Fwd: [council] ICANN Policy Update
Robin Gross
robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG
Sat Apr 19 04:21:00 CEST 2008
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Denise Michel" <denise.michel at icann.org>
> Date: April 17, 2008 2:16:32 AM PDT
> To: "Council GNSO" <council at gnso.icann.org>, liaison6c
> <liaison6c at gnso.icann.org>
> Subject: [council] ICANN Policy Update
> Reply-To: denise.michel at icann.org
>
> 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 below
> 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 policy-staff at icann.org.
>
> 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-03feb08.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-14jun07.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-19mar08.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-director-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
>
>
> # # #
>
>

IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin at ipjustice.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20080418/af0f5a0a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: POLICY DEPT April 08 Update final.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 158720 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20080418/af0f5a0a/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20080418/af0f5a0a/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list