Subject: [At-Large] ICANN Policy Update
From: "Denise Michel" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:21:07 +1000

Below (and attached in Word with hyperlinks) are brief summaries of a number
of significant Internet policy issues that are being addressed by the ICANN
community's bottom-up policy development structure, as well as other
significant activities of interest.  This latest monthly update is provided
by ICANN's Policy Staff in response to community requests for periodic
summaries of ICANN's policy work.  Links to additional information are
included and we encourage you to go beyond these brief staff summaries and
learn more about the ICANN community's work. These monthly updates also will
be available on our website. Our goal is to maximize transparency and broad
community participation in ICANN's policy development activities.  We
continue to investigate more effective and efficient ways to communicate the
relevance, importance and status of ongoing issues to the ICANN community.
Comments and suggestions on how we can improve these efforts are most
welcome and should be sent to [email-masked].

Regards,
Denise Michel
ICANN VP, Policy

ICANN POLICY UPDATE – April 2008

CONTENTS:

1.   GNSO -- IMPROVEMENTS
2.   GNSO -- DOMAIN NAME TASTING
3.   GNSO -- WHOIS
4.   GNSO -- INTER-REGISTRAR TRANSFER POLICY REVIEW
5.   GNSO -- FAST FLUX HOSTING
6.   GNSO/CCNSO -- BOARD SEAT ELECTIONS
7.   MULTIPLE ENTITIES -- IDN ccTLDs
8.  CCNSO -- INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS CONTINUE
9.  CCNSO -- PHISHING SURVEY
10.  CCNSO -- NEW MEMBERS
11.  ASO AC -- GLOBAL POLICY PROPOSALS (ASNs, IPv4)
12.  SSAC -- DNSSEC BROADBAND ROUTER TESTING REVISED
13.  SSAC -- ANTI-PHISHING ACTIVITIES
14.  AT-LARGE -- NEW PRACTICES EXPAND POLICY PARTICIPATION
15.  AT-LARGE -- NEW WEBSITE/PORTAL LAUNCHED

1. GNSO -- IMPROVEMENTS

Background:  The ICANN Board is considering a comprehensive set of
recommendations to improve the structure and operations of the Generic Names
Supporting Organization (GNSO). This is part of ICANN's ongoing commitment
to its evolution and improvement, and follows an independent review of the
GNSO and extensive public consultation.  A working group appointed by
ICANN's Board has developed a comprehensive proposal (GNSO Improvements
Report) to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy
activities, structure, operations and communications.  On 15 February 2008,
the Board accepted the GNSO Improvements Report for consideration and
directed ICANN staff to open a public comment forum on the Report for 30
days, draft a detailed implementation plan in consultation with the GNSO,
begin implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, and return to
the Board and community for further consideration of the implementation
plan.

Recent Developments:  The period for public comments on the GNSO
Improvements Report has been extended to 25 April 2008.  Although many
elements of the report seem to have broad support, the proposed stakeholder
groups/constituency structures and allocation of seats on the GNSO Council
continue to draw a significant amount of discussion from a variety of
parties including the Business, Intellectual Property, and Internet Service
Provider Constituencies who advocate a different allocation of seats than
that recommended to the Board.

Next Steps:  Public comment period on the GNSO Improvements Report (closes
25 April  2008) -- subsequent Board action is expected at the Paris meeting.

More Information:
•    GNSO Improvements information page <
http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/>
•    Full GNSO Improvements Report <
http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03feb
08.pdf>

•    Board resolution on GNSO Improvements <
http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15feb08.htm#_Toc64545918>

Staff Contact:  Denise Michel, VP Policy Development

2.  GNSO -- DOMAIN NAME TASTING

Background:  In Spring 2007, ICANN's At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC),
asked the GNSO Council to review the issue of "domain tasting." The term
refers to a case when an entity registers a domain name and then tests to
see if the name has sufficient traffic to provide more income than the
annual registration fee (usually through the addition of pay-per-click
advertising). If the address is deemed sufficiently profitable, it is kept.
If not, the current "add grace period" (AGP) - where domains can be returned
within five days without cost - is used to return the domain at no net cost
to the registrant.  Among other reasons, the practice is controversial
because registrants who engage in this behavior can typically register many
hundreds of thousands of domain names under this practice, with these
temporary registrations far exceeding the number of domain names actually
licensed.

Over time, there has been a significant increase in the number of domains
registered and returned prior to expiration of the AGP.  A significant
number of community members feel the AGP process presents a loophole that
facilitates this conduct. In October 2007, after fact finding and
consideration, the GNSO Council launched a formal policy development process
(PDP) on domain tasting and encouraged ICANN staff to consider applying
ICANN's fee collections to names registered and subsequently de-registered
during the AGP. Subsequently, staff included in the initial draft of ICANN's
next fiscal year budget, a proposal to charge a fee for all domains added,
including domains added during the AGP.   Public discussion of the budget,
and this proposal, is ongoing.

As part of the formal PDP process, an Initial Report was produced for public
comment, outlining the problems caused by domain tasting, possible actions
to be taken, and the arguments put forward for and against such actions  .
Public comments were incorporated into a draft Final Report posted on 8
February 2008.

Recent Developments:   At its 6 March 2008 meeting, the GNSO Council
considered a motion drafted and subsequently revised by a small design team
to stop the practice of domain tasting. The revised draft motion would
prohibit any gTLD operator that has implemented an AGP from offering a
refund for any domain name deleted during the AGP that exceeds 10% of its
net new registrations in that month, or fifty domain names, whichever is
greater. Under the terms of the motion, an exemption from the limitation may
be sought for a particular month, upon a showing of extraordinary
circumstances detailed in the motion.

Public comments and constituency impact statements regarding the revised
draft motion have been solicited and incorporated into a Final Report for
Council consideration at its scheduled 17 April 2008 meeting. The comments
and constituency statements reflect a plurality of views on what should be
done to eliminate abuse of the AGP to facilitate domain tasting and
addressed three potential options including (1) views on the draft
resolution itself; (2) views on eliminating the AGP entirely; and (3) views
on the proposed ICANN budget changes.

Next Steps:  The GNSO Council will consider the Draft Motion at its upcoming
17 April 2008 meeting

More Information:
•    Public comment request <
http://www.icann.org/public_comment/#domain-tasting>
•    GNSO Domain Tasting Issues Report, June 2007 <
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/domain-tasting/gnso-domain-tasting-report-14jun
07.pdf>

•    Outcomes Report October 2007 <
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-domain-tasting-adhoc-outcomes-report-final
.pdf>
•    Final Report 4 April 2008  <
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/domain-tasting/gnso-final-report-domain-tasting
-04apr08.pdf
>

Staff Contact:   Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor

3.  GNSO -- WHOIS

Background:  WHOIS services provide public access to data on registered
domain names.  That data currently includes contact information for
Registered Name Holders. The extent of registration data collected at the
time of registration of a domain name, and the ways such data can be
accessed, are specified in agreements established by ICANN for domain names
registered in generic top-level domains (gTLDs). For example, ICANN requires
accredited registrars to collect and provide free public access to (1) the
name of the registered domain name and its name servers and registrar, (2)
the date the domain was created and when its registration expires, and (3)
the contact information for the Registered Name Holder, the technical
contact, and the registrant's administrative contact.

WHOIS has been the subject of intense policy development debate and action
over the last few years. Information contained in WHOIS is used for a wide
variety of purposes.  Some uses of WHOIS data are viewed as constructive and
beneficial.  For example, sometimes WHOIS data is used to track down and
identify registrants who may be posting illegal content or engaging in
phishing scams.  Other uses of WHOIS are viewed as potentially negative,
such as harvesting WHOIS contact information to send unwanted spam or
fraudulent email solicitations.  Privacy advocates have also been concerned
about the privacy implications of unrestricted access to personal contact
information.

The GNSO Council decided in October 2007 that a comprehensive, objective and
quantifiable understanding of key factual issues regarding WHOIS will
benefit future GNSO policy development efforts, and plans to ask the ICANN
staff to conduct several studies for this purpose. Before defining the
details of these studies, the Council has solicited suggestions for specific
topics of study on WHOIS from community stakeholders. Possible areas of
study might include a study of certain aspects of gTLD registrants and
registrations, a study of certain uses and misuses of WHOIS data, a study of
the use of proxy registration services, including privacy services, or a
comparative study of gTLD and ccTLD WHOIS.

Recent Developments:  A forum for public comments on suggestions for
specific topics of study on WHOIS was open through 15 February 2008.
Approximately 25 suggestions were received.  A summary of those comments has
been prepared. On 27 March the GNSO Council approved a motion to form a
group of volunteers to: (1) review and discuss the 'Report on Public
Suggestions on Further Studies of WHOIS; (2) develop a proposed list of
recommended studies, if any, for which ICANN staff will be asked to provide
cost estimates to the Council; and (3) produce the list of recommendations
with supporting rationale not later than 24 April 2008.

Next Steps:  A report from the small group reviewing the suggestions on
further WHOis studies is due to the Council by 24 April 2008. The GNSO
Council will consider the recommendations of the group.  Based on direction
from the Council, ICANN staff will subsequently provide the Council with
rough cost estimates for various components of data gathering and studies.
The Council will then decide what data gathering and studies it will
request, given available resources.  Staff will perform the resulting data
gathering and studies and report the results to the Council.

More Information: GNSO WHOis Policy Work Web page <
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/>

Staff Contact:   Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor

4.  GNSO -- INTER-REGISTRAR TRANSFER POLICY REVIEW

Background:  Consistent with ICANN's obligation to promote and encourage
robust competition in the domain name space, the Inter-Registrar Transfer
Policy aims to provide a straightforward procedure for domain name holders
to transfer their names from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another
should they wish to do so. The policy also provides standardized
requirements for registrar handling of such transfer requests from domain
name holders. The policy is an existing community consensus that was
implemented in late 2004 that is now being reviewed by the GNSO.  As part of
that effort, the Council formed a Transfers Working Group (TWG) to examine
and recommend possible areas for improvements in the existing transfer
policy. The TWG identified a broad list of over 20 potential areas for
clarification and improvement.

In an effort to get improvements on-line as soon as possible, the GNSO
Council initiated a policy development process (PDP) to immediately clarify
four specific issues regarding reasons for which a registrar of record may
deny a request to transfer a domain name to a new registrar. That PDP
process in now under way and the GNSO constituencies have submitted their
initial comments.

Recent Developments:   ICANN staff finalized and posted an Initial Report
for public comments to immediately clarify the four specific issues
regarding reasons for which a registrar of record may deny a request to
transfer a domain name to a new registrar. A summary of those comments is
now available (see <
http://forum.icann.org/lists/transfer-policy-2008/msg00004.html>).  In
parallel with the PDP process, the Council tasked a short term planning
group to evaluate and prioritize the remaining 19 policy issues identified
by the Transfers Working Group. In March, the group delivered a report to
the GNSO Council with suggested clustering of those issues for consideration
in five new PDPs.

Next Steps:  The public comments received on the Initial Report will be used
by ICANN staff to compile a Final Report for the GNSO Council's
consideration of further steps to take in this PDP.  The report from the
short term planning group on other potential PDPs will next be discussed and
decided upon by the GNSO Council.

More Information:
•    Draft Advisory <
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/gnso-draft-transfer-advisory-14nov07.
pdf
>
•    Initial Report <
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-17mar08.htm>
•    PDP Recommendations <
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/transfer-wg-recommendations-pdp-groupings-19mar
08.pdf>

Staff Contact:   Olof Nordling, Manager, Policy Development Coordination

5.   GNSO – FAST FLUX HOSTING

Background: Fast flux hosting is a term that refers to several techniques
used by cyber criminals to evade detection, in which criminals rapidly
modify IP addresses and/or name servers.  The ICANN Security and Stability
Advisory Committee (SSAC) recently completed a study of fast flux hosting.
The results of the study were published in January 2008 in the SSAC Advisory
on Fast Flux Hosting and DNS (SAC 025). Because fast flux hosting involves
many different players—the cybercriminals and their victims, ISPs, companies
that provide web hosting services, and DNS registries and registrars—it is
possible to imagine a variety of different approaches to mitigation.  Most
of these will require the cooperation of a variety of actors including users
and ISPs as well as registries and registrars.

Recent developments: On 26 March 2008, staff posted an Issues Report on fast
flux hosting, as directed by the GNSO Council.  In the Report, staff
recommends that the GNSO sponsor additional fact-finding and research to
develop best practices guidelines concerning fast flux hosting.  Staff also
notes that it may be appropriate for the ccNSO also to participate in such
an activity.

Next Steps: The GNSO Council is scheduled to discuss the topic at its
upcoming meeting on 17 April 2008.

More Iinformation:
•    SSAC Report 025 on fast flux hosting, January 2008 -
http://www.icann.org/committees/security/sac025.pdf
•    Issues Report on Fast Flux Hosting, corrected 31 March 2008 -
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/fast-flux-hosting/gnso-issues-report-fast-flux-
25mar08.pdf

Staff Contact:    Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor

6.  CCNSO/GNSO -- BOARD SEAT ELECTIONS

Background:  The Country Codes Name Supporting Organization (ccNSO) and GNSO
Councils are responsible for filling two seats each on the ICANN Board of
Directors.  ccNSO seats are identified as Board seat numbers 11 and 12.
GNSO seats on the Board are identified as seat numbers 13 and 14.

Recent Developments:

CCNSO Board Seat 11

Peter Dengate-Thrush was selected to fill seat 11 on the ICANN Board at the
ccNSO Council meeting on the 31 March 2008. This selection was based on the
outcome of a prior call for nominations among the ccNSO members. The only
candidate who was nominated and seconded was Mr. Dengate-Thrush and he
accepted the nomination.

Next Steps: The ccNSO Council Chair will provide the Secretary of ICANN with
written notice of the decision.
More Information: ccNSO ICANN Election of Director Procedures <
http://ccnso.icann.org/about/elections/election-procedure-to-elect-icann-dir
ector-03mar08.htm>

Staff Contact:   Gabriella Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat

GNSO Board Seat 14

Rita Rodin was elected by the GNSO Council to fill seat 14 on the ICANN
Board of Directors. The election closed on 7 March 2008. The GNSO Council
confirmed the election results at its meeting scheduled on 27 March 2008,
and pursuant to the bylaws, Avri Doria, GNSO Chair, informed ICANN's General
Counsel of the outcome.

Next Steps:  The next GNSO election process will commence at the end of this
year for the GNSO Chair.  The current Chair's term ends 31 January 2009.

More Information: GNSO Elections Procedures <
http://gnso.icann.org/elections/election-procedures-2008.shtml>

Staff Contact:   Glen De Saint Géry, GNSO Secretariat

7.    MULTIPLE ENTITIES -- IDN ccTLDs

Background:  The potential introduction of Internationalized Domain Names
(IDNs) represents the beginning of an exciting new chapter in the history of
the Internet. IDNs offer the potential for many new opportunities and
benefits for Internet users of all languages around the world by allowing
them to establish domains in their native languages and alphabets.

An IDN ccTLD (internationalized domain name country code top level domain)
is a country code top-level domain (corresponding to a country, territory,
or other geographic location as associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter
codes) with a label that contains at least one character that is not a
standard Latin letter (A through Z), a hyphen, or one of the standard
numerical digits (0 through 9). The technical potential for ICANN to now
make these domain names available for assignment is prompting significant
discussion, study and demand within the ICANN community – particularly for
territories who want to make use of non-Latin characters.  Current efforts
are taking place on two fronts; (1) efforts to identify a "fast track"
process to provide new domain opportunities to territories with immediate
justifiable needs; and (2) efforts to develop a comprehensive long term plan
that ensures a stable process for all interested stakeholders.

IDNC Working Group Pursues The IDN "Fast Track"

A joint IDNC Working Group (IDNC WG) was chartered by ICANN's Board to
develop and report on feasible methods, if any, that would enable the
introduction of a limited number of non-contentious IDN ccTLDs, in a timely
manner that ensures the continued security and stability of the Internet
while a comprehensive long-term IDN ccTLD policy is being developed. On 1
February 2008, the IDNC WG posted a "Discussion Draft of the Initial Report"
(DDIR) for public comment and input from the ICANN community. The DDIR
clarified the relationship between the "fast track" process and the broader
long-term process IDNccPDP (the ccNSO Policy Development Process on IDN
ccTLDs) and also identified the mechanisms for the selection of an IDN ccTLD
and an IDN ccTLD manager. The ccNSO Council determined that those mechanisms
were to be developed within the parameters of:

•    The overarching requirement to preserve the security and stability of
the DNS;
•    Compliance with the IDNA protocols;
•    Input and advice from the technical community with respect to the
implementation of IDNs; and
•    Current practices for the delegation of ccTLDs, which include the
current IANA practices.

A public workshop was held 11 February in New Delhi, India to discuss the
DDIR and a comment period was opened on that document.

Recent Developments:  The IDNC WG has now produced a first draft of the IDNC
WG Methodology in the form of an Interim Report that has also been made
available for public comment. Discussions on the methodology were held at
the ICANN Regional Meeting in Dubai, UAE (1-3 April 2008) and public
comments on the methodology can be submitted until 25 April 2008.

Next Steps:  The work schedule agreed to by the IDNC Working Group is as
follows:
•    An Initial Report, which will solidify the topics and their relation to
the IDNccPDP.
•    A final Interim Report, which will contain potential implementation
mechanisms is scheduled to be released 16 May 2008).
•    The Final Report, which will contain the actual recommendations of the
IDNC WG  is due to be published 13 June 2008)

More Information:
•    Public Comments Requested on Initial Draft Fast-Track Mechanism <
http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-01feb08.htm>
•    Draft Methodology for Fast Track <
http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-proposed-methodology-31mar08.pdf>
•    Public Comments on the Discussion Draft of the Initial Report <
http://www.icann.org/public_comment/#dd-idn-cctld-ft>

Staff Contact:   Bart Boswinkel, Senior Policy Advisor

CCNSO Also Focuses On Comprehensive IDNccTLD Policy Development

Background:  In parallel to considerations of a "fast track" approach, the
ccNSO Council has initiated a comprehensive long term policy development
process for IDNccTLDs (referred to as the IDNccPDP). At its meeting in
October 2007, the ccNSO Council resolved  to call for an Issues Report to
examine the need for an IDNccPDP to consider:

•    Whether Article IX of the ICANN bylaws applies to IDN ccTLDs associated
with the ISO 3166-1 two letter codes, and if it does not then to establish
if Article IX should apply.
•    Whether the ccNSO should launch a PDP to develop the policy for the
selection and delegation of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1
two-letter codes.

The Council formally requested that Issues Report on 19 December 2007 and
directed ICANN staff to identify policies, procedures, and/or by-laws that
should be reviewed and, as necessary revised, in connection with the
development and implementation of any IDN ccTLD policy – including efforts
designed to address the proposed fast-track concept.

Recent Developments:  The GNSO and several other parties have submitted
comments regarding the proposal to set a comprehensive long term policy
development process for IDNccTLDs (referred to above as the IDNccPDP).  An
Issues Report will be submitted to the ccNSO Council and will form the basis
for the Council's decision on whether or not to formally initiate the
IDNccPDP.

Next Steps:  Comments regarding the preparation of an Issues Report on the
IDNccPDP and are now being evaluated.

More Information: IDNccPDP Announcement:  <
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19dec07.htm>

Staff Contact: Bart Boswinkel, Senior Policy Advisor

8.  CCNSO -- INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS CONTINUE

Background:  The ccNSO Council has recently been taking steps to improve its
work plans, administrative procedures and communications tools. As a result
of a ccNSO Council workshop held at the ICANN New Delhi meeting, a working
group of the Council was established to propose administrative procedures
for the ccNSO. The ccNSO Council also approved creation of a new
"authoritative" ccNSO email list.  The organization has also been conducting
a participation survey in an effort to understand better why ccTLDs do or do
not participate in ccNSO meetings.

Recent Developments:  In preparation for making recommendations on new
structures, the new "Working Group on ccNSO Administrative Procedures" has
had two conference calls on the structuring processes within the ccNSO. All
ccTLD managers have been invited to subscribe to a new global ccTLD email
list and a first draft of the results of the ccNSO participation survey
recently was shared with the community at the African Top Level Domain
meeting in Johannesburg.

Next Steps:  The Working Group will continue to develop new procedures for
the ccNSO.

More Information:
•    ccNSO <http://www.ccnso.icann.org/>
•    ccTLD Community Email List <
http://www.ccnso.icann.org/about/charter-cctld-community-list.pdf>

Staff Contacts:   Bart Boswinkel, Senior Policy Advisor and Gabriella
Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat

9.  CCNSO -- PHISHING SURVEY

Background:   The term "phishing" has been used to describe criminal and
fraudulent attempts by cybercriminals to acquire sensitive private
information (such as usernames, passwords and credit card details) by
masquerading as trustworthy entities in an electronic communication.
Phishing remains a major problem among ccTLDs and as a result ccNSO members
are being called upon to identify countermeasures that can be undertaken to
fight back. A draft survey seeking to identify those types of measures was
presented to and approved by the ccNSO Council during its meeting in New
Delhi in February 2008.  The survey was launched and sent to all available
email lists.  ICANN regional liaisons were also asked to help distribute the
survey.

Recent Developments:  Originally, survey results of the anti-phishing survey
were expected to be ready for posting by early April 2008, but the response
period has been extended to allow for the receipt of more survey responses.
To date 21 responses have been received and Staff is working to inspire
more.

Next Steps:  Survey response and evaluation time extended to encourage more
responses.

More information: Survey <
http://ccnso.icann.org/surveys/anti-phishing-survey-27feb08.pdf>

Staff Contact:   Gabriella Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat

10.   CCNSO -- NEW MEMBERS

Russia (.ru) and Georgia (.ge) recently were approved as new ccNSO members.
The ccNSO now has 77 members.

More Information: ccNSO Applications Archive <
http://www.ccnso.icann.org/applications/summary-date.shtml>

Staff Contact: Gabriella Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat

11.   ASO AC - GLOBAL POLICY PROPOSALS (ASNs, IPv4)

Background:   Two significant global policy proposals on addressing matters
continue to be actively studied and discussed within the addressing
community.  If they are (1) adopted by all Regional Internet Registries
(RIRs), (2) verified by the Address Supporting Organization (ASO) and (3)
subsequently ratified by the ICANN Board, the policies will govern the
allocation of Internet addresses from the Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority (IANA) to the RIRs. The two current proposals are described below.

Recent Developments:

Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs)

Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs) are addresses used in addition to IP
addresses for Internet routing. A new global policy proposal for ASNs would
formalize the current procedure for allocation of ASNs and provides a policy
basis for the transition from 2-byte (16 bits) to 4-byte (32 bits) ASNs. The
final transition step is now foreseen for 31 December 2009, after which date
the distinction between 2- and 4-byte ASNs will cease and all ASNs will be
regarded as of 4-byte length, by appending initial zeroes to those of 2-byte
original length.

Next Steps:  This new 4-byte proposal has been adopted in all RIRs.  It will
be forwarded to the ICANN Board for ratification by the ASO Address Council
after the Council has verified that each RIR's procedural steps have been
duly followed.

More information:  Background Report <
http://www.icann.org/announcements/proposal-asn-report-29nov07.htm>

Staff Contact:  Olof Nordling, Manager Policy Development Coordination

Remaining IPv4 address space

The IANA pool of unallocated IPv4 address blocks is continuing to be
depleted.  As announced last month, a new global policy has been proposed to
allocate the remaining address blocks once a given threshold is triggered.
The text of the proposed policy essentially recommends that when there are
five /8 blocks remaining in the IANA pool, one remaining block will be
allocated to each RIR.

Next Steps:  This proposal was discussed at the APNIC 25 meeting in February
2008 and at the ARIN (American Registry for Internet Numbers) in Denver
earlier this month. It will be discussed in upcoming meetings of the other
RIRs, next in RIPE (Resaux IP Europeens Network Coordination Centre) -
Berlin 5-6 May 2008, LACNIC (Latin American and Caribbean Internet Addresses
Registry) – Salvador/Bahia, Brazil 26-30 May 2008 and AfriNIC (African
Region Internet Registry) – 24 May-6 June, Rabat, Morocco.

More information:  Background Report
http://www.icann.org/announcements/proposal-ipv4-report-29nov07.htm

Staff Contact:  Olof Nordling, Manager Policy Development Coordination

12.   SSAC -- DNSSEC BROADBAND ROUTER TESTING REVISED

Background:  When Sweden and other ccTLDs began more extensive deployment of
the Domain Name System Security Extension (DNSSEC), it was discovered that
several broadband routers failed when they received DNS response messages
containing DNSSEC resource records and other DNSSEC related protocol
parameters. Study of these routers revealed that many have embedded DNS
servers. The DNSSEC deployment community and SSAC have been collaborating to
create a testing program for broadband routers to gauge the ability of these
devices to correctly process DNS messages that contain DNSSEC resource
records. A set of web pages was developed by ICANN staff to provide a series
of tests that Internet users could use to determine if their router succeeds
or fails when DNNSEC is present in DNS response messages.

Recent Developments:  After reviewing the new testing suite for broadband
routers running DNSSEC, Staff determined that the test suite was too
complicated and required too much data collection and analysis for voluntary
community participation.

Next Steps:  Staff is now investigating an alternative testing approach that
may involve several independent bodies testing broadband routers and SOHO
firewalls -- one for U.S. domestic products, one for Europe products, one
for U.K. products, and one for Asia Pacific products. The testing criteria
are being re-evaluated to determine a new common test suite with a goal to
have this new testing begin before 1 May 2008.
More Information:  SSAC <http://www.icann.org/committees/security/>
Staff Contact: Dave Piscitello, Senior Security Technologist

13.   SSAC – ANTI-PHISHING ACTIVITIES

Recent Developments:  ICANN staff has been helping to update/revise a work
in progress for the Anti Phishing Working Group entitled, "What To Do If
Your Web Site Is Hacked." The document describes preparation and incident
response with respect to web site phishing attacks. The report was approved
by the Internet Policy Forum (formerly the DNS Policy Working Group) and is
currently being edited and prepared for publication.

A new SSAC Advisory entitled "Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks"
has been distributed for review and approval by SSAC and ICANN's general
counsel. Several external experts have reviewed the Advisory and provided
some valuable additional insights. The document may be distributed in two
phases - the first to registrars, so that they are advised of the threat,
and the second (at or prior to the ICANN Paris meeting) to the general
public.

ICANN staff is also assisting with anti-phishing investigations of two
registrars who are alleged to be shielding phishing activities. In one case
the registrar's WHOIS/43 service is not responding; in another case, staff
is studying a service that allegedly hampers anti-phishing investigations by
creating barriers on WHOIS information access.

Staff Contact: Dave Piscitello, Senior Security Technologist

14.   AT-LARGE – NEW PRACTICES EXPAND POLICY PARTICIPATION

Recent Developments:  New policy development processes and simultaneous
translation improvements are significantly expanding policy participation in
the At-Large community.

As a result of additional staff capacity and other developments within the
At-Large community, the process by which the At-Large community develops
policy statements has been completely overhauled.  At the direction of the
At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), ICANN Staff has now begun producing
initial draft statements on policy (synthesis statements of written and
verbal comments) for review by working groups and subcommittees. These
drafts are put through several steps of community review before being voted
on by the ALAC.  Approved comments are transmitted, as appropriate, to the
public comment process or to the Board of ICANN.

The first three products of this new process effort are already making their
way through the process. They are:
•    ALAC Statement on the Proposed Travel Policy for Volunteers
•    ALAC Statement on the Operating Plan and Budget Framework for FY
2008/2009
•    ALAC Statement on GNSO Improvements

Additionally, the worldwide At-Large Calendar has been improved to include a
community comments window to make it easier for the public to keep track of
comments.

Also, thanks to new simultaneous interpretation capabilities and a new
teleconference service the African Regional At-Large Organisation (AFRALO)
and the Latin America and the Caribbean Islands Regional At-Large
Organisation (LACRALO) are now holding monthly teleconference meetings.

Staff Contact:  Nick Ashton-Hart, Director for At-Large

15.   AT-LARGE – NEW WEBSITE/PORTAL LAUNCHED

Recent Developments:  At-Large's new website  went live in March. The new
site is built upon a state-of-the-art, open-source content management system
– Drupal.  The result is a framework which can be duplicated and used by
other parts of ICANN.  The new site provides an array of new features which
the static html-based old site could not, including:
•    Two-way links between forums on the site and the community's mailing
lists – with new postings soon to be automatically visible;
•    Dynamically updated content;
•    Standardised multilingual support built into the site's architecture
•    Multilingual calendaring and events, including support for multilingual
documents and time zone support.

More Information: At-Large < http://atlarge.icann.org>

Staff Contact:  Nick Ashton-Hart, Director for At-Large

# # #
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
[email-masked]
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org