Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

The ICANN life seems to revolve around our meetings. In Toronto, our Communications team recorded a short video of me attending meetings and talking to our community. As we prepare for Beijing, I am excited to visit a country where some of the oldest civilizations are now overlaid with the largest Internet community in the world, and a community who I am anxious to meet. I want to share the concept of the ombudsman with our new friends and colleagues in China, and I hope the video will introduce my work to you. The symbol of my office as a commitment to fair and open governance is a most important part of the multi-stakeholder environment of ICANN, and a place where your concerns can be heard in a confidential manner.

{ 0 comments }

Dave Piscitello, on behalf of the ICANN Security Team

In recent weeks, numerous high profile organizations and financial institutions have been targets of massive service disruption attacks. Several of these attacks are characteristically similar to attacks against top level domain name servers in 2006. ICANN’s Security and Stability Advisory Committee published an Advisory, SAC008 [PDF, 963 KB]: Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Attacks, shortly after the 2006 incidents. Recommendations from that Advisory remain relevant today.

We encourage private organizations, service operators and governments to carefully consider the recommendations from SAC 008, which describe the best known means to mitigate DDoS attacks.

“the most effective means of mitigating the effects of… numerous DoS attacks is to adopt source IP address verification” – SAC008

DDoS attacks commonly use IP addresses that are not allocated to the subscriber or IP addresses from reserved/private space to make it difficult to identify sources of attack traffic. This is called IP address spoofing. Access service providers or corporations should apply network ingress filtering (described in SAC004 and recommended by the Internet IAB in BCP038) to prevent spoofing. Squelching attack traffic close to its origins has the added benefit of relieving ISPs from forwarding malicious or criminal traffic. Everyone benefits when every operator filters spoofed source addresses, except would be attackers.

“Document operational policies relating to countermeasures… to protect [your] name server infrastructures against attacks that threaten [your] ability to offer service, give notice when such measures are implemented, and identify the actions affected parties must take to have the measures terminated.” – SAC008

I recently wrote an article, Preparing for the (Inevitable) DDoS Attack, that describes how to develop policies and prepare a response should your organization come under attack.

“disable open recursion on name servers from external sources and only accept DNS queries from trusted sources to assist in reducing amplification vectors for DNS DDoS attacks – SAC008

When open recursion is enabled on a DNS server, that server will accept DNS queries from any client (any IP source address). Attackers exploit open recursive servers in DDoS attacks and amplification attacks. US-CERT Alert TA13-088A recommends that all DNS operators:

• Disable recursion on authoritative name servers
• Limit recursion to authorized clients, and
• Rate limit responses of recursive name servers

Alert TA13-088A also identifies ways for every organization to test whether any of its name servers are open resolvers, and lists sources that describe how to do so for major operating system and name server software. (Note: TA13-088A does not have a resource for Microsoft DNS server, try here.)

The ICANN Security Team encourages you to help mitigate this increasing threat to security, stability, and resiliency.

{ 1 comment }

In the interest of transparency and accountability ICANN is providing the latest revision of the previously posted "Revised New gTLD Registry Agreement" for the community’s information and review.

• Clean [PDF, 458 KB]
• Redline [PDF, 455 KB]
• Summary of Changes [PDF, 155 KB]

This revision reflects the inputs and comments received from our stakeholders and other members of the community.

We have carefully considered the feedback on the revised Agreement and many suggestions have now been implemented in the new version of the Agreement. Community discussions will continue at ICANN’s Public Meetings in Beijing (7-11 April 2013).

The summary and analysis of comments received on the "Revised New gTLD Registry Agreement" that was posted on 5 February 2013 for official public comment have also been posted to http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/report-comments-base-agreement-01apr13-en.pdf [PDF, 507 KB].

2 April Update: A flowchart illustrating the Agreement’s amendment process is available at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-proposed-amendment-process-02apr13-en.pdf [PDF, 446 KB].

Feedback on the revised Agreement can be emailed to registry-agreement-feedback@icann.org. Please monitor the ICANN blog and new gTLDs microsite for further updates on next steps.

We look forward to your comments.

{ 0 comments }

As we go into the Beijing meeting, I am struck by the manner in which ICANN meetings are defined by the open exchange of ideas.

In no small way, the meetings form the foundation for discussion, agreement and often-respectful disagreement. It is not merely an opportunity to speak; it is also a chance to listen, to hear different voices that carry a multitude of opinions. Even in this era of instant Internet-facilitated communication, I still believe there is great value in our interpersonal exchanges.

The Public Forum session at our meetings affords an opportunity for Board members to listen and engage the community face to face. The session always has been, and will remain, a defining example of transparent dialog.

In that context, we will make some changes to the Public Forum session in Beijing (scheduled for Thursday, 11 April), so we can hear from as many community members as possible and also to encourage new members to speak freely.

Here are the changes:

• During that portion of the Public Forum where we address a specific subject for a specific amount of time, we will have the Board member who chairs the appropriate Board committee, or the member with the greatest subject expertise, moderate that specific discussion.
• Each speaker will get two chances to address the specific issue as it is discussed.
  • Two minutes to make initial remarks (just like what occurred during the Toronto meeting).
  • Two minutes later in the queue for any possible follow-up remarks.
• Following the subject-specific portion of the session, we will have a more-relaxed open-microphone portion to discuss other business.
  • Any subject may be discussed.
  • Speakers will be limited to two two-minute opportunities.

Our hope is that these new guidelines will open the Public Forum to more voices and avoid the trap of hearing the same voices over and over again.

For me, those unheard voices are the ones that concern me most.

Again, the Public Forum is intended to encourage dialogue. It is not designed to be a venue for lobbying or pontification. Questions are preferable to comments, and both are preferable to elongated statements.

I welcome, and strongly encourage, those with new ideas, questions or concerns to engage the Board during the Public Forum. We have established an email address where you can send questions and/or suggestions as to which topics you feel deserve dedicated time-slots during the Public Forum session in Beijing. The address is public_forum@icann.org.

Finally, if during the Public Forum, someone makes your point, please consider the option of silence, over that of time-consuming repetition. In doing so, you could be giving new voices the opportunity to be heard.

I look forward to seeing you, and listening to you, in Beijing!

{ 3 comments }

By Margie Milam, Senior Director, Strategic Initiatives

In October ICANN’s President & CEO, Fadi Chehadé, announced an ambitious plan for tackling one of ICANN’s most controversial issues—WHOIS. Undeterred by the decade’s long debate, and encouraged by the WHOIS Review Team’s Report, he challenged the notion that WHOIS couldn’t be fixed, and instead suggested a fresh approach. In line with this vision, the ICANN Board approved a two-pronged strategy to adopt the WHOIS Review Team (RT)’s recommendations to fully enforce the existing WHOIS policy and to follow the SSAC’s recommendations to redefine the purpose and scope of data directory services. When complete, ICANN hopes to transform the current antiquated WHOIS system into one that is better suited for the needs of tomorrow’s Internet.

I’d like to share with you some information on ICANN’s progress on these WHOIS-related activities.

Execution of the WHOIS RT Recommendations. The Board’s November WHOIS resolution prioritized and kicked-off a series of activities throughout ICANN—involving the Board, Staff, registrars, registries, the GNSO, At-Large and other interested community members— to implement the WHOIS RT Recommendations. Highlights include:

• Reshaping online services. Chris Gift, ICANN’s newly appointed Vice President of Online Community Services, has been tapped by Fadi to, among other duties, create an "information portal" that will be a one-stop shop for WHOIS related inquiries targeted at helping consumers understand and use WHOIS. The portal is to include WHOIS look-ups for both thin and thick registries, and links to educational materials and a compilation of WHOIS policy and provisions. This department also will build tools to statistically sample and report on WHOIS accuracy as part of a new effort to increase data accuracy and create accuracy metrics, as recommended by the WHOIS-RT. Research and planning are under way for both of these key initiatives.
• Enhanced Contractual Framework supporting WHOIS. The WHOIS RT noted areas where existing contracts could be enhanced to better support enforcement of current WHOIS obligations, improve accuracy, and issues related to privacy services. In response to these recommendations, ICANN has proposed amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA) that include:
• WHOIS Accuracy Specification requiring validation and verification of certain WHOIS data fields.
• Specification on Privacy/Proxy Services that sets minimum requirements (escrow, relay requirements, abuse point of contact, and disclosure of service terms) for services offered by Registrar or its resellers.
• WHOIS Specification describing a minimum Service Level Agreement for WHOIS Port 43 requirements and a commitment to adopt the IETF’s WEIRDS protocol after publication by IETF, which is expected to accommodate IDN WHOIS records.
• Registrant Rights and Responsibilities Specification, that is to be accompanied by significant media outreach, to educate & informs registrants of their obligations to maintain the accuracy of their WHOIS records.
• 2013 RAA to be a Requirement for New GTLDs, in furtherance of ICANN’s commitment to make WHOIS a strategic priority.
• ICANN Compliance efforts to enforce WHOIS obligations. The WHOIS RT offered recommendations to improve ICANN Compliance Team’s structure, communications, and enforcement of WHOIS obligations. Substantial progress has been made. Highlights include:
• Reinforcing WHOIS Compliance as a priority by moving Compliance directly under the CEO.
• A New Consolidated Complaint Management System that improves both the user experience and the compliance operations; phase one was launched this week with WHOIS inaccuracy as a priority.
• Completed rollout of Compliance Process to WHOIS complaints processing; this improved processing quality and efforts, including shortening complaint resolution time.
• Launched an Audit Program that includes review of inaccuracy responses and WHOIS data elements "population," among other elements.
• Increased compliance updates and published the Annual Report

A more complete description of the implementation activities is contained in the table below and detailed program reporting will be regularly issued to enable the community to track the progress of these activities.

Under Development: Next Generation Data Directory Services

In December, ICANN launched a new effort to replace the current WHOIS system with a call for volunteers to serve on an Expert Working Group. After an exhaustive search, the members of the Expert Working Group were announced, and each of them brings extraordinary expertise, leadership and consensus building skills. Led by Jean Francois Baril, the Expert Working Group will start from scratch, and take a fresh look at what the ideal data directory services might be. This effort is expected to produce a model for a replacement system—referred to as the "Next Generation Data Directory Services"—that is to take into account data accuracy and access issues, while at the same time including appropriate safeguards for privacy. The outcome of the Expert Working Group is to serve as a foundation for the GNSO’s creation of new consensus policy (and requisite contract changes, as appropriate), as requested by the ICANN Board.

The Expert Working Group met for two days in Los Angeles, and met again for another two days in London, prior to convening once again in Beijing. For more information on the group’s activities, including meeting reports, please visit the Expert Working Group’s Wiki: or attend the session in Beijing on Monday April for the latest developments regarding this key project.

We will continue to keep you updated on implementation of the WHOIS Review Team recommendations and the Expert Working Group’s progress, and look forward to receiving your input in Beijing, online and in future webinars.

Implementation of WHOIS Review Team Recommendations

{ 0 comments }

{ 0 comments }

In addition to the ccTLD CEO Roundtable in London (see blog), I was able to meet the next day, 14 March 2013, with senior executives from Internet Service Providers (ISPs) as well as from telecommunications companies (telecoms).

During the course of our roundtable, we explored the role of ISPs in relation to other organizations within the Domain Name System (DNS) sector and discussed how they can best participate in a number of ICANN’s current initiatives. For instance, we share many of the same objectives that aim to further develop Information and Communications Technology (ICT), drive innovation and foster greater business opportunities on a global level.

For ISPs and telecoms, participation in the multistakeholder model aligns with ICANN’s enhanced engagement efforts in regions where technical infrastructure and capacity building is still maturing. We also recognize that to Internet users, regardless of their origin or geographic location, our performance and reputations as stewards of a stable and secure Internet are linked. Simply put, for many individuals ISPs and the Internet are one and the same.

We agreed that more should be done to create tools, leverage technological solutions, and disseminate information that brings awareness to our collective work. This was also highlighted in presentations from industry analysts whose research findings support this concept of mutual dependency.

Our session also addressed a number of technical issues pertaining to Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs), IPv6, DNSSEC adoption, and the new gTLD program, all of which are emblematic of the next phase of Internet development.

Finally, we concluded with the challenges posed by the diversity of the industry, but which also allow for immense opportunity for further collaboration, greater problem-solving, new strategies, and enhanced technical and policy-making processes.

I am truly grateful for the time, insights and contributions provided by the group members, and I look forward to continued partnership around these critical activities.

Back Row (from left to right):

Christopher Mondini, Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN
Daniel Doro, Business Development Executive, UOL
Miles Beckingham, Senior Trade Mark Attorney, BT
Michael Rotert, Professor, and CEO, ECO
David Olive, Vice President, Policy Development Support, ICANN

Front Row (from left to right):

Mohamed Hammady, Director, BSkyB, Sky Network Services
Francois Comet, Deputy to the Chief Regulatory Officer, Orange Group
Carolina Cosse, President, ANTEL
Sally Costerton, Senior Advisor to the President, Global Stakeholder Engagement, ICANN

Not Pictured:

Robert Hoggarth, Senior Director, Policy Development Support, ICANN
Fadi Chehadé, President and CEO, ICANN

{ 1 comment }

After several months of intensive work marked by an open and constructive dialog between the regional members from different countries and stakeholder groups, the LAC Strategy Working Group has completed a first draft of the Latin American and Caribbean Strategic Plan.

When reading the draft, it is possible that most members of the region may see many concerns, ideas, proposals, projects and goals reflected in this draft which have already been discussed within their organizations for quite some time. We hope that this is the case. But, beyond what may be useful to each member individually, I wish to share a glimpse of the collective benefit. The region’s cooperation potential is enormous.

We always say to each other how well we have been working towards a single, interoperable Internet in our region. This document features areas with opportunities and also reflects the serious challenges facing us ahead. We stand before a historical opportunity to set a milestone in the Latin American and Caribbean Internet development. Let us do whatever is in our reach to contribute in strengthening Internet’s critical infrastructure in our region. Let us take our region to the next level.

Personally, I am very satisfied with the work done by the members of the working group. I am inspired by the spirit of cooperation and openness with which the group has been working. I sincerely appreciate the time, enthusiasm, knowledge and talent of all those who have contributed to the creation of this strategic plan draft.

We have made great progress but we still have a long way to go. Submitting the Strategic Plan draft to community consultation is actually the most important part of the journey ahead. It is crucial for everyone to contribute. Although the working group was carefully created to ensure a broad geographical and stakeholder group representation, it would not have been possible to complete the work without everyone’s participation.

To learn more about the document and participate in the consultation, click the link provided below. Thank you very much!

https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40933220&focusedCommentId=40933224#comment-40933224

{ 0 comments }

Después de varios meses de trabajo intensivo caracterizado por un diálogo abierto y constructivo entre actores de la región provenientes de diversos países y grupos de interés, el Grupo de Trabajo para la estrategia LAC ha concluido con un primer borrador del Plan Estratégico para América Latina y el Caribe.

Quizás al leer el borrador muchos de los actores de la región vean reflejados muchas de las inquietudes, ideas, propuestas, proyectos y metas que se han venido planteando al interior de sus propias organizaciones desde hace ya algún tiempo. Esperamos que así sea. Pero más allá de lo que resulte útil en lo individual, es mi deseo que se vislumbre el beneficio de lo colectivo. El potencial de cooperación de la región es inmenso.

Siempre decimos entre nosotros lo bien que hemos venido trabajando para procurar una Internet única e interoperable en nuestra región. Este documento da cuenta de las áreas de oportunidad que tenemos y también muestra los grandes retos que enfrentamos. Estamos ante una oportunidad histórica de marcar un hito en el desarrollo de Internet en América Latina y el Caribe. Hagamos lo que esté en nuestras manos para contribuir a robustecer la infraestructura crítica de Internet en nuestra región. Llevemos a la región al siguiente nivel.

En lo personal me siento muy satisfecho por el trabajo realizado por los miembros del grupo de trabajo. Me entusiasma el ánimo de cooperación y apertura con el que se ha venido trabajando. Mi más sincero reconocimiento al tiempo, disposición, conocimiento y talento de todos los que han contribuido a la integración de este borrador de plan estratégico.

Tenemos un gran avance pero aún nos falta camino por recorrer. Parte importante del trayecto por delante es justamente someter a consulta de la comunidad este borrador de plan estratégico. Es crucial que todos puedan contribuir. Si bien el grupo de trabajo fue cuidadosamente formado procurando una amplia representación geográfica y de grupos de interés, el trabajo no estaría completo sin la participación de todos.

Aquí les dejo el vínculo para que conozcan el documento y puedan participar de la consulta. Muchas Gracias!

https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40933220&focusedCommentId=40933224#comment-40933224

{ 0 comments }