<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16915" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV>Jorge, thanks so much for this summary and update. It's very useful, and as one of the non-technie lawyers here in Seoul (and periodically but regularly needing to deal with technical issues on the Council) I for one appreciate your sharing your expertise.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I hope members - especially those who are not able to attend ICANN meetings in person - don't think that the only major issues NCUC has to deal with are trademark-related (fundamentally important though that may be). The trademark issues are also but one (albeit substantial) part of the whole discussion about new gTLDs. At this meeting, for instance, studies and decisions relating to matters that will have global impact include the forthcoming introduction of fast-track IDNs, registry/registrar vertical separation, and malicious conduct (from abusive registrations to phishing etc.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I hope that members with expertise in all these issues, from technical to legal, will contribute to our learning and discussion on this list.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks,</DIV>
<DIV>Mary</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#800080>Mary W S Wong</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV>Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs</DIV>
<DIV>Franklin Pierce Law Center</DIV>
<DIV>Two White Street</DIV>
<DIV>Concord, NH 03301</DIV>
<DIV>USA</DIV>
<DIV>Email: <A href="mailto:mwong@piercelaw.edu">mwong@piercelaw.edu</A></DIV>
<DIV>Phone: 1-603-513-5143</DIV>
<DIV>Webpage: <A href="http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php">http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php</A></DIV>
<DIV>Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: <A href="http://ssrn.com/author=437584">http://ssrn.com/author=437584</A></DIV><BR><BR>>>> Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@GMAIL.COM> 10/25/2009 11:35 PM >>><BR>I received a question from Rafik that I believe interesting to share<BR>my answer with the rest of the<BR>NCUC crowd.<BR><BR>Question from Rafik (via FB)<BR>>Hi Jorge,<BR>><BR>>it is plenty of lawyers here , I am not sure that they understand technical side. almost discussion<BR>> are about trademark, trademark and trademark.<BR>>wil be glad to know your feedback (technical)<BR>><BR>>Rafik<BR><BR>yes way too many lawyers over there.<BR><BR>From the technical side, the first thing you must know is that the<BR>three reports which are connected<BR>are not conclusive.<BR><BR>One of the reports deal with how the technology scales or not, that's<BR>the OARC report<BR>(Root Zone Augmentation and Impact Analysis), which shows that servers<BR>running BIND or NSD may<BR>be able to scale swiftly but there are some breaking points where<BR>memory and concurrent number of<BR>processes running on the servers could produce problems.<BR><BR>There are also some issues related to server load and additional<BR>traffic growth based on the increase in<BR>size of the dns query responses that exceed 512 bytes due or<BR>additional IPv6 glue records or<BR>DNSSEC information.<BR><BR>Users sending queries for which the answer will exceed 512 bytes and<BR>are not able to receive that<BR>response via UDP will revert to TCP, this has the side effect that now<BR>the query has to establish<BR>a full TCP handshake, taking more processor time/memory and additional<BR>network traffic, this not<BR>only will increase the delay to obtain the response but also will put<BR>more load on the servers and<BR>on the network. And the studies are preliminary since there is not yet<BR>a conclusive study that shows<BR>how the entire system will behave when DNSSEC is fully deployed.<BR><BR>Also having the query being satisfied via TCP will potentially break<BR>the use of ANYCAST as the<BR>mechanism that enables to have replicated "mirror" root servers around<BR>the world.<BR><BR>The second report, or the "TNO Report" (by the folks from<BR>Netherlands) only describes the model has<BR>been used to forecast and try to put together a systematic model to<BR>simulate the DNS root,<BR>but it is just that a description of the model and unfortunatelly<BR>given the short time these<BR>guys had to do their job the report states:<BR>"Given the time frame of the root scalability study, there was barely<BR>time to perform scalability analysis<BR>with the model. However, for purpose of model validation and to<BR>illustrate typical use of the<BR>simulation model several numerical cases were simulated."<BR><BR>The last report, and most important one is the report of the Root<BR>Scaling Study Team known<BR>as the "Report on the Impact on the DNS Root System", which also<BR>address many aspects<BR>of scalability but in particular how the associated processes (like<BR>dealing with VeriSign, IANA,<BR>root operators, DoC, etc) scale or not.<BR><BR>One of the important topics on this report (and you can talk more<BR>about it over there with<BR>Patrik Fältström) is that the recommendation is that we need to<BR>introduce all these changes<BR>to the root zone in a gradual manner and have the tools to monitor and<BR>analyze the impact<BR>of each change since all the previous experience has been based on the<BR>concept that the<BR>root zone is something in the system that has been stable and without<BR>major changes, and<BR>the problem is not just adding the new TLDs, is how the processes and<BR>the overall system<BR>will react when we are required to update/remove/change entries in the<BR>root zone in a<BR>more dynamic fashion with many thousands or hundreds of thousand new TLDs.<BR>Some changes will be driven by the technology, such as DNSSEC that<BR>will require changing<BR>keys, signatures, etc.<BR><BR>Because of the rush and pressure of the moment, many years ago we<BR>missed the opportunity<BR>to nail the baseline metrics and study the overal system before the<BR>"proof of concept" TLDs<BR>where added to the root zone.<BR><BR>This is the information that now the SSAC is digesting but there is a<BR>lot of work to do<BR>to put together a summary report and reach a more conclusive analysis.<BR>So far the best<BR>advice seems to be "PROCEED WITH CAUTION".<BR><BR>The lawyers need to understand that this is a real concern and not<BR>just a trick to delay the<BR>introduction of new gTLDs.<BR><BR>Feel free to ask if you need more specifics or have any questions.<BR><BR>Here are the links to the three related reports:<BR><BR>Root Zone Augmentation and Impact Analysis:<BR><A href="http://www.icann.org/en/topics/ssr/root-zone-augementation-analysis-17sep09-en.pdf">http://www.icann.org/en/topics/ssr/root-zone-augementation-analysis-17sep09-en.pdf</A><BR><BR>TNO report - Root Scaling Study<BR>Description of the DNS Root Scaling Model:<BR><A href="http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-model-description-29sep09-en.pdf">http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-model-description-29sep09-en.pdf</A><BR><BR>Scaling the Root - Report on the Impact on the DNS Root System<BR>of Increasing the Size and Volatility of the Root Zone:<BR><A href="http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-study-report-31aug09-en.pdf">http://www.icann.org/en/committees/dns-root/root-scaling-study-report-31aug09-en.pdf</A><BR><BR>Regards<BR>Jorge<BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>