ICANN 72: Difference between revisions
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
===Universal Acceptance=== | ===Universal Acceptance=== | ||
* [[IDN]]s | * [[IDN]]s | ||
** [[ccNSO]] discussed | ** [[ccNSO]] discussed ccPDP4 on validation and delegation of ccTLD IDN variants and what triggers IDN ccTLD retirements | ||
** GNSO held a session on the [[EPDP on Internationalized Domain Names]] | ** GNSO held a session on the [[EPDP on Internationalized Domain Names]] | ||
Revision as of 18:12, 3 November 2021
Dates: | Prep Week: October 12-14, 2021
AGM: October 25-28, 2021 |
Location: | Seattle, WA |
Venue: | Virtual |
Website: | ICANN 72 (registration required) |
ICANN 72 was the annual general meeting for 2021, held in October. The meeting was fully virtual in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The meeting schedule was based on the time zone of the intended host city, Seattle.[1] Note that users must be logged in to their ICANN account in order to view information about meeting sessions, transcripts, and archived video and audio.
Board Composition & Leadership[edit | edit source]
As with every annual general meeting, a number of board members ended their terms of service: Ron da Silva (ASO), Lito Ibarra (NomCom), Merike Käo (SSAC Liaison), and Nigel Roberts (ccNSO) concluded their terms on the board.[2] Alan Barrett (ASO), Edmon Chung (NomCom), James Galvin (SSAC Liaison), and Katrina Sataki (ccNSO) were elected to the board during the organizational meeting.[3]
Themes[edit | edit source]
Interacting with Governments[edit | edit source]
- ICANN Executive Team Response (Mandy Carver): ICANN's Government Engagement is growing to meet the need to learn about and give input on DNS-related legislation around the world; this is not the purview of the GAC.
DNS Abuse[edit | edit source]
- Trusted Notifier Framework
- Interisle gave a presentation to the BC on its Phishing Landscape 2021.
- Goran Marby pointed to DNS Security Facilitation - Technical Study Group recommendations as an indication of the 12 steps ICANN could take in response to Cybersecurity if not directly DNS Abuse
SubPro[edit | edit source]
In the GAC Discussions on Subsequent Procedures, Karen Lentz explained that a version of the ODP generally happens anyway following the ICANN Board's reviewing of a Consensus Policy; now it has just been formalized. Likewise, the funding is not outside of what is already happening; rather, it reflects processes that are or would happen as ICANN Organization determined next steps toward implementation (or not).
There were several discussions around incorporating responses to DNS Abuse into the Contractual Compliance obligations of the next round.
Universal Acceptance[edit | edit source]
SSAD[edit | edit source]
On 17 May 2018, the ICANN Board approved the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data to allow contracted parties to comply with ICANN contractual requirements while also complying with the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, triggering a GNSO Council initiation of a PDP on 19 July 2018. Phase 1 was to confirm the Temporary Specification by 25 May 2019. Phase 2 was chartered to discuss a standardized access model to nonpublic registration data, aka SSAD.[4]
- ALAC expressed unhappiness to the ICANN Board over SSAD ODP, EPDP phase 2 recommendations, emphasizing SSAD would probably not be worth the cost and would run into trouble with NIS2 when passed.
- The BC was presented with a model and demo capable of supporting both sides of the SSAD challenge. It provides the verifiable claims to support the evaluation of requests from requesters and allows the logic engine to evaluate the lawfulness of the request, even if the backend remains manual on the registrar side.
- In the SSAC Public Meeting, Steve Crocker presented a summary of SAC118's three recommendations.[5]
- The GNSO and ICANN Organization should focus on building and operating a timely, reliable, effective, and efficient differentiated access system for competing interests.
- to address issues around legal/natural personal registration data:
- There should be a data element to denote the legal status of the registrant, which can be displayed as publicly available data;
- at the time of new domain registration, registrars should be required to classify all registrants as natural or legal persons;
- Registrants should continue to have the option of making their contact data publicly available; and
- Legal person registrants should be able to protect their data via privacy and proxy services.
- On Pseudonymizing Email Contacts:
- separate the ability to quickly, effectively contact registrants without disclosing personal data from helping investigators correlate registrations with contact information;
- registrars should support registrant-based email contact and develop safeguard requirements for them;
- EPDP Phase 2A should not specify a method for correlating registrations with contact information
Prioritization[edit | edit source]
- ICANN's Office of Planning and Finance presented its plans for developing a Prioritization Framework
Data Accuracy[edit | edit source]
- The GNSO Council created a Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team to consider current enforcement and reporting; measurement of accuracy, and effectiveness[6]; this meeting spent a significant amount of time discussing the definition of accuracy and spent a little bit of time on determining how much time each step will take to answer whether changes should be recommended to improve accuracy levels; how and by whom they would be developed; and whether existing contractual requirements may necessitate a PDP or contractual negotiations.
Transfer Policy[edit | edit source]
- The GNSO Transfer Policy Review PDP Working Group focused on enhancing security without limiting options for verification
- In the SSAC Public Meeting, Steve Crocker presented SAC119, which concerns two security risks:
- A domain name can experience a discontinuity of DNS resolution and DNSSEC validation if the transfer of DNS Services is not considered during the process.
- A domain name is more at risk of being hijacked if the authInfo code is not managed based on best practice security principles.
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ ICANN 72 Event Site (registration required)
- ↑ ICANN.org Blog - Preview of ICANN 72, by Maarten Botterman, October 20, 2021
- ↑ ICANN 72 Archive - Annual General Meeting of the Board, October 28, 2021
- ↑ Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – PHASE 2A, ICANN Public Comment
- ↑ SSAC Public Meeting, ICANN 72, Oct 26, 2021
- ↑ RDA Scoping Team, GNSO Council Meetings