ICANN : Final Initial Evaluation Results Published

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has finished the Initial Evaaluation for the 1930 new gTLD applications.

 

Out of the 1930 new gTLD applications, only 1783 passed the Initial Evaluation (IE).Some of the applications have been withdrawn without even reaching the Initial Evaluation.

ICANN had three possible outcomes of Initial Evaluation :

-Pass

-Eligible for Extended Evaluation

-Ineligible for Further Review

33 out of the initial 1930 new gTLD applications have passed the Extended Evaluation. Extended Evaluation is available for those that did not probide sufficient information in Initial Evaluation to pass technical, financial, registry services or geographic names review.

You can see the status of all new gTLDs here.

 

ICANN Board Rules .AMAZON Canned

The ICANN Board ruled last week the application for the .amazon gTLD, including its related internationalised domain names in Japanese and Chinese should not proceed.

The decision came about after the board accepted the advice of the New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC). And while it is possible the applications could proceed at some stage in the future, this is very unlikely.

The applications had been vigorously opposed by the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Peru and Uruguay, with the full support of the Amazon basin countries.

In a statement to the 47th ICANN Durban meeting, the “involved governments … expressed serious concerns related to public interest. In particular “.amazon” is a geographic name that represents important territories of some of our countries, which have relevant communities, with their own culture and identity directly connected with the name. Beyond the specifics, this should also be understood as a matter of principle.”

In making its recommendation, the NGPC took into account the issues raised by the applicant, the GAC advice and an independent, third-party expert commissioned by ICANN “to provide additional analysis on the specific issues of application of law at issue, which may focus on legal norms or treaty conventions relied on by Amazon or governments.”

The Expert Analysis considered “whether the consensus advice issued by the GAC is of such nature as to oblige ICANN to reject the application filed by Amazon, or to the contrary, whether the rules and principles cited by Amazon in its response of 23 August 2013 to the GAC’s advice oblige ICANN to approve the applications for .AMAZON (and related IDNs). The Expert Analysis concludes the following:
As regards the application for assignment of the new gTLD ‘.amazon’ filed by the Amazon company:
i) there is no rule of international, or even regional or national, law applicable in the field of geographical indications which obliges ICANN to reject the application;
ii) there is no rule of international, or even regional or national, law applicable in the field of intellectual property and in particular of trade marks or in the field of fundamental rights, which obliges ICANN to accept this application.”

The ICANN Bylaws require the Board to take into account the GAC’s advice on public policy matters in the formulation and adoption of the policies. If the Board decides to take an action that is not consistent with the GAC advice, it must inform the GAC and state the reasons why it decided not to follow the advice. The Board and the GAC will then try in good faith to find a mutually acceptable solution. If no solution can be found, the Board will state in its final decision why the GAC advice was not followed.

The board decided to “accept the GAC’s advice to the ICANN Board contained in the GAC’s Durban Communiqué stating that it is the consensus of the GAC that the applications for .AMAZON (application number 1-1315-58086) and related IDNs in Japanese (application number 1-1318-83995) and Chinese (application number 1-1318-5591) should not proceed.”

More details of the NGPC advice are available from:
www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-14may14-en.htm#2.b.rationale

Sedo To Hold LLLL Auction in June

Domain name aftermarket Sedo will hold a domain auction June 26 through July 03,2014 featuring domain names consisting only of four letter domains.

 

The auction features 49 four-letter domain names, all with a reserve range of 100-499 USD.

Some interesting domain names including in the auction are :

Opze.com

Touk.com

Buow.com

Duzn.com

Zavg.com

Dvue.com

To see the entire inventoy check out Sedo.com here .

 

.RU Domain Names Approaching 5 Million Milestone

The Coordination Center for TLD RU/РФ, the company responsible for the administrations of .RU and .РФ extensions, is approaching 5 million domain registrations under .RU .

 

.RU currently holds the 6th position in list of biggest ccTLD’s after .DE , .TK , .UK , .CN and .NL, with 15.3 million domain names for .DE, 15.1 million domain names for .TK , 10.3 million domains for .UK, 6.4 million domain names for .CN and 5.2 million domain names for .NL. .RU is also a leader in terms of growth rates among the biggest ccTLDs.

The fourth million .RU domain name was registered on 17 September 2012, while the third million .RU domain name was registered registered on the night of 24/25 September 2010.

Three years ago, .RU got a little brother, IDN TLD .РФ. Since then, the Internet market in Russia started growing twice as fast: by approximately 1,000-1,500 new domain names daily in each domain zone.

At the time of writing this article, there are 4,919,746 .RU domain names.

Check out EuroDNS here to register your .RU domain name.

 

Security Concerns of IPv6-SLAAC and Security Policies to Diminish the Risk Associated with Them by Parul Sharma & Dr. Anup Girdhar [Cyber Times International Journal of Technology & Management]

Abstract: Though, IPV6 has presented a long list of features that will actually change the entire networking environment, it still represents a very small proportion of Internet traffic. One of the major reasons behind its partial acceptance is its security, as these features were incorporated in IPV6 just to enhance its overall performance and quality of service, thereby neglecting its security part.

One such feature is Stateless Address Auto Configuration or simply SLAAC, which have undoubtedly reduced a lot of overhead in configuring networks, but on the same time it has challenged the security of IPV6 networks. This research work, therefore targets at proposing some security policies to mitigate the risks associated with SLAAC, by understanding its working scenario and trying to create the possible attack vector to highlight its security concerns. Hence, the implementation of these policies will directly add security to networks and make them resistant to SLAAC based attacks.

This paper published on the Social Science Research Network is available for download from:
ssrn.com/abstract=2434529