RES: [ispcp] New gTLD overarching issue - malicious conduct

[Jaime Plug In]

Tony and all,

 

My personal opinion is that this is THE main overarching issue since the
beginning. One that has been, in my opinion, overlooked and poorly
considered.

I endorse the letter in its general terms, but would like to see the
specific wording.

 

 

Jaime Wagner
 <mailto:jaime at corp.plugin.com.br> jaime at corp.plugin.com.br
Cel (51) 8126-0916
Fax (51) 3123-1708

 

De: owner-ispcp at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp at gnso.icann.org] Em nome
de Tonyarholmes at btinternet.com
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 1 de julho de 2010 08:27
Para: ispcp at icann.org
Assunto: [ispcp] New gTLD overarching issue - malicious conduct

 

All members of the ISPCP

It has been proposed within the CSG Executive that the CSG leadership send a
joint letter from the three constituencies expressing major concern over the
overarching issue of malicious conduct  related to the introduction of
gTLDS. As discussed during the Brussels meeting one of the problems is that
the high security zone program is purely voluntary.  The IPC in particular
has said there still needs to be some way to raise an objection that a
particular application that does not meet the "voluntary" program poses real
problems, the example that's been used is .kids.

The other view that appears to be held by ICANN is that malicious conduct as
an overarching issues is now done. 

 

It's worth stating that the HSTLD advisory group is still working hard
(although  down to a very small group of people) on some fundamental
principles that still have to work out (like who these rules would apply to
(registry, registrar, registrant). But that does not take away the concerns
raised in some quarters that  this is an optional program, is not tied to
the new GTLD rollout, and even whether it will actually make a TLD more
secure.

 

The issue I would like your feedback on is whether it's appropriate for the
ISPCP executive to add their support to this letter. A number of times
during the Brussels meeting I heard ISPs making the point that further
delays to the gTLD program would not be supported, so there is a balance to
strike. Certainly if its argued that the issues around malicious conduct are
still unresolved, then effectively we are accepting the need for additional
delay.

 

Please provide feedback and comments on whether the ISPCP should offer
support for the view that the malicious conduct issue is not resolved to a
satisfactory level and more work is required before ICANN can push ahead
with the gTLD program.

 

 If as a result of your response we require a conference call to discuss
this further, that will be arranged. However this is urgent and requires a
quick answer.

 

Many thanks

 

Tony

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ispcp/attachments/20100701/419b9193/attachment.html>