AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
ALAC Liaisons and Representatives
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
This workspace will be used by the ALAC New gTLD Metrics Task Force for its report.
First Draft
Public confusion / awareness related to the expansion
Public confusion of the difference between closed and open TLDs
Transparency of contact information, privacy policies and domain registration policies (for open and closed TLDs)
Alternative methods to reach Internet resources
Proportion of new TLDs using IDNs at the second level
Unusual growth patterns in ccTLDs (perhaps as an alternative to new gTLDs)
Proportion of domains in gTLDs that are purely speculative in nature (for sale, park pages)
Instances of action taken by by police or regulatory agencies related to fraud or misrepresentation
End-user complaints to police, regulatory bodies or ICANN
Redundancy (multiple domain names going to the same resource)
Support by existing end-user-focused tools (browsers, search engines)
Encounters with technical difficulties reaching domains
Accuracy of marketing and promotion of new gTLDs
Number of ownership changes of TLDs
Background
On February 28 2013, the At-Large Advisory Committee approved a statement in response to the GNSO report on metrics designed to evaluate the performance of ICANN's gTLD expansion program. The statement, which was sent as correspondence by ALAC Chair Olivier Crepin-Leblond to the Chair of the ICANN Board and the Chair of the Board gTLD Working Group, indicated that the GNSO report did not adequately address metrics that would accurately measure end-user benefits and trust resulting from the expansion. In the statement, the ALAC committed to produce recommendations for additional metrics which we believe are required to supplement the GNSO recommendations. The ALAC created a Task Force to create the new metrics, which are listed below.
...
| # | Measure of End-User Trust | Source | Anticipated Difficulties in | 3-year target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
End-user Confusion | ||||
| 1.1 | Success in reaching the intended information supplier using domain names | Survey | Neutral or increase | |
| 1.2 | Accidental landing at unintended destinations | Survey, web analytics | Selective sampling of analytics may help determine the success of typo-squatting or other unintended destinations | |
Growth in use of both domain-based and non-domain-based alternatives for Internet resource access | ||||
Complaints to, and action taken by, police, regulatory agencies and advocacy groups | ||||
Transparency of contact information and domain-allocation policies for all gTLDs | ||||
Accuracy of new gTLD promotion to end users | ||||
Technical issues encountered (including application support) | ||||
Public confusion / awareness related to the expansion
Public confusion of the difference between closed and open TLDs
Transparency of contact information, privacy policies and domain registration policies (for open and closed TLDs)
Alternative methods to reach Internet resources
Proportion of new TLDs using IDNs at the second level
Unusual growth patterns in ccTLDs (perhaps as an alternative to new gTLDs)
Proportion of domains in gTLDs that are purely speculative in nature (for sale, park pages)
Instances of action taken by by police or regulatory agencies related to fraud or misrepresentation
End-user complaints to police, regulatory bodies or ICANN
Redundancy (multiple domain names going to the same resource)
Support by existing end-user-focused tools (browsers, search engines)
Encounters with technical difficulties reaching domains
Accuracy of marketing and promotion of new gTLDs
Number of ownership changes of TLDs
