+1 @Seun 2014-07-03 13:21 GMT+00:00 Seun Ojedeji <[log in to unmask]>: > Hello Avri, all > > I think this particular issue needs to be addressed carefully. I > personally don't see why a domain owner would not have a valid whois > contact as one cannot overemphasise it's advantage. > I think it's okay to penalise those who don't have valid contact, however > the process that had been taken before arriving at implementing the > penalty is what I suggest we look into. > > There is a whois policy currently under discussion within the AfriNIC > region which has penalty that results to withdrawing member IP resource. > However before such implementation is done, there are series of contacting > options (using different means like phone, email etc, friends, upstream) > that is used by staff to reach the member. Also the proposal indicates > clear timeline on when to withdraw IP resource if no luck on reaching > member. > > So my view is that NCSG looks at the process currently taken to verify > whois contacts with the aim of suggesting better ways and perhaps proposing > longer timeline periods. Nevertheless, I think it's still important to > penalise those who don't maintain their contact details. > > Cheers! > > sent from Google nexus 4 > kindly excuse brevity and typos. > On 3 Jul 2014 13:56, "Avri Doria" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> IS this something we are taking a position on? >> >> I do not know whether at-large will decide that this is a registrant >> issue instead of a user issue (leaving aside issues on whether >> registrants could be considered a form of user), but it does seem like >> it would be an issue for us. >> >> Do we want to take it up? >> >> Is it something the GNSO Council should take up? >> >> avri >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: [At-Large] Fwd: A million domains taken down by email checks >> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 18:36:55 +0800 >> From: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <[log in to unmask]> >> Reply-To: At-Large Worldwide <[log in to unmask]> >> To: ALAC Working List <[log in to unmask]> >> CC: At-Large Worldwide <[log in to unmask]> >> >> Dear ALAC, >> >> In reference to Joly MacFie's mail to the At-Large (see forwarded), the >> topic was also raised by Registrars during their meeting with the ICANN >> Board in London. >> >> Fadi posed a question to the Registrars on whether they have engaged with >> the At-Large on the matter. Fadi then raised the issue to the At-Large >> during his ATLASII Fayre speech. >> >> It would be important that the At-Large articulates its position on the >> issue (possibly via an ALAC statement) as it is being presented as a >> problem for Internet users. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Rinalia >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: "Joly MacFie" <[log in to unmask]> >> Date: Jun 26, 2014 1:00 AM >> Subject: [At-Large] A million domains taken down by email checks >> To: "At-Large Worldwide" <[log in to unmask]> >> Cc: >> >> Fwd over from the NCSG list. I underdtand that this would have been >> > discussed in today's EWG and privacy sessions. Any comments? >> > >> > >> > >> http://domainincite.com/16963-a-million-domains-taken-down-by-email-checks >> > >> > A million domains taken down by email checks >> > < >> > >> http://domainincite.com/16963-a-million-domains-taken-down-by-email-checks >> > > >> > Kevin Murphy <http://domainincite.com/about>, June 24, 2014, 14:34:25 >> > (UTC), Domain Registrars >> > <http://domainincite.com/category/domain-registrars> >> > >> > *Over 800,000 domain names have been suspended since the beginning of >> the >> > year as a result of Whois email verification rules in the new ICANN >> > Registrar Accreditation Agreement.* >> > >> > That's according to the Registrars Stakeholder Group, which collected >> > suspension data from registrars representing about 75% of all registered >> > gTLD domain names. >> > >> > The actual number of suspended domains could be closer to a million. >> > >> > The 2013 RAA requires registrars to verify the email addresses listed in >> > their customers' Whois records. If they don't receive the verification, >> > they have to suspend the domain. >> > >> > The RrSG told the ICANN board in March that these checks were doing more >> > harm than good >> > < >> > >> http://domainincite.com/16375-are-whois-email-checks-doing-more-harm-than-good >> > > >> > and today Tucows CEO Elliot Noss presented, as promised, data to back up >> > the claim. >> > >> > "There have been over 800,000 domains suspended," Noss said. "We have >> > stories of healthcare sites that have gone down, community groups whose >> > sites have gone down." >> > >> > "I think we can safely say millions of internet users," he said. "Those >> are >> > real people just trying to use the internet. They are our great >> > unrepresented core constituency." >> > >> > The RrSG wants to see contrasting data from law enforcement agencies and >> > governments -- which pushed hard for Whois verification -- showing that >> the >> > RAA requirement has had a demonstrable benefit. >> > >> > Registrars asked at the Singapore meeting in March that law enforcement >> > agencies (LEA) be put on notice that they can't ask for more Whois >> controls >> > until they've provided such data and ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade said >> > < >> > >> http://domainincite.com/16375-are-whois-email-checks-doing-more-harm-than-good >> > > >> > "It shall be done by London." >> > >> > Noss implied that the majority of the 800,000 suspended names belong to >> > innocent registrants, such as those who had simply changed email >> addresses >> > since registering their names. >> > >> > "What was a lovely political win that we said time and time again in >> > discussion after discussion was impractical and would provide no >> benefit, >> > has demonstrably has created harm," Noss said. >> > >> > He was received with cautious support by ICANN board members. >> > >> > Chair Steve Crocker wonder aloud how many of the 800,000 suspended >> domains >> > are owned by bad guys, and he noted that LEA don't appear to gather >> data in >> > the way that the registrars are demanding. >> > >> > "We were subjected, all of us, to heavy-duty pressure from the law >> > enforcement community over a long period of time. We finally said, >> 'Okay, >> > we hear you and we'll help you get this stuff implemented,'", he added. >> > "That creates an obligation as far as I'm concerned on their part." >> > >> > "We're in a -- at least from a moral position -- in a strong position to >> say, >> > 'You must help us understand this. Otherwise, you're not doing your >> part of >> > the job'", he said. >> > >> > Chehade also seemed to support the registrars' position that LEA needs >> to >> > justify its demands and offered to take their data and concerns to the >> LEA >> > and the Governmental Advisory Committee. >> > >> > "They put restrictions on us that are causing harm, according to these >> > numbers," he said. "Let's take this back at them and say, hey, you ask >> for >> > all these things, this is what happened." >> > >> > "If you can't tell me what good this has done, be aware not to come back >> > and ask for more," he said. "I'm with you on this 100%. I'm saying let's >> > use the great findings you seem to have a found and well-package them >> in a >> > case and I will be your advocate." >> > >> > Director Mike Silber also spoke in support of the RrSG's position. >> > >> > "My view is if what you are saying is correct, the LEA's have blown >> their >> > credibility," he said. "They're going to have to do a lot of work >> before we >> > impose similar disproportional requirements on actors that are not >> proven >> > to be bad actors." >> > >> > So what does this all mean for registrants? >> > >> > I don't think there's any ongoing process right now to get the Whois >> > verification requirements overturned -- that would require a >> renegotiation >> > of the RAA -- but it does seem to mean demands from governments and >> police >> > are going to have to be much more substantiated in future. >> > >> > Noss attempted to link the problem to the recommendations of the Whois >> > Expert Working Group (EWG), which propose a completely revamped, >> > centralized Whois system with much more verification >> > < >> http://domainincite.com/16855-whois-killer-is-a-recipe-for-a-clusterfuck> >> > and not much to benefit registrants. >> > >> > To paraphrase: if email verification causes so much harm, what harms >> could >> > be caused by the EWG proposal? >> > >> > The EWG was not stuffed with LEA or governments, however, so it couldn't >> > really be characterized as another set of unreasonable demands from the >> > same entities. >> > >> > >> > -- >> > --------------------------------------------------------------- >> > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast >> > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com >> > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com >> > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org >> > -------------------------------------------------------------- >> > - >> > _______________________________________________ >> > At-Large mailing list >> > [log in to unmask] >> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large >> > >> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >> _______________________________________________ >> At-Large mailing list >> [log in to unmask] >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >> > -- Olévié Ayaovi Agbenyo KOUAMI DG Ets GIDA-OKTETS CEO de INTIC4DEV (http://www.intic4dev.org) SG de ESTETIC (http://www.estetic.tg) Membre de ISoc (www.isoc.org <http://www.isog.org/>) & du FOSSFA ( www.fossfa.net) Membre de l'ICANN-NCSG/NPOC (http://www.icann.org/ et http://www.npoc.org/) BP : 851 - Tél.: (228) 90 98 86 50 / (228) 98 43 27 72 Skype : olevie1 FB : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé - Togo