- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

ICANN Geographic Regions
by Danny Younger Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

For discussion at the NARALO monthly meeting: Pursuant to ICANN Board Resolution 07.92, the GNSO and other ICANN bodies were invited to provide input to the ICANN staff on a proposal by the ccNSO recommending that the ICANN Board appoint a community-wide working group to review the structure of ICANN's present Geographic Regions and related issues. Concern over the proper formulation of the ICANN Geographic Regions has long been a significant part of At-Large structure-building considerations with the earliest recommendations dating back to the 2001 proposal of the At-Large Study Committee to create a Central/West/South Asia Region (CWSA) comprising India (.in), Pakistan (.pk), Afghanistan (.af), Kazakhstan (.kz), Uzbekistan (.uz), Kyrgyzstan (.kg), Turkmenistan (.tm), Tajikistan (.tj), Sri Lanka (.lk), Maldives (.mv), Iraq (.iq), Iran (.ir), Israel (.il), Syria (.sy), Jordan (.jo), Lebanon (.lb), Palestine Territories (.ps), Kuwait (.kw), UAE (.ae), Yemen (.ye), Oman (.om), Bahrain (.bh), Qatar (.qa), Saudi Arabia (.sa). The recent recommendations of the Westlake Consulting Team charged with the current ALAC review follow in this spirit by recognizing that ICANN’s geographic regional structure is not well aligned with global population distribution and is increasingly unrepresentative of world-wide Internet usage, leading Westlake to recommend increasing the number of NomCom appointees to the ALAC by two members, both of whom would be from Asia. As any change in the total number or composition of ICANN geographic Regions will impact ICANN's At-Large Structures, we formally request that an at-large representative from each current ICANN Geographic Region be included in the Board-appointed community-wide working group to review the structure of ICANN's present Geographic Regions and related issues.

6 13

FW: [ALAC-Announce] Global ALAC election process/NARALO election process
by Thompson, Darlene Sept. 4, 2008

Sept. 4, 2008

Hi all, I have just been reviewing our organizing documents and it appears that I have missed a deadline for the ALAC election. Our Operating Principles state that "At least once a year, on or before the First of July, or whenever a vacancy arises, the NARALO shall issue a call for Statements of Interest from members of the North American Internet community to serve on the ALAC. The call for Statements of Interest shall be open for at least 30 days. At least once a year, on or before the First of July, or whenever a vacancy arises, the NARALO shall issue a call for Statements of Interest from members of the North American Internet community to serve on the ALAC. The call for Statements of Interest shall be open for at least 30 days." Since that date has come and gone, I would like to propose that we open the call for nominations as of our next telephone conference (this coming Monday) and hold it open for two weeks (rather than 30 days). I think that two weeks is plenty of time. Once all nominations are in, then we can use the on-line voting tools provided by staff to vote (within one week of the close of the nominating period) to be held open for one (or two?) weeks. Just as a note: The position that we are looking at is the ALAC seat that Beau is holding. Our OP allows for him to be elected for another term (of two years). Please let me know if you do not agree with the procedures that I have outlined above and I will try to correct it. We need to have this election completed prior to the Cairo meeting. Thanks, 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: alac-announce-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-announce-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of At-Large Staff Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 11:26 AM To: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Global ALAC election process Dear all, As you know, the ICANN annual meeting in Cairo will mark the end of the terms of: 1. One Member of the At-Large Advisory Committee from each Geographic Region; 2. The officers of the ALAC; 3. The Liaisons appointed by the ALAC To help ensure the elections for the open positions run smoothly, this email will provide you with an overview of the election process as it relates to the elections of Members of the At-Large Advisory Committee. You will find: * The general provisions governing the elections (ICANN By-laws and ALAC rules of procedures) * A suggestion for an election timetable for all regions * The regional provisions governing the elections (regional MoU and Operating Principles) * An overview of open ALAC positions General provisions governing the elections When the RALOs were formed in 2006 and 2007, the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) and regional Operating Principles did not, with one exception, cover the voting process (nomination period, timing and other rules governing the elections) in any detail. Most regional instruments only say that the region is responsible for electing two out of the three regional ALAC positions, the third position being appointed by the NomCom. Given the lack of clear provisions on the election process in the regional instruments, one needs to turn to the ICANN by-laws, the Rules of Procedure of the RALOs (for those which have adopted RoPs), and to the extent RALOs who would otherwise not have specific rules for the conduct of elections, if they so desire the ALAC rules of procedure. The ICANN by-laws, which apply to all regions, do not cover the election process but make clear that the regional ALAC members will serve two-year terms starting at the conclusion of an annual ICANN meeting. The terms are staggered, meaning that one term will start in an odd-numbered year and one term will start in an even-numbered year: ICANN Bylaws: Article Xi, Section 2.4.c 1. The term of one member selected by each RALO shall begin at the conclusion of an ICANN annual meeting in an even-numbered year. 2. The term of the other member selected by each RALO shall begin at the conclusion of an ICANN annual meeting in an odd-numbered year. See: http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm <http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm> At-Large Advisory Committee Internal Rules of Procedure The ALAC rules of procedure, on the other hand, only contain rules that apply to the ALAC officer elections: 1. Call for election: no earlier than one month before the ICANN meeting and no later than three weeks before an ICANN meeting (rule 9) 2. Deadline for nominations: 14 days after election call (rule 9) 3. Acceptance period: Nomination must be accepted no later than 7 days after the nomination deadline and no later than 7 days before the start of an ICANN meeting (rule 9) See: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?rules_of_procedure <https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?rules_of_procedure> (At-Large Advisory Committee Rules of Procedure) Suggested election procedure for ALAC representatives: Since the RALOs have few details about the procedure by which they elect their ALAC members, it is suggested that the election process for ALAC representatives use the procedure by which ALAC elects officers and liaisons: * Call for election: The regional Secretariat will make a call for election no later than seven weeks before the start of the annual ICANN meeting (14 September 2008) * Nomination Period: nominations shall be accepted for two weeks after the Secretariat calls for nominations (28 September 2008) * Acceptance deadline: the nominees need to accept their nomination no later than seven days after the nomination period ends (05 October 2008) * Election deadline: The election shall begin no later than one week after the end of the acceptance deadline (12 October 2008) and end not later than two weeks before the start of the annual ICANN meeting. (19 October 2008). In other words, votes would actually be cast between 12 to 19 October 2008) Voting Mechanism We would suggest that the online voting system used previously in various regions at www.bigpulse.com <http://www.bigpulse.com> (and which is used for all ALAC votes including for ALS Applications). The staff would administer these votes through the system, in all cases allowing independent verification via a URL located on the BigPulse servers which would provide the results of votes held. There are two regions NARALO and LACRALO which have adopted detailed Rules of Procedure for meetings. These RALOs may wish to use the elections procedures as specified in those RoPs, since they do provide clauses which allow online meetings to vote on various issues. Regional provisions governing the elections Various RALOs are at present speaking about the upcoming elections. A separate email communication follows this message that is tailored for each RALO, in hopes that this is useful in facilitating this process. AFRALO: a) Length of the nomination period: "a reasonable period shall be provided" (MOU:2.) b) Election date: not specified c) Additional provisions: one- year term, one vote per ALS (MOU:2) See: https://st.icann.org/afralo/index.cgi?mou_and_organising_documents <https://st.icann.org/afralo/index.cgi?mou_and_organising_documents To make sure that there will be staggered terms in all regions, it was decided that one of the current African ALAC positions shall be for two years and one should be for one years (see below for an overview of all open ALAC positions). In accordance with the ICANN bylaws, the terms of African ALAC representatives shall be set to two years. APRALO: a) Length of the nomination period: not specified b) Election date: not specified c) Additional provisions: "one vote per ALS" See: https://st.icann.org/asiapac/index.cgi?ralo_organising_documents <https://st.icann.org/asiapac/index.cgi?ralo_organising_documents EURALO: a) Length of the nomination period: not specified b) Election date: not specified c) Additional provisions: The European Mou says that ³The voting rights shall be determined by the EURALO.² (EURALO MoU, 5.4.1). According to the EURALO Bylaws, the European representatives elect the regional ALAC members at their General Assembly ( EURALO Bylaws, 11.10). The following rules govern the decisions of the GA: ³... each Member has one vote.² (11.4) whereas ³ Members of The Association shall consist of ...... organisations domiciled in Europe ........ which qualify as an ALS.² (EURALO Bylaws 4.1.) Additionally, the selected representatives must be members of different ALSes, must have their principal residence in different countries of the region and their nationalities must be different. To the extent possible, gender balance and regional balance within Europe shall be fostered.²(11.5 EURALO Bylaws). See: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?ralo_organising_instruments <https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?ralo_organising_instruments> LACRALO: a) Length of the nomination period: not specified b) Election date: not specified c) Additional provisions: two-year terms, "no re-election", one vote per ALS (Operating Principles 8) Detailed provisions for elections and voting during meetings can be found under: https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi?ralo_organising_documents <https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi?ralo_organising_documents> It is up to the region to decide if it wishes to treat the election as if it were a meeting. NARALO: a) Length of the nomination period: 30 days (Operating Principles 11) Start of nomination period: on or before 1 July (OP 11) b) Election date: "sufficiently in advance of ICANN's annual meeting" (OP 11) c) Additional provisions: ALAC representatives may not serve more than two consecutive terms (OP 10) Detailed provisions for elections and voting during meetings can be found under: See: https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi?ralo_organizing_documents <https://st.icann.org/naralo/index.cgi?ralo_organizing_documents> It is up to the region to decide if it wishes to treat the election as if it were a meeting. Open ALAC positions: AFRALO: Hawa Diakité¹s term expires after the annual ICANN meeting in 2008 APRALO: Izumi Aizu¹s term expires after the annual ICANN meeting in 2008 EURALO: Sébastien Bachollet¹s term expires after the annual ICANN meeting in 2008. Veronica Cretu stepped back from her position earlier this year. It is suggested that there shall be a call for somebody to replace her until the end of her term, which ends at the end of the ICANN annual meeting in 2009. LACRALO: José Ovidio Salgueiro¹s term expires after the annual ICANN meeting in 2008 NARALO: Beau Brendler¹s term expires after the annual ICANN meeting in Cairo Minimum Participation Requirements With respect to the Minimum Participation Requirements for Members of the At-Large Advisory Committee, the ALAC Rules of Procedure in Rule 21 is relevant. Rule 21.9 is of particular importance as it talks about the quantitative requirements. They are: A) Participation in at least 2/3 of the ALAC conference calls in any 6-month period B) Attending at least one physical meeting in any 9 month period C) Completing at least one feedback survey on At-Large issues in any 6 month period With regards rules A) and B) above, please find attached the attendance record for ALAC members and Liaisons. It covers the nine months preceding August 2008. The Staff will keep this up to date and publicly accessible. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

3 2

Fwd: Board minutes from 28 August 2008
by Ross Rader Sept. 4, 2008

Sept. 4, 2008

Hello everyone - FYI regarding some of the Board work related to the nominating committee and bylaws. > > The ICANN Board minutes from 28 August 2008 have been posted on the > ICANN website. The Board considered the proposed bylaws change from > the Nom Com and voted 13-0 to post the proposed amendment for public > comment. The excerpt from the minutes is below. In addition, the > Board selected Tricia Drakes as Chair of the 2009 ICANN Nominating > Committee. See http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/prelim-report-28aug08.htm > . > > Nominating Committee’s Recommendation for ICANN Bylaws Change > regarding Criteria for Board Member Selection > > John Jeffrey presented a proposed Bylaws change and requested that > the Board permit Management to post the proposed changes for public > comments. > > Over the past several years, the Nominating Committee has expressed > concern that being required to count more than one country of > citizenship for diversity purposes often makes it difficult to > select the best candidates for the Board seats that the Nominating > Committee is mandated to fill. In carrying out its responsibilities > to fill Seats 1 through 8, the Nominating Committee shall seek to > ensure that the ICANN Board is composed of members who in the > aggregate display diversity in geography, culture, skills, > experience, and perspective, by applying the criteria set forth in > Bylaws. > > The Nominating Committee also noted that some of the candidates have > often lived in a country for many years, and thereby better > represent the interests of that country than any country of which > the candidates may be citizens. > > As the Nominating Committee requested, the General Counsel provided > the Nominating Committee with suggested Bylaws revisions to reflect > the Nominating Committee’s stated goals. In the proposal, domicile, > not just citizenship, is to be considered in the diversity > calculation. The Nominating Committee members have unanimously > agreed that the proposed Bylaws revisions would alleviate the > concerns. > > John Jeffrey noted that considering the possibility of revising the > method for calculating diversity for seats 1 through 8, staff > determined that such diversity calculations should be consistent for > seats 9 though 14 and have proposed revisions accordingly. > > Bruce Tonkin moved and Harald Alvestrand seconded a motion that the > proposed changes to the bylaws be posted for public comment and then > considered again by the Board, via the following resolution: > > Whereas, the Nominating Committee has expressed concern that, > pursuant to the Bylaws mandated diversity requirements that no more > than five Board members be citizens of any one geographic region, > the Nominating Committee is required to count all countries of > citizenship for each candidate. > > Whereas, the Nominating Committee has noted that the requirement to > count all countries of citizenship has caused some selection > difficulties each year over the past several years. > > Whereas, the Nominating Committee has also expressed concern that > the calculation is presently limited to citizenship given that many > people have lived for long periods of time in, and represent the > interests of, countries in which they may not be citizens. > > Whereas, making a diversity calculation pursuant to the ICANN Bylaws > as it relates to Board member selection for seats 1 through 14 > should be consistent. > > It is hereby resolved (__.2008) that the following proposed > revisions to Article VI, Sections 2.2 and 2.3, shall be posted for > public comment in accordance with ICANN’s normal process for > proposed Bylaw revisions. > > A voice vote was taken of all Board Members present, and the motion > was approved by a vote of 13 to 0, with no abstentions. > > Board Governance Committee’s Recommendation for selection of the > next Nominating Committee Chair > > Roberto Gaetano advised that following the evaluation of a number > of different candidates the BGC unanimously propose Tricia Drakes as > Chair of the 2009 Nominating Committee and asks the Board to approve > her appointment to this position. > > The Chair inquired regarding the BGC’s process in considering > applications and in putting out a call for candidates. Roberto > Gaetano advised that a job profile had been published, a call for > candidates was issued, additional qualified candidates were also > evaluated and then the BGC created a matrix and did a final > evaluation and from that, came the recommendation. > > The Chair accepted this a recommendation from the Board Governance > Committee and made a motion to approve Tricia Drakes as the > Nominating Committee Chair for 2009; Jean-Jacques Subrenat seconded > the following motion: > > Resolved (__.2008), that Tricia Drakes is appointed as Chair of the > 2009 Nominating Committee, to serve until the conclusion of the > ICANN annual meeting in 2009, or until the Chair’s earlier > resignation, removal, or other disqualification from service. > > A voice vote was taken of all Board Members present, and the motion > was approved by a vote of 13 to 0, with no abstentions.

1 0

Invitation: Consultation Meeting in Washington DC
by Danny Younger Sept. 3, 2008

Sept. 3, 2008

Found on the GNSO Mailing List: ICANN is hosting a series of international consultative meetings about its future. A half-day meeting will be held in Washington on Wednesday, 1st October to consult with North American Internet stakeholders. ICANN's leadership, as well as members of its Strategy Committee, will be present to outline proposed improvements to the organization's multi-stakeholder model. The goal of the meeting is to explain the proposed changes and give participants the opportunity to input directly into the consultation. DATE: Wednesday, 1st October 2008 TIME: 08:30 sharp till 11:00am (coffee and refreshments will be available from 08:00) PLACE: The Ballroom, National Press Club,529 14th Street, NW, 13th Floor, Washington DC 20045 Expected to attend from ICANN will be: * Peter Dengate Thrush, Co-chair of the President's Strategy Committee and ICANN Chairman * Paul Twomey, Co-chair of the President's Strategy Committee and ICANN CEO * Marilyn Cade, President's Strategy Committee member * Yrjö Länsipuro, President's Strategy Committee member * Jean-Jacques Subrenat , President's Strategy Committee member and ICANN Board member * Paul Levins, Vice President of Corporate Affairs, ICANN

1 0

Request
by Danny Younger Sept. 3, 2008

Sept. 3, 2008

Cheryl and members of the ALAC: The user community has long been concerned with the WHOIS data accuracy issue. As you are aware, the GAC has previously issued a WHOIS Principles document that notes that "gTLD WHOIS services should provide sufficient and accurate data about domain name registrations..."; the GAC has also requested that a number of WHOIS studies be conducted. Concurrently the GNSO Council's WHOIS hypotheses Working Group has been working on supporting language designed to lead to an investigation of a number of related open issues. The ALAC is in a position to support these initiatives through its own investigation into WHOIS data accuracy issues. Allow me to remind everyone that the Board has set up Advisory Committees for the express purpose of conducting investigations that will result in the release of findings and recommendations. It would be appreciated if the ALAC would agree to conduct a formal investigation of the following topic: issues pertaining to the WHOIS Data Problem Report System (WDPRS). This concern is being raised in view of the following considerations: 1. It has been reported that the WDPRS has been down for the whole month of April 2007. It has also been down on these dates: 1/22/2008 2/2/2008 2/5/2008 2/12/2008 2/26/2008 3/6/2008 4/5/2008 6/17/2008 2. On 19 March a concerned WDPRS submitter reported to ICANN's Public Participation site: "I have not received a 45-day WDPRS follow-up since 20-Jan-2008, even though I have filed WDPRS reports almost daily for the past several months. Has ICANN discontinued WDPRS follow-ups? I have emailed the webmaster a few times about this matter, but as with all emails to the webmaster on any subject, I have never received a reply. Dale H. Cook, Chief Engineer, Centennial Broadcasting, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA - WZZI / WZZU / WLNI / WLEQ; 3. Just before the Paris session, the WDPRS stopped accepting reports from the largest submitter of inaccurate WHOIS data; 4. The WDPRS has been newly reconfigured with rate limiters that serve to obstruct the reporting process. Prior submission rates allowed for three report submissions per minute (the daily ceiling of reports was 4320). It would now take 1 month to submit this quantity of reports with the programmed delays; 5. The largest WDPRS submitter receives reports in the range of 5000 – 10,000 illicit unique domains per day and has noted that it would hypothetically take 4 years to report a month’s worth of false registrations through the current WDPRS. 6. Rather than working in cooperation with the submitting agents and jointly fashioning a more scalable system, ICANN Staff has resolved to implement "a system that will ensure staff reviews every alleged inaccuracy report for a particularized inaccuracy before sending the report to the registrar". This approach assuredly will not scale and can be expected to inadequately serve the needs of the user community. 7. We are aware that the reporting of inaccurate WHOIS Data is also hampered by proxy services that withhold underlying data. While it may be appropriate for individuals to utilize such privacy services, it remains inappropriate for those engaged in commercial transactions over the internet to obfuscate/shield their contact data -- such actions do not serve the interests of users/consumers. The ALAC could be of value to the user community were it to request that the GNSO engage in policy development pertaining to such proxy services. We currently receive a lot of data from ICANN's compliance department, but lots of data does not equate with transparency. The WDPRS represents a problem area about which the Compliance Department has not been sufficiently forthcoming. In the May Compliance Department report it was noted that staff: "Created a new database to allow processing of WDPRS reports; Raised the report limiter to accommodate an increased number of reports; and Monitored (and continues to monitor) daily activity for system response and capacity. As part of a long-term solution, ICANN is conducting a system redesign that will improve operational effectiveness, data processing, accuracy, data recovery, and increase data capacity." By all indications an increased number of reports is not being accommodated and the system redesign has totally failed to meet its objectives. Those of you that read the SSAC reports will note their recent analysis of 4444 registrations that determined that: – 10% were missing admin contact name (439 records) – 11% were missing admin contact email (502 records) – 12% were missing admin contact address (514 records) With this level of inaccuracy one has to wonder if registrars are actually investigating inaccuracies as required by Section 3.7.8 of the RAA, or if that entire community is just going through the motions. A thoroughgoing investigation is warranted. It certainly would be appreciated if ICANN's Compliance Department could tell us exactly how many domain name registrations were terminated as a result of inaccurate data over the course of the last year. I leave it up to the ALAC to decide whether user concerns about WHOIS Data Accuracy and the WDPRS will be formally investigated by the ALAC, or whether the ALAC will sit on the sidelines while others do what has to be done. Danny

2 2

9 September 1300 UTC: Discussion on ICANN Travel Procedures and the ALAC Review
by At-Large Staff Sept. 3, 2008

Sept. 3, 2008

Dear all, You have been invited by the ALAC Chair Cheryl Langdon-Orr to join a community-wide discussion on the new ICANN travel procedures and the ALAC Review on Tuesday September 9th. The discussion will start at 1300 UTC and is scheduled to for 30 minutes. It will precede the monthly ALAC teleconference scheduled at 1330 UTC. French and Spanish interpretation will be available for this call if requested. Please get in touch with us before Friday, 1200 UTC if you would like to be on either the French or Spanish channel. If you are in a country with a toll free phone number you can use this number and the access codes to join the English, French or Spanish channel. A list of the toll free phone numbers is available on the meeting page for this meeting. https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?09_september_2008 You will also find additional documents with background information on the ICANN travel procedures and the ALAC Review on this page. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Recommendation 12
by Danny Younger Sept. 3, 2008

Sept. 3, 2008

Alan, In a note to the GNSO Council regarding the agenda for the 4 September session, the BGC has expressed a particular interest in a discussion on Westlake Consulting Recommendation #12: That the ALAC should explore ways to differentiate between organizations that genuinely represent individual Internet users, and are therefore ALS candidates, as opposed to those which may be a better fit with the the NCUC. Could I trouble you for pointers to ALAC discussions on this topic (or more generally to current ALAC discussions on the ALAC Review)? Thanks, Danny

2 1

Semi-Annual Compliance Report
by Danny Younger Sept. 2, 2008

Sept. 2, 2008

Dear Ms. Burnette, I wish to discuss one particular section of the semi-annual compliance report. On the topic of the Whois Data Inaccuracy you wrote: "In addition, staff is implementing a system that will ensure staff reviews every alleged inaccuracy report for a particularized inaccuracy before sending the report to the registrar. Staff expects to implement this system by December 2008." I am very concerned by what appears to be an effort that cannot properly scale. I am aware of WDPRS submitters that have the ability to submit several thousand reports of WHOIS inaccuracies daily. One would think that a staff review process of every alleged inaccuracy will not be as efficient as audit procedures normally used by your department. Can you comment further on this new system and its potential impact on the WDPRS submitting community? Thanks, Danny Younger

1 0

Proposed ALAC statement on new amendments to RAA -- please read
by Brendler, Beau Sept. 2, 2008

Sept. 2, 2008

Hello, everyone. Attached is a draft of a proposed statement on behalf of ALAC regards the registrar accreditation agreement. This follows our briefing from Tim Cole a couple of weeks ago. As I mentioned in that briefing, I think a number of consumer and user community concerns can be traced back to this agreement and its enforcement. I think it's important to stay on top of the process and make as strong a statement as possible regarding the user community's concerns. The document is brief, and in two parts: The first part addresses possible concerns with the new amendments, as described by Tim. Some of these items are taken from the briefing discussion, some are taken from the general pool of user comments, and some have been re-worded and re-applied from "Section F" of the summary document (you can find links to all these referenced documents on the briefing page here: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?draft_amendments_to_raa) Danny Younger's expertise on this is of course acknowledged as well and you'll see some ideas and language in here from his own public comment document. I hope he will have some additions and suggestions for this. The second part revisits some of the initial comments made by the ALAC when the consultation period began. Some of these were placed in section F, but I reworded them to perhaps make them more timely and possibly acceptable for consideration. I also omitted some of the recommendations from Section F that seemed stale or probably just not doable at this point. If you have anything to add, please do so! This represents a starting point, we can add whatever else we want, but we promised to get this to Tim Cole by the end of August, and it's here. Nick has been very helpful to me in putting this together, so please send any additions or comments to this list, and/or Nick or me and we will integrate them into the final. **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ********

4 7

Washington Post to expose ICANN registrar ESTDomains
by Danny Younger Sept. 2, 2008

Sept. 2, 2008

A Washington Post article by Brian Krebs entitled "Report Slams U.S. Host as Major Source of Badware" promises a follow-up article on ICANN accredited registrar ESTdomains: "In a follow-up post, Security Fix will examine the activities of Atrivo's largest customer: domain name registrar ESTDomains". http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2008/08/report_slams_us_host_a… Estdomains recently came to our attention when LegitScript and KnujOn sent a letter to EstDomains requesting they terminate an unlicensed steroid site being sponsored at EstDomains. We were told that EstDomains never responded and the site is sill active. Other online sources point to known Storm Botnet related FastFlux Domains registered by way of ESTDomains -- see http://www.disog.org/text/storm-fastflux.txt Also, Estdomains recently experienced over three weeks of downtime for their domain privacy protection service, the service failure exposing all domain registration information to the public during that episode -- see http://www.johnraul.com/estdomains-domain-privacy-down-for-three-weeks-now/ It will be interesting to see which (if any) provisions of the proposed Registrar Accreditation Agreement will deal with the revelations that emerge in the Washington Post's next article.

1 0