Page History

07:56:36 From iPad (27)Vanda Scartezini to Everyone:
Hi everyone
07:56:51 From iPad (27)Vanda Scartezini to Everyone:
I Am understanding you
08:00:09 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
Although you DO need a key light, Olivier
08:00:21 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
indeed
08:00:35 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
I might move to the balcony to get more light
08:00:55 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
You just need to turn around, I think. Light in front, instead of behind
08:01:32 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
@JZ - absolutely correct - He needs to have the light from behind
08:02:17 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
@Holly, ideally Olivier would be lit from below, like the old horror movies…
08:02:33 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
I have to leave on the hour.
08:02:44 From Gisella Gruber - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Alfredo Calderon Apologies as well
08:02:52 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Little to report on EDPD RDDS.
08:03:06 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
@ JZ - wicked…
08:03:22 From Herb Waye Ombuds to Everyone:
Hello everyone.
08:03:34 From Gisella Gruber - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Real time transcription (RTT) available at: https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN
08:03:52 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
OCL - come in from the balcony - we aren’t hiring you as well
08:03:52 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Problem with Olivier's sound
08:04:00 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
sorry - hearing
08:04:00 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
Olivier, your audio is suddenly crappy
08:04:30 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
MUCH better
08:07:45 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Thanks - it would be interesting - but may be dropped if there are more important items
08:07:48 From Devan Reed - ICANN Org to Everyone:
RTT Link: https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN
08:09:35 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
So we have a uniform reaction now
08:09:38 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
We’re docking @Alan’s pay
08:12:10 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Fully justified! But I want it put back once the work is done.
08:13:11 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Should we be on next slide?
08:13:54 From Hadia’s iPhone to Everyone:
Apologies for joining late
08:14:16 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
They get one instead of 2
08:14:18 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Pointer to slides?
08:14:51 From Gisella Gruber - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Alan - slides will be posted on the wiki page shortly. We just received them
08:16:07 From Gisella Gruber - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Alan - slides now posted on the wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=167544121
08:17:40 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
Apologies am slightly late
08:18:15 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Went back on mute. What I think is needed is some line BACK to the registrant so the registrant is NOT aware of the change of registrar . and what about a situation when the change is NOT at the request of the registrar
08:20:05 From Amrita Choudhury to Everyone:
Agree Holly - we had a similar situation in India with Net4 which closed shop and many registrants were kept in the dark when the migration to next Registrar was happening . Many of them had their website down for over 72 hours with no one to follow up with or getting some automated non useful response
08:20:26 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
EXACTLY my question -
08:21:59 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
What about the NEXT slide
08:22:49 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
So what is being changed?
08:23:41 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
The auth code allows proof of transfer
08:24:02 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Risk is the account is hacked and requests transfer without knowledge of Registrant.
08:24:12 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
Without the auth code the transfer cannot take place
08:24:14 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Luckily, no one ever hacks accounts.
08:24:16 From Amrita Choudhury to Everyone:
Question: Should registrants not be given any notification?
08:24:27 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
So what are the security measures to protect the AuthCode?
08:24:41 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Thanks Alan - EXACTLY my concern
08:25:14 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
We are discussing the security measures that should be taken for the protection of the auth code
08:25:29 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Thanks Daniel
08:25:48 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
at what point we discussed about 2FA but discussion were not conclusive
08:25:53 From Steinar Grøtterød to Everyone:
The question is will the FOAs reduce the risk of unauthorised transfers?
08:26:31 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Look at Amrita’s note in the chat
08:27:09 From Dave Kissoondoyal to Everyone:
Hello everyone.. sorry to be late.. was stuck in traffic jam
08:27:25 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
@Amrita the registrants should be given notification
08:27:35 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
during a transfer
08:27:42 From Roberto to Everyone:
+1 Alan
08:27:59 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
Correct, Alan
08:28:01 From Roberto to Everyone:
… although I know you are the one and only…
08:28:18 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
And they’re really vague
08:29:22 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
Alan - do you mean domain hijacking?
08:29:32 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
Alan has the unique opportunity to call ICANN directly to order them to slap the registry in Question. So Alan is a bad example either
08:30:21 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
A post transfer notification couldn’t occur but a PRE transfer COULD take place
08:31:37 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
Pre transfer notification are always sent
08:32:23 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
it appears that ICANN's PDPs are going through a wave of breaking fail safe processes to make them more unstable, as a domino effect starting from the PDP on Registration Data
08:32:32 From Chokri Ben Romdhane to Everyone:
As I mentioned by mail ,I think that the registrant need to have a tools in order to follow the evolution of the transfer process no need that they get involved in the process , by receiving FOA or Authcode
08:33:46 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
@OCL if it works then why fix it, there has been technology changes and the PDP would be to match the technology
08:33:57 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
for instance 2FA
08:34:40 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
2FA is a dead end in mass application
08:34:58 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Reseller is a channel for the Registrar, the Registrar registers the Domain with the Registry, notionally, it is the Registry that keeps the register (the book of records), why is it necessary to move the pointer records, which are meant to be registered with the Registry, between resellers and registrars back and forth, during transfer or expiry? The trade channels and the Registrars could retain the customer contact information, but the critical records related to the domain name could be static for the time with the Registry. Just a thought. Whatever domain related records that the customer creates, or the channel or Registrar creates, could be created with the Registry and may not necessarily be held dispersed among Registrars and Resellers. The Registry's Register could also serve as point of query, manual query as well as necessary machine queries related to pointers. Is this (or a technically correct version of this notion) technically too infeasible?
08:35:08 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
Registry doesn’t have contact info either
08:35:20 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Services can work by look with the Registry.
08:35:35 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
@Daniel - I always thought the most important problem our community had was they they had registered some domains through a company that has disappeared since and they are locked out from their own domain and are unable to transfer it back to themselves on another registrar
08:36:43 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
how does a domain registrant prove they are the legitimate registrant of a domain now?
08:37:00 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
They have it after also!
08:37:48 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
The Net4India case is a REAL situation for which there should be policy to address a similar future case.
08:38:01 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
+1 Justine
08:38:02 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Registries and Registrars are accredited, but there are a myriad of unaccredited actors in the domain name system where domain records are held without proper systems, to say the least
08:38:07 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
I can speak to Net3India...
08:39:50 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
@Siva, true and even accredited registrars can fail.
08:40:18 From Amrita Choudhury to Everyone:
Yes that happened in Net4 India
08:40:34 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Morning, Afternoon, Evening all.
08:40:48 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Thankss Daniel
08:41:30 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
A good model is the Credit card information model, merchants accept credit card transactions without getting to know the sensitive part of the credit card details, the sensitive parts of the credit card, for example, the 3 digit code or signature records stay only with the Credit card company, which looks up, verifies the records and merely tells the merchant, 'the information is correct', 'money is transferred to you' etc..
08:42:39 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
@Justine, accredited Registrars can fail, but the chances aren't as harmfully large as that of unaccredited players failing or being irregular
08:43:23 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
@Siva, tell that to Net4India (former) customers/
08:43:51 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
@Justine, even the chances of accredited Registrars failing can be minimized by improving the accreditation process which would also make it beneficial for the 'good' Registrars
08:44:15 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
@@ Alan - in the EPDP, maybe another important issue is what data is held in escrow?
08:44:41 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
@Siva, Net4India was India's largest registrar. Sigh.
08:44:54 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
It’s getting uglier
08:45:21 From K MOHAN RAIDU, ISoc India Hyderabad Chapter to Everyone:
My Company has suffered a lot due to the failure of Net4India
08:46:04 From DotAsia - Pavan Budhrani to Everyone:
Yes exactly, net4 not being responsive during that time was the crucial part
08:46:06 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
@Justine, I don't know about Net4India as a company, as a Registrar, but I can talk -- in general -- about Registrars who fail on standards and services
08:46:08 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
@K Mohan -- and this is the real concern that I have: ICANN is rolling our some policies that could make things even worse
08:46:15 From K MOHAN RAIDU, ISoc India Hyderabad Chapter to Everyone:
We have hosted websites with them. And the sites did not work. And there is no response to our mails/calls.
08:46:47 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
The Net$India is a real issue for end users
08:47:20 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Yes, but it was not the transfer policy (alone) that caused the problem.
08:48:37 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
And it has an impact on the relatively unregulated field of resellers.
08:48:47 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
Can you state the options please
08:48:56 From Amrita Choudhury to Everyone:
Agree Alan it was not just a Transfer issue mainly but transfer was one of the issues
08:49:01 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
Agree, but we need to ask what can be done to address the problem, if there is anything within the transfer policy that can help address it.
08:49:29 From Amrita Choudhury to Everyone:
Agree Justine
08:49:53 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
@ Alan - it is a serious problem as to what information is had in escrow
08:49:54 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
@Justine, In the case of Registrars failing in various geographies, I would rather focus on the ICANN processes and make it a thorough process so much so that any Registrar who has passed the accreditation process has a good infrastructure, good systems, escrow like systems in place as a matter of emergency / routine succession planning etc.
08:51:25 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
So can we propose what Alan is talking about in this PDP?
08:51:31 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
The registrars might pass for accreditation but the problems occur afterwards. Unless ICANN actively monitors the state of the registrars, events like Net4India will keep happening.
08:51:33 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
And a more general question: Why does ICANN separate services from the domain name? What good is a domain name if not for the content -- be it a website, an email service or an application of some kind?
08:52:30 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
(Stuck because I don't remember what FOA stands for)
08:52:35 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
Agree @John, so I don't think accrediting 'good' registrars is THE solution.
08:53:03 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
My poll worked
08:53:25 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
Nobody expects the Spanish Internet
08:53:50 From Roberto to Everyone:
Spain has enough reasons to be sad not to add the Internet on top
08:54:08 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Excellent Monty Python ref, Lutz. :)
08:54:48 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Thanks to Steiner for this
08:54:50 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
+1 Steiner, there isn't enough info for making a proper decision now IMO
08:54:50 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
Spain will never lose against Germany in terms of Internet quality
08:54:51 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
+1 alan
08:54:56 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
Yes!
08:55:12 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
Form Of Authorization
08:56:06 From Steinar Grøtterød to Everyone:
Thanks for a good discussion
08:56:17 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
we have a small group meeting
08:56:44 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
could we have the google doc on the screen
08:57:09 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
could we scroll a bit
08:57:12 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org to Everyone:
All, please note regarding FOA, a community outreach presentation from ICANN70:

https://icann.zoom.us/rec/play/dK9qk08zEpYxTFWJSz7qomUQhdr9z-lbkWRYQN7D1TAR4GelLYTf[…]618214529609.40a8c286fbbb4f81cc8b44a17dec4060&_x_zm_rhtaid=296

There are changes on the gaining registrar side, but the FOA sent by the losing registrar is retained.
08:57:48 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org to Everyone:
If there are any outstanding questions or lack of clarity about the before and after processes, they can use this for reference
08:57:50 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
The point about is that content and services as the essential purpose of the domain name. A domain name comes to life with content or services, a domain name is FOR the content in it, so if services don't work, it is a matter of concern, even if it extends beyond the scope of tehcnical concerns rigidly classified as 'domain related". Content is domain related.
08:58:30 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_EPaFDv46r8HEq3Rj7fY0IZmkYy63zMiIIGPalF5jPY/edit
08:59:12 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
The link ending 296 says the recording does not exist
08:59:53 From Steinar Grøtterød to Everyone:
*evin:
09:00:30 From Steinar Grøtterød to Everyone:
@Evin: I tried to load the FOA outreached, but got This recording does not exist. (3,301)
09:01:39 From Olivier Crépin-Leblond to Everyone:
yes @Evn - looks like the URL you sent was shortened….
09:01:55 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org to Everyone:
Thank you Olivier and all - will get the correct link
09:05:14 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org to Everyone:
Please try this link (re: FOA) ICANN70 agenda page (sign in may be required): https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/w6oKZ4aZbisQE8kyE#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE
09:05:19 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org to Everyone:
You may click the recording link from there
09:05:57 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
@Hadia, @Alan, thanks, will check the G-doc
09:06:19 From AK oloyede to Everyone:
Thanks Hadia
09:06:46 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
You are most welcome AK, Justine and all
09:07:35 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
+1 JZ, yes please!
09:07:38 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org to Everyone:
Thank you and noted
09:08:04 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
Okay, then the other FOA will come up on a later round
09:13:54 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Will the new .AERO agreement will see the zone added to the CZDS?
09:14:23 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Only .AERO and .NAME are not on the CZDS (.INT doesn't really count)
09:14:42 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
John, does that matter to us?
09:15:13 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Statistics, Jonathan. :) If we can't measure then we won't know what is happening.
09:15:32 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
@Justine, can you look at that?
09:15:35 From AK oloyede to Everyone:
Bye all
09:15:41 From Gisella Gruber - ICANN Org to Everyone:
14 July
09:15:50 From Gisella Gruber - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Bastille day!
09:15:50 From Justine Chew to Everyone:
@JZ, yes, will talk to John.
09:15:51 From Sébastien Bachollet to Everyone:
Bastille Day
09:15:54 From Herb Waye Ombuds to Everyone:
Have a great week everyone… stay safe and be kind.
09:15:57 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
Thanks everyone
09:15:57 From Dave Kissoondoyal to Everyone:
Thanks and bye to all
09:16:00 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org to Everyone:
Thank you all!
09:16:06 From Amrita Choudhury to Everyone:
Thanks all
09:16:08 From Satish Babu to Everyone:
Thanks and bye!!
09:16:11 From Gisella Gruber - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Thank you to all participants - keep well and safe
09:16:55 From Hanan Khatib to Everyone:
thank you all
09:16:55 From iPad (27)Vanda Scartezini to Everyone:
ThNk you for this interessante discussion . have a Nice week
09:17:57 From Bukola Oronti to Everyone:
bye
09:17:58 From Steinar Grøtterød to Everyone:
bye
09:18:06 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Later all