ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-consumercci-dt]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[gnso-consumercci-dt] Chat Transcript from Consumercci-dt meeting 22 May 2012

  • To: "gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Chat Transcript from Consumercci-dt meeting 22 May 2012
  • From: Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:15:59 -0700


  Berry Cobb:Welcome to the 22 May 2012 Consumer Metrics Call.
  Berry Cobb:Also apologies for Julie Hedlund and Wendy Seltzer
  Nathalie  Peregrine:JonathanZuck has joined the audio bridge
  Nathalie  Peregrine:Michael Graham has joined the AC room
  Nathalie  Peregrine:Olivier Crepin Leblond has joined the AC roo
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Apologies for ariving late. I am still on another 
call, ending in a couple of minutes
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:on now
  Berry Cobb:http://reports.internic.net/cgi/registrars/problem-report.cgi 
  Steve DelBianco (BC):The USG comment asks for these metrics as part of 
consumer trust: malware sites; sites used in botnets; sites associated with ID 
theft, and with Spam;  breach notices for misconduct of officers; security 
breaches
  Steve DelBianco (BC):of those, only Spam is included in the Internic 
complaint form
  Berry Cobb:Another perspeective that I recall, is that the complaint form 
will allow for delination of a Registry Complaint vs. Registrar Complaint
  Jonathan Zuck:Agree. This is just advice. Let's give it.
  Steve DelBianco (BC):Berry -- please capture the thought that some of the 
complaint "categorization" will need to be done by ICANN compliance folks, as 
they do an initial review of a complaint
  Jonathan Zuck:It's also probably worth noting that asking for data and being 
refused has some rhetorical value as well
  Steve DelBianco (BC):one definition, I think
  Steve DelBianco (BC):does anyone know how many breach notices ICANN issued 
last year?
  Berry Cobb:http://www.icann.org/en/resources/compliance/notices
  Jonathan Zuck:agree. so its' two percentages
  Berry Cobb:looks like 14
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:hear hear
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:the problem is that the current "breach notices" are 
very restricted in scope
  Berry Cobb:http://www.icann.org/en/resources/compliance/notices/archive
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:so many incidents happen but few give rise to a breach 
notice
  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:hence my mentioning earlier on the call, to assume 
that Compliance will expand its scope. This scope expansion will most likely 
give rise to more breach notices being issued
  Steve DelBianco (BC):i suggest we say "Significantly lower" instead of 50% 
lower
  Carlos:Sorry to be late, I am here after to escape to my today classes
  Jonathan Zuck:sure, as a percentage
  Jonathan Zuck:Makes sense
  Steve DelBianco (BC):to clarify, these are relative to Registrations in new 
vs legacy gTLDs
  Rosemary:my phone battery has died! would Steve chair last few 
minutes...apologies!
  Rosemary:lost the call, apologies!
  Jonathan Zuck:can we set a percentage like 5%
  Jonathan Zuck:;)
  Jonathan Zuck:registries in this case. only 5% receive breach notices
  Jonathan Zuck:are we creating the wrong incentive for contract compliance 
with these metrics?




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy