FINAL VERSION SUBMITTED (IF RATIFIED)
The final version to be submitted, if the draft is ratified, will be placed here by upon completion of the vote.
FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC
The final draft version to be voted upon by the ALAC will be placed here before the vote is to begin.
DRAFT SUBMITTED FOR DISCUSSION
The first draft submitted will be placed here before the call for comments begins. The Draft should be preceded by the name of the person submitting the draft and the date/time. If, during the discussion, the draft is revised, the older version(S) should be left in place and the new version along with a header line identifying the drafter and date/time should be placed above the older version(s), separated by a Horizontal Rule (available + Insert More Content control).
Draft statement for consideration:
The ALAC thanks OCTO, NCAP WP members and NCAP DG members for overseeing the work that has led to the NCAP Study 1 being completed with the production of this NCAP Study 1 Proposed Final Report, and we maintain our acknowledgment of the report as a useful primer on the subject of Name Collisions.
We note that the contractor engaged to perform Study 1 has made a recommendation in this proposed final report, summarized as follows:
"Given these findings, the recommendation is that Studies 2 and 3 should not be performed as currently designed ...... All of that being said, this does not mean further study should not be conducted into name collision risks and the feasibility of potentially delegating additional domains that are likely to cause name collisions. Most notably, the Study 3 question of how to mitigate name collisions for potential delegation of the corp, home, and mail TLDs is still unresolved. However, the proposals for Studies 2 and 3, which were developed years ago, do not seem to be effective ways of achieving the intended goals."
The ALAC understands this recommendation to mean that the NCAP Studies 2 and 3 remain highly necessary, not only to facilitate further study into name collision risks associated with potential delegation of additional TLDs into the root zone, but also to determine effective mitigation steps to address such identified risks. We see such risks as potentially arising from delegations of any strings from the 2012 round of applications for new gTLDs still undergoing the contracting process, as a result of any new round of applications for new gTLDs, as well as in the management of ccTLDs. As the final report has noted, even the ICANN Board's question which the SSAC seeks to answer with Study 3 in respect of .CORP, .HOME and .MAIL as TLDs remains unresolved.
Therefore, we strongly support the SSAC in proceeding with Studies 2 and 3, and we also strongly urge the ICANN Board and ICANN Org/OCTO to take the necessary action to facilitate the conduct and funding of the NCAP Studies 2 and 3 in a manner agreeable by the SSAC.
1 Comment
Justine Chew
Following the discussion at the CPWG call of 27 May 2020, it was decided that ALAC/At-Large should respond to the public comment call by providing a general acknowledgment of this work product, and in particular, to express strong support for SSAC’s onward action with Studies 2 and 3, while urging ICANN to do the same.
Draft statement for consideration:
The ALAC thanks OCTO, NCAP WP members and NCAP DG members for overseeing the work that has led to the NCAP Study 1 being completed with the production of this NCAP Study 1 Proposed Final Report, and we maintain our acknowledgment of the report as a useful primer on the subject of Name Collisions.
We note that the contractor engaged to perform Study 1 has made a recommendation in this proposed final report, summarized as follows:
"Given these findings, the recommendation is that Studies 2 and 3 should not be performed as currently designed ...... All of that being said, this does not mean further study should not be conducted into name collision risks and the feasibility of potentially delegating additional domains that are likely to cause name collisions. Most notably, the Study 3 question of how to mitigate name collisions for potential delegation of the corp, home, and mail TLDs is still unresolved. However, the proposals for Studies 2 and 3, which were developed years ago, do not seem to be effective ways of achieving the intended goals."
The ALAC understands this recommendation to mean that the NCAP Studies 2 and 3 remain highly necessary, not only to facilitate further study into name collision risks associated with potential delegation of additional TLDs into the root zone, but also to determine effective mitigation steps to address such identified risks. We see such risks as potentially arising from delegations of any strings from the 2012 round of applications for new gTLDs still undergoing the contracting process, as a result of any new round of applications for new gTLDs, as well as in the management of ccTLDs. As the final report has noted, even the ICANN Board's question which the SSAC seeks to answer with Study 3 in respect of .CORP, .HOME and .MAIL as TLDs remains unresolved.
Therefore, we strongly support the SSAC in proceeding with Studies 2 and 3, and we also strongly urge the ICANN Board and ICANN Org/OCTO to take the necessary action to facilitate the conduct and funding of the NCAP Studies 2 and 3 in a manner agreeable by the SSAC.
Background
Here is the extract of the presentation I made on Name Collisions - the part focused on the NCAP and the NCAP Study 1 Final Report, updated to reflect the discussion of the CPWG.
Note that this call for public comment follows the one which was made on an earlier draft version of the present report, see: