[ga] RE: [At-Large] ICANN Policy Update

["Dominik Filipp" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>]

All @large,

As regards the domain tasting issue I have not noticed any sufficient public 
deliberation over the issue. I have visited all publicly accessible at-large 
mailing lists and have found just few contributions on the merits. Moreover, 
the domain tasting working group list is empty, which just supports my initial 
suspicion.

In my view, the public deliberation was utterly insufficient and the ALAC's 
updated statement for the final report is a premature unilateral conclusion of 
the ALAC Committee directed more towards the registrars/registries expectations 
than to the needs of the broad Internet user community worldwide. This is 
particularly apparent in the position shift from the previously presented and 
strongly supported fundamental motion for the AGP elimination, later swiftly 
replaced by supporting the current draft motion, which in its current 
formulation raises more questions than answers and formally 'as is' does not 
guarantee anything.

I therefore propose to revise the updated statement and to start a proper 
deliberation over the issue with full public participation.

Dominik Filipp, a GA list member
 

-----Original Message-----
From: alac-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:alac-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Denise Michel
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 11:21 AM
To: alac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [At-Large] ICANN Policy Update

Below (and attached in Word with hyperlinks) are brief summaries of a number of 
significant Internet policy issues that are being addressed by the ICANN 
community's bottom-up policy development structure, as well as other 
significant activities of interest.  This latest monthly update is provided by 
ICANN's Policy Staff in response to community requests for periodic summaries 
of ICANN's policy work.  Links to additional information are included and we 
encourage you to go beyond these brief staff summaries and learn more about the 
ICANN community's work. These monthly updates also will be available on our 
website. Our goal is to maximize transparency and broad community participation 
in ICANN's policy development activities.  We continue to investigate more 
effective and efficient ways to communicate the relevance, importance and 
status of ongoing issues to the ICANN community.
Comments and suggestions on how we can improve these efforts are most welcome 
and should be sent to policy-staff@xxxxxxxxx.

Regards,
Denise Michel
ICANN VP, Policy


ICANN POLICY UPDATE - April 2008


CONTENTS:

1.   GNSO -- IMPROVEMENTS
2.   GNSO -- DOMAIN NAME TASTING
3.   GNSO -- WHOIS
4.   GNSO -- INTER-REGISTRAR TRANSFER POLICY REVIEW
5.   GNSO -- FAST FLUX HOSTING
6.   GNSO/CCNSO -- BOARD SEAT ELECTIONS
7.   MULTIPLE ENTITIES -- IDN ccTLDs
8.  CCNSO -- INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS CONTINUE 9.  CCNSO -- PHISHING SURVEY 10.  
CCNSO -- NEW MEMBERS 11.  ASO AC -- GLOBAL POLICY PROPOSALS (ASNs, IPv4) 12.  
SSAC -- DNSSEC BROADBAND ROUTER TESTING REVISED 13.  SSAC -- ANTI-PHISHING 
ACTIVITIES 14.  AT-LARGE -- NEW PRACTICES EXPAND POLICY PARTICIPATION 15.  
AT-LARGE -- NEW WEBSITE/PORTAL LAUNCHED


1. GNSO -- IMPROVEMENTS

Background:  The ICANN Board is considering a comprehensive set of 
recommendations to improve the structure and operations of the Generic Names 
Supporting Organization (GNSO). This is part of ICANN's ongoing commitment to 
its evolution and improvement, and follows an independent review of the GNSO 
and extensive public consultation.  A working group appointed by ICANN's Board 
has developed a comprehensive proposal (GNSO Improvements
Report) to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy 
activities, structure, operations and communications.  On 15 February 2008, the 
Board accepted the GNSO Improvements Report for consideration and directed 
ICANN staff to open a public comment forum on the Report for 30 days, draft a 
detailed implementation plan in consultation with the GNSO, begin 
implementation of the non-contentious recommendations, and return to the Board 
and community for further consideration of the implementation plan.

Recent Developments:  The period for public comments on the GNSO Improvements 
Report has been extended to 25 April 2008.  Although many elements of the 
report seem to have broad support, the proposed stakeholder groups/constituency 
structures and allocation of seats on the GNSO Council continue to draw a 
significant amount of discussion from a variety of parties including the 
Business, Intellectual Property, and Internet Service Provider Constituencies 
who advocate a different allocation of seats than that recommended to the Board.

Next Steps:  Public comment period on the GNSO Improvements Report (closes
25 April  2008) -- subsequent Board action is expected at the Paris meeting.

More Information:
*    GNSO Improvements information page <
http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/>
*    Full GNSO Improvements Report <
http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03feb08.pdf>

*    Board resolution on GNSO Improvements <
http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15feb08.htm#_Toc64545918>

Staff Contact:  Denise Michel, VP Policy Development

2.  GNSO -- DOMAIN NAME TASTING

Background:  In Spring 2007, ICANN's At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), asked 
the GNSO Council to review the issue of "domain tasting." The term refers to a 
case when an entity registers a domain name and then tests to see if the name 
has sufficient traffic to provide more income than the annual registration fee 
(usually through the addition of pay-per-click advertising). If the address is 
deemed sufficiently profitable, it is kept.
If not, the current "add grace period" (AGP) - where domains can be returned 
within five days without cost - is used to return the domain at no net cost to 
the registrant.  Among other reasons, the practice is controversial because 
registrants who engage in this behavior can typically register many hundreds of 
thousands of domain names under this practice, with these temporary 
registrations far exceeding the number of domain names actually licensed.

Over time, there has been a significant increase in the number of domains 
registered and returned prior to expiration of the AGP.  A significant number 
of community members feel the AGP process presents a loophole that facilitates 
this conduct. In October 2007, after fact finding and consideration, the GNSO 
Council launched a formal policy development process
(PDP) on domain tasting and encouraged ICANN staff to consider applying ICANN's 
fee collections to names registered and subsequently de-registered during the 
AGP. Subsequently, staff included in the initial draft of ICANN's next fiscal 
year budget, a proposal to charge a fee for all domains added,
including domains added during the AGP.   Public discussion of the budget,
and this proposal, is ongoing.

As part of the formal PDP process, an Initial Report was produced for public 
comment, outlining the problems caused by domain tasting, possible actions to 
be taken, and the arguments put forward for and against such actions  .
Public comments were incorporated into a draft Final Report posted on 8 
February 2008.

Recent Developments:   At its 6 March 2008 meeting, the GNSO Council
considered a motion drafted and subsequently revised by a small design team to 
stop the practice of domain tasting. The revised draft motion would prohibit 
any gTLD operator that has implemented an AGP from offering a refund for any 
domain name deleted during the AGP that exceeds 10% of its net new 
registrations in that month, or fifty domain names, whichever is greater. Under 
the terms of the motion, an exemption from the limitation may be sought for a 
particular month, upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances detailed in the 
motion.

Public comments and constituency impact statements regarding the revised draft 
motion have been solicited and incorporated into a Final Report for Council 
consideration at its scheduled 17 April 2008 meeting. The comments and 
constituency statements reflect a plurality of views on what should be done to 
eliminate abuse of the AGP to facilitate domain tasting and addressed three 
potential options including (1) views on the draft resolution itself; (2) views 
on eliminating the AGP entirely; and (3) views on the proposed ICANN budget 
changes.

Next Steps:  The GNSO Council will consider the Draft Motion at its upcoming
17 April 2008 meeting

More Information:
*    Public comment request <
http://www.icann.org/public_comment/#domain-tasting>
*    GNSO Domain Tasting Issues Report, June 2007 <
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/domain-tasting/gnso-domain-tasting-report-14jun07.pdf>

*    Outcomes Report October 2007 <
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/gnso-domain-tasting-adhoc-outcomes-report-final.pdf>
*    Final Report 4 April 2008  <
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/domain-tasting/gnso-final-report-domain-tasting-04apr08.pdf
>

Staff Contact:   Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor

3.  GNSO -- WHOIS

Background:  WHOIS services provide public access to data on registered domain 
names.  That data currently includes contact information for Registered Name 
Holders. The extent of registration data collected at the time of registration 
of a domain name, and the ways such data can be accessed, are specified in 
agreements established by ICANN for domain names registered in generic 
top-level domains (gTLDs). For example, ICANN requires accredited registrars to 
collect and provide free public access to (1) the name of the registered domain 
name and its name servers and registrar, (2) the date the domain was created 
and when its registration expires, and (3) the contact information for the 
Registered Name Holder, the technical contact, and the registrant's 
administrative contact.

WHOIS has been the subject of intense policy development debate and action over 
the last few years. Information contained in WHOIS is used for a wide variety 
of purposes.  Some uses of WHOIS data are viewed as constructive and 
beneficial.  For example, sometimes WHOIS data is used to track down and 
identify registrants who may be posting illegal content or engaging in phishing 
scams.  Other uses of WHOIS are viewed as potentially negative, such as 
harvesting WHOIS contact information to send unwanted spam or fraudulent email 
solicitations.  Privacy advocates have also been concerned about the privacy 
implications of unrestricted access to personal contact information.

The GNSO Council decided in October 2007 that a comprehensive, objective and 
quantifiable understanding of key factual issues regarding WHOIS will benefit 
future GNSO policy development efforts, and plans to ask the ICANN staff to 
conduct several studies for this purpose. Before defining the details of these 
studies, the Council has solicited suggestions for specific topics of study on 
WHOIS from community stakeholders. Possible areas of study might include a 
study of certain aspects of gTLD registrants and registrations, a study of 
certain uses and misuses of WHOIS data, a study of the use of proxy 
registration services, including privacy services, or a comparative study of 
gTLD and ccTLD WHOIS.

Recent Developments:  A forum for public comments on suggestions for specific 
topics of study on WHOIS was open through 15 February 2008.
Approximately 25 suggestions were received.  A summary of those comments has 
been prepared. On 27 March the GNSO Council approved a motion to form a group 
of volunteers to: (1) review and discuss the 'Report on Public Suggestions on 
Further Studies of WHOIS; (2) develop a proposed list of recommended studies, 
if any, for which ICANN staff will be asked to provide cost estimates to the 
Council; and (3) produce the list of recommendations with supporting rationale 
not later than 24 April 2008.

Next Steps:  A report from the small group reviewing the suggestions on further 
WHOis studies is due to the Council by 24 April 2008. The GNSO Council will 
consider the recommendations of the group.  Based on direction from the 
Council, ICANN staff will subsequently provide the Council with rough cost 
estimates for various components of data gathering and studies.
The Council will then decide what data gathering and studies it will request, 
given available resources.  Staff will perform the resulting data gathering and 
studies and report the results to the Council.

More Information: GNSO WHOis Policy Work Web page < 
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/>

Staff Contact:   Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor

4.  GNSO -- INTER-REGISTRAR TRANSFER POLICY REVIEW

Background:  Consistent with ICANN's obligation to promote and encourage robust 
competition in the domain name space, the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy aims 
to provide a straightforward procedure for domain name holders to transfer 
their names from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another should they wish to 
do so. The policy also provides standardized requirements for registrar 
handling of such transfer requests from domain name holders. The policy is an 
existing community consensus that was implemented in late 2004 that is now 
being reviewed by the GNSO.  As part of that effort, the Council formed a 
Transfers Working Group (TWG) to examine and recommend possible areas for 
improvements in the existing transfer policy. The TWG identified a broad list 
of over 20 potential areas for clarification and improvement.

In an effort to get improvements on-line as soon as possible, the GNSO Council 
initiated a policy development process (PDP) to immediately clarify four 
specific issues regarding reasons for which a registrar of record may deny a 
request to transfer a domain name to a new registrar. That PDP process in now 
under way and the GNSO constituencies have submitted their initial comments.

Recent Developments:   ICANN staff finalized and posted an Initial Report
for public comments to immediately clarify the four specific issues regarding 
reasons for which a registrar of record may deny a request to transfer a domain 
name to a new registrar. A summary of those comments is now available (see < 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/transfer-policy-2008/msg00004.html>).  In parallel 
with the PDP process, the Council tasked a short term planning group to 
evaluate and prioritize the remaining 19 policy issues identified by the 
Transfers Working Group. In March, the group delivered a report to the GNSO 
Council with suggested clustering of those issues for consideration in five new 
PDPs.

Next Steps:  The public comments received on the Initial Report will be used by 
ICANN staff to compile a Final Report for the GNSO Council's consideration of 
further steps to take in this PDP.  The report from the short term planning 
group on other potential PDPs will next be discussed and decided upon by the 
GNSO Council.

More Information:
*    Draft Advisory <
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/gnso-draft-transfer-advisory-14nov07.pdf
>
*    Initial Report <
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-17mar08.htm>
*    PDP Recommendations <
http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/transfer-wg-recommendations-pdp-groupings-19mar08.pdf>


Staff Contact:   Olof Nordling, Manager, Policy Development Coordination

5.   GNSO - FAST FLUX HOSTING

Background: Fast flux hosting is a term that refers to several techniques used 
by cyber criminals to evade detection, in which criminals rapidly modify IP 
addresses and/or name servers.  The ICANN Security and Stability Advisory 
Committee (SSAC) recently completed a study of fast flux hosting.
The results of the study were published in January 2008 in the SSAC Advisory on 
Fast Flux Hosting and DNS (SAC 025). Because fast flux hosting involves many 
different players-the cybercriminals and their victims, ISPs, companies that 
provide web hosting services, and DNS registries and registrars-it is possible 
to imagine a variety of different approaches to mitigation.  Most of these will 
require the cooperation of a variety of actors including users and ISPs as well 
as registries and registrars.

Recent developments: On 26 March 2008, staff posted an Issues Report on fast 
flux hosting, as directed by the GNSO Council.  In the Report, staff recommends 
that the GNSO sponsor additional fact-finding and research to develop best 
practices guidelines concerning fast flux hosting.  Staff also notes that it 
may be appropriate for the ccNSO also to participate in such an activity.

Next Steps: The GNSO Council is scheduled to discuss the topic at its upcoming 
meeting on 17 April 2008.

More Iinformation:
*    SSAC Report 025 on fast flux hosting, January 2008 -
http://www.icann.org/committees/security/sac025.pdf
*    Issues Report on Fast Flux Hosting, corrected 31 March 2008 -
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/fast-flux-hosting/gnso-issues-report-fast-flux-25mar08.pdf

Staff Contact:    Liz Gasster, Senior Policy Counselor

6.  CCNSO/GNSO -- BOARD SEAT ELECTIONS

Background:  The Country Codes Name Supporting Organization (ccNSO) and GNSO 
Councils are responsible for filling two seats each on the ICANN Board of 
Directors.  ccNSO seats are identified as Board seat numbers 11 and 12.
GNSO seats on the Board are identified as seat numbers 13 and 14.

Recent Developments:

CCNSO Board Seat 11

Peter Dengate-Thrush was selected to fill seat 11 on the ICANN Board at the 
ccNSO Council meeting on the 31 March 2008. This selection was based on the 
outcome of a prior call for nominations among the ccNSO members. The only 
candidate who was nominated and seconded was Mr. Dengate-Thrush and he accepted 
the nomination.

Next Steps: The ccNSO Council Chair will provide the Secretary of ICANN with 
written notice of the decision.
More Information: ccNSO ICANN Election of Director Procedures < 
http://ccnso.icann.org/about/elections/election-procedure-to-elect-icann-director-03mar08.htm>

Staff Contact:   Gabriella Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat

GNSO Board Seat 14

Rita Rodin was elected by the GNSO Council to fill seat 14 on the ICANN Board 
of Directors. The election closed on 7 March 2008. The GNSO Council confirmed 
the election results at its meeting scheduled on 27 March 2008, and pursuant to 
the bylaws, Avri Doria, GNSO Chair, informed ICANN's General Counsel of the 
outcome.

Next Steps:  The next GNSO election process will commence at the end of this 
year for the GNSO Chair.  The current Chair's term ends 31 January 2009.

More Information: GNSO Elections Procedures < 
http://gnso.icann.org/elections/election-procedures-2008.shtml>

Staff Contact:   Glen De Saint Géry, GNSO Secretariat

7.    MULTIPLE ENTITIES -- IDN ccTLDs

Background:  The potential introduction of Internationalized Domain Names
(IDNs) represents the beginning of an exciting new chapter in the history of 
the Internet. IDNs offer the potential for many new opportunities and benefits 
for Internet users of all languages around the world by allowing them to 
establish domains in their native languages and alphabets.

An IDN ccTLD (internationalized domain name country code top level domain) is a 
country code top-level domain (corresponding to a country, territory, or other 
geographic location as associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter
codes) with a label that contains at least one character that is not a standard 
Latin letter (A through Z), a hyphen, or one of the standard numerical digits 
(0 through 9). The technical potential for ICANN to now make these domain names 
available for assignment is prompting significant discussion, study and demand 
within the ICANN community - particularly for territories who want to make use 
of non-Latin characters.  Current efforts are taking place on two fronts; (1) 
efforts to identify a "fast track"
process to provide new domain opportunities to territories with immediate 
justifiable needs; and (2) efforts to develop a comprehensive long term plan 
that ensures a stable process for all interested stakeholders.

IDNC Working Group Pursues The IDN "Fast Track"

A joint IDNC Working Group (IDNC WG) was chartered by ICANN's Board to develop 
and report on feasible methods, if any, that would enable the introduction of a 
limited number of non-contentious IDN ccTLDs, in a timely manner that ensures 
the continued security and stability of the Internet while a comprehensive 
long-term IDN ccTLD policy is being developed. On 1 February 2008, the IDNC WG 
posted a "Discussion Draft of the Initial Report"
(DDIR) for public comment and input from the ICANN community. The DDIR 
clarified the relationship between the "fast track" process and the broader 
long-term process IDNccPDP (the ccNSO Policy Development Process on IDN
ccTLDs) and also identified the mechanisms for the selection of an IDN ccTLD 
and an IDN ccTLD manager. The ccNSO Council determined that those mechanisms 
were to be developed within the parameters of:

*    The overarching requirement to preserve the security and stability of
the DNS;
*    Compliance with the IDNA protocols;
*    Input and advice from the technical community with respect to the
implementation of IDNs; and
*    Current practices for the delegation of ccTLDs, which include the
current IANA practices.

A public workshop was held 11 February in New Delhi, India to discuss the DDIR 
and a comment period was opened on that document.

Recent Developments:  The IDNC WG has now produced a first draft of the IDNC WG 
Methodology in the form of an Interim Report that has also been made available 
for public comment. Discussions on the methodology were held at the ICANN 
Regional Meeting in Dubai, UAE (1-3 April 2008) and public comments on the 
methodology can be submitted until 25 April 2008.

Next Steps:  The work schedule agreed to by the IDNC Working Group is as
follows:
*    An Initial Report, which will solidify the topics and their relation to
the IDNccPDP.
*    A final Interim Report, which will contain potential implementation
mechanisms is scheduled to be released 16 May 2008).
*    The Final Report, which will contain the actual recommendations of the
IDNC WG  is due to be published 13 June 2008)

More Information:
*    Public Comments Requested on Initial Draft Fast-Track Mechanism <
http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-01feb08.htm>
*    Draft Methodology for Fast Track <
http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-proposed-methodology-31mar08.pdf>
*    Public Comments on the Discussion Draft of the Initial Report <
http://www.icann.org/public_comment/#dd-idn-cctld-ft>

Staff Contact:   Bart Boswinkel, Senior Policy Advisor

CCNSO Also Focuses On Comprehensive IDNccTLD Policy Development

Background:  In parallel to considerations of a "fast track" approach, the 
ccNSO Council has initiated a comprehensive long term policy development 
process for IDNccTLDs (referred to as the IDNccPDP). At its meeting in October 
2007, the ccNSO Council resolved  to call for an Issues Report to examine the 
need for an IDNccPDP to consider:

*    Whether Article IX of the ICANN bylaws applies to IDN ccTLDs associated
with the ISO 3166-1 two letter codes, and if it does not then to establish if 
Article IX should apply.
*    Whether the ccNSO should launch a PDP to develop the policy for the
selection and delegation of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 
two-letter codes.

The Council formally requested that Issues Report on 19 December 2007 and 
directed ICANN staff to identify policies, procedures, and/or by-laws that 
should be reviewed and, as necessary revised, in connection with the 
development and implementation of any IDN ccTLD policy - including efforts 
designed to address the proposed fast-track concept.

Recent Developments:  The GNSO and several other parties have submitted 
comments regarding the proposal to set a comprehensive long term policy 
development process for IDNccTLDs (referred to above as the IDNccPDP).  An 
Issues Report will be submitted to the ccNSO Council and will form the basis 
for the Council's decision on whether or not to formally initiate the IDNccPDP.

Next Steps:  Comments regarding the preparation of an Issues Report on the 
IDNccPDP and are now being evaluated.

More Information: IDNccPDP Announcement:  < 
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19dec07.htm>

Staff Contact: Bart Boswinkel, Senior Policy Advisor

8.  CCNSO -- INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS CONTINUE

Background:  The ccNSO Council has recently been taking steps to improve its 
work plans, administrative procedures and communications tools. As a result of 
a ccNSO Council workshop held at the ICANN New Delhi meeting, a working group 
of the Council was established to propose administrative procedures for the 
ccNSO. The ccNSO Council also approved creation of a new "authoritative" ccNSO 
email list.  The organization has also been conducting a participation survey 
in an effort to understand better why ccTLDs do or do not participate in ccNSO 
meetings.

Recent Developments:  In preparation for making recommendations on new 
structures, the new "Working Group on ccNSO Administrative Procedures" has had 
two conference calls on the structuring processes within the ccNSO. All ccTLD 
managers have been invited to subscribe to a new global ccTLD email list and a 
first draft of the results of the ccNSO participation survey recently was 
shared with the community at the African Top Level Domain meeting in 
Johannesburg.

Next Steps:  The Working Group will continue to develop new procedures for the 
ccNSO.

More Information:
*    ccNSO <http://www.ccnso.icann.org/>
*    ccTLD Community Email List <
http://www.ccnso.icann.org/about/charter-cctld-community-list.pdf>

Staff Contacts:   Bart Boswinkel, Senior Policy Advisor and Gabriella
Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat

9.  CCNSO -- PHISHING SURVEY

Background:   The term "phishing" has been used to describe criminal and
fraudulent attempts by cybercriminals to acquire sensitive private information 
(such as usernames, passwords and credit card details) by masquerading as 
trustworthy entities in an electronic communication.
Phishing remains a major problem among ccTLDs and as a result ccNSO members are 
being called upon to identify countermeasures that can be undertaken to fight 
back. A draft survey seeking to identify those types of measures was presented 
to and approved by the ccNSO Council during its meeting in New Delhi in 
February 2008.  The survey was launched and sent to all available email lists.  
ICANN regional liaisons were also asked to help distribute the survey.

Recent Developments:  Originally, survey results of the anti-phishing survey 
were expected to be ready for posting by early April 2008, but the response 
period has been extended to allow for the receipt of more survey responses.
To date 21 responses have been received and Staff is working to inspire more.

Next Steps:  Survey response and evaluation time extended to encourage more 
responses.

More information: Survey <
http://ccnso.icann.org/surveys/anti-phishing-survey-27feb08.pdf>

Staff Contact:   Gabriella Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat

10.   CCNSO -- NEW MEMBERS

Russia (.ru) and Georgia (.ge) recently were approved as new ccNSO members.
The ccNSO now has 77 members.

More Information: ccNSO Applications Archive < 
http://www.ccnso.icann.org/applications/summary-date.shtml>

Staff Contact: Gabriella Schittek, ccNSO Secretariat


11.   ASO AC - GLOBAL POLICY PROPOSALS (ASNs, IPv4)

Background:   Two significant global policy proposals on addressing matters
continue to be actively studied and discussed within the addressing community.  
If they are (1) adopted by all Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), (2) 
verified by the Address Supporting Organization (ASO) and (3) subsequently 
ratified by the ICANN Board, the policies will govern the allocation of 
Internet addresses from the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) to the 
RIRs. The two current proposals are described below.

Recent Developments:

Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs)

Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs) are addresses used in addition to IP addresses 
for Internet routing. A new global policy proposal for ASNs would formalize the 
current procedure for allocation of ASNs and provides a policy basis for the 
transition from 2-byte (16 bits) to 4-byte (32 bits) ASNs. The final transition 
step is now foreseen for 31 December 2009, after which date the distinction 
between 2- and 4-byte ASNs will cease and all ASNs will be regarded as of 
4-byte length, by appending initial zeroes to those of 2-byte original length.

Next Steps:  This new 4-byte proposal has been adopted in all RIRs.  It will be 
forwarded to the ICANN Board for ratification by the ASO Address Council after 
the Council has verified that each RIR's procedural steps have been duly 
followed.

More information:  Background Report <
http://www.icann.org/announcements/proposal-asn-report-29nov07.htm>

Staff Contact:  Olof Nordling, Manager Policy Development Coordination

Remaining IPv4 address space

The IANA pool of unallocated IPv4 address blocks is continuing to be depleted.  
As announced last month, a new global policy has been proposed to allocate the 
remaining address blocks once a given threshold is triggered.
The text of the proposed policy essentially recommends that when there are five 
/8 blocks remaining in the IANA pool, one remaining block will be allocated to 
each RIR.

Next Steps:  This proposal was discussed at the APNIC 25 meeting in February
2008 and at the ARIN (American Registry for Internet Numbers) in Denver earlier 
this month. It will be discussed in upcoming meetings of the other RIRs, next 
in RIPE (Resaux IP Europeens Network Coordination Centre) - Berlin 5-6 May 
2008, LACNIC (Latin American and Caribbean Internet Addresses
Registry) - Salvador/Bahia, Brazil 26-30 May 2008 and AfriNIC (African Region 
Internet Registry) - 24 May-6 June, Rabat, Morocco.

More information:  Background Report
http://www.icann.org/announcements/proposal-ipv4-report-29nov07.htm

Staff Contact:  Olof Nordling, Manager Policy Development Coordination

12.   SSAC -- DNSSEC BROADBAND ROUTER TESTING REVISED

Background:  When Sweden and other ccTLDs began more extensive deployment of 
the Domain Name System Security Extension (DNSSEC), it was discovered that 
several broadband routers failed when they received DNS response messages 
containing DNSSEC resource records and other DNSSEC related protocol 
parameters. Study of these routers revealed that many have embedded DNS 
servers. The DNSSEC deployment community and SSAC have been collaborating to 
create a testing program for broadband routers to gauge the ability of these 
devices to correctly process DNS messages that contain DNSSEC resource records. 
A set of web pages was developed by ICANN staff to provide a series of tests 
that Internet users could use to determine if their router succeeds or fails 
when DNNSEC is present in DNS response messages.

Recent Developments:  After reviewing the new testing suite for broadband 
routers running DNSSEC, Staff determined that the test suite was too 
complicated and required too much data collection and analysis for voluntary 
community participation.

Next Steps:  Staff is now investigating an alternative testing approach that 
may involve several independent bodies testing broadband routers and SOHO 
firewalls -- one for U.S. domestic products, one for Europe products, one for 
U.K. products, and one for Asia Pacific products. The testing criteria are 
being re-evaluated to determine a new common test suite with a goal to have 
this new testing begin before 1 May 2008.
More Information:  SSAC <http://www.icann.org/committees/security/>
Staff Contact: Dave Piscitello, Senior Security Technologist

13.   SSAC - ANTI-PHISHING ACTIVITIES

Recent Developments:  ICANN staff has been helping to update/revise a work in 
progress for the Anti Phishing Working Group entitled, "What To Do If Your Web 
Site Is Hacked." The document describes preparation and incident response with 
respect to web site phishing attacks. The report was approved by the Internet 
Policy Forum (formerly the DNS Policy Working Group) and is currently being 
edited and prepared for publication.

A new SSAC Advisory entitled "Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks"
has been distributed for review and approval by SSAC and ICANN's general 
counsel. Several external experts have reviewed the Advisory and provided some 
valuable additional insights. The document may be distributed in two phases - 
the first to registrars, so that they are advised of the threat, and the second 
(at or prior to the ICANN Paris meeting) to the general public.

ICANN staff is also assisting with anti-phishing investigations of two 
registrars who are alleged to be shielding phishing activities. In one case the 
registrar's WHOIS/43 service is not responding; in another case, staff is 
studying a service that allegedly hampers anti-phishing investigations by 
creating barriers on WHOIS information access.

Staff Contact: Dave Piscitello, Senior Security Technologist

14.   AT-LARGE - NEW PRACTICES EXPAND POLICY PARTICIPATION

Recent Developments:  New policy development processes and simultaneous 
translation improvements are significantly expanding policy participation in 
the At-Large community.

As a result of additional staff capacity and other developments within the 
At-Large community, the process by which the At-Large community develops policy 
statements has been completely overhauled.  At the direction of the At-Large 
Advisory Committee (ALAC), ICANN Staff has now begun producing initial draft 
statements on policy (synthesis statements of written and verbal comments) for 
review by working groups and subcommittees. These drafts are put through 
several steps of community review before being voted on by the ALAC.  Approved 
comments are transmitted, as appropriate, to the public comment process or to 
the Board of ICANN.

The first three products of this new process effort are already making their 
way through the process. They are:
*    ALAC Statement on the Proposed Travel Policy for Volunteers
*    ALAC Statement on the Operating Plan and Budget Framework for FY
2008/2009
*    ALAC Statement on GNSO Improvements

Additionally, the worldwide At-Large Calendar has been improved to include a 
community comments window to make it easier for the public to keep track of 
comments.

Also, thanks to new simultaneous interpretation capabilities and a new 
teleconference service the African Regional At-Large Organisation (AFRALO) and 
the Latin America and the Caribbean Islands Regional At-Large Organisation 
(LACRALO) are now holding monthly teleconference meetings.

Staff Contact:  Nick Ashton-Hart, Director for At-Large

15.   AT-LARGE - NEW WEBSITE/PORTAL LAUNCHED

Recent Developments:  At-Large's new website  went live in March. The new site 
is built upon a state-of-the-art, open-source content management system - 
Drupal.  The result is a framework which can be duplicated and used by other 
parts of ICANN.  The new site provides an array of new features which the 
static html-based old site could not, including:
*    Two-way links between forums on the site and the community's mailing
lists - with new postings soon to be automatically visible;
*    Dynamically updated content;
*    Standardised multilingual support built into the site's architecture
*    Multilingual calendaring and events, including support for multilingual
documents and time zone support.

More Information: At-Large < http://atlarge.icann.org>

Staff Contact:  Nick Ashton-Hart, Director for At-Large


# # #
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org