ICANN Resolutions » Consideration of SSAC Recommendations from SAC047, SAC058, SAC061, SAC090, and SAC097
Important note: The Board Resolutions are as reported in the Board Meeting Transcripts, Minutes & Resolutions portion of ICANN's website. Only the words contained in the Resolutions themselves represent the official acts of the Board. The explanatory text provided through this database (including the summary, implementation actions, identification of related resolutions, and additional information) is an interpretation or an explanation that has no official authority and does not represent the purpose behind the Board actions, nor does any explanations or interpretations modify or override the Resolutions themselves. Resolutions can only be modified through further act of the ICANN Board.
Whereas, the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) submitted recommendations in SAC Documents: SAC047, SAC058, SAC061, SAC090, and SAC097.
Whereas, the ICANN org has evaluated the feasibility of the SSAC's advice and developed implementation recommendations for each, or noted the completed implementation where relevant.
Whereas, the Board has considered the SSAC Advice and the ICANN org's implementation recommendations relating to these pieces of advice.
Resolved (2018.06.23.10), the Board adopts the scorecard titled "ICANN Board Action for SSAC Advice Documents SAC047, SAC058, SAC061, SAC090, and SAC097 (08 June 2018)" [PDF, 182 KB], and directs the Preident and CEO or his designee(s) to implement the advice as described in the scorecard.
The Action Request Register is a framework intended to improve the process for the Board's consideration of recommendations to the ICANN Board, including advice from ICANN Advisory Committees. This framework has been under development since 2015, and as part of the initial effort, the ICANN org reviewed SSAC Advice issued between 2010 and 2015 to identify items that had not yet received Board consideration. The results of this initial review were communicated to the SSAC Chair in a letter from the Chair of the ICANN Board on 19 October 2016 (see https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/crocker-to-faltstro... [PDF, 627 KB]). This resolution is intended to address several of items that were identified as open at that time, as well as two items that have been submitted to ICANN Board and processed by the ICANN org since the inception of the ARR.
As part of the Action Request Register process, for each advice item presented with this resolution, the ICANN org has reviewed the request, confirmed its understanding of the SSAC's request with the SSAC, and evaluated the implementation feasibility of the request.
Background information on each advice document is provided below:
SAC047 [PDF, 197 KB], recommendation 2, recommends that ICANN preserve operational data about ex-registries and define a framework to share such data with the community.
SAC058 [PDF, 489 KB], recommendation 3, recommends that the ICANN community seek to identify validation techniques that can be automated.
SAC061 [PDF, 384 KB], recommendation 2, recommends that the ICANN Board ensure that a formal security risk assessment of the registration data policy be conducted as an input into the Policy Development Process.
SAC090 [PDF, 255 KB], recommendation 1, recommends that the ICANN Board take appropriate steps to establish definitive and unambiguous criteria for determining whether or not a syntactically valid domain name label could be a top-level domain name in the global DNS.
SAC090 [PDF, 255 KB], recommendation 2, recommends that the scope of work presented in recommendation 1 include at least the following issues and questions:
Should ICANN formalize in policy the status of the names listed on the reserved names listed in Section 22.214.171.124.1 and ineligible strings listed in Section 126.96.36.199.3 of the Applicant Guidebook, the two-character ISO 3166 codes proscribed by reference in Section 188.8.131.52.2 Part III of the Applicant Guidebook, the geographic names proscribed by reference in Section 184.108.40.206 of the Applicant Guidebook, the names listed in RFC 6761? If so: i) How should ICANN respond to changes that other parties may make to lists that are recognized by ICANN but are outside the scope of ICANN's direct influence? ii) How should ICANN respond to a change in a recognized list that occurs during a round of new gTLD applications?
The IETF is an example of a group outside of ICANN that maintains a list of "special use" names. What should ICANN's response be to groups outside of ICANN that assert standing for their list of special names?
Should ICANN formalize in policy the status of private use names? If so: i) How should ICANN deal with private use names such as .corp, .home, and .mail that already are known to collide on a large scale with formal applications for the same names as new ICANN-recognized gTLDs ii) How should ICANN discover and respond to future collisions between private use names and proposed new ICANN-recognized gTLDs?
SAC090 [PDF, 255 KB], recommendation 3, recommends that the ICANN Board establish effective means of collaboration on these issues with relevant groups outside of ICANN, including the IETF.
SAC090 [PDF, 255 KB], recommendation 4, recommends that ICANN complete recommendations 1 through 3 before making any decision to add new TLD names to the global DNS.
SAC097 [PDF, 324 KB], recommendation 1, recommends that the ICANN Board suggest to ICANN org to consider revising the CZDS system to address the problem of subscriptions terminating automatically by default.
SAC097 [PDF, 324 KB], recommendation 2, recommends that the ICANN Board suggest to ICANN org to ensure that in subsequent rounds of new gTLDs, the CZDS subscription agreement conform to the changes executed as a result of implementing recommendation 1.
SAC097 [PDF, 324 KB], recommendation 3, recommends that the ICANN Board suggest to ICANN org to seek ways to reduce the number of zone file access complaints, and resolve complaints in a timely manner.
SAC097 [PDF, 324 KB], recommendation 4, recommends that the ICANN Board suggest to ICANN org to ensure that zone file access and Web-based WHOIS query statistics are accurately and publicly reported, according to the standards that are uniform across all gTLD registry operators. The Zone File Access metric should be clarified.
The Board's acceptance of these items of advice serves the public interest and is in furtherance of ICANN's mission as it improves the security and stability of the DNS. Implementation of these advice can be accomplished within ICANN org's existing operating plan and budget.
In considering these items of advice, the Board reviewed the following materials:
SSAC047 <> [PDF, 197 KB]
SSAC058 <> [PDF, 489 KB]
SSAC061 <> [PDF, 384 KB]
SSAC090 <> [PDF, 255 KB]
SSAC097 <> [PDF, 324 KB]
2012 Applicant Guidebook <> [PDF, 5.9 MB]
GNSO Subsequent Procedures for gTLDs PDP Working Group Charter <> [PDF, 196 KB]
RFC 6761 <>
Name Collision Occurrence Management Framework <> [PDF, 634 KB]
2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement <>
GNSO gTLD Registration Data Services PDP Working Group Charter <> [PDF, 628 KB]
Expert Working Group (EWG) on Next Generation Directory Services Final Report <> [PDF, 5.12 MB]
Zone File Access Advisory Group Archive: https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/zone-file-access-en.htm
Zone File Access Concept Paper: https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/zfa-concept-paper-18feb10-... [PDF, 277 KB]