Logo

Terri Agnew's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Andrea Glandon
34:29
I will check on the phone number
Anne Aikman-Scalese
35:10
Valpurgis in Sweden!
Javier Rua-Jovet
35:22
excuse tardinees
Annebeth Lange
35:35
A really big celebration for the Swedish people!
Katrin Ohlmer
36:04
Also here in Germany - but not this year ….
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
36:41
May Day, Beltane or mid Solstice: Equinox in either hemisphere - a change of seasons regardless
Anne Aikman-Scalese
36:47
Katrin - I heard they cancelled Oktoberfest???
Katrin Ohlmer
37:09
Yup, that is really bad for Munic
Annebeth Lange
38:25
We had planned bicycling in Germany this summer, but Katrin, I really fear that this holiday has to be postponed to 2021
rubens
38:34
OTCO -> OCTO
Katrin Ohlmer
39:33
@Annebeth: Not very likely that other than in-Country tourism will be allowed.
rubens
39:53
Just to note that .corp, .home and .mail are part of the board questions to SSAC, but they are not in scope for the SubPro PDP WG.
Andrea Glandon
41:02
I am unable to identify the name for the phone number ending in 412. The area code is from Columbus, Ohio, does this sound familiar to anyone?
Jeffrey Neuman
42:10
@Andrea - we did invite members from the NCAP, so I am wondering if it someone from the NCAP
Andrea Glandon
42:21
Okay, thank you!
Matt Larson
42:30
@Andrea: does the phone number end in 5412?
Andrea Glandon
42:57
@Matt, I can only see the area code of 614 and the last 3 numbers of 412
Matt Larson
43:05
It's almost certainly Jeff Schmidt.
Andrea Glandon
43:14
Okay, thank you so much!
Anne Aikman-Scalese
44:23
There is a special and more detailed SOI for the NCAP Discussion Group. Not too difficult - but questions are more specific.
Alexander Schubert
45:57
Is there a tool where I can check my current 2nd round application strings for potential collision?
rubens
47:15
Alexander, while there is no such a tool yet or and it might never be, the list of undelegated TLDs with most queries is published by ICANN L-Root operations.
rubens
47:49
Those with most queries might not be the only collision issues, but they are strong candidates.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
48:21
@Alexander and Rubens - it would be highly desirable to develop such a tool.
rubens
49:16
http://stats.dns.icann.org/ is the ICANN site I mentioned. The queries take long to render so one needs patience.
Alexander Schubert
50:33
Hi Rubens. Would be cool to drop a string online, and get an "indication". Most strings are probably uncritical. Those who have a potential to be impcated should be very rare. But it would be nice to get an indication.
Jeffrey Neuman
51:47
All - Karen is the contractor hired by OCTO to do Study 1
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
53:21
Thx for the clarification @Jeff
Alexander Schubert
54:19
Rubens: Once you go to http://stats.dns.icann.org/- what then? Looks like SARS-CoV-2 curves for South Korea.
rubens
55:02
The strings that looking that appear at today's traffic are: local, home, . , lan, dhcp, corp, zghjccbob3n0, localdomain, intra, localhost, invalid, gateway, lan1, wlan_ap, dlinkrouter, getdhcpresultsforcurrentconfig, dom, rac2v1a, mygateway, grp, tootling, belkin, pvt, workgroup, airdream, station, novalocal, intranet, 1
Donna Austin, Neustar
55:25
Shame about tootling
rubens
55:58
tootling was totolink after being auto-corrected.
rubens
56:14
It is totolink that appears in queries to the root
Greg Shatan
56:20
Thought it was Tooting Bec.
Donna Austin, Neustar
56:34
Thanks Rubens
Anne Aikman-Scalese
57:02
QUESTION - To Jim - Will Study 2 proceed if not funded by ICANN?
James Galvin (Afilias)
57:11
@anne - yes
James Galvin (Afilias)
57:30
SSAC, through NCAP, has a responsibility to answer the Board’s questions
rubens
58:27
Note that the contractor suggested changing study 2 to look at different angles, not to be done. She did though suggested to scrap study 3 altogether.
rubens
58:54
(not to not be done)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
59:43
This has been a most useful briefing Thank You all from NCAP, OCTO et.al. :-)
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:00:27
Thanks to Jim and Matt.
Steve Chan
01:00:40
Link to document on screen here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kUlmZH8nxWTgfcRluA5FxLheMm4XhhOwkRt7om52aQU/edit?usp=sharing
Julie Hedlund
01:01:10
Page 91
martinsutton
01:01:11
Thanks Jim and Matt - very helpful and appreciate your time and information
rubens
01:06:13
It surely reflects the WT4 output, and the public comments were split, even from within a single stakeholder group.
Susan Payne
01:06:43
why would they not be delegated Anne? 1200 odd were delegated last round using the "old mechanism" and it worked fine
rubens
01:07:59
This is also status quo, and there is clearly no consensus to defer to anything.
rubens
01:08:34
All public comments analysis finished.
Jim Prendergast
01:08:50
Is this an instance where there might be a minority statement?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:09:03
Correct @Rubens it does
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:09:33
and Anne Yes there was PC's that raised this BUT the analysis WT DID finish it's work
rubens
01:09:40
All of the report can have minority statements.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:09:50
There was follow-up after Work Track 4 in Subgroup B and Subgroup B processed Public comment We did not actually finish that work in subgroup B
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:09:59
it was noted that the ALAC and GAC held this view so AC's as well as some others
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:11:24
The analysis DID have to complete we then took it to plenarry
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:11:48
If that is Leadership's conclusion - then Minority Statement is definitely appropriate as Jim Predergast points out.
rubens
01:16:36
Overall, this guidance reflects what everyone (applicants, SSAC, ICANN Org) wants, but its feasibility is to be seen.
martinsutton
01:16:45
Makes good sense Jim
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:17:18
Indeed
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:17:34
ad Yes @Anne cooperation is key here
rubens
01:19:06
Expertise on this doesn't reside only within SSAC. ICANN Org, both in Technical Services and in OCTO divisions, also has expertise, there is expertise in the DNS operators community, in contractors ICANN might procure etc.
Alexander Schubert
01:19:47
How long do we expect it will take until those rules are developed?
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:19:50
+1 Rubens
Alexander Schubert
01:20:08
This decade?
Alexander Schubert
01:20:39
And why haven't we started in summer 2012 with that?
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:21:19
Very important for "dovetailing" to occur between the NCAP work and the implementation work related to drafting of AGB etc - hopefully all recommendations come together in time to launch with definitive collision string testing.
Justine Chew
01:21:36
@Jim Galvin, @Matt Larson, might there be some sort of recommendation that will accompany the Final Study 1 Report to the ICANN Board that is expected from SSAC, OCTO and/or even NCAP DG?
rubens
01:22:52
Alexander, the first call to action on this is from 2009:
rubens
01:22:54
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090618_most_popular_invalid_tlds_should_be_reserved/
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:23:20
@justine - what recommendation are you looking for?
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:23:29
something related to the final work product, then no
Jim Prendergast
01:23:36
I'm not laying money on it but tend to agree with Jeff's crystal ball. Implementation will take time.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:23:44
The Board passed the Resolutions to require the work in 2017 I think. Matt - can you confirm?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:23:47
Optimism is important of course :-)
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:23:56
the only “recommendation” that will be there is an assessment of whether or not to move forward with other study work.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:24:26
Thanks Jeff - just trying to answer Alexander's question.
rubens
01:24:46
There is no optimism in information security, never. It can't be. ;-)
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:24:49
right Jeff
Justine Chew
01:24:53
@Jim Galvin, that's what I was looking for, thanks.
rubens
01:25:35
Not only Jim, Karen also wrote in study 1 that she doesn't think that as feasible.
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:25:39
perhaps JeffN.
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:25:54
since I don’t know exactly what the criteria will be it’s rather difficult to say
Alexander Schubert
01:26:13
Cure worse then sickness. All we need is a set of rules how to compile such list. How difficuilt is that? How did we do it in 2012?
rubens
01:26:38
In 2012 there was no such list, each string was evaluated on its merits by the contractors.
Alexander Schubert
01:27:07
Contractors will have used lists as well, no?
rubens
01:27:52
Cure x sickness is not the trade-off here, since the benefits go to a group and the issues go to a different group.
Matt Larson
01:29:58
yed
Matt Larson
01:29:59
yes
Julie Hedlund
01:31:16
Sure you can send to me
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:34:39
Thanks @Matt very interesting data and observations indeed!
Alan Greenberg
01:36:01
Need to leave now. Good discussion.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:43:08
Thanks Jeff - for Action items - can we please note a Minority Statement as to this Name Collision section?
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:44:01
The whole section actually
Steve Chan
01:45:02
@Anne, technically, minority statements would be submitted after the formal consensus call. The request for minority statements would apply to everything in the report of course, not just this section.
rubens
01:46:59
The board decision to approve the 2012 name collision framework also conflicts with SSAC advice, and it happened anyways.
Julie Hedlund
01:48:15
The reference to Study 1 is from the version circulated by Jeff this week, which staff understands it the most recent draft — but in any case it is noted that the final version of this report will reference the final version of Study 1.
rubens
01:48:22
Draft final means they are candidate to be final.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:49:01
Happy to do so. Comments are still open to Study 1 until Wednesday next week in NCAP.
Julie Hedlund
01:50:07
The language is based on the language of the final report, by which time the final study will have been published.
rubens
01:50:14
The paragraph is a quote. We can only change if it changes.
Elaine Pruis
01:50:22
study is done. report isn’t final
Justine Chew
01:50:35
+1 Elaine
Matt Larson
01:50:53
This language only appeared in the most recent version of the Study 1 report because that section of the report was not completed until now.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:50:55
+1 Greg
Greg Shatan
01:51:41
It’s also not really the NCAP’s study/report.
Matt Larson
01:52:11
It's worth pointing out that the Study 1 is output of the org. It was written in cooperation with the NCAP Discussion Group, but the org is responding to a request from the Board to produce the Study 1 report.
Jeffrey Neuman
01:52:29
Thanks Matt
Jeffrey Neuman
01:52:34
We should make that change
Greg Shatan
01:52:58
These are not the conclusions of NCAP. They are the conclusions of the contractor.
rubens
01:52:59
Matt, do you have language changes to suggest to better reflect that ?
Matt Larson
01:53:07
No
Justine Chew
01:53:39
+1 Greg and Matt, it's more a report by a contractor engaged by OCTO.
Matt Larson
01:53:47
Yes
Matt Larson
01:54:18
But not written in isolation but in cooperation with the NCAP DG. Not sure the best way to word that.
Greg Shatan
01:54:34
We don’t have a crystal ball. So lets not predict the future.
rubens
01:54:38
I said that already, by the contractor is not suggesting to not do study 2, but to do it differently.
Greg Shatan
01:55:35
Rubens that’s not what the quote says.
Greg Shatan
01:55:45
Unfortunately.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
01:56:32
No objection but add the fact that the Board has asked questions that the SSAC must answer and did so by Board Resolutions.
rubens
01:56:43
The footnote will point to the whole report, so the full opinion of the contractor will also be linked.
Donna Austin, Neustar
02:00:03
Sorry all, i need to drop.
Annebeth Lange
02:00:40
Sorry, have to go.
Justine Chew
02:01:24
It might also help to preface the text with "As at <date>"
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:01:54
Thanks Kem very clear
rubens
02:02:10
Justine, that would apply if the highlighted text was not going to be changed. But it will changed to its final version, regardless of what it might contain.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:02:13
THANKS everyone this has been *Excellent* IMO... Bye for Now!
Justine Chew
02:02:39
@Rubens, 'for now' purposes.
Anne Aikman-Scalese
02:02:56
Thank you Jeff et al
Vaibhav Aggarwal
02:02:58
Thanks Team
Vaibhav Aggarwal
02:03:01
Ciao