July 2019 - council - lists.icann.org

Update on EPDP team
by Rafik Dammak July 18, 2019

July 18, 2019

hi all, In preparation for the council meeting today, I am sharing here a written update since Marrakech meeting. - The EPDP team will continue the work on a consolidated list of use cases (https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/d.+Use+Cases) proposed from the different groups and will continue the review till end of August following a tentative schedule and “accelerated” approach (with a 1st and 2nd reading and using mailing list to capture concerns and comments). The rationale is not to agree on every single word of the use cases but to be able to derive policy principles and/or preliminary recommendations that would form the basis for the F2F meeting in LA. The EPDP team is also using the use cases to develop the building blocks of the SSAD. - EPDP team finished its calls regarding the priority 2 worksheets (priority 2 items are leftovers topics from phase 1 and temporary spec annex) https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/b.+Worksheets . Worksheets are used as tool to summarize charter questions, deliberations, relevant documents and legal questions in a single place. - EPDP team received the letter regarding Accuracy/ARS and discussed it briefly during the priority 2 worksheet call last week. No input shared yet for Council consideration. - Planning for F2F in LA started and travel arrangement for EPDP members soon. Leadership team will start working with the professional facilitators. - The team also received early input from SO/AC/SG/C regarding the charter questions and work scope ( https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=109479372) EPDP team will review the comments and representatives were tasked to add their input and questions. - A legal team was setup and had its first call this week to review the questions and rework them if needed and endorsed by the whole EPDP team before sending them to legal firm. For reference: timeline/workplan (new working products including factsheet to be shared soon) https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=105388008 Best Regards, Rafik

1 0

GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#318]
by ICANN July 18, 2019

July 18, 2019

1 0

GNSO Council Abstention Notification Form [#317]
by ICANN July 18, 2019

July 18, 2019

1 0

ICANN Community Leaders] 18 July Update
by Nathalie Peregrine July 18, 2019

July 18, 2019

[http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=ed8230d3-1b13-414c-8393-a76601e7a331&a=1122025…] Thursday, 18 July 2019 ICANN Community Leadership Digest [https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/31f30ab5-1445-45c3-aef7-c0ea4…] This twice-weekly digest helps ICANN community leaders track requests and provides updates from ICANN org. TABLE OF CONTENTS Information Sharing · NEW: Accountability and Transparency Review -- Highlights from ICANN65 and Share Your Views · REMINDER: Post-ICANN65 Policy Report Now Available · REMINDER: NextGen@ICANN Survey · REMINDER: Update and Information on IRP IOT Re-Composition · REMINDER: Planning Assumptions for Subsequent Procedures for New gTLDs ICANN66 Planning · NEW: Plenary Session Topics: Proposals Due Friday, 2 August · NEW: Publication Support Deadlines Public Comment · CLOSING TOMORROW: Study on Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules · CLOSING NEXT WEEK: Fundamental Bylaws Amendment Proposal -- IANA Naming Function Review · CLOSING NEXT WEEK: Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws re SSAC and RSSAC Leadership · CLOSING NEXT WEEK: Proposed IANA SLAs for Publishing LGRs/IDN Tables · Draft Final Report of the Second Country Code Names Supporting Organization Review · Draft Financial Assumptions & Projections and Operating Initiatives for the Development of the Fiscal Years 2021-2025 Operating & Financial Plan · Evolving the Governance of the Root Server System · Proposed Definition of Name Collisions and Scope of Inquiry for the Name Collisions Analysis Project Information Sharing NEW: Accountability and Transparency Review -- Highlights from ICANN65 and Share Your Views Executive: Theresa Swinehart, Senior Vice President, Multistakeholder Strategy and Strategic Initiatives FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3) had a productive five days at ICANN65. Read the team's latest blog post [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> to learn more. REMINDER: Post-ICANN65 Policy Report Now Available Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The Post-ICANN65 Policy Report [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> written by the ICANN Policy Development Support team captures decisions and outcomes from the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees. While the report provides an overview of activities held during the Policy Forum, it also looks ahead at the work to come in the upcoming months. Included in the report are various resources to support the ongoing, sustained engagement of the community on several important issues. REMINDER: NextGen@ICANN Survey Executive: Sally Costerton, Senior Adviser to President and Senior Vice President, Global Stakeholder Engagement FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The ICANN organization is initiating a community consultation [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> to identify improvement opportunities for the NextGen@ICANN Program [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. The review will start with gathering community input via a survey about several aspects of the NextGen@ICANN Program, including its purpose, goals, processes, and synergies with the ICANN academic community. The survey [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> (PDF with background at the beginning and questionnaire questions at the end) is intended for all ICANN community groups; individuals are encouraged to work with their relevant Supporting Organizations, Advisory Committees, stakeholder groups, and constituencies. Responses are due Monday, 9 September. Based on the input received from the survey, ICANN org will draft a proposal for program improvements that will be published for Public Comment. Once all feedback is received, ICANN org will prepare the final proposal for program improvements. Sally Costerton's blog about the NextGen@ICANN Community Consultation [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> REMINDER: Update and Information on IRP IOT Re-Composition Executive: John Jeffrey, General Counsel FOR: All SO/AC Chairs INFORMATION SHARING As the ICANN Board committee with oversight responsibility of ICANN's accountability mechanisms, the Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee (BAMC) considers the work of the [Independent Review Process (IRP)] Implementation Oversight Team (IOT) to be paramount to ICANN's accountability...we seek your help in finding additional volunteers within the community that meet the qualifications identified in the attached letter, outlining skills and experience requirements, to join the IOT and help to conclude its work in a timely fashion. Read more [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. REMINDER: Planning Assumptions for Subsequent Procedures for New gTLDs Executive: Cyrus Namazi, Senior Vice President, Global Domains Division FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING In December 2015, the GNSO initiated a Policy Development Process (PDP) to determine if changes to existing policy recommendations are needed before the next round of gTLDs. The PDP Working Group expects to publish its final report with its recommendations by December 2019. These recommendations may lead to procedural changes for subsequent rounds of gTLD applications, which ICANN org must implement and manage. In the course of our preparatory work toward the planning and implementation of the new policy, ICANN org has compiled a number of fundamental operationally focused assumptions to help with the preliminary planning and operational readiness of the organization. These assumptions have been shared with the ICANN Board, and now ICANN org would like to share them with relevant parts of the community. ICANN66 Planning NEW: Plenary Session Topics: Proposals Due Friday, 2 August Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING The official submission period to propose plenary session topics for ICANN66 is from Monday, 22 July to Friday, 2 August. The proposal form is now open for anyone who wants to get a head start! Plenary Session Topic Proposal Form [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> An online report of proposals will be shared with the ICANN Public Meeting Community Planning Group as soon as it becomes available. NEW: Publication Support Deadlines Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support FOR: All Community Leaders INFORMATION SHARING Design Deadline If you require design assistance for an ICANN66 publication, all text, images, layout, and publication type/size requirements (i.e. newsletter, 1-pager, tri-fold, etc.) are due Friday, 23 August. Due to budget constraints, please keep in mind that all materials, new or updated, need to be evergreen. Translation Deadline If your ICANN66 publication requires translation, please provide the final material(s) by Friday, 6 September. This ensures that there is enough time to translate the publication by the print deadline. If your materials require design assistance (outlined above), please note that the final materials will have to be complete, including the edit/approval process, by this deadline in order to be translated. Print-Only Deadline If you only need your ICANN66 publication printed (meaning your publication is ready to send directly to the printer and needs no translation or design/layout modifications), please provide the file along with the quantity you want printed and dimensions of the publication by Friday, 20 September. Please work directly with your Policy support staff to submit these requests. Public Comment Study on Technical Use of Root Zone Label Generation Rules [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> CLOSES TOMORROW: Friday, 19 July Fundamental Bylaws Amendment Proposal -- IANA Naming Function Review [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> CLOSING NEXT WEEK: Friday, 26 July 2019 Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws re SSAC and RSSAC Leadership [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> CLOSING NEXT WEEK: Friday, 26 July 2019 Proposed IANA SLAs for Publishing LGRs/IDN Tables [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> CLOSING NEXT WEEK: Friday, 26 July 2019 Draft Final Report of the Second Country Code Names Supporting Organization Review [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: 4 August 2019 Draft Financial Assumptions & Projections and Operating Initiatives for the Development of the Fiscal Years 2021-2025 Operating & Financial Plan [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 5 August 2019 Evolving the Governance of the Root Server System [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Friday, 9 August 2019 Proposed Definition of Name Collisions and Scope of Inquiry for the Name Collisions Analysis Project [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 12 August 2019 Volume 1, Issue 33 | Archive [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> | Next Issue: Monday, 22 July 2019 ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Unsubscribe so-ac-sg-cleaders(a)icann.org [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> Update Profile [visitor.constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__visitor.constantcontac…> | About Constant Contact [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Sent by david.olive(a)icann.org<mailto:david.olive@icann.org> in collaboration with [Trusted Email from Constant Contact - Try it FREE today.][constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…> Try email marketing for free today! [constantcontact.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.constantcontact.com…>

1 0

GNSO Council Review of ICANN 65 GAC Communique
by Drazek, Keith July 18, 2019

July 18, 2019

Hi all, Attached is the latest and hopefully final version of the Council's review of the ICANN 65 GAC Communique. It references and reinforces previous GNSO Council statements on the relevant topics, as the GAC didn't add anything new in Marrakech. Thanks to Julf and the other volunteers for their contributions. Please review. We will have an opportunity to discuss during our Council call this week. The Board and GAC will meet at the end of July, so we need to get this wrapped up soon. Regards, Keith

3 5

Re: [council] GNSO Council Review of ICANN 65 GAC Communique
by Darcy Southwell July 17, 2019

July 17, 2019

I support Paul’s position and language here. From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Reply-To: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Date: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 at 12:20 PM To: "McGrady, Paul D." <PMcGrady(a)taftlaw.com> Cc: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council Review of ICANN 65 GAC Communique This makes sense to me. Thanks, Keith On Jul 17, 2019, at 8:06 PM, McGrady, Paul D. <PMcGrady(a)taftlaw.com> wrote: Thanks Julf. That is exactly what I am trying to do by suggesting the language I did which addresses the process. GAC has asked for an explanation from the Board and we are saying "hey Board, please do that", nothing more. Referring back to our Abu D. position could be mistakenly taken as us tell the Board they made the wrong decision and we want them to rewind the clock. Can I have substantive comments on my proposed language? For ease it is to delete the language you proposed and replace it with “As this Advice from the GAC is merely a request for the Board to explain its actions, the GNSO Council sees little harm in the Board doing so.” Thanks! Best, Paul -----Original Message----- From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Johan Helsingius Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 12:23 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council Review of ICANN 65 GAC Communique Thanks, Paul, As we know, the Board doesn't need our approval to do whatever they want. While we might all feel our duty is to try to prevent the Board from doing anything harmful, it might still not be the message we want to communicate. Therefore I believe a neutral formulation, where we stick to our procedural concerns, would be better. That is of course just my personal view. Julf On 17-07-19 17:01, McGrady, Paul D. wrote: Thanks Keith. Thanks Julf. I don’t think that this should be the final version. Julf’s suggestion to refer back to the Abu Dhabi doesn’t make sense to me since events have overtaken that. I think, instead, that we should address the actual GAC advice, namely, a request that the Board write to the GAC and explain why the Board believes it has complied with GAC advice in relationship to this decision. Let’s focus on that and delete the language proposed by Julf and replace it with: “As this Advice from the GAC is merely a request for the Board to explain its actions, the GNSO Council sees little harm in the Board doing so.” Julf, any objection to Keith doing this? Best, Paul This message may contain information that is attorney-client privileged, attorney work product or otherwise confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, use and disclosure of this message are prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments. *From:* council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Drazek, Keith via council *Sent:* Wednesday, July 17, 2019 3:36 AM *To:* council(a)gnso.icann.org *Cc:* gnso-secs(a)icann.org *Subject:* [council] GNSO Council Review of ICANN 65 GAC Communique Hi all, Attached is the latest and hopefully final version of the Council’s review of the ICANN 65 GAC Communique. It references and reinforces previous GNSO Council statements on the relevant topics, as the GAC didn’t add anything new in Marrakech. Thanks to Julf and the other volunteers for their contributions. Please review. We will have an opportunity to discuss during our Council call this week. The Board and GAC will meet at the end of July, so we need to get this wrapped up soon. Regards, Keith _______________________________________________ council mailing list council(a)gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council(a)gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council(a)gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ council mailing list council(a)gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos) You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

1 0

Please read in preparation for the GNSO Council meeting Thursday 18 July 2019 at 21:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine July 17, 2019

July 17, 2019

Dear all, In order to ensure you are fully prepared for the GNSO Council meeting on Thursday 18 July 2019 at 21:00 UTC, specifically to have all documents to hand as Zoom does not support document scrolling, please see the links below: Final Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Final+Proposed+Agen… Motion: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+18+July+2019 Documents: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Documents+18+July+2… Action Items: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Action+Items Project list: https://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project In relation to agenda item 6, in order to make the conversation with the PDP leadership as productive as possible, Councilors may want to review the “asks” of Council raised during the pre-ICANN65 webinar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> (see pages 7, 13, and 20) and be prepared to provide response as appropriate. Thank you! Kind regards, Nathalie Nathalie Peregrine Manager, Operations Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org%20> Skype: nathalie.peregrine.icann Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwM…> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGN…> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_grou…> See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar<https://features.icann.org/calendar>

1 0

ATRT3 Questions for GNSO Council and GNSO Appointment to ATRT3
by Drazek, Keith July 17, 2019

July 17, 2019

Hi all, Two items related to ATRT3: 1. A reminder about the questions posed to Council by the ATRT3 team in Marrakech. See the email below. We need to develop a Council response or advise the ATRT3 that we are deferring response/input to our individual SGs and Cs. Regardless, if you haven't done so already, please socialize these questions with your respective groups. 2. One of the GNSO-appointed members of ATRT3, Erica Varlese, has advised that she will be moving to a new job and will therefore resign from the ATRT3. The GNSO Council leadership team discussed this situation and reviewed the history around the current slate of GNSO appointees. In brief, the GNSO Council originally nominated three primary candidates (Wolfgang Kleinwächter, (NCSG), Patrick Kane (RySG) and Osvaldo Novoa (ISPCP)). It also nominated the following four candidates in case additional spaces needed to be filled: Michael Karanicolas (NCSG), Adetola Sogbesan (BC), Erica Varlese (RySG), and Jacques Blanc (RrSG). All seven of the GNSO nominees were seated. There are none who applied but were not selected. Noting that the GNSO has substantial representation in ATRT3, and no backup candidates, the leadership team recommends we *not* undertake a new EOI and candidate replacement process. Please let us know if you have a different view or any follow-up questions. We can discuss further during our call this week. Thanks, Keith From: Drazek, Keith Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 2:55 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: ATRT3 Questions for GNSO Council Hi all, Here are the questions we'll discuss with the ATRT3 team this afternoon: * Are your community members satisfied with their interaction with the GAC? What types of improvements would your community like to see implemented? * What is your perception of transparency within policy development process, including the EPDP? * Do you find the Board's current level and recent efforts towards accountability and transparency improvements satisfactory? * Is there anything else you'd like to share from the perspective of accountability and transparency? Thanks, Keith

1 0

Re: [council] FW: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs
by Mary Wong July 16, 2019

July 16, 2019

Dear Keith and everyone, Apropos of the specific point made by Jeff that “CCWG’s are not the place where policy is developed both with respect to the GNSO as well as the ccNSO. If there are policies developed through a CCWG, they would just have to be referred to both the GNSO Council to commence a PDP as well as the ccNSO Council for their own policy development process”, staff thought it may be helpful (especially for newer members of the Council and community) to mention that in 2016 the ccNSO and GNSO Councils formally approved a Uniform Framework of Principles for Cross-Community Working Groups. The Framework specifically notes that a CCWG “is not the proper vehicle for formal policy development where such authority has been granted under the ICANN Bylaws to a specific Supporting Organization”, among other guidance relating to initiation and scoping etc. You can find the final set of principles here: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/2016-12/u…. There is also a process flow diagram and user guide available here: https://gnso.icann.org/issues/ccwg/ccwg-recommendations-framework-principle…. Cheers Steve & Mary From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of "Drazek, Keith via council" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Reply-To: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Date: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 at 17:53 To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Subject: [council] FW: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Hi all, I am forwarding this email to the full Council list for consideration and discussion during our upcoming meeting. This was raised by Jeff Neuman during our Marrakech Council meeting as an outstanding action item from the pre-ICANN 65 webinar. Please see his email below, as flagged by Flip last week. Thanks, Keith From: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 10:59 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>; Pam Little <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com Cc: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>; Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Dear all, This came up at the Sub Pro Leadership call today. I think it would be helpful for Jeff and Cheryl if the GNSO Council takes a view on this. Best Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law [petillion.law]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.petillion.law&d=DwM…> [signature_939337310][petillion.law]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.petillion.law_&d=Dw…> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> Date: Wednesday, 10 July 2019 at 22:51 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "elsa.saade(a)gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade(a)gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Subject: FW: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive , Suite 600 Mclean , VA 22102 UNITED STATES T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 CONFIRMATION OF ORDERS: Please note that we always confirm receipt of orders. To assist us in identifying orders, please use the word ORDER in the subject line of your email. If you have sent us an order and have not received confirmation on the same working day (PST) it is possible that your order has not been received or has been trapped by our spam filter. In this case, please contact your client manager or admin(a)comlaude.com<mailto:admin@comlaude.com> for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. From: Jeff Neuman Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 12:21 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; Cheryl Langdon-Orr (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) <langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>>; pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>; Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: RE: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Keith, It has occurred to me that although you and I chatted about this previously in Bangkok during the GDD Summit, we have not responded back to you formally on this subject. Cheryl and I have had the opportunity to discuss this with the SubPro leadership team and we stand by our original position, namely, that at this point in time we would not support the creation of a Cross Community Working Group on this issue. There are several reasons why we do not believe that the creation of a CCWG is the right venue to have these discussions. First, as you know, the topic of string similarity has already been the topic of a number of conversations within our Working Group (both in Sub-Teams and as a full group). We have also had a section on String Similarity in our initial report and solicited comment back on the topic. We are getting towards the development of our final recommendations on this topic within the next several weeks. Second, our PDP, like all PDPs, is open to any one that wants to participate. We do have some representatives from the ccNSO participating and more are welcome to participate should they wish to do so. Third, the ccTLD Fast Track analysis of similarity as represented in its Fast Track Final report (https://ccnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/filefield_37897/idn-ccpdp-final… [ccnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ccnso.icann.org_sites_…>) is incredibly different than the standard used by ICANN evaluators in the 2012 round. Not only is this true with respect to the process followed, but also in the standards applied and the remedies available where similarity is found. Fourth, in the gTLD space, string similarity should not be viewed in isolation, but rather in conjunction with the right to object by third parties. The objection process is unique to the gTLD landscape and is not relevant to the ccTLD Fast Track. Finally, CCWG’s are not the place where policy is developed both with respect to the GNSO as well as the ccNSO. If there are policies developed through a CCWG, they would just have to be referred to both the GNSO Council to commence a PDP as well as the ccNSO Council for their own policy development process. Thus, a CCWG would introduce a number of potential time delays into the process which is already well underway y our PDP. With this note, we are not saying that some form of collaboration on the issues that may overlap, but rather to the extent that those discussions should take place, it should be in this already existing PDP. Please feel free to pass this on to the rest of the Council. We can discuss further with you at ICANN 65. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive , Suite 600 Mclean , VA 22102 UNITED STATES T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 CONFIRMATION OF ORDERS: Please note that we always confirm receipt of orders. To assist us in identifying orders, please use the word ORDER in the subject line of your email. If you have sent us an order and have not received confirmation on the same working day (PST) it is possible that your order has not been received or has been trapped by our spam filter. In this case, please contact your client manager or admin(a)comlaude.com<mailto:admin@comlaude.com> for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. From: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 8:32 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; Cheryl Langdon-Orr (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) <langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>>; pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>; Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Thanks Keith. Cheryl and I will discuss this week and let you know our recommendation. As you may be aware, our PDP has already done some work on this issue, including several public comment periods and we have reached out to the ccNSO for its comments. We would ask the GNSO Council give us time this week to discuss within the leadership team before making any commitments to the ccNSO. Best regards, Jeff Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive Suite 600, McLean VA 22102, USA M: +1.202.549.5079 D: +1.703.635.7514 E: jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> www.comlaude.com [comlaude.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.comlaude.com_&d=DwM…> [cid:image001.jpg@01D51D29.C46A40A0] ________________________________ From: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Sent: 26 April 2019 20:48 To: Jeff Neuman; Cheryl Langdon-Orr (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>); pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Hi Jeff and Cheryl, I’m following up on Action Items from the GNSO Council meetings in Kobe. During our engagement with the ccNSO, we had discussions concerning the Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs. The transcripts of that session are here: https://static.ptbl.co/static/attachments/200777/1552352565.pdf?1552352565 [static.ptbl.co]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__static.ptbl.co_static_…> The slide deck presentation is attached. We need to coordinate on next steps. The ccNSO suggested the possibility of a CCWG on the issue. Please advise the Council on your views of next steps and the possible interaction of the SubPro group in this effort. Best, Keith ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com [comlaude.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__comlaude.com&d=DwMGaQ&…>

1 0

FW: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs
by Drazek, Keith July 16, 2019

July 16, 2019

Hi all, I am forwarding this email to the full Council list for consideration and discussion during our upcoming meeting. This was raised by Jeff Neuman during our Marrakech Council meeting as an outstanding action item from the pre-ICANN 65 webinar. Please see his email below, as flagged by Flip last week. Thanks, Keith From: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 10:59 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com>; Pam Little <pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com Cc: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>; Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Dear all, This came up at the Sub Pro Leadership call today. I think it would be helpful for Jeff and Cheryl if the GNSO Council takes a view on this. Best Flip Flip Petillion fpetillion(a)petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law> +32484652653 www.petillion.law<http://www.petillion.law> <http://www.petillion.law/> Attorneys – Advocaten - Avocats From: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> Date: Wednesday, 10 July 2019 at 22:51 To: Flip Petillion <fpetillion(a)petillion.law<mailto:fpetillion@petillion.law>>, "elsa.saade(a)gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>" <elsa.saade(a)gmail.com<mailto:elsa.saade@gmail.com>> Subject: FW: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive , Suite 600 Mclean , VA 22102 UNITED STATES T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 CONFIRMATION OF ORDERS: Please note that we always confirm receipt of orders. To assist us in identifying orders, please use the word ORDER in the subject line of your email. If you have sent us an order and have not received confirmation on the same working day (PST) it is possible that your order has not been received or has been trapped by our spam filter. In this case, please contact your client manager or admin(a)comlaude.com<mailto:admin@comlaude.com> for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. From: Jeff Neuman Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 12:21 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; Cheryl Langdon-Orr (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) <langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>>; pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>; Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: RE: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Keith, It has occurred to me that although you and I chatted about this previously in Bangkok during the GDD Summit, we have not responded back to you formally on this subject. Cheryl and I have had the opportunity to discuss this with the SubPro leadership team and we stand by our original position, namely, that at this point in time we would not support the creation of a Cross Community Working Group on this issue. There are several reasons why we do not believe that the creation of a CCWG is the right venue to have these discussions. First, as you know, the topic of string similarity has already been the topic of a number of conversations within our Working Group (both in Sub-Teams and as a full group). We have also had a section on String Similarity in our initial report and solicited comment back on the topic. We are getting towards the development of our final recommendations on this topic within the next several weeks. Second, our PDP, like all PDPs, is open to any one that wants to participate. We do have some representatives from the ccNSO participating and more are welcome to participate should they wish to do so. Third, the ccTLD Fast Track analysis of similarity as represented in its Fast Track Final report (https://ccnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/filefield_37897/idn-ccpdp-final…) is incredibly different than the standard used by ICANN evaluators in the 2012 round. Not only is this true with respect to the process followed, but also in the standards applied and the remedies available where similarity is found. Fourth, in the gTLD space, string similarity should not be viewed in isolation, but rather in conjunction with the right to object by third parties. The objection process is unique to the gTLD landscape and is not relevant to the ccTLD Fast Track. Finally, CCWG’s are not the place where policy is developed both with respect to the GNSO as well as the ccNSO. If there are policies developed through a CCWG, they would just have to be referred to both the GNSO Council to commence a PDP as well as the ccNSO Council for their own policy development process. Thus, a CCWG would introduce a number of potential time delays into the process which is already well underway y our PDP. With this note, we are not saying that some form of collaboration on the issues that may overlap, but rather to the extent that those discussions should take place, it should be in this already existing PDP. Please feel free to pass this on to the rest of the Council. We can discuss further with you at ICANN 65. Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive , Suite 600 Mclean , VA 22102 UNITED STATES T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 CONFIRMATION OF ORDERS: Please note that we always confirm receipt of orders. To assist us in identifying orders, please use the word ORDER in the subject line of your email. If you have sent us an order and have not received confirmation on the same working day (PST) it is possible that your order has not been received or has been trapped by our spam filter. In this case, please contact your client manager or admin(a)comlaude.com<mailto:admin@comlaude.com> for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. From: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 8:32 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>>; Cheryl Langdon-Orr (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) <langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>>; pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com>; Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>>; Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Re: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Thanks Keith. Cheryl and I will discuss this week and let you know our recommendation. As you may be aware, our PDP has already done some work on this issue, including several public comment periods and we have reached out to the ccNSO for its comments. We would ask the GNSO Council give us time this week to discuss within the leadership team before making any commitments to the ccNSO. Best regards, Jeff Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive Suite 600, McLean VA 22102, USA M: +1.202.549.5079 D: +1.703.635.7514 E: jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> www.comlaude.com<http://www.comlaude.com/> _____ From: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com>> Sent: 26 April 2019 20:48 To: Jeff Neuman; Cheryl Langdon-Orr (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>) (langdonorr(a)gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com>); pam.little(a)alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little@alibaba-inc.com>; rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> Subject: Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs Hi Jeff and Cheryl, I’m following up on Action Items from the GNSO Council meetings in Kobe. During our engagement with the ccNSO, we had discussions concerning the Harmonization of String Similarity in gTLDs and ccTLDs. The transcripts of that session are here: https://static.ptbl.co/static/attachments/200777/1552352565.pdf?1552352565 The slide deck presentation is attached. We need to coordinate on next steps. The ccNSO suggested the possibility of a CCWG on the issue. Please advise the Council on your views of next steps and the possible interaction of the SubPro group in this effort. Best, Keith _____ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>

1 0