[At-Large] Fwd:  Final Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Thu Dec 10 14:48:30 UTC 2015
let me chime in on this issue.
On 09/12/2015 22:17, Avri Doria wrote:
> On 09-Dec-15 12:38, Christopher Wilkinson wrote:
>> > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20151204_security_firm_predicts_unprecedented_series_of_new_gtld_failures/
>> > Good evening. Did the WG see this coming?
> The gTLD group that made the current set of recommendations (many of
> which were disregarded)?
> Yes, it did.
> And it realized that as with all products people come to rely on, some
> survive and some don't.
> This is the way it should be with products.
Registry failure was of course anticipated and ICANN has a complex set
of wheels that come in motion when that happens, as described in the
Registry Accreditation Agreement:
There are numerous places in the Agreement that deal with Registry
failure, transfer of data, escrow etc.
So the noise that this security firm is much ago about nothing.
Second, some in the thread are saying that ICANN should do nothing at
all to ensure business continuity. Actually all of the above measures
were ingrained in the Registry Agreement in order to provide continuity
in the resolution of a registered domain name, under any generic Top
Level Domain. They were defined as part of ICANN's DNA through the
Affirmation of Commitments which ICANN as signed with NTIA:
The pertinent section is section 9.2, preserving security, stability and
Read this document again in detail. A lot of what ICANN does and how it
does it is actually mandated here.
More information about the At-Large