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

[Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Chuck,
that was the idea. 

Thanks,
Thomas





Am 26.01.2013 um 22:24 schrieb "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
> @berrycobb
>