[council] AGP Limits Policy - Status Report Inquiry
icann at rodenbaugh.com
Fri Apr 2 19:48:10 UTC 2010
I am curious to know from contract parties whether the fraud issue is really
a significant issue needed Council consideration. Otherwise, I think this
issue can be closed and no further reports are needed to the Council since
the stats are reported in the monthly registry reports anyway.
tel/fax: +1 (415) 738-8087
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On
Behalf Of Craig Schwartz
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 6:38 AM
To: GNSO Council
Subject: [council] AGP Limits Policy - Status Report Inquiry
The AGP Limits Policy contains a provision that requires ICANN staff to
provide semi-annual updates to the GSNO on the implementation of the Policy.
To date ICANN has issued two reports, the first in June 2009 and the second
in December 2009. With excessive AGP deletes down by 99.7%, the Policy is
achieving its desired outcome and this was stated in the last report.
Also noted in the last report were some registrar complaints about
exemptions requests that had been denied when the basis for the request was
fraud. From the 14 December 2009 report, ICANN noted: A question the GNSO
Council may wish to consider in the future is whether modifications to the
Policy are necessary and/or appropriate given the results and community
reaction to date. For example, should the GNSO Council consider defining the
terms "extraordinary circumstances" or "reoccur regularly?" During the
policy development process on domain tasting some community members
suggested that the mitigation of instances of consumer fraud may be a
legitimate use of AGP deletes. Additionally, if a registrar proactively
takes down (i.e., deletes) domains that are known to propagate a fraudulent
activity such as phishing, should the registrar bear the cost if the
deletions cause the registrar to exceed the threshold defined in the Policy?
Staff recommends that the GSNO consider whether further work is needed in
light of the fact that excessive AGP deletes are down by 99.7%. Staff
further recommends that the Council consider whether semi-annual reports
should be continued and if so, with what frequency?
I'm happy to join the next GNSO call to discuss this and to answer any
questions you may have.
Chief gTLD Registry Liaison
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the council