism, if implemented, would constitute a change to the current String Confusion Objection process in the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook. > > Whereas, the NGPC is undertaking this action pursuant to the authority granted to it by the Board on 10 April 2012, to exercise the ICANN Board's authority for any and all issues that may arise relating to the New gTLD Program. > > Resolved (2014.02.05.NG02), the NGPC directs the President and CEO, or his designee, to publish for public comment the proposed review mechanism for addressing perceived inconsistent Expert Determinations from the New gTLD Program String Confusion Objections process. > > > > c. Staff Update on Reassignment of Registry Agreements > > Item not considered. > > > d. Staff Update on Name Collision Framework > > Item not considered. > > > Published on 7 February 2014 PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

string delegations
by Mike O'Connor Feb. 8, 2014

Feb. 8, 2014

hi all an interesting article - “More Problems Crop Up With Universal Acceptance of Top Level Names” which will be of interest to ISPs and infrastructure providers. just because TLDs are in the root doesn’t mean that our networks or software will handle them correctly. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20140207_more_problems_crop_up_universal_acce… here are all the strings delegated last week. mikey DATE STRING REGISTRY 5 February 2014 . 移动 (xn--6frz82g) – Chinese for "mobile" Afilias Limited 5 February 2014 .BLUE Afilias Limited 4 February 2014 .FLIGHTS Fox Station, LLC 4 February 2014 .CLEANING Fox Shadow, LLC 4 February 2014 .REPORT Binky Glen, LLC 4 February 2014 .EVENTS Pioneer Maple, LLC 4 February 2014 .CRUISES Spring Way, LLC 4 February 2014 .RENTALS Big Hollow, LLC 4 February 2014 .PARTNERS Magic Glen, LLC 4 February 2014 .PROPERTIES Big Pass, LLC 4 February 2014 .CATERING New Falls, LLC 4 February 2014 .EXPOSED Victor Beach, LLC Description of the name-collision problem and link to mitigation research project -- http://www.haven2.com/index.php/archives/name-collision-research ICANN's "Name Collision Resources and Information" page - http://www.icann.org/en/help/name-collision ICANN's list of all delegated new gTLDs - http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings ICANN’s list of scheduled “sunrise” and “trademark claims” periods for new gTLDs - http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/sunrise-claims-periods Follow this link if you would like to subscribe to this weekly bulletin — http://ispcp.info/mailman/listinfo/gtld-delegations Follow this link if you would like to learn more about the Internet Service Provider and Connectivity Provider (ISPCP) constituency of ICANN’s Generic Name Supporting Organization (GNSO) — www.ispcp.info _______________________________________________ gTLD-delegations mailing list - sponsored by ICANN's ISP and Connectivity Provider constituency (www.ISPCP.info) gTLD-delegations(a)ispcp.info http://ispcp.info/mailman/listinfo/gtld-delegations - click this link to subscribe, or review list information and prior posts

1 0