The following automated report pulls selected data from each of the official metrics pages to provide a consolidated view of the entire project; it is sorted by Metric number.
This report is not editable and is for informational purposes only.
| Page Title | Description | WG | Category | Impact | Utility | Feasibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metric 1.1 (IAG) | % DNS Service Availability. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.2 (IAG) | % Availability for Registration Data Directory Services (RDDS). | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.3 (IAG) | % of Service Availability for Shared Registration Services (SRS). | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.4 (IAG) | Survey of perceived consumer trust in DNS, relative to experiences before the gTLD expansion. Survey could at least measure experiences with:
| GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Significant |
|
|
| Metric 1.5 (IAG) | % Uptime for Registrar services such as WHOIS, contact info, and complaints. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Significant |
|
|
| Metric 1.6 (IAG) | Relative incidence of breach notices issued to Registry operators for contract or policy compliance matters. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.7 (IAG) | Relative incidence of breach notices issued to Registrars, for contract or policy compliance matters. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.8 (IAG) | Relative incidence of Registry & Registrar general complaints submitted to ICANN. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Negligible |
|
|
| Metric 1.9 (IAG) | Relative incidence of combined UDRP and URS Complaints. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.10 (IAG) | Relative incidence of combined UDRP and URS Decisions against registrants. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.11 (IAG) | Quantity of intellectual property claims and cost of domain name policing relating to new gTLDs.
| GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Significant |
|
|
| Metric 1.12 (IAG) | Decisions against Registry Operator arising from Registry Restrictions Dispute Resolutions Procedure (RRDRP). | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Moderate |
|
|
| Metric 1.13 (IAG) | Quantity of Compliance Concerns regarding Applicable National Laws, including reported data security breaches. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Significant |
|
|
| Metric 1.14 (IAG) | Quantity and relative incidence of Domain Takedowns. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Moderate |
|
|
| Metric 1.15 (IAG) | Quantity and relative incidence of spam from domains in new gTLDs, which could be measured via specialized email addresses and methodologies. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Moderate |
|
|
| Metric 1.16 (IAG) | Quantity and relative incidence of fraudulent transactions caused by phishing sites in new gTLDs. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.17 (IAG) | Quantity and relative incidence of detected phishing sites using new gTLDs. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.18 (IAG) | Quantity and relative incidence of detected botnets and malware distributed using new gTLDs. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Moderate |
|
|
| Metric 1.19 (IAG) | Quantity and relative incidence of sites found to be dealing in or distributing identities and account information used in identity fraud. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.20 (IAG) | Quantity and relative incidence of complaints regarding inaccurate, invalid, or suspect WHOIS records in new gTLD. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.21 (IAG) | Relative incidence of errors in new gTLD zones. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 1.22 (IAG) | Qualitative comparison of mission and purpose set forth in Question 18 of the new gTLD Application with current actual use of the gTLD. | GNSO |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.1 (IAG) | Measure potential registrants’ understanding of TLD benefits and restrictions, such that potential registrants can make informed choices about registration of their domain names. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.2 (IAG) | Measure Internet users’ understanding of TLD eligibility restrictions, such that Internet users can make informed choices about reliance on domain names in that TLD. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.3 (IAG) | Biennial surveys of perceived consumer choice in DNS, relative to experience before the gTLD expansion. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.4 (IAG) | Quantity of TLDs using IDN scripts or languages other than English. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.5 (IAG) | Quantity of Registrar websites offering IDN scripts or languages other than English. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.6 (IAG) | The percentage of IDNs as compared to the total number of gTLDs in each script or language should be compared to the percentage of people who use each particular language or script. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.7 (IAG) | Quantity of different national legal regimes where new gTLD Registry Operators are based. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.8 (IAG) | Measure share of Sunrise registrations & domain blocks to total registrations in each new gTLD. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.9 (IAG) | Relative share of new gTLD registrations already having the same domain in legacy TLDs prior to expansion. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
Moderate |
|
|
| Metric 2.10 (IAG) | Automated analysis or online survey to determine the number of “duplicate” registrations in new gTLDs. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.11 (IAG) | Measure the increased geographic diversity of registrants across all new gTLDs, as indication of new choices created by gTLD expansion. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.12 (IAG) | Survey or Study to gauge the frequency with which users access internet resources via tools that do not reveal the TLD (e.g. QR Codes, search results, apps, etc., that do not display URLs). | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.13 (IAG) | Biennial survey of perceived consumer choice relative to experiences before the gTLD expansion. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 2.14 (IAG) | DNS traffic in new gTLDs should be compared to contemporary user traffic in legacy gTLDs. | GNSO |
Consumer Choice (CC) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.1 (IAG) | Quantity of total TLDs before1 and after expansion. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
Negligible |
|
|
| Metric 3.2 (IAG) | Quantity of gTLDs2 before and after expansion. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
Negligible |
|
|
| Metric 3.3 (IAG) | Quantity of unique gTLD Registry Operators3 before and after expansion. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.4 (IAG) | Quantity of unique gTLD Registry Service Providers4 before and after expansion. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.5 (IAG) | Quantity of Registrars5 before and after expansion, along with indication of country where Registrar is based. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.6 (IAG) | Relative share of new gTLD registrations held by “new entrants”. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.7 (IAG) | To assess competitive impact of new gTLDs, measure the quantity of second level registrations per gTLD and ccTLD. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.8 (IAG) | Quantity of “unique” second level registrations in the new gTLD space where that same string does not appear as a registration in any other TLD. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
Moderate |
|
|
| Metric 3.9 (IAG) | Wholesale price of new gTLD domains offered to the general public. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.10 (IAG) | Retail price of new gTLD domains offered to the general public. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 3.11 (IAG) | Qualitative assessment of non-price competition through innovations that benefit registrants and users, particularly for new market served. | GNSO |
Competition (C) |
|
|
|
| Metric 4.1 (IAG) | Frequency of success in reaching the intended information supplier through direct entry of domain names. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 4.2 (IAG) | Frequency of landing at unintended destinations. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 4.3 (IAG) | Frequency of redundant or defensive domains (i.e., multiple domains pointing to the same destination). | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 4.4 (IAG) | Frequency of dead-end domains (registered, but do not resolve). | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 4.5 (IAG) | Numbers of complaints received by ICANN regarding improper use of domains. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 5.1 (IAG) | Relative preference of explicit use of domain names versus search engines for end-user general Internet use. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 5.2 (IAG) | Growth in use of hosted pages for organizations (such as Facebook or Google+). | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 5.3 (IAG) | Growth in use of QR codes. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 5.4 (IAG) | Growth in use of URL shortening services. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 5.5 (IAG) | Growth in registrations in ccTLDs relative to gTLDs. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
Effective |
Potential |
| Metric 5.6 (IAG) | Growth of Software Defined Networking (SDN) as alternative to the DNS. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Significant |
|
|
| Metric 6.1 (IAG) | Number of consumer complaints to government agencies related to confusing or misleading domain names. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 6.2 (IAG) | Number of complaints to police agencies alleging fraud or misrepresentation based on – or traced to – domain names. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 6.3 (IAG) | Number of fraud investigations where WHOIS information positively assisted investigation and identification of offending parties. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 7.1 (IAG) | How many gTLD registries have privacy policies which are clearly and easily accessible by end users. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 7.2 (IAG) | How many gTLD registries have allocation policies which are clearly and easily accessible by end users, even if those policies simply restrict or prohibit public availability. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 7.3 (IAG) | How many registries disclose end-user information regarding their codes of conduct for sub-domain owner/operators. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 8.1 (IAG) | How many complaints are received by ICANN related to confusion or misunderstanding of TLD functions. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 8.2 (IAG) | How many registries are subject to Compliance activity based on reported breaches of RAA. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 8.3 (IAG) | How many registries have been the subject of complaints related to their Public Interest Commitments (PICs). | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 8.4 (IAG) | How many registries have lost a dispute resolution process related to their PICs. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
|
|
|
| Metric 9.1 (IAG) | Are end-user software applications capable of implementing all of the new Audit gTLDs; can browsers and DNS clients in end-user systems resolve all new gTLDs. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Significant |
|
|
| Metric 9.2 (IAG) | Which browsers or other end-user applications require plugins or user-installed enhancements in order to use new gTLDs. | ALAC |
Consumer Trust (CT) |
Significant |
|
|
| 70 |
