Logo

Michelle DeSmyter's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Sue Schuler - RySG Secretariat
23:06
Welcome to the meeting of the DAAR Discussion Group. Please announce your name before speaking for purposes of the transcript. Please mute your microphone when not speaking to help maintain sound quality. Thanks
Donna Austin, Neustar
30:27
In the context of the DNS abuse discussion, how important do we think it is to have an enhanced DAAR?
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
30:28
question for the group (I don't know): do we know if DAAR reports are very small part of what Samaneh does?
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
31:47
@Donna, I think that's exactly the right question in #2 on the agenda...I worry that the CCT-RT and, by extension, the GAC is being over-reliant on it, which to me means its critical we fix it.
James Galvin (Afilias)
32:50
@donna - one thing I want to be careful about is not calling it “enhanced DAAR”. I want DAAR to be DAAR, i.e., I want it show something unambiguous to the largest extent possible, which is something it is not at this time.
Donna Austin, Neustar
34:10
@Jim, I take your point and I did think for two seconds whether 'enhanced' was the right word.
James Galvin (Afilias)
35:06
One thing that is essential is getting away from gTLD versus new gTLD. I’d rather some kind of “category” of TLD, because abuse is different in different types of TLDs. The big part of the discussion we had in Montreal was about categories, what are they, how to know them.
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
35:19
+1 Kristine : circular, etc
Kurt Pritz
39:28
I am not sure how to put this but I think we should let the data create the categories rather than creating categories first. Category creation leads to anticipated or predetermined outcomes - and from a statistical standpoint might tend to skew results.
James Galvin (Afilias)
39:59
I like registration policy.
Donna Austin, Neustar
40:57
Registration policy is difficult because of considerable nuances across TLDs. I think there's value in Kurt's suggestion.
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry) #2
41:23
Not a fan of categories either: the general public sees it all as « dots » (if at all…)
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry) #2
41:57
+1 @kurt
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
42:05
true… there aren’t firm boundaries between registration policies
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
44:12
+1Kurt. or post-registration anti-abuse enforcement. :)
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
46:07
I don't disagree that likely most of the abuse is in open TLDs...but its that useful? How can we cut the data to determine what factors in open TLDs lead to more abuse?
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
46:55
“most” by what measure? by quantity or pro rata?
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
47:10
Thinking the same thing Rick...
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
47:45
Also a TLD with fewer DUM might find reactive measures to be easier than someone with millions of DUM
Donna Austin, Neustar
48:53
you make some good points Jim
Kurt Pritz
48:59
One other point: I’d rather that we (and OCTO) spend time on statistical analysis rather than attempting categorization
James Galvin (Afilias)
50:51
@kurt - I agree. I think we just tell them what “categories” to use, if any.
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
51:32
Unfortunatly, I think we do need to dive into the pros and cons of categories so we can decide if they add value. :)
Maxim Alzoba
52:32
could we ask for those TLDs which have AGP? (without it there is no free try)
Maxim Alzoba
52:41
as categories?
Maxim Alzoba
53:39
life cycle
James Galvin (Afilias)
54:24
I agree we keep pricing out of the discussion for now.
Maxim Alzoba
55:06
it is about free try and not pricing
James Galvin (Afilias)
55:08
I do think it might become something of interest in open TLDs, but if we focus on getting credit for mitigation then perhaps we can steer away from price concerns.
Maxim Alzoba
01:00:41
it was just an idea
Kristine Dorrain (Amazon Registry)
01:01:46
no bad ideas today, Maxim. :) It's a free for all.
Kurt Pritz
01:04:05
One question fro OCTO: see, https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/daar-monthly-report-31oct19-en.pdf - e.g., pg 7, fig 6 - is the reduction on abuse in new TLDs every month since May statistically significant?
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:07:42
No, definitely not “pretty poor”. Like you, I’m trying to think through this.
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:07:53
That was a comment to Kurt. :-)
Kurt Pritz
01:11:18
@ Rick - that is really interesting - I would think If the reduction started in May 2018 (as opposed to 2019) - it might be an effect of GDPR
Maxim Alzoba
01:11:30
ehh, spam is bit outside of the set of the issues we are responsible for dealing with
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:17:28
Yes, Kristine, I agree.
Kurt Pritz
01:19:34
One more thought: the cop on the NDS Abuse panel talked of (paraphrasing) ‘skyrocketing’ abuse levels. Is that borne out by DAAR data. It doesn’t seem so but that doesn’t mean that the claim is incorrect. Where is the data demonstrating the increase? Can that data be correlated to domain registrations?
Kurt Pritz
01:19:50
NDS = DNS (in some places)
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:21:59
Thanks Kristine
Maxim Alzoba
01:22:03
bye all