[gnso-igo-ingo] v0.3 Domain Registration Analysis
IGO-INGO WG, Attached is the next version of the spreadsheet that carries forward the analysis of domain names registered for organizational identifiers. It is hoped that this gathering of information shall help the group determine what - if at all - additional information or research should be required to satisfy defining the nature of the problem. We will review this at tomorrow's meeting. Of 18 Organizations, each potential identifier was first determined to be registered across 30 TLDs (generic and country-code) or not. Upon discovering each registration, a quick review on the use of the domain and its corresponding DNRD-DS (WHOIS) information was performed and documented. Pertinent information about the analysis: Status of Analysis: . This is only an initial draft and does not constitute WG input or any representation of stakeholder positions. Sample Scope: . Identifier scope for this analysis is only direct match of acronym for IGOs except where a full string was used by IOC/RCRC (for expediency, only a subset of 20 IGOs were chosen from the 13DEC2011 letter to the ICANN Board). . This sample does not include any typo or keyword+identifier registration analysis (for example, olympic2016games.tld). . This analysis does not represent any protective actions that may have or could be taken by a respective organization. . This analysis only uses a representative sample of ccTLDs (11 of 200+), and the sample pool also omits the .post sponsored gTLD. Analysis Perspective: . Registration policies can vary among the generic, generic-restricted, sponsored, and ccTLD Registries and in some cases may decrease the likely hood of an identifier being registered by a third party (denoted in light. blue, dark blue, and black). . Domains not in control of the organization contain a status of the green, yellow, and red scale denoting the use (or potential threat) of the domain based on the organization's perspective as though they were exploring a threat analysis to defend their identifiers across multiple TLDs. General Findings: . Generally, each organization within the sample shows some indication of threat via monetization (parked or for sale), but this analysis cannot quantify any specific amount of harm. . With the exception of two instances, none of the direct match domains that are not in control by the respective organization did not reveal a threat of where the registrant was attempting to mimic or claim to be the said organization. . Many of the organizations reviewed also reveal domain registrations of like textual identifier of what might be considered legitimate competitive use of the identifier. . Several organizations have not configured network DNS settings to allow resolution to http://identifier.tld and/or http://www.identifier.tld. Analysis Framework Changes to Consider: . Should entries where reserved names are identified increment by a count of one for being registered and increment by a count of one for organization control (presently both listed as zero "0")? . Refine green, yellow and red status flags for domains not in control of the respective organization (vantage point of the organization in question as if they were to pursue a protection strategy using existing practices for brand protection online). Thank you. B Berry Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) 720.839.5735 mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx @berrycobb Attachment:
IGO-INGO_Domain_Registration_Eval_WB_v0.3.xlsx |