- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

New Top Ten Abused Registrars
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn Feb. 4, 2009

Feb. 4, 2009

Folks, We have just published our follow-up report on the top ten abused Registrars. Much has changed since our first report in May 0f 2008. Who is not on the list is just as interesting as who is on the list. We have issued this report with the assumption that these numbers indicate problems at certain registrars and not necessarily malfeasance. However, 83% of the spammed domains since June or 2008 are held by just 10 Registrars. Full statistics and charts can be found here: http://www.knujon.com/registrars/ An article about the report has been published here: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/02/report_most_spam_sites… KnujOn is a public service for Internet users and we are extending that service to the Registrars. We contacted each of the Registrars in advance with a list steps they need to take to fix some of these problems, including specifics about the customers who are wreaking the most havoc. Each Registrar (and this is true for any Registrar) was extended an offer of assistance in clearing out problems and removing abusive registrants. So far none have responded to our offer or recommendations. This list may or may not surprise some of you: 1. XIN NET (Second Time at #1) 2. eNom 3. Network Solutions 4. Register.com 5. PLANETONLINE 6. RegTime 7. OnlineNIC 8. SpotDomains (domainsite) 9. Wild West 10. HICHINA Web Solutions Before going into specifics of each case, compare this to the list from May, 2008: 1. Xin Net Bei Gong Da Software 2. Beijing Innovative Networks 3. Todaynic 4. Joker 5. eNom, Inc. 6. MONIKER 7. Dynamic Dolphin 8. The Nameit Co/AITDOMAINS.COM 9. PDR/Directi 10. Intercosmos/DIRECTNIC With the exception of Xin Net and eNom all the other cited Registrars dropped off the list. Why? They were either forced to take action or took action of their own accord. Joker and Beijing Innovative Networks (DNS.COM.CN) were issued breach notices by ICANN, the others were impacted by the public disclosure and modified their behavior. What does this tell us? For one when the system functions as designed we get results. Secondly we can see that a so-called impossible situation can be altered in fairly short period of time. I’m very positive about the overall situation. -Garth ------------------------------------- Collect, analyze, enforce, repeat... ICANN, Mexico City - March 1-6 http://mex.icann.org/ MIT Spam Conference, Cambridge Mass. - March 26-27 http://projects.csail.mit.edu/spamconf/ Dr. Robert Bruen at: MAAWG, San Francisco, CA - February 17-19 http://www.maawg.org/news/GeneralMeeting_Feb09/ RSA, San Francisco, CA - April 20-24 https://365.rsaconference.com/index.jspa

1 0

OnlineNic, again
by Danny Younger Feb. 4, 2009

Feb. 4, 2009

Last month we discussed the OnlineNic situation. >From the minutes: "This is an ICANN accredited registrar that was convicted of cyber-squatting. ICANN should de-register them. Danny would like our rep at the ALAC meeting tomorrow to forward the view that appropriate enforcement action must be taken. Beau has seconded that. All in agreement." Of course, to date, the ALAC has done nothing to specifically address the NARALO concern regarding OnlineNic's accreditation status. No surprise there as the ALAC is as close to useless as one could imagine. Now we get yet another report that OnlineNic has been hit with yet another lawsuit (fourth one by my count) for trademark infringement -- see http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuit.asp?id=43567 One has to wonder how many more lawsuits it will take before ICANN recognizes that it has a very bad apple that must be removed from the barrel.

4 5

Re: [NA-Discuss] ICANN loses $4.6 mil
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn Feb. 3, 2009

Feb. 3, 2009

If ICANN turned a profit on the investments instead of a loss, where would the money go? > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ICANN loses $4.6 mil > From: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> > Date: Tue, February 03, 2009 9:46 am > To: "John R. Levine" <johnl(a)iecc.com> > Cc: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA>, NA Discuss > <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > For what it's worth, I have requested "ICANN financial transparency" to > be added to the Agenda of the NARALO General Assembly, to be held during > the ICANN At-Large Summit in Mexico City. Those of you who will not be > able to attend in person will be able to connect by teleconference. > As advance preparation for the meeting I have asked staff to have ready > for us as much of a detailed accounting as exists, for the amount and > the breakdown of money spent on At-Large over the past two years (just > one year would not have been sufficient as the Summit has no doubt > ballooned this year's figures). > At that point I would like NARALO to examine the documents and determine > their level of completeness, and determine any necessary specific action > to be taken to increase ICANN's financial transparency. > - Evan > ------ > 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 > ------

4 6

ICANN loses $4.6 mil
by Danny Younger Feb. 3, 2009

Feb. 3, 2009

On the ICANN Finance Public Dashboard a note hidden within the first drop-down arrow on the left indicates "The large variance to budget is due to investment losses of $4.6 mil". http://forms.icann.org//idashboard/public/ One would think that a more expansive explanation would be in order.

5 4

NARALO and the GNSO
by Nick Ashton-Hart Feb. 2, 2009

Feb. 2, 2009

Dear All: As a point of information, so that everyone understands the position vis a vis the Bylaws of ICANN, NARALO per se cannot withdraw from At-large and join the GNSO. The members of NARALO might choose to form a GNSO constituency, or do any number of other things, but NARALO as a part of At-Large would still exist, as that is provided for in the Bylaws. Further, At-Large's remit is much larger than any GNSO constituency, as the GNSO only relates to generic TLDs, and not addressing policy, country code TLDs, etc. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

Introduction (Garth Bruen at Knujon.com)
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn Jan. 30, 2009

Jan. 30, 2009

Hello, I wanted to take a moment to introduce myself, some of you already know me. Our organization was recently accepted as an ICANN At-Large Structure and I am looking forward to working with all of you and participating in positive way. I would like to acknowledge Danny, Beau, Suzanne, Heidi, Rudi, Darlene, Dave, Nick, Evan, and everyone else who helped in this process or encouraged us to do it. Hopefully, I will get a chance to thank you in person in Mexico. Our goals are to advocate for our consumer clients, help the ordinary Internet user navigate the bureaucracy, mitigate online abuse, and help develop common sense policy. We want to see the global network expand in ways that benefits everyone it touches but also protects their interests and rights. It’s a tall order, but this why we want to be a part of the discussion. To that end we extend an invitation for anyone in the community to talk to us even if they disagree with us, are frustrated by KnujOn’s work, or simply don’t like us. We welcome the debate and spirited discussion. Thanks, Garth Bruen

3 2

Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details
by Garth Bruen at KnujOn Jan. 30, 2009

Jan. 30, 2009

Not sure of the merits, but would certainly listen to Danny'sw argument. > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational > Details > From: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> > Date: Fri, January 30, 2009 4:05 pm > To: <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com>, <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Interesting! > > Does anybody else who will be attending this session in Mexico wish to > discuss this matter? > > D > > Darlene A. Thompson > Community Access Program Administrator > Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP > P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > Phone: (867) 975-5631 > Fax: (867) 975-5610 > E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > > -----Original Message----- > From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny > Younger > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 4:01 PM > To: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; Thompson, Darlene > Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational > Details > > Hi Darlene, > > Perhaps the NARALO could discuss withdrawing from the ALAC and > re-forming as a GNSO constituency. Such a move would allow us to bring > user concerns and policy solutions directly to the table. > > Best regards, > Danny > > > --- On Fri, 1/30/09, Thompson, Darlene <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> wrote: > > > From: Thompson, Darlene <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> > > Subject: [NA-Discuss] FW: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details > > To: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > Date: Friday, January 30, 2009, 2:00 PM > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Please see below. We have THREE HOURS to discuss/do > > whatever we want to > > and ICANN is offering briefings. Please reply to this > > e-mail TODAY (to > > me) so that we can get everybody's ideas/desires looked > > after. If you > > don't ask for it, ya can't complain if we don't > > provide it! So, ANY > > ideas are good (I'll let you know if they are way out > > there). > > > > > > > > I need this TODAY, please... please, please, please. :-) > > > > > > > > D > > > > > > > > Darlene A. Thompson > > > > Community Access Program Administrator > > > > Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP > > > > P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > > > > Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > > > > Phone: (867) 975-5631 > > > > Fax: (867) 975-5610 > > > > E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > <mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca> > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Heidi Ullrich [mailto:Staff@alac.icann.org] > > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:41 PM > > To: Thompson, Darlene; Evan Leibovitch > > Cc: Atlarge Staff > > Subject: NARALO GA: Agenda and Organizational Details > > > > > > > > Dear Darlene and Evan, > > > > > > > > With just under one month to go before the start of the > > Summit, we would > > like to work with you to ensure the smooth operation of > > your GA. As a > > reminder, GA meetings will take place on Tuesday, 3 March > > between 9 > > a.m. and 1 p.m. > > > > > > > > The purpose of this message is to: > > > > > > > > - Request you to send us your GA agenda > > (Deadline: 31 January) > > > > - Ask whether you would like any Staff Briefings > > during your GA > > > > > > - Highlight relevant text from your RALO's > > Operating Principles > > and MOU > > > > - Establish your document needs for your GA > > (Additional > > Document Deadline: 13 February) > > > > > > > > AGENDA > > > > > > > > Could you please send us your draft GA agenda by 31 > > January? Given that > > the Summit will provide considerable discussion on policy > > issues, we > > request that the GA agenda focus on organizational issues. > > However, the > > agenda is of course ultimately to be decided by you in > > conjunction with > > your ALS representatives. > > > > > > > > Agenda items suggested during the NARALO meeting of January > > 12: > > > > - Ideas - better information sharing strategies - > > issue mapping > > (Dharma) > > > > - Operating procedures - flag those that have not > > worked well > > in the past (Darlene) > > > > > > > > STAFF BRIEFINGS > > > > ALAC has requested that RALO chairs/secretariats consider > > holding a > > short briefing by ICANN Services Staff to discuss > > registrar/registry RAA > > non-compliance during their GA. Can this item be added to > > your GA > > agenda? We will arrange for appropriate ICANN Staff to > > attend your GA > > for this purpose. > > > > > > > > At-Large staff are very interested to have the opportunity > > to speak with > > your ALS participants about how we can help them with > > engaging with > > At-Large activities to a greater degree. For example, what > > are their > > specific policy interests? What can be done to facilitate > > NARALO's > > engagement? What tools would you like to see developed? > > Would you like > > to include such a discussion during your GA or during an > > informal > > session? > > > > > > > > Are there any regionally specific policy issues that may be > > of interest > > to your ALS participants? > > > > > > > > > > > > RELEVENT TEXT FROM YOUR OPERATING PRINCIPLES/MOU > > > > > > > > For your convenience, NARALO's MOU and Rules of > > Procedure may be viewed > > here: > > https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi?ralo_organizing_documents > > > > > > > > > > > > DOCUMENTS NEEDS > > > > > > > > At-Large staff will prepare documents for your ALS > > representatives > > including the NARALO MOU and Rules of Procedure. > > > > > > > > We will need to be informed of any other documents you will > > require by > > 13 February. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let us know if you have any questions on organizing > > your GA. We > > very much look forward to assisting you to ensure a very > > successful > > NARALO GA. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, > > Gisella > > Gruber-White, Marie-Helene Bouchoms > > ICANN At-Large Staff > > email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------ > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists > .icann.org > > > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > > ------ > > > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists > .icann.org > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > > ------ > 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 > ------

2 1

Still more folk complaining about GoDaddy Transfer Policy Violations
by Danny Younger Jan. 30, 2009

Jan. 30, 2009

http://www.oxadox.com/article/healthfood/2009-01-29/51115.html The issue of GoDaddy's ongoing violation of Inter-Registrar Transfer Consensus Policy has been brought to the attention of the ICANN Compliance Department -- but what action has been taken? ICANN Senior Management is aware of the issue -- but what action has been taken? The ALAC has been notified of the issue -- but what action have they taken? Question: What's the point in working hard to come up with appropriate consensus-based policies if ICANN routinely turns a blind eye to policy violations? ... and what's the point in working with the ALAC if they fail to bring these oft-repeated user concerns to the attention of the Board?

2 1

Rudi Vansnick in NYC
by WWWhatsup Jan. 29, 2009

Jan. 29, 2009

Rudi Vansnick, chair of ISOC Belgium, and a board member of EURALO, is visiting NYC later this week, I've set up a tentative meeting for 7pm Friday 1/30 (midtown) and invited Danny Younger. Anyone else interested? j Joly MacFie 212 608 1334 http://wwwhatsup.com http://punkcast.com http://pinstand.com

1 0

FW: WHOIS study analysis
by Brendler, Beau Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

________________________________ From: Brendler, Beau Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:06 PM To: 'At-Large Staff'; Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Alan Greenberg; Danny Younger; Gareth Shearman; seth.reis(a)lex-ip.com; sylvia.caras(a)gmail.com Cc: NA Discuss Subject: WHOIS study analysis Per our call last week: Here are my suggested re-scored priorities for all studies. However, I will start first with the re-groupings assigned letters. In each case, I established the priority score for each letter grouping, using original scoring from the list of all studies (in other words, the scores for the letter groupings make sense when compared to the entire chart of proposed studies, I did not score them separately.) A word on feasibility: Since I come from a research/investigative organization, my bias is towards the conclusion that just about anything can be studied. I did not assign a feasibility score to the letter groupings of studies. However, I did include a "yes" or "no" feasibility assessment for the individual study scores. 5=Highest 1=Lowest LETTER GROUPINGS: A: Studies 1, 14, 21 & GAC data set 2: 2 B: Studies 13, 17, GAC 1 and GAC 11: 5 C: GAC Studies 5 & 6: 4 D: Studies 18, 19, GAC 9 & GAC 10: 4 E: Studies 3 & 20: 3 The top grouping priority that emerges is: B: Studies 13, 17, GAC 1 and GAC 11: Outside these letter groups, the top-priority study grouping I would suggest for ALAC is: GAC 3, 16, GAC 12-15,24, GAC 7, 17, 6, GAC 1, 13 & GAC 11, 8. Note that GAC 3, 16, 24, GAC 7, GAC 1, and 8 do not appear in the letter groupings. Why were these studies, which I encourage ALAC to recommend as high priorities, not included? Study Table: Study Priority Score Feasible? 1 2 N 14 2 Y (SSAC has already studied) 15 3 Y 21 & GAC 2 2 N GAC 3 5 Premise needs development 16 5 Y 22 4 Y 23 2 Y GAC 12-15 5 Y 24 5 Y 2 1 Y 5 1 Y GAC 7 5 Y GAC 8 4 Y 17 5 Y 18, 19, GAC 9 & 10 4 Y 6 5 Y GAC 1 5 Y 13 & GAC 11 5 Y GAC 2 2 N 3 4 Y Metalitz 1 4 Y 20 3 Y 12 4 Y 8 5 Y 11 4 Technical analysis GAC 4 3 N GAC 5 4 Y GAC 6 4 Y ________________________________ From: At-Large Staff [mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 2:18 PM To: Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Alan Greenberg; Brendler, Beau; Danny Younger; Gareth Shearman; seth.reis(a)lex-ip.com; sylvia.caras(a)gmail.com Subject: Doodle: WHOIS Briefing - follow up call / UTC timing Dear All, Apologies - timings on Doodle are in UTC for this call. Thank you Kind regards Gisella On 23/01/2009 11:11, "At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> wrote: Dear All, Further to the WHOIS Briefing call by Liz Gasster yesterday, it was decided to have a follow up call to review the revised document Beau is in the process of developing. Please find attached the link to the doodle pole. It would be much appreciated if you could respond at your earliest convenience. http://doodle.com/fwixwace6fqu88cg Thank you Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White, Marie-Helene Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org *** Scanned ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.

1 0