- Ccnso-council - lists.icann.org

Update: initial slate of the CSC
by Katrina Sataki Aug. 2, 2016

Aug. 2, 2016

Dear Councillors, I am pleased to inform you that during today's joint ccNSO-GNSO coordination call to finalize approval of the initial CSC slate, consensus was reached on the full slate for the CSC. The work of the ccNSO with respect to this matter is now complete, other than joining with the GNSO in informing ICANN, and the larger ICANN community, of the slate (this will occur on 10 August). The GNSO is using a slightly different procedure than we used, so the final approval of the slate by them will have to be done via a simple majority vote of the GNSO Council by 9 August. Whilst there were some concerns expressed by participants from both organizations regarding the diversity of the approved CSC slate (similar to those already raised by the Councillors), it was agreed that time constraints prevented further attempts in this area for this slate. Participants on today's call from both SOs agreed that for future rounds of CSC slate formations, sufficient time must be allowed to pursue greater diversity during the selection process. There's an idea to share these concerns with the larger community in a joint ccNSO-GNSO statement. As the ccNSO Selection Committee is not mandated to issue such a statement on behalf of the Council, I will keep you informed when your support and approval will be needed. Kind regards, ]{atrina

2 1

September Council Call
by Kimberly Carlson Aug. 2, 2016

Aug. 2, 2016

Dear Councilors, Please find the details below for the September 1st Council call. Date: 1 September 2016 Time: 11:00 UTC Dial in numbers: http://www.adigo.com/icann/ Conference ID: 5258 Adobe Room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/ccnsocouncil/ There will be two-way audio through Adobe. Please let me know if you will require a dial out. Kind regards, Kim Carlson

1 0

Doodle - CWG-ISTP 10 or 11 August
by Kimberly Carlson Aug. 2, 2016

Aug. 2, 2016

Dear al, Per Bart’s email below, here is the Doodle for the next CWG-ISTP call. http://doodle.com/poll/m38bgfdesvw6km8g I will close the Doodle middle of next week and calendar invites will be sent. Please let Bart or I know if you have any additional questions or concerns. Thank you and kind regards, Kim Carlson From: Bart Boswinkel Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 5:45 AM To: Katrina Sataki <katrina(a)nic.lv>; Byron Holland <byron.holland(a)cira.ca>; Jay Daley <jay(a)nzrs.net.nz> Cc: cwg-istp(a)icann.org; ccnso-council(a)icann.org; Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: Adobe Connect - Note Pod Content from CWG-ISTP Dear Katrina, Byron and Jay As you will see from the informal notes from this week’s ISTP call, the members and active participants involved in the implementation work around the CWG-Stewardship proposal seek active participation from a broader group of people, in particular from Councillors and the ccNSO appointed members on the CSC (who will be actively involved in post-IANA transition work). In the view of the active members and participants in that work, things are moving rather fast and will set the parameters around PTI and hence CSC and other groups. FYI: the ISTP is a smaal coordination group from ccTLD people closely involved in the implementation of the CWG-stewardship Proposal ( Lise, Allan, Martin, Maarten and Paul, and meets regularly) Kim will send out a Doodle poll shortly for a call on 10-11 August and will include you as well, with a copy to Council. Kind regards, Bart From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org<mailto:bart.boswinkel@icann.org>> Date: Thursday 28 July 2016 at 09:01 To: "cwg-istp(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-istp@icann.org>" <cwg-istp(a)icann.org<mailto:cwg-istp@icann.org>> Subject: FW: Adobe Connect - Note Pod Content from CWG-ISTP Dear all, Please find included the informal notes from the previous call Kind regards, Bart CWG ISTP Call - 26 July @19:00 UTC 1. Welcome 2. Update CSC formation & Update RZERC a. Invite ccTLD operators on CSC future calls? 3. SLE discussion & progress 4. Progress PTI Bylaws and contract language 5. IRP status 6. Next call 7. AOB Question Bart need to send out guideline to Maarten: Done Paul Kane: Council members and CSC members - Vital stage to have Council members involved Martin: Agree flag that is members do not need to make an effort on what is going on, encourage peole to subsribe to the list. need to invite Councillors ( Action Bart) See Allan's comment in chat as well 3. Paul: meeting last Thursday Rationale for data : dashboard well recevied Extrapolate raw data During call, calls performance Some fields were incomplete, Fields were incomplete Historical data will be used. IANA staff will do All thresholds need to be filled in Not an SLE, but IANA telling what was captured. SLE call needs to happen. SHAve SLE's not been agreed? Need for DT-A to meet and Not all has filled in. SLE's being too demanding? Parameters need to follow the norms, not being out of reach. NTIA did capture time to fulfill there role in process. Timing not captured in proposed text. Document is incomplete, in area's where IAAN has not taken into NTIA role? How close are we in closing htis. Some of the processes are still blank. Document far from complete In some earea's agreement ( quite a few) agreement with Istanbul document. But still far complete Martin: struggling if we are almost there or not? Is there an explanation from IANA staff? How close we are? Depends on when IANA wil complete their task. Not significant Process needs to be completed before transition CSC will refine SLA, at the date of transition Difference between ccTLD and gTLD operate the same system. Need to investigate if there is a rationale Lise: SLE need to be finalised before the transition. From this call, on ensuring to make this happen CWG need to highlight expectation PTI Bylaws and contract Document from Sidley Bylaws out for public comment Instead of chaning bylaws art of publi comments Naming agreemtn two documents • Naming function agreement, drafted and send to CWG , disucssed upcoming Thursday • Service contract, only headings, Sidley comment on agreement in CWG Sidley advise on Annex C, to include only on naming Function Agreement ( difficult to change) Becasue of timg total package difficult Bylaws, agreement and service should be viewed a total package Paul: need to read last iteration. Sidley Service agreement is locked. Concern: cultural reason to include in Bylaws. From a pragmatic, legal point it may not be necessary, but in some cultural environments is may be very advisable/necessary Matter of Optics. As to mission statement it should focus on global community and not just on ICANN. Martin: Not chance to look at document Concern in bylaws, when new operator if and choosen in future. Looking at last iteration. Both in Bylaws and contract Implmentation concern around NTIA contract. Clarification around way C 8.2 is a concern Wider issue then in NTIA contract Two consequences: - Not a carry-over from CWG porposal Need for hymn sheet, IRP Non-discussion, Next meeting: 10-11 August Staff to send out Doodle poll.

1 1

ccNSO Activity Summary July 2016
by Kimberly Carlson Aug. 1, 2016

Aug. 1, 2016

ccNSO Activity Summary July 2016 ICANN56 Helsinki: Technical report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icann56-technical-report-18jul1…> Post meeting survey<https://meetingapp.icann.org/icann56/surveys/170137/74658> ccNSO Related meetings presentations and recordings/transcripts<http://ccnso.icann.org/meetings/helsinki56> ICANN57 Hyderabad: Meeting page with tentative block schedule<https://meetings.icann.org/en/hyderabad57> Registration<https://registration.icann.org/register.php?id=Hyderabad57> ICANN57 Hyderabad: What You Need to Know<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann57-hyderabad-what-you-need-to-know> blog by Nicholas Tomasso Proposed TENTATIVE ccNSO schedule<http://ccnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-26jul16-en.htm> Working/Study Group Meeting Output: Recordings of various Working Group Meetings can be found here: http://ccnso.icann.org/calendar 11 July - Guidelines Review Committee - recording<http://audio.icann.org/ccnso/ccnso-grc-11jul16-en.mp3> 20 July - Proposed Guidelines for the Second String Similarity Review Process<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-epsrp-guidelines-2016-07-20-…> - open for public comment 25 July - Guidelines Review Committee - recording<http://audio.icann.org/ccnso/ccnso-grc-25jul16-en.mp3> 26 July - CWG-ITSP 26 July - ccTLD members Customer Standing Committee selected<https://community.icann.org/x/zQ6bAw> ccNSO Council: ccNSO Council preparation material and output can be found here: http://ccnso.icann.org/about/council/minutes.htm ccNSO Council Decisions and Resolutions: http://ccnso.icann.org/about/council/decisions-resolutions.htm ccNSO Council Wiki space <https://community.icann.org/x/BiyAAw> Links and Announcements regarding the IANA Stewardship Transfer and ICANN's Accountability Process: IANA Stewardship Transition Implementation Page<https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation> IANA Stewardship Transition Implementation Planning Update (Volume 4)<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/iana-stewardship-transition-implementation-…> blog by Trang Nguyen Service Level Agreement (SLA) for the IANA Numbering Services<https://www.icann.org/en/stewardship-implementation/service-level-agreement…> Draft PTI Articles of Incorporation<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-01-en> PTI Governance Documents<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2016-07-08-en> Draft PTI Bylaws<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-12-en> Other Announcements: ICANN Board Adopts Updated Five-Year Operating Plan, and FY17 Operating Plan and Budget<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-05-en> 90-day Root Zone Management System "Parallel Testing" Period Ends Successfully<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-14-en> ICANN Publishes gTLD Marketplace Health Index (Beta) for Community Feedback<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2-2016-07-19-en> / Tracking gTLD Marketplace Health<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/tracking-gtld-marketplace-health> Successful Candidates Announced for ICANN57 Fellowship<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-28-en> Third LAC DNS Forum to Take Place in the Dominican Republic<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-29-en> Hundreds Gather at IGF-USA to Tackle Pressing Internet Issues<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/hundreds-gather-at-igf-usa-to-tackle-pressi…>

1 0

public comment: ccNSO Extended Process Similarity Review Panel (guidelines for and refinement of the methodology on the second string similarity review process)
by Joke Braeken Aug. 1, 2016

Aug. 1, 2016

Dear all, The ccNSO Extended Process Similarity Review Panel (EPSRP) Working Group has concluded its deliberations, and seeks public comments on its proposed guidelines for and refinement of the methodology on the second string similarity review process, including the interpretation of its split recommendations<http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/epsrp-guidelines-23jun16-en.pdf> (http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/epsrp-guidelines-23jun16-en.pdf) What are the next steps? After the closure of the public comment proceeding, the EPSRP Working Group will review the public comments received and revise its proposed guidelines, if deemed appropriate. The proposed guidelines will then be submitted to the ccNSO Council for approval and submission to the ICANN Board. The close date for public comments is 31 Aug 2016 23:59 UTC. Read more here<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-epsrp-guidelines-2016-07-20-…> and here<http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/epsrp.htm>. About the EPSRP-WG The goals of the ccNSO Extended Process Similarity Review Panel (EPSRP) Working Group are: · To provide guidance on and refinement of the methodology for second string similarity review process · To provide interpretation of split recommendations · To Inform policy on selection of strings The work of the WG EPSRP is limited to the review of the Extended Process Review Process as defined in the Implementation Plan and the Guidelines for the Extended Process Similarity Review Panel<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/epsrp-guidelines-04dec13-en.pdf> (https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/epsrp-guidelines-04dec13-en.pdf ) and as part of the overall proposed policy for the selection of IDN ccTLD strings, including the definition of confusing similarity. The working group was created in response to the request of the ICANN Board of Directors of 25 June 2-15 to provide "further guidance on and refinement of the methodology of second string similarity review process, including the interpretation of its split recommendations, to be applied to the relevant current and subsequent cases in the IDN ccTLD Fast Track process as well as to inform the proposed policy for the selection of the IDN ccTLD strings" Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 0

CSC: Any concerns on proposed liaisons?
by Katrina Sataki Aug. 1, 2016

Aug. 1, 2016

Dear Councillors, As you will recall on 2 August and possibly on 4 August the Selection Committee will meet with the GNSO to prepare the approval of the full slate of members on the Customer Standing Committee. As you will also recall the Selection Committee has been mandated by the ccNSO Council to take the decision whether or not to approve the full slate. That being said, the Selection Committee would like to know if any of you have grave concerns about any of the nominees, in particular with any of the proposed liaisons (see below). If so, we would like to hear from you by 31 July COB UTC. You can either email me directly or use the ccNSO Council list. As you know the membership needs to be approved on the basis of their skills and, to the extent possible, (geographic) diversity. Please also note that we cannot dismiss an individual - we can only dismiss the full slate, which will mean that the CSC cannot be formed on time. The proposed full slate of CSC is: Members: - ccNSO: Byron Holland, male, NA region and Jay Daley, male, AP region - RySG: Elaine Pruis, female, NA region and Kal Feher, male, AP region Liaisons: - ALAC: Mohamed El Bashir, male, AF region - GNSO - Non-Registry: James Gannon (supporting document is available at https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaygannon) male, EU region - RSSAC: Lars-Johan Liman, male, EU region - SSAC: Jeff Bedser, male, NA region - PTI: Elise Gerich (ex-officio), female, NA region - GAC: Elise Lindeberg, female, EU region The EoI and Bio, if available, are included. On behalf of the Selection Committee, ]{atrina

7 6

Re: Adobe Connect - Note Pod Content from CWG-ISTP
by Bart Boswinkel July 28, 2016

July 28, 2016

Dear Katrina, Byron and Jay As you will see from the informal notes from this week’s ISTP call, the members and active participants involved in the implementation work around the CWG-Stewardship proposal seek active participation from a broader group of people, in particular from Councillors and the ccNSO appointed members on the CSC (who will be actively involved in post-IANA transition work). In the view of the active members and participants in that work, things are moving rather fast and will set the parameters around PTI and hence CSC and other groups. FYI: the ISTP is a smaal coordination group from ccTLD people closely involved in the implementation of the CWG-stewardship Proposal ( Lise, Allan, Martin, Maarten and Paul, and meets regularly) Kim will send out a Doodle poll shortly for a call on 10-11 August and will include you as well, with a copy to Council. Kind regards, Bart From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday 28 July 2016 at 09:01 To: "cwg-istp(a)icann.org" <cwg-istp(a)icann.org> Subject: FW: Adobe Connect - Note Pod Content from CWG-ISTP Dear all, Please find included the informal notes from the previous call Kind regards, Bart CWG ISTP Call - 26 July @19:00 UTC 1. Welcome 2. Update CSC formation & Update RZERC a. Invite ccTLD operators on CSC future calls? 3. SLE discussion & progress 4. Progress PTI Bylaws and contract language 5. IRP status 6. Next call 7. AOB Question Bart need to send out guideline to Maarten: Done Paul Kane: Council members and CSC members - Vital stage to have Council members involved Martin: Agree flag that is members do not need to make an effort on what is going on, encourage peole to subsribe to the list. need to invite Councillors ( Action Bart) See Allan's comment in chat as well 3. Paul: meeting last Thursday Rationale for data : dashboard well recevied Extrapolate raw data During call, calls performance Some fields were incomplete, Fields were incomplete Historical data will be used. IANA staff will do All thresholds need to be filled in Not an SLE, but IANA telling what was captured. SLE call needs to happen. SHAve SLE's not been agreed? Need for DT-A to meet and Not all has filled in. SLE's being too demanding? Parameters need to follow the norms, not being out of reach. NTIA did capture time to fulfill there role in process. Timing not captured in proposed text. Document is incomplete, in area's where IAAN has not taken into NTIA role? How close are we in closing htis. Some of the processes are still blank. Document far from complete In some earea's agreement ( quite a few) agreement with Istanbul document. But still far complete Martin: struggling if we are almost there or not? Is there an explanation from IANA staff? How close we are? Depends on when IANA wil complete their task. Not significant Process needs to be completed before transition CSC will refine SLA, at the date of transition Difference between ccTLD and gTLD operate the same system. Need to investigate if there is a rationale Lise: SLE need to be finalised before the transition. From this call, on ensuring to make this happen CWG need to highlight expectation PTI Bylaws and contract Document from Sidley Bylaws out for public comment Instead of chaning bylaws art of publi comments Naming agreemtn two documents • Naming function agreement, drafted and send to CWG , disucssed upcoming Thursday • Service contract, only headings, Sidley comment on agreement in CWG Sidley advise on Annex C, to include only on naming Function Agreement ( difficult to change) Becasue of timg total package difficult Bylaws, agreement and service should be viewed a total package Paul: need to read last iteration. Sidley Service agreement is locked. Concern: cultural reason to include in Bylaws. From a pragmatic, legal point it may not be necessary, but in some cultural environments is may be very advisable/necessary Matter of Optics. As to mission statement it should focus on global community and not just on ICANN. Martin: Not chance to look at document Concern in bylaws, when new operator if and choosen in future. Looking at last iteration. Both in Bylaws and contract Implmentation concern around NTIA contract. Clarification around way C 8.2 is a concern Wider issue then in NTIA contract Two consequences: - Not a carry-over from CWG porposal Need for hymn sheet, IRP Non-discussion, Next meeting: 10-11 August Staff to send out Doodle poll.

1 0

Second Reminder: Call for Volunteers for membership CCWG - Accountability July 2016
by Bart Boswinkel July 27, 2016

July 27, 2016

Dear all, This is the final, friendly reminder of the call for volunteers as member of the CCWG-Accountability. Closing date of this call for volunteers is Friday 29 July 2016, 17.00 UTC. Kind regards, Bart Boswinkel From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> Date: Friday 15 July 2016 at 10:48 To: "ccnso-members(a)icann.org" <ccnso-members(a)icann.org>, "cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org" <cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org>, "cctldworld(a)icann.org" <cctldworld(a)icann.org> Cc: "ccnso-council(a)icann.org" <ccnso-council(a)icann.org> Subject: Call for Volunteers for membership CCWG - Accountability July 2016 Call for Volunteers as Member of the Cross-Community Working Group Enhancing ICANN Accountability The ccNSO seeks two (2), new members for the CCWG-Accountability. As chartering organization, the ccNSO has been asked to appoint up to five (5) members of the CCWG. As two of the five members have stepped down, the ccNSO is seeking two new volunteers who want to serve as members on the CCWG- Accountability. As usual membership of the CCWG is open to all ccTLDs, both ccNSO members and non-ccNSO members. The CCWG-Accountability will now be focusing on addressing accountability topics for which a timeline for developing solutions and full implementation extend beyond the anticipated IANA Stewardship Transition (Work stream 2). Topics to be discussed include, but are not limited to, accountability of the supporting organizations and advisory committees, Human Rights, Jurisdiction, and Ombudsman (see: https://community.icann.org/display/WEIA/WS2+Topics ) If you are interested, you are requested to provide the ccNSO (ccNSOsecretariat(a)icann.org<mailto:ccNSOsecretariat@icann.org> ) with the following: · a recent curriculum vitae summarizing background and experience, including that in ccTLD operations, and · a statement of what the candidate sees as being the main objectives that ccTLD operators should be seeking in an IANA transition proposal. Closing date of this call for volunteers is Friday 29 July 2016, 17.00 UTC. The ccNSO Council will appoint the members to the CCWG as soon as possible after closure of this call for volunteers. ccTLD Participation in the Cross-Community Working Group In accordance with the adopted charter of the CCWG Accountability, the ccNSO (as well as each of the other chartering organizations) shall appoint a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 5 members to the working group. As two of the five members have stepped down, the ccNSO is seeking two new volunteers who want to serve as members on the CCWG- Accountability. As usual membership of the CCWG is open to all ccTLDs, both ccNSO members and non-ccNSO members. In addition, the CCWG will be open to any interested person as a Participants, who may be from the ccNSO, from a stakeholder group not represented in the CCWG, or may be self-appointed. Participants will be able to actively participate in and attend all CCWG meetings. However, any consensus calls or decisions that need to be made will be limited to CCWG members appointed by the ccNSO and the other chartering organizations, and members are expected to inform their stakeholder group regularly on progress made and seek engagement in the process. Additional Call for Volunteers The ccNSO Council is now calling on volunteers from ccTLD managers (independent of ccNSO membership), who might wish to serve as one of the two (2) new ccTLD members on the CCWG Accountability. Candidates are expected to have: · A thorough understanding and interest in accountability issues, in particular as they relate to ICANN and from a ccTLD manager’s perspective, · Commit to actively participate in the activities of the CCWG on an ongoing and long-term basis; and · Where appropriate, solicit and communicate the views and concerns of individuals from the ccTLD community. · Effective communication skills in order to represent ccTLD interests on the CCWG and to keep the ccNSO and broader ccTLD community abreast of the state of play in the cross-community group. If you are interested in this role, you are requested to provide the ccNSO (ccNSOsecretariat(a)icann.org<mailto:ccNSOsecretariat@icann.org> ) with the following: · a recent curriculum vitae summarizing background and experience, including that in ccTLD operations, and · a statement of what the candidate sees as being the main objectives that ccTLD operators should be seeking in an IANA transition proposal. Closing date of the call for volunteers is Friday 29 July 2016, 17.00 UTC. The ccNSO Council will select and appoint the two new members on the WG, based on the selection criteria mentioned above and taking into account the diversity of the ccTLD community, including geographical diversity. Background On 14 March 2014 the US Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced its intent to transition stewardship of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions to the global multistakeholder community. The NTIA asked the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), as the IANA functions contractor and global coordinator for the Domain Name System (DNS), to convene a multistakeholder process to develop a proposal for the transition. IANA also said that the transition proposal must have broad community support and address the following four principles: · Support and enhance the multistakeholder model; · Maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS; · Meet the needs and expectation of the global customers and partners of the IANA services; and, · Maintain the openness of the Internet. The NTIA also said that it will not accept a proposal that replaces the NTIA role with a government-led or an inter-governmental organization solution. Full details of IANA’s announcement are available at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition…. During discussions around the transition process, the community raised the broader topic of the impact of the change on ICANN's accountability given its historical contractual relationship with the United States and NTIA. Accountability in this context is defined, according to the NETmundial multistakeholder statement<http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder…>, as the existence of mechanisms for independent checks and balances as well as for review and redress. Statements made by various stakeholders, including the ccNSO Council, suggest that current accountability mechanisms need to be reviewed and, if need be, improved, amended, replaced, or supplemented with new mechanisms (see for instance ATRT recommendations) in light of the changing historic contractual relationship with the U.S. Government. Reviewing ICANN’s accountability mechanisms was considered to be crucial for the transition process. The CCWG-Accountability, which charter was adopted by the ccNSO Council, has delivered proposals that have to be in place or committed to before the IANA Stewardship Transition, in light of the changing historical contractual relationship with the U.S. Government (Work Stream 1). The CCWG will now be focusing on addressing accountability topics for which a timeline for developing solutions and full implementation extend well beyond the anticipated IANA Stewardship Transition (Work stream 2). Topics to be discussed include, but are not limited to, accountability of the supporting organizations and advisory committees, Human Rights, Jurisdiction, and Ombudsman (see: https://community.icann.org/display/WEIA/WS2+Topics ) On behalf of the ccNSO Secretariat, kind regards, Bart Boswinkel

1 0

Triage Recommendation [ 33 - 2016 ] – Proposed Guidelines for the second String Similarity Review Process
by Joke Braeken July 27, 2016

July 27, 2016

Dear Councillors, Please find below the proposed Triage recommendation 33-2016. Kindly provide me with your input by the end of 29 July 2016, 23:59 UTC, in case you do not agree with the proposed recommendation. Thank you. +++++++++++ Topic: [ 33 - 2016 ] – Proposed Guidelines for the second String Similarity Review Process Originator: ccNSO Summary of request: The ccNSO Extended Process Similarity Review Panel (EPSRP) Working Group seeks public comments on its proposed guidelines for and refinement of the methodology on the second string similarity review process, including the interpretation of its split recommendations [ http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/epsrp-guidelines-23jun16-en.pdf ]. After the closure of the public comment proceeding, the EPSRP Working Group will review the public comments received and revise its proposed guidelines, if deemed appropriate. The proposed guidelines will then be submitted to the ccNSO Council for approval and submission to the ICANN Board. https://www.icann.org/public-comments/proposed-epsrp-guidelines-2016-07-20-… Date received: 25 July 2016 Last day for Comments/input/response, if any: 31 August 2016 Recommended action, if any: send to ccNSO-council, ccNSO-members, cctldcommunity. Share on social media. Expertise needed, if any: managerial, operational, technical Recommendation received by Triage Committee: 27 July 2016 Date of submission to Council: 27 July 2016 Deadline Council decision: 29 July 2016, 23:59 UTC Impact on ccNSO/ccTLDs: middle +++++++++++ Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 0

gTLD Registries and Registrars required to implement RDAP gTLD Profile by February 2017
by Joke Braeken July 27, 2016

July 27, 2016

Dear all, ICANN announced on 26 July that gTLD contracted parties must update their Registration Data Directory Services (RDDS) by 1 February 2017. Registries and registrars are required to implement the new Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) gTLD Profile<https://www.icann.org/rdap-gtld-profile>. Registries must also implement the data specifications defined in the Registry Registration Data Directory Services Consistent Labeling and Display Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-labeling-policy-2016-07-26-en>. Read more here: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-07-26-en The RDAP gTLD Profile and the RDDS Consistent Labeling and Display Policy are the products of community efforts to improve the current system used to discover who controls a domain name. This system comprises data retrieval protocols – WHOIS and a web-based version of WHOIS – and databases controlled by registries and registrars that contain domain registration information. ICANN has notified contracted parties that they are responsible for modifying their systems within six months. ICANN consulted these parties when defining the new requirements and implementation plans. Background The Registration Data Access Protocol was developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force<https://ietf.org/> to eventually replace the WHOIS protocol. This new protocol is superior to WHOIS in terms of data access security, support for international characters, extensibility, and in the standardization of query, response and error messages. The RDAP gTLD Profile maps ICANN policy and contractual requirements onto technical requirements in order to standardize directory services across gTLD contracted parties. The RDDS Consistent Labeling and Display Policy is a Consensus Policy developed and adopted in accordance with ICANN Bylaws. The policy is the result of recommendations adopted by the GNSO Council after the completion of the Thick WHOIS Policy Development Process. The ICANN board adopted these recommendations on 7 February 2014. The goal of the RDDS Consistent Labeling and Display Policy is to align the way registries and registrars label and display registration data outputs. The policy uses the output specifications found in the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement as the standard, thus only registries need to update their systems. Changes might include renaming or re-ordering fields and displaying additional data, such as registrar abuse contact information. For more information on these topics, visit: • Registration Data Access Protocol gTLD Profile<https://www.icann.org/rdap-gtld-profile> • Registry RDDS Consistent Labeling and Display Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-labeling-policy-2016-07-26-en> • Thick WHOIS Policy Implementation<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/thick-whois-2016-06-27-en> • Policy Implementation at ICANN<https://www.icann.org/policy/implementation> Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ http://ccnso.icann.org

1 0