RE: [gnso-igo-ingo] IGO Organization Survey / Domain Registration Analysis

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is the expectation that the organizations that want protection would provide 
the data?

Chuck

From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Berry Cobb
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 3:17 PM
To: gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] IGO Organization Survey / Domain Registration Analysis

Team,

Attached is a spreadsheet evolved from the analysis started by Alan Greenberg 
and supported by other in the WG that should be performed to further define the 
nature of the problem.  At this stage, we are looking for the WG to comment on 
this approach before we continue "filling in the blanks."  If the WG agrees 
with this approach, we can then discuss a divide and conquer strategy to 
complete the analysis.

A few notes about the SS:


1.          The 1st tab, "data_gather_form" is a list of the items Alan 
suggested we request information from organizations seeking protection.  Other 
WG members seemed to agree with this list of questions.  I'd like to ask the WG 
to review and recommend additional types of information that we should possibly 
request.  A possible tool to solicit this feedback from the organizations is to 
construct a survey and distribute to organizations identified for completion.  
ICANN has deployed a survey tool (LimeSurvey) that may benefit this exercise 
(https://limesurvey.icann.org/), and it may aid in generating useful statistics 
to aid in the analysis.

2.          The 2nd tab, "registration_by_org_by_tld" is a matrix evolved from 
the analysis performed by Alan, and it also includes responses submitted by the 
IOC.  Several notes about this framework:

a.          The organizations listed here are the organizations list in the 
13DEC11 letter to ICANN signed by NGOs.  It also includes UNICEF (from Alan's 
PDF analysis) that was not a signatory of the letter.

b.          Not all identifiers from the IOC and RCRC are included at this 
point.  We can add them to this analysis after we agree to the approach.

c.          I only completed the IOC identifiers as a working example.  As you 
will see we have much more to complete once finalized.

d.          Countrycodes listed next to the TLDs are not all inclusive, but I 
attempted to pick the larger ccTLDs.  We can add others as necessary.

e.          The remainder of TLD types are divided by generic, 
generic-restricted, and sponsored as defined by IANA Root Zone dB

f.           Cells with Green Fill and White letters are an indication that the 
site may have legitimate use, as first identified by Alan

g.          We may want to further define meta-tags for domains that are 
registered, but not controlled by the respective organization (i.e. do we tag 
by malicious use, monetary gain, for sale, etc....)

h.          Stats at the bottom of the chart for each organization are meant to:

*            Determine total % of identifier domains as registered across the 
various TLDs

*            Then a % of domains registered as a breakout of TLD type

*            Each is compared alongside as to whether the respective org has 
control of the domain or not

We welcome your input to this tool.  Please provide feedback over the list, and 
we will discuss this approach at our meeting next week.

Thank you.  B

Berry Cobb
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
720.839.5735
mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
@berrycobb