Page History

What happened?

This session focused on the new DNS Abuse requirements in the RA and RAA contracts that go into effect on April 5th, 2024. There was a panel that included representatives from the CPH as well folks from IPC and NCUC. The CPH participants focused on the the speed with which an agreement was reached and the effort to get it voted on by a majority of the CPH and expressed high hopes for a positive impact on taking down "bad actors."  Elliot Noss made a rare appearance to emphasize the expectation that ICANN Contract Compliance now has the tools it has been asking for and hope to see real results. The IP and business interests suggested it was a good start and the NCUC rep expressed concern that it might trample due process.

What are the At-Large specific takeaways from this session? 

the At-Large perspective is that we've been looking for similar changes to the contracts for many years and welcome them. We have no desire to see due process suffer as a result. Ideally, these ammendments do NOT change the behavior of "good actors" but allow ICANN to punish bad ones, there by splitting the difference between the fears of the NCUC and the expectations of the business community.

What are the At-Large specific action items (next steps)?

Justine has suggested that we perhaps begin holding a series of plenaries on how these ammendments are working out, starting at ICANN 80 so that there are continuous updates.

What happened?

This session focused on the new DNS Abuse requirements in the RA and RAA contracts that go into effect on April 5th, 2024. There was a panel that included representatives from the CPH as well folks from IPC and NCUC. The CPH participants focused on the the speed with which an agreement was reached and the effort to get it voted on by a majority of the CPH and expressed high hopes for a positive impact on taking down "bad actors."  Elliot Noss made a rare appearance to emphasize the expectation that ICANN Contract Compliance now has the tools it has been asking for and hope to see real results. The IP and business interests suggested it was a good start and the NCUC rep expressed concern that it might trample due process.

What are the At-Large specific takeaways from this session? 

the At-Large perspective is that we've been looking for similar changes to the contracts for many years and welcome them. We have no desire to see due process suffer as a result. Ideally, these ammendments do NOT change the behavior of "good actors" but allow ICANN to punish bad ones, there by splitting the difference between the fears of the NCUC and the expectations of the business community.

What are the At-Large specific action items (next steps)?

Justine has suggested that we perhaps begin holding a series of plenaries on how these ammendments are working out, starting at ICANN 80 so that there are continuous updates.

What happened?
This session discuss the organization of the work regarding rewriting IPC-2
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/new-rirs-criteria-2012-02-25-en

What are the At-Large specific takeaways from this session?
How the rest of the community will be engaged to be part of this discussion.

What are the At-Large specific action items (next steps)?

At-Large can participate at the level of the RIR. At-Large need to be ready to answer consultation from ASO-AC about IPC-2

GDS: Subpro IRT Work Session (2 of 3)

Agenda: https://community.icann.org/x/boAvEQ

What happened?

ICANN org provided an update on:

• The Next Round Implementation Plan, covering implementation of 126 Subsequent Procedures recommendations adopted by the Board; with 10 recommendations still pending revision by GNSO Council as well as other pending dependencies.
• Role and Open+Rep model of the Implementation Review Team (IRT); methodology (i.e. how the IRT undertakes its work), and timeline for a May 2025 completion of the next Applicant Guidebook (AGB).
• Timetable of 3 public comments for chunks of AGB draft text.
• The Draft Applicant Support Program Handbook.  

What are the At-Large specific takeaways from this session? 

At-Large should follow progress of IRT work, paying particular attention to topics of importance to us. 

What are the At-Large specific action items (next steps)?

At-Large should participate in the public comments as needed, and note that there will be no extensions for any of the public comment proceedings. 

Link to Report and Notes 

What happened?

• Item 1: DNS Abuse is growing .  As per  FTC Commission 2023 Fraud Trends reports would of  2.6 million  fraud reported in 2023, Phishing which is considered a form of DNS Abuse reported  1000  cases worth  2.2 million
• Item 2: The DNS Abuse measurement needs to  be  both qualitative and quantitative based on actionable evidence for prompt resolution.

What are the At-Large specific takeaways from this session? 

• Item 1: Need for  consumer awareness and outreach against DNS Abuse and methods used by threat actors
• Item 2:  How can  end users be aware and understand what is the actionable evidence they need to report and where to report for prompt resolution of issues.

What are the At-Large specific action items (next steps)?

• Item 1: Emphasise on  more consumer awareness and outreach on keeping oneself safe but also reporting mechanisms. 
• Item 2:  Follow whether  CPH reports on the  DNS Abuse after the contract is enforced from April 2024. 

Reviews Program Session with the Community on ATRT4 Deferral and Pilot Holistic Review

What happened?

This session provided updates on the timing for the Fourth Accountability and Transparency Review and the status of the Pilot Holistic Review.

The group also discussed the CIP.

https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/icann79/12/Reviews%20Update%20ICANN79%20Webinar%20Presentation.pptx%20%281%29.pdf

What are the At-Large specific takeaways? 

ATRT4 must be done in a not to distant futur.
Proposal discussed: Launch ASAP the PHR and as soon as the PHR started ICANN can start the launch of the ATRT4.
ATRT4 must have a defined scope – no ATRT3 recommendation not completely implemented (particularly CIP and HR).

CIP can be started "officially" the 1st of July 2024 (start of the FY25).

What are the At-Large specific action items (next steps)?

At-Large needs to answer the letter received by the ALAC Chair from Theresa S. (ICANN Org) regarding ATRT4.
At-Large need to start selecting participants to both PHR & ATRT4

UASG Governance and Plans Working Session

What happened?

The UASG Leadership interacted with the community and presented the 5-year Work Plan for UASG from FY25 to FY29 for UASG as a whole, as well as for each of the four Working Groups (Measurement, Tech, EAI, and Comms).

In addition, the UASG Leadership also presented suggested changes to the Governance Processes to enhance the transparency and accountability of UASG.

What are the At-Large specific takeaways?

Since UASG and At-Large work in close relation, particularly for initiatives such as the UA Day, At-Large needs to track the strategic plan as well as governance initiatives within the UASG.

Specific Governance Changes Proposed

Pls see the full report here.

New gTLD Program Next Round: Planning for String Similarity Review Work Session

What happened?

The IDN project presented the String Similarity Review Guidelines ( https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/string-similarity-review-guidelines-07-02-2024-en.pdf ) which are currently up for Public Comment.  The IDN Project has recognized that there are lots of pairs of symbols which, while they are not classed as variants, are sufficiently similar to cause confusion.  They have identified some of these, and developed a process to automate the initial evaluation of proposed TLDs.  The proposed automation will basically eliminate those TLDs which are clearly NOT similar to any other TLD (current or proposed), thus keeping the number requiring manual review to a manageable number.  The only significant oversight appears to be in the matter of variations under the basic character which would be obscured by the underlining which major browsers and word process software packages automatically generate for domain names. 

What are the At-Large specific takeaways?

This is a huge improvement over where the IDN project appeared to be a couple of years ago, and it should be commended for that.  ALAC may also wish to produce a Public Comment (deadline 27 March) on the matter of underlining, and a couple of other more technical details.   (NOTE: This is an interim document, with several unwritten sections still visible.  So there will be opportunities for further comment later.  This is an opportunity to get some things included while the situation is still somewhat fluid.)

What are the At-Large specific action items (next steps)?

CPWG to draft a Public Comment for ALAC.