Logo
ICANN
ICANN
Filtered Search

Are you sure you want to sign out from http://www.vip.icann.org?

If you want to sign out from both http://www.vip.icann.org and ICANN Account, click here.

Board Activities and Meetings

View records of actions and decisions made by the ICANN Board from recent activities and meetings.

Minutes | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board | 11 December 2024

A Special Meeting of the ICANN Board of Directors was held telephonically on 11 December 2024, at 21:30 UTC.

Tripti Sinha, Chair, promptly called the meeting to order.

In addition to the Chair, the following Directors participated in all or part of the meeting: Catherine Adeya, Alan Barrett, Maarten Botterman, Chris Buckridge, Becky Burr, Chris Chapman (Vice-Chair), Sarah Deutsch, Christian Kaufmann, Kurt Erik "Kurtis" Lindqvist (President and CEO), Patricio Poblete, León Sánchez, Miriam Sapiro, and Amitabh Singhal.

The following Directors sent their apologies: Sajid Rahman.

The following Board Liaisons participated in all or part of the meeting: David Lawrence (IETF Liaison), Nico Caballero (GAC Liaison), James Galvin (SSAC Liaison), and Wes Hardaker (RSSAC Liaison).

Secretary: John Jeffrey (General Counsel and Secretary).

The following ICANN org Executives and Staff participated in all or part of the meeting: Michelle Bright (Board Operations Content Coordination Director), Xavier Calvez (SVP, Planning and Chief Financial Officer), John Crain (SVP & Chief Technology Officer), Samantha Eisner (Deputy General Counsel), Jamie Hedlund (SVP, Contractual Compliance & U.S. Government Engagement), John Jeffrey (General Counsel and Secretary), Aaron Jimenez (Senior Board Operations Specialist), Elizabeth Le (Deputy General Counsel), Veni Markovski (VP, Government Engagement - UN NY and Interim Head of Government and IGO Engagement), Cassia Oliveira (Director, Office of the CEO), Wendy Profit (Board Operations Sr. Manager), Amy Stathos (Deputy General Counsel), and Theresa Swinehart (SVP, Global Domains & Strategy).

1. Main Agenda

The Chair opened the meeting and entertained a motion to revise the Main Agenda. Chris Buckridge moved, and Chris Chapman seconded a proposed motion to revise the Main Agenda to remove the item concerning the ICP-2 Implementation Document. All Board members present voted in favor of revising the agenda. The motion carried.

a. Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency of the DNS (SSR2) Review Pending Recommendation 17.1

The Chair called for conflicts of interest. Chris Buckridge noted that the proposed Board resolution is related to the New gTLD Program: Next Round. Chris stated that he is currently recusing himself from Next Round discussions given that he has contracted for a short‑term project with a ccTLD operator. Jim Galvin stated that given the relationship between the Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP) and its inclusion in the Next Round, he had been recused from all decisions related to NCAP.

Alan Barrett introduced the agenda item. Alan noted that over time, the Board has reviewed and considered each of the recommendations issued in the second Security, Stability, and Resiliency (SSR2) Review Team Final Report . Alan stated that there were more than 60 recommendations and all but one have been handled by the Board. He explained that the action before the Board is to consider the final pending recommendation (Recommendation 17.1 ), which concerns name collisions in the DNS.

As part of the briefing to the Board, Alan highlighted the Board's recent action on the recommendations in the NCAP Final Report . The NCAP recommendations will be incorporated into the Next Round implementation work. Because of this, Alan reported that the Board Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) recommends that the Board document that it considers SSR2 Recommendation 17.1 as fully addressed by the NCAP, and that no additional actions are needed. Alan read the proposed Board action into the record.

After discussion, Alan Barrett moved, and Becky Burr seconded the proposed resolution. The Board took the following action:

Whereas, on 22 July 2021, the Board took action on each of the 63 recommendations issued within the Second Security, Stability, and Resiliency (SSR2) Review Team Final Report dated 25 January 2021, as specified within the Scorecard titled "Final SSR2 Review Team Recommendations – Board Action", hereafter "July 2021 SSR2 Scorecard", resolved to place 34 SSR2 recommendations into pending status, and committed to take further action on these recommendations subsequent to the completion of steps as identified in the July 2021 SSR2 Scorecard.

Whereas, on 1 May 2022, the Board took action on three pending SSR2 recommendations, as documented in the "Scorecard: SSR2 Pending Recommendations - Board Action 1 May 2022".

Whereas, on 16 November 2022, the Board took action on 21 pending SSR2 recommendations, as documented in the "Scorecard SSR2 Pending Recommendations - Board Action - 16 November 2022".

Whereas, on 10 September 2023, the Board took action on nine pending SSR2, as documented in the "Board Action/Rationale on & ICANN org Assessment of Competition, Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice Review (CCT) Pending Recommendations 14 and 15, and Second Security, Stability and Resiliency of DNS Review (SSR2) Recommendations 9.2, 9.3, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.4, 13.1, 13.2 and 14.2 - 10 September 2023".

Whereas, SSR2 Recommendation 17.1 was placed in pending status because of dependencies on the SSAC NCAP studies that would inform the Board's decision on next steps.

Whereas, on 7 September 2024, the Board resolved to accept the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC)'s advice on Name Collision Analysis (SAC124) endorsing the recommendations in the NCAP Study 2 Final Report, and resolved to approve all of the recommendations in the Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP) Study 2 Final Report, with the sole exception of Recommendation 4.1, and directed ICANN org to implement.

Whereas, the Board Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) reviewed the ICANN assessment and, on 5 December 2024, made a recommendation to the ICANN Board to approve SSR2 Recommendation 17.1 as fully implemented.

Resolved (2024.12.11.01), the Board acknowledges the significant work contributed by the community in addressing name collisions, considers all aspects of the SSR2 Recommendation 17.1 addressed in a holistic fashion, and concludes that no additional actions are necessary. Therefore, the Board approves SSR2 Recommendation 17.1 as fully implemented, as documented in the Board Action/Rationale on & ICANN Assessment of Second Security, Stability and Resiliency of DNS Review (SSR2) Pending Recommendation 17.1, 11 December 2024. The Board will continue to support ICANN in further investigating name collision and testing possible new solutions.

Thirteen members of the Board voted in favor of Resolution 2024.12.11.01. Sajid Rahman was unavailable to vote on the Resolution. Chris Buckridge abstained from voting, citing the reasons previously noted above. The Resolution carried.

Rationale for Resolution 2024.12.11.01

Why is the Board addressing the issue?

The Security, Stability, and Resiliency (SSR) Review is one of the four Specific Reviews anchored in Article 4, Section 4.6 of the ICANN Bylaws. Specific Reviews are conducted by community-led review teams, which assess ICANN's performance in fulfilling its commitments. Reviews contribute to ensuring that ICANN serves the public interest, are critical to maintaining an effective multistakeholder model, and help ICANN achieve its mission, as detailed in Article 1 of the Bylaws.

The SSR2 Review is the second iteration of the SSR Review and is focused on the assessment of ICANN's execution of its commitment to enhance the operational stability, reliability, resiliency, security, and global interoperability of the systems and processes that are affected by the Internet's system of unique identifiers that ICANN coordinates.

What is the proposal being considered?

This proposed action is in furtherance of resolution 2021.07.21.13 to respectively place 34 SSR2 recommendations in "pending" status. The SSR2 Recommendation 17.1 was placed in a pending status, noting dependencies on the SSAC's Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP).

SSR2 Recommendation 17.1 entails four key components: 1) creating a framework that describes the nature and frequency of name collisions and resulting concerns; 2) including metrics and mechanisms that may be used to measure the extent to which controlled interruption is successful in identifying and eliminating name collisions in such framework; 3) having a mechanism to enable protected disclosure of name collision instances; and 4) ensuring that the framework allows the handling of sensitive data and security threats.

The Name Collision Analysis Project Study 1 Final Report, published on 19 June 2020, documented prior work on name collisions and assessed name collision datasets. The Name Collision Analysis Project Study 2 Final Report, completed on 5 April 2024, proposes a Name Collision Risk Assessment Framework, which holistically measures the nature and frequency of name collisions, as well as mitigating the name collisions. The NCAP Study 2 report also examines historical data and trends, identifies common scenarios where collisions occur, and explores potential risks. In May 2024, the SSAC released SAC 124 through which it advised the Board to approve and implement the recommendations in the Name Collision Analysis Project (NCAP) Study 2 Final Report.

Beyond the NCAP study 2 report, the Board notes that the Root Cause Analysis - New gTLD Collisions report, dated January 2023, also enumerated and described causes for name collisions. The Root Cause Analysis also studied the effectiveness of controlled interruption as a mechanism to mitigate name collision.

The Board wishes to highlight the name collision related amendments to the Base Registry Agreement that are being considered by the Subsequent Procedures Implementation Review Team (IRT) assisting ICANN org in the implementation of the policy recommendations in the Final Report in the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process.

The Board also recognizes ICANN's centralized reporting mechanism, that allows users to report instances of name collision, allowing ICANN to handle reported issues.

The Board concurs with the ICANN assessment that taken together, the Name Collision reporting page, the requirements in the Registry Agreement for Registry Operators, and the implementation of the Name Collision Risk Assessment Framework provide sufficient identification and mitigation of name collisions during the introduction of additional new gTLDs.

Which stakeholders or others were consulted?

The SSR2 Final Report was published for public comment and the Board received feedback as part of that process.

What significant materials did the Board review?

The Board considered various significant materials and documents. In addition to the ICANN org assessment, the Board consulted the following:

Are there positive or negative community impacts?

Taking action on the SSR2 pending recommendation contributes to concluding the work to address the outcome of the SSR2 Specific Review, and enhances ICANN's accountability. With action on this remaining SSR2 pending recommendation, the status of pending Specific Reviews recommendations will be fully cleared.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, budget); the community; and/or the public?

No direct fiscal impact. This Board resolution is in line with the 7 September 2024 action on the Name Collisions: SAC124 Advice and NCAP Discussion Group Recommendations.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

This Board resolution is in line with the 7 September 2024 action on the Name Collisions: SAC124 Advice and NCAP Discussion Group Recommendations. It "constitutes a formal process for managing the security, stability and resilience risks associated with name collisions occurring as a result of the establishment of new generic top-level domains"1.

Is this decision in the public interest and within ICANN's mission?

This action is in the public interest as it is a fulfillment of ICANN Bylaws, as articulated in Article 4, Section 4.6. It is also within ICANN's mission and mandate. ICANN reviews are an important and essential part of how ICANN upholds its commitments.

Is this either a defined policy process within ICANN's Supporting Organizations or ICANN's Organizational Administrative Function decision requiring public comment or not requiring public comment?

None required.

The Chair called the meeting to a close.

Published on 5 May 2025

Related Documents