6,681
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: − + Line 15:
Line 15: + + +
no edit summary
===Interisle Consulting Report===
===Interisle Consulting Report===
[[ICANN]] contracted [[Interisle Consulting]] to carry out an investigation into the effects the delegation of 100s of new gTLDs would have on the security of the existing Internet and intranets around the world. The resulting report, which was published on August 6th, 2013 by ICANN, found that there would be many name collisions for new gTLDs that could create potential security risks. ICANN's initial response to this report was to propose a delay based on the assessed security risk each New gTLD would carry.
[[ICANN]] contracted [[Interisle Consulting]] to carry out an investigation into the effects the delegation of 100s of new gTLDs would have on the security of the existing Internet and intranets around the world. The resulting report, which was published on August 6th, 2013 by ICANN, found that there would be many name collisions for new gTLDs that could create potential security risks. ICANN's initial response to this report was to propose a delay based on the assessed security risk each New gTLD would carry. <ref>[http://domainincite.com/13994-new-gtlds-are-the-new-y2k-corp-and-home-are-doomed-and-everything-else-is-delayed New gTLDs are The New Y2K, .corp and .home are doomed, and Everything Else is Delayed, DomainIncite] Retrieved 05 Feb 2014</ref>
* For [[.home]] and [[.corp]], ICANN deemed the two strings "high-risk" because of the widespread use of the terms on internal networks. Currently, ICANN is indefinitely delaying the delegation of these string to the [[Root Zone]].
* For [[.home]] and [[.corp]], ICANN deemed the two strings "high-risk" because of the widespread use of the terms on internal networks. Currently, ICANN is indefinitely delaying the delegation of these string to the [[Root Zone]].
* 20% of applications had been deemed an "uncalculated risk" by ICANN initially, saying these strings would be delayed 2-3 months in their application process while they conduct more research into whether the string is of "high" or "low" risk.
* 20% of applications had been deemed an "uncalculated risk" by ICANN initially, saying these strings would be delayed 2-3 months in their application process while they conduct more research into whether the string is of "high" or "low" risk.
* 80% of applications were deemed "low risk" by ICANN. These strings would face a delay in activating domains until 120 days after contracting with ICANN, but otherwise would not face any long terms delays towards delegation.
Overall, the initial reaction to the publishing of the Interisle report took the form of outrage by many New gTLD applicants, especially since the delays could potentially add on millions of dollars in costs to the applicants on their way to delegating a new gTLD. In the months following the report's publishing, the ICANN community mobilized to create alternative solutions to the Name Collision issue, as well as argue whether or not the issue was serious enough to delay delegation of 100s of gTLDs.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-07oct13-en.pdf ICANN.org] Retrieved 05 Feb 2014</ref>
===Reception by New gTLD Applicants===
===Reception by New gTLD Applicants===