April 2020 - council - lists.icann.org

CPH Response re EPDP Extension and Accuracy Issue
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight 16 Apr '20

16 Apr '20

All The below is shared on behalf of representatives of the RrSG and RySG aka the CPH. Also attached as a PDF. == Use of the pandemic to inflate the seriousness of DNS abuse == Registries and registrars share concerns about the potential for increased online criminal activity and are taking action. Marie’s email refers to Göran’s recent blog where he thanked the contracted parties for “their efforts and actions aimed at helping to mitigate and minimize the abusive domain names being used to maliciously take advantage of the coronavirus pandemic. For example, the Registrar Stakeholder Group has posted a useful guide, entitled “Registrar approaches to the COVID-19 Crisis.” (https://rrsg.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Registrar-approaches-to-the-COV…) Registries and registrars have joined with security experts, law enforcement, Internet engineers, and others, in the COVID-19 Cyber Threat Coalition (CTC)( https://www.cyberthreatcoalition.org/ ). Many registrars have banned the registration of covid-related domains, a trend that is growing. Finally, a RySG working group is wrapping a year’s worth of work to improve the DAAR system so that the data reported is actionable, i.e., can be used to curtail abuse. It does little good to gainsay the tragedy of COVID-19 through hyperbole and rhetoric to circumvent laws and processes that were developed to withstand crises. It is more effective, we think, to support all the individual initiatives that are currently taking effect and can be implemented now. In addition, it is important to recognize that there is a primary role here for law enforcement and as is always the case registries and registrars are co-operating and are responsive to requests for assistance of action with law enforcement. We should also recognize the important role of governments to ensure that they are adequately educating their community about online fraud and scams that are occurring at this time. In addition, many businesses are stepping up to provide education and information. We think it is a time where we all should be focused at taking initiatives within our respective bailiwicks, rather than pointing to others as being inadequate. Let’s not make this an, “opportunistic way to progress agendas on the issue of DNS abuse.” We believe it is important to maintain the ‘business of ICANN.’ ICANN is one of the few areas where, due to our distributed and diverse nature, we can come close to business as usual. Let each entity contribute where it can. Let ICANN be a platform where we can learn from the examples of others. There is lot of good work going on in the industry and by governments around the world so let’s not lose sight of that. == Extension of EPDP Phase 2 timeline == The CPH has serious reservations about extending the EPDP timeline because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, we do not support the proposal to extend the EPDP timeline to address issues such as data accuracy or legal vs natural persons. We are sympathetic to those whose capacity participate in the EPDP have been affected as a result of this pandemic - we are all in the same boat, our businesses, our staff, our customers are all affected. But we believe this is time for us to show solidarity and resilience by honouring our commitment and wrapping up EPDP Phase 2 work as planned. In fact, as recent as last week, we were told that that another on-going PDP working group has not seen any decrease in participation. Thus, more facts and data are needed to make an informed and rational decision. • How many EPDP members are affected (and how are they affected) • Whether alternate members can step up? • Will an extension address the capacity problem? • What is the goal of an extension? • Will an extension achieve such goal? • How long should the extension be? Bear in mind COVID-19 may be around for a long time and travel restrictions may be in place for 2020 and beyond. == Accuracy and other issues == The GNSO Council has advised the EPDP on this so the matter should be closed for the EPDP. See email from GNSO Council Liaison to the EPDP https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2020-March/003191.html. From the RrSG’s perspective, accuracy issue was never in-scope for the EPDP and we disagree it should be dealt with by the EPDP on extended timeline or otherwise. It is crystal clear from the Charter that the EPDP has a very specific and narrow scope, namely, to ensure the new registration data policy (based on the Temporary Specification) is compliant with GDPR and other privacy laws. The EPDP was not about more accurate data for access purpose or for combating abuse. We accept Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR (the "Accuracy Principle") is relevant in this context but Bird & Bird has opined on this (see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/102138857/ICANN - Memo on Accuracy.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1550152014000&api=v2). Our reading of the GDPR is consistent with the advice from Bird & Bird that the Accuracy Principle is about data subjects, not about third parties who use the data. As catalogued in the Bird & Bird memo, we are of the view that the existing contractual obligations regarding accuracy are sufficient. Indeed, we believe an accuracy scoping team would be duplicative of these existing efforts and long-standing accomplishments Any new initiative to review non-public data requires a sufficient legal justification, and without one is not permissible under GDPR and other privacy legislation. No legal basis or any significant need for such a review has yet been demonstrated. Additionally, before dedicating substantial resources to a policy initiative, the goal of such a policy initiative should be determined. It is not clear that complete accuracy of RDS data is possible, nor whether improved accuracy will result in any benefits (e.g. reducing DNS abuse), but if there are benefits or goals of increased RDS data accuracy they should be clearly documented prior to any policy undertakings. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com https://blacknight.blog / http://ceo.hosting/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park, Sleaty Road, Graiguecullen, Carlow, R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845

1 0

Observers at the GNSO Council meeting Thursday 16 April 2020
by Nathalie Peregrine 15 Apr '20

15 Apr '20

Dear councilors, After having experimented with the Zoom webinar room during ICANN67 for the GNSO Council April meeting, it was decided to keep the format moving forward for all GNSO Council monthly meetings. For councilors, this changes very little. Upon arriving in the Zoom room, staff will promote you to panelists and you will be able to activate your microphones and take part in the chat as per usual. For observers, this means there will no longer be the need to connect to an audiocast, they will enter the room and be able to observe the Council meeting. They will not however be allowed to type in the chat or activate their microphones. The Zoom webinar room url is unique to each Council meeting and appears on the meeting agenda. All agendas can be found here<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/GNSO+Council+meetin…>. Thank you ever so much, Kind regards, Nathalie Nathalie Peregrine Manager, Operations Support (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 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…>

2 1

GNSO Council Draft Work Plan for Agenda Item 5 on the April Meeting
by Marie Pattullo 15 Apr '20

15 Apr '20

Steve, all Thanks so much for this. Rolling together points 4 (impact of COVID-19) and 5 (work plan) of our agenda for tomorrow, some thoughts I’d like to put on the table: · One huge, practical impact of this virus that all of us in the DNS world are facing is the massive uptick in criminals and fraudsters preying on people’s fears by offering online fake (or plain non-existent) safety equipment and tests, and rolling out massive phishing and malware attacks. We’ve all seen the reports – e.g. from Europol<https://www.europol.europa.eu/> – and all of the work that Goran references in his blog post<https://www.icann.org/news/blog/keeping-the-dns-secure-during-the-coronavir…> (thanks to the Registrars for the their prompt action here). However, all of us involved in combating all forms of online crime and deception have a massive practical hurdle: we don’t know who owns the domains promulgating this insidious content. · Even the briefest look at the recent findings of the security research-focused Interisle Consulting Group<http://www.interisle.net/sub/DomainRegistrationData.pdf> illuminates the basic fact: the inability to access WHOIS data (adding in the well-documented problems of inaccuracy and non-transparent privacy and proxy info) means that all public and private actors fighting this online evil are doing so with their hands tied behind their backs. This excellent, albeit terrifying, article from CircleID<http://www.circleid.com/posts/20200407-covid19-whois-and-pressing-need-for-…> sets out the pressing need for compliance and action. · Put bluntly, we need to do something – and now. · Punting the essential issues of data accuracy and legal vs natural data from the EPDP to some unknown future date is unconscionable in the current climate. We need accurate data. The GDPR does not apply to legal persons’ data. We agree with the GAC: pushing for the artificial deadline of June to wrap up the EPDP is untenable and would jeopardise the legitimacy of the entire EPDP process. The agreement made during Phase 1 was a compromise: that accuracy and legal vs natural would be fully discussed and debated during Phase 2. Discarding that compromise and kicking these issues into the long grass just cannot happen. As Council, we have a (moral) duty to put these issues at the very top of our priority list. · We also need the PPSAI to be implemented as soon as possible. I’m looking forward to talking to you all tomorrow; I do miss talking to people. Please stay safe, dear colleagues, Marie From: council <council-bounces(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Steve Chan Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 5:36 PM To: council(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] GNSO Council Draft Work Plan for Agenda Item 5 on the April Meeting Dear Councilors, In support of agenda item 5 (COUNCIL DISCUSSION – GNSO Work Prioritization - 2020 Work Plan / Impact From Coronavirus) for the upcoming Council meeting, staff has worked with Council leadership to prepare the attached draft work plan. When this topic was first discussed in detail at the January Strategic Planning Session, the focus was more on prioritizing (i.e., establishing an order for) the Council’s anticipated work. However, it became apparent that trying to simply create a ranked list lacked nuance and was too dependent on the varying levels of importance for the various Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies. The attached draft work plan considers the sense of urgency (e.g., impact from not beginning the work), resources (staff/community), possible timing/dependencies, and whether there are discrete preparatory parts of the work that can be carved out and started earlier. Taking those elements into consideration, you will find relatively detailed analysis for each of the potential projects. In addition, there are a set of assumptions on the first page and a high-level summary graphic on page two. If you have any questions in advance of the meeting, please let us know. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Email: steve.chan(a)icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 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…>

1 0

Updated Zoom info: Final Proposed Agenda GNSO Council Meeting - 16 April 2020 at 12:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine 15 Apr '20

15 Apr '20

** with updated Zoom room details** Dear all, Please find below the final proposed agenda for the GNSO Council Meeting on 16 April 2020 at 12:00 UTC. Draft GNSO Council Agenda 16 April 2020 Please note that all documents referenced in the agenda have been gathered on a Wiki page for convenience and easier access: https://community.icann.org/x/myWJBw This agenda was established according to the GNSO Operating Procedures [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_coun…> v3.3, updated on 30 January 2018 For convenience: * An excerpt of the ICANN Bylaws defining the voting thresholds is provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this agenda. * An excerpt from the Council Operating Procedures defining the absentee voting procedures is provided in Appendix 2 at the end of this agenda. GNSO Council meeting held at 12:00 UTC Coordinated Universal Time: 12:00 UTC: https://tinyurl.com/vau3jkd [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_vau3jkd&d=…> 05:00 Los Angeles; 08:00 Washington DC; 13:00 London; 17:00 Islamabad; 21:00 Tokyo; 22:00 Melbourne GNSO Council Meeting Webinar Room https://icann.zoom.us/j/895774606?pwd=a051c2pESGpYaEdQWktzN2V5Y0xxQT09 Password: 808774 Councilors should notify the GNSO Secretariat in advance if they will not be able to attend and/or need a dial out call. ___________________________________ Item 1: Administrative Matters (10 mins) 1.1 - Roll Call 1.2 - Updates to Statements of Interest 1.3 - Review / Amend Agenda 1.4 - Note the status of minutes for the previous Council meetings per the GNSO Operating Procedures: Minutes [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 20 February 2020 will be posted on 6 March 2020 Minutes [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> of the GNSO Council meeting on the 11 March 2020 were posted on 27 March 2020. Item 2: Opening Remarks / Review of Projects & Action List (10 minutes) 2.1 - Review focus areas and provide updates on specific key themes / topics, to include review of Projects List [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_coun…>and Action Item List. <https://community.icann.org/x/RgZlAg> Item 3: Consent Agenda (0 minutes) * None Item 4: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Impact of Coronavirus (COVID-19) (10 minutes) Everyone is affected by the coronavirus pandemic, including members of the Council, members of the Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, and staff. The impact is substantial for some, who in addition to their regular job are now also playing additional roles as day care provider and educator. For some, their work may be directly related to the effort to combat coronavirus. Here, the Council will have a brief discussion about how the coronavirus pandemic may impact the capacity of the GNSO Council and the SG/Cs as well as ICANN Org’s operations and staff, and that it should be accounted for in discussing all of the subsequent agenda items during this meeting. 4.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership) 4.2 – Council discussion 4.3 – Next steps Item 5: COUNCIL DISCUSSION – GNSO Work Prioritization - 2020 Work Plan / Impact From Coronavirus (25 minutes) After the GNSO Council’s Strategic Planning Session in January 2020, the Council acknowledged that there are limited resources available for policy development activities and related work. This resource limitation means that the GNSO Council must efficiently complete its current work, but also prioritize the new work waiting in its pipeline. At the Strategic Planning Session, Councilors participated in an informal and non-binding ranking survey, which was used as a “sense of the room.” This informational survey result was shared with Councilors to then share with their respective Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, to gain a better sense of the various groups’ top priorities. The Council touched on this topic briefly during the February Council meeting and again during its March meeting. Council leadership and staff developed a draft work plan for the Council’s consideration. Previously, the focus was on prioritization of the GNSO’s work, which implies that the work should be ranked in order of priority. However, Council leadership determined that it might be more practical to think of this exercise more simply as establishing a work plan, which does still consider the urgency of the work, but also looks at each element of work in a more granular fashion and identifies potential dependencies. What this allows the Council to do is to potentially carve out pieces of work from a project that might be initiated in the near-term, some of which may then serve as the preparatory/informational basis for Council next steps. While this topic is focused on a relatively long-term work plan for the GNSO, the landscape has changed significantly since the Strategic Planning Session in late January of 2020. It is possible that capacity within the community, as well as Policy staff, is or may be diminished by the impact from the coronavirus pandemic. For instance, the Council had anticipated initiating the IGO Work Track just after ICANN68, but Council leadership believes discussion is warranted on whether the timing still remains appropriate. Here, the Council will discuss this change in approach (and draft document) to establishing the Council’s draft work plan for 2020, and potentially beyond, but will also consider whether the coronavirus pandemic might impact that plan. 5.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership) 5.2 – Council discussion 5.3 – Next steps Item 6: COUNCIL DISCUSSION - Report from the Transfer Policy Scoping Team (15 minutes) On April 22, 2019, ICANN Org delivered the most recent version of the Transfer Policy Status Report (TPSR) [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> to the GNSO Council. ICANN Org delivered the TPSR pursuant to Recommendation 17 of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part D PDP Working Group’s Final Report [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…>, which provides, “[t]he Working Group recommends that contracted parties and ICANN should start to gather data and other relevant information that will help inform a future IRTP review team in its efforts.” The GNSO Council established the Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team to review the TPSR and consider the best approach/mechanism to conduct the review, composition of the potential review team, and the scope of the review and future policy work related to the Transfer Policy. The team believes that the GDPR and similar national privacy legislations have rendered the Transfer Policy ineffective and unworkable as written and recommends that a PDP, or series of PDPs, be established to conduct policy work on the Transfer Policy. Further, as a first step, the team recommends that the GNSO Council instruct ICANN Policy staff to draft an Issues Report in line with the Scoping Document [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> delivered to the GNSO Council on 7 April 2020.. Here, the Council will discuss the report from the Transfer Policy Scoping Team and consider possible next steps, including the request of an Issue Report on the Transfer Policy. 6.1 - Introduction of topic (Council leadership) 6.2 – Council discussion 6.3 – Next steps Item 7: Registration Directory Service (RDS) - Program Management (35 minutes) The GNSO Council has a number of Registration Directory Service (RDS) related topics to consider. * EPDP Phase 1, Recommendation 27 Wave 1 report - The Council was provided with the updated version of the Wave 1 report<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2020-February/023534.html> on 19 February 2020. On 24 March 2020, a suggested approach<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2020-March/023615.html> for addressing the Council’s work related to recommendation 27 was shared with the Council. The Council has not yet discussed how it wants to prioritize and allocate this work, which will have an impact on the Council’s work plan. * Whois Procedure Implementation Advisory Group (WPIAG) - At the Council’s 13 March 2019 meeting, it agreed to defer further discussion of the WPIAG for 12 months, reserving the right to revisit at any time. With 12 months having lapsed, what action, if any, should be taken? * Registration Directory Service Review Team (RDS-RT) - On 18 March 2020, the Council was informed<https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/2020-March/023606.html> that the ICANN Board passed two recommendations to the Council, in whole or in part, for its consideration as documented in the scorecard [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste…> associated with the Board resolution [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…>. The Council has not yet discussed how it will consider the two relevant recommendations (i.e., CC1 and CC.4). Here, the Council will discuss the bullet points above and discuss next steps, as applicable. 7.1 – Introduction of topic (Council leadership) 7.2 – Council discussion 7.3 – Next steps Item 8: ANY OTHER BUSINESS (15 minutes) * 8.1 - GNSO Chair election timeline [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> announced * 8.2 - EPDP Phase 2 Initial Report and latest EPDP Project Package<https://community.icann.org/x/6BdIBg> - Any questions? * 8.3 - RDS data accuracy - possible next steps? * 8.4 - Expectations for ICANN68 (if virtual)? * 8.5 - Letter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> from the ICANN Board regarding a potential impasse concerning the implementation of EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 7, related to Thick WHOIS Transition Policy.. _______________________________ Appendix 1: GNSO Council Voting Thresholds (ICANN Bylaws, Article 11, Section 11.3(i)) See https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article11 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…>. Appendix 2: GNSO Council Absentee Voting Procedures (GNSO Operating Procedures, Section 4.4) See https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/op-proced… [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_d…> References for Coordinated Universal Time of 12:00 UTC Local time between October and March Winter in the NORTHERN hemisphere ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- California, USA (PDT) UTC-7 05:00 San José, Costa Rica (CST) UTC-6 06:00 New York/Washington DC, USA (EDT) UTC-4 08:00 Buenos Aires, Argentina (ART) UTC-3 09:00 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (BRST) UTC-3 09:00 London, United Kingdom (GMT) UTC+1 13:00 Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (WAT) UTC+1 13:00 Paris, France (CEST) UTC+2 14:00 Islamabad, Pakistan (PKT) (+1 day) UTC+5 17:00 Singapore (SGT) UTC+8 20:00 Tokyo, Japan (JST) UTC+9 21:00 Melbourne, Australia (AEST) UTC+10 22:00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DST starts/ends on Sunday 25 of October 2020, 2:00 or 3:00 local time (with exceptions) for EU countries and on Sunday 01 of November 2020 for the US. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For other places see http://www.timeanddate.com [timeanddate.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.timeanddate.com_&d=…> and https://tinyurl.com/vau3jkd [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tinyurl.com_vau3jkd&d=…>

2 1

GNSO Council Draft Work Plan for Agenda Item 5 on the April Meeting
by Steve Chan 14 Apr '20

14 Apr '20

Dear Councilors, In support of agenda item 5 (COUNCIL DISCUSSION – GNSO Work Prioritization - 2020 Work Plan / Impact From Coronavirus) for the upcoming Council meeting, staff has worked with Council leadership to prepare the attached draft work plan. When this topic was first discussed in detail at the January Strategic Planning Session, the focus was more on prioritizing (i.e., establishing an order for) the Council’s anticipated work. However, it became apparent that trying to simply create a ranked list lacked nuance and was too dependent on the varying levels of importance for the various Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies. The attached draft work plan considers the sense of urgency (e.g., impact from not beginning the work), resources (staff/community), possible timing/dependencies, and whether there are discrete preparatory parts of the work that can be carved out and started earlier. Taking those elements into consideration, you will find relatively detailed analysis for each of the potential projects. In addition, there are a set of assumptions on the first page and a high-level summary graphic on page two. If you have any questions in advance of the meeting, please let us know. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Email: steve.chan(a)icann.org Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar

1 0

GNSO Project List - 13 April 2020
by policy＠bacinblack.com 13 Apr '20

13 Apr '20

Dear All, Please find attached the latest version of the GNSO Council's Projects List for the meeting on 16 April 2020. Per the agenda, the Council will not review the project list in detail. However, after your review and should you find an area that you have questions or needs clarification, you will have the opportunity to do so under agenda item #2. https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Final+Proposed+Agend a+16+April+2020 Thank you. B Berry Cobb @berrycobb GNSO Policy Consultant

1 0

FYI: FW: [ICANN Community Leaders] 13 April 2020
by Terri Agnew 13 Apr '20

13 Apr '20

FYI: From: SO-AC-SG-CLeaders <so-ac-sg-cleaders-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of ICANN Community Leadership Digest <david.olive(a)icann.org> Reply-To: "policyinfo(a)icann.org" <policyinfo(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, April 13, 2020 at 10:00 AM To: "so-ac-sg-cleaders(a)icann.org" <so-ac-sg-cleaders(a)icann.org> Subject: [ICANN Community Leaders] 13 April 2020 [http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=eb107574-8462-4665-88dc-ace51f96a82e&a=1122025…] Monday, 13 April 2020 ICANN Community Leadership Digest [https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/31f30ab5-1445-45c3-aef7-c0ea4…] The ICANN org Policy Development Support function publishes this twice-weekly digest to help ICANN community leaders track requests and follow updates. Table of Contents Information Sharing · REMINDER: PIR Transaction and Proposed Public Interest Commitments Update · REMINDER: Call for Expressions of Interest: Standing Panel for ICANN’s Independent Review Process ICANN68 Planning · NEW: ICANN68 to be Held as Remote Public Meeting · NEW: ICANN68 Virtual Meeting Survey Public Comment · CLOSES TODAY: Revised Community Travel Support Guidelines · Proposal for Chinese Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules · Proposal for Bangla Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules · Phase 1 Initial Report of the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Policy Development Process · Addendum to the Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – Phase 2 · Guidelines for Developing Reference Label Generation Rules (LGRs) for the Second Level Version 2 Information Sharing REMINDER: PIR Transaction and Proposed Public Interest Commitments Update Executive: Göran Marby, ICANN President and CEO Since Public Interest Registry (PIR) formally notified ICANN of the proposed change of control transaction on 14 November 2019 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>, the ICANN org and Board have worked together to thoughtfully and thoroughly evaluate the proposed acquisition to ensure that the .ORG registry remains secure, reliable, and stable. Throughout this process, ICANN has urged PIR, the Internet Society (ISOC), and Ethos Capital (Ethos) to engage and consult with the .ORG community, and to provide full transparency regarding the proposed transaction. Today, ICANN is publishing [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> PIR's recently updated Public Interest Commitments (PICs), which were received by ICANN on 7 April 2020. PIR proposes that these PICs be added to the .<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=0017eTtWE0Oia7IGfUXBNCkvKAhfnvZHOCIMbgQ5WvN_NHN…>ORG Registry Agreement [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>should ICANN approve the change of control request submitted by PIR. Two versions of the PICs are being published: a "clean [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>" version and a "redline [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>" version that shows changes made by PIR from its 16 March 2020 version submitted to ICANN following PIR's Public Engagement process [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> The revised PICs that ICANN is publishing today are in response to additional questions posed by ICANN as part of its diligence around the change of control request. On 3 April 2020, ICANN provided PIR with two sets of questions. One set of questions are in follow-up to previous ICANN inquiries designed to further understand the proposed transaction and its potential effect on PIR and the .ORG top-level domain (TLD). The second set of questions relate specifically to the proposed PICs. PIR has indicated that it is working to answer all of the questions from ICANN. It is ICANN's intention to post PIR's responses to these questions when they are available, subject to any appropriate requests for confidentiality made by PIR. Many people have questioned the enforceability of PICs by ICANN. To be clear, PICs are enforceable by ICANN. Any Internet user may submit complaints to ICANN Contractual Compliance. In addition, ICANN Contractual Compliance may identify an issue through its proactive monitoring. ICANN's follow-up questions to PIR seek to ensure that ICANN has a clear understanding of each commitment within the PICs, such that it could be enforced should the need arise. The ICANN Board continues to have reservations regarding the enforceability of PIR's proposed PICs. The .ORG Registry Agreement stipulates a specified time period for ICANN to approve or withhold consent of the proposed change of control of PIR. ICANN and PIR have agreed to extend the deadline several times since the original deadline in mid-January, and the deadline for ICANN's response is now Monday, 20 April 2020. Similar to when voluntary commitments in the form of PICs were proposed by applicants for new generic TLDs, ICANN is providing PIR's proposed PICs to the ICANN community with this public notice. Given the fast-approaching deadline for ICANN to make a decision to approve or withhold consent on the requested change of control of PIR, the typical 30-day public notice period has been condensed to seven days. We recognize the full engagement of the .ORG community in PIR's consultation process, but wanted to ensure ICANN remained fully transparent in what is being considered, the concerns still present in the Board's review, and what the Board will be reviewing. How to Participate: Feedback may be submitted as a comment to this blog [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> or through correspondence to me or the ICANN Board. We thank the ICANN community for its active participation in this matter and remain committed to keeping you informed of new developments. REMINDER: Call for Expressions of Interest: Standing Panel for ICANN’s Independent Review Process Announcement [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> On 31 March 2020, ICANN opened a call for Expressions of Interest for panelists to serve on the omnibus Standing Panel for ICANN's Independent Review Process (IRP). The deadline to submit Expressions of Interest is Friday, 31 July 2020 at 23:59 UTC. Candidates for the IRP omnibus Standing Panel should review the Expressions of Interest document [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>before submission. The document includes the following information: · Panel Position Description · Required or Highly Preferred Skills · Required or Highly Preferred Experience · Time Commitment · Compensation and Selection Expressions of Interest should be submitted to IRP-Standingpanel-EOI2020(a)icann.org<mailto:IRP-Standingpanel-EOI2020@icann.org> by 23:59 UTC on 31 July 2020. ICANN68 Planning NEW: ICANN68 to be Held as Remote Public Meeting Announcement [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> On 9 April 2020, the ICANN announced that its ICANN68 Policy Forum, which was to be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, will now be held via remote participation only. The ICANN Board of Directors has made the decision [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> that ICANN68 will not proceed as an in-person meeting. Instead, the Board has directed the ICANN org to explore additional community feedback and suggestions, in order to develop a meaningful and productive ICANN68 Policy Forum while we are unable to meet in person. The meeting, scheduled for 22-25 June 2020, will be the second time ICANN has held a Public Meeting solely with remote participation. ICANN67, which was originally slated to be held in Cancún, Mexico, from 7-12 March 2020, was held as ICANN's first entirely remote virtual meeting [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> following the declaration of COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. With an increasing number of countries issuing stay-at-home, lockdown, or social-distancing orders to its citizens to slow the spread of COVID-19, gatherings and international travel are effectively on pause for the foreseeable future. The health and safety of ICANN's community is a top priority, and as such, convening ICANN68 as an in-person meeting is no longer feasible. Following the success of ICANN67 as a Virtual Community Forum, the ICANN org sought the ICANN community's feedback on how to improve future virtual meetings. In its decision, the Board also directed ICANN org to coordinate with the ICANN community on the best way forward in order to meet the expected outcomes of an ICANN Policy Forum. The community's feedback will be incorporated into the planning and execution of ICANN68. ICANN thanks the Kuala Lumpur host committee and our regional partners in Asia Pacific (APAC), who have provided their support and expertise throughout the planning process for ICANN68. We look forward to returning to the APAC region for future ICANN Public Meetings. Those interested in attending the virtual meeting will still be required to register. An announcement will be posted once registration is open. To learn more about remote participation, visit ICANN Public Meetings [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. More information, including information about the meeting's time zone, language interpretation options, and final schedule will be provided at a later date. NEW: ICANN68 Virtual Meeting Survey Dear Community Leaders: Updated survey results [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> for the preliminary ICANN68 Virtual Meeting Strategy Survey [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> are now available. We would now like to invite the Chair and Vice Chair of each ICANN Supporting Organization and Advisory Committee, and members of the ICANN68 planning group, to participate in a second survey [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> by 16:00 UTC on Wednesday, 15 April. This second survey is intended to advance the discussion on our next call on Wednesday, 15 April at 19:00 UTC. While the results of the survey will not be viewed as decisive or representative of the entire community’s wishes on a specific topic, we encourage you to share the questions with your groups. Once again, if you are unable to complete the survey in advance, there will still be an equal opportunity to express your views during the call. Please let us know if you have any questions. Best regards, Tanzanica Public Comment CLOSES TODAY: Revised Community Travel Support Guidelines [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 13 April 2020 Proposal for Chinese Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 20 April 2020 Proposal for Bangla Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Thursday, 23 April 2020 Phase 1 Initial Report of the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Policy Development Process [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 27 April 2020 Addendum to the Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – Phase 2 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Tuesday, 5 May 2020 Guidelines for Developing Reference Label Generation Rules (LGRs) for the Second Level Version 2 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Tuesday, 12 May 2020 Volume 2, Issue 30 | Archive [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> | Next Issue: Thursday, 16 April 2020

1 0

EPDP seeking guidance regarding extension of timeline
by Rafik Dammak 13 Apr '20

13 Apr '20

Hi all, in the last EPDP team call, there was discussion regarding request for extension of the EPDP team timeline taking into account COVID-19 situation. I am sharing this on behalf of the team and as GNSO council liaison to seek guidance from GNSO Council as we approved previously PCR and the updated timeline in last December. I want also to flag an important factor to have in consideration. Any timeline extension might require replacing the current EPDP team chair due to Janis's availability as he cannot continue in that role beyond 30th June. Best, Rafik

3 3

FW: ICANN68 Announcement
by Drazek, Keith 09 Apr '20

09 Apr '20

FYI From: SO-AC-SG-CLeaders <so-ac-sg-cleaders-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of David Olive Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2020 2:34 PM To: so-ac-sg-cleaders(a)icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ICANN Community Leaders] ICANN68 Announcement Dear Community Leaders: We have published the announcement and Board resolution regarding ICANN68: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2020-04-09-en. ICANN68 to be Held as Remote Public Meeting LOS ANGELES – 9 April 2020 – The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) today announced that its ICANN68 Policy Forum, which was to be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, will now be held via remote participation only. The ICANN Board of Directors has made the decision<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2020-04-08-en> that ICANN68 will not proceed as an in-person meeting. Instead, the Board has directed the ICANN org to explore additional community feedback and suggestions, in order to develop a meaningful and productive ICANN68 Policy Forum while we are unable to meet in person. The meeting, scheduled for 22-25 June 2020, will be the second time ICANN has held a Public Meeting solely with remote participation. ICANN67, which was originally slated to be held in Cancún, Mexico, from 7-12 March 2020, was held as ICANN's first entirely remote virtual meeting<https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2020-02-19-en> following the declaration of COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization<https://www.who.int/>. With an increasing number of countries issuing stay-at-home, lockdown, or social-distancing orders to its citizens to slow the spread of COVID-19, gatherings and international travel are effectively on pause for the foreseeable future. The health and safety of ICANN's community is a top priority, and as such, convening ICANN68 as an in-person meeting is no longer feasible. Following the success of ICANN67 as a Virtual Community Forum, the ICANN org sought the ICANN community's feedback on how to improve future virtual meetings. In its decision, the Board also directed ICANN org to coordinate with the ICANN community on the best way forward in order to meet the expected outcomes of an ICANN Policy Forum. The community's feedback will be incorporated into the planning and execution of ICANN68. ICANN thanks the Kuala Lumpur host committee and our regional partners in Asia Pacific (APAC), who have provided their support and expertise throughout the planning process for ICANN68. We look forward to returning to the APAC region for future ICANN Public Meetings. Those interested in attending the virtual meeting will still be required to register. An announcement will be posted once registration is open. To learn more about remote participation, visit ICANN Public Meetings<https://meetings.icann.org/en/remote-participation>. More information, including information about the meeting's time zone, language interpretation options, and final schedule will be provided at a later date. About ICANN ICANN's mission is to help ensure a stable, secure, and unified global Internet. To reach another person on the Internet, you need to type an address – a name or a number – into your computer or other device. That address must be unique so computers know where to find each other. ICANN helps coordinate and support these unique identifiers across the world. ICANN was formed in 1998 as a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with a community of participants from all over the world. Approved Board Resolutions | Special Meeting of the ICANN Board 08 Apr 2020 1. Main Agenda:<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2020-04-08-en#1> a. Impact of COVID-19 on ICANN68<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2020-04-08-en#1.a> •• Rationale for Resolutions 2020.04.08.01 – 2020.04.08.03<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2020-04-08-en#1.…> 1. Main Agenda: a. Impact of COVID-19 on ICANN68 Whereas, on 23 June 2018, the ICANN Board approved for ICANN organization to proceed to contracting in support of ICANN68 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2018-06-23-en#1.e). Under the Meetings Strategy, ICANN68 is scheduled as the Policy Forum for 2020. Whereas, the ICANN Board is responsible for a decision to change an ICANN public meeting location once such a meeting location has been approved for contracting and announced. Whereas, in December 2019, a new strain of coronavirus, referred to as COVID-19, emerged and on 11 March 2020 was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a pandemic. As of 7 April 2020, there are confirmed cases of COVID-19 in 184 countries or territories across the world, with nearly 1,400,000 confirmed cases. Globally, a high number of people are under some form of a "stay at home" or lock-down order, directed to avoid contact with others except to receive essential services such as medical care or to purchase supplies. Schools and offices are closed, gatherings are prohibited, and international travel is largely on pause. We do not know when travel or in-person meetings will be authorized or possible. As it relates to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia has a Movement Control Order in force at least until 14 April 2020 that prohibits meetings such as ICANN68. The duration of the Movement Control Order has already been extended once. Whereas, as an organization with staff and stakeholders across the globe, in January 2020 ICANN org convened an adaptive crisis management team (A-CMT) in order to assist ICANN org in tracking and mitigating the impact of COVID-19 on ICANN's work. Whereas, ICANN org, through the A-CMT, briefed the Board on the current status of COVID-19 on ICANN's work, including the potential impacts on ICANN68. ICANN org has also consulted with the leadership teams of the various ICANN community structures – our Advisory Committees, Supporting Organizations, Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies – regarding the planning for ICANN68 in the face of the pandemic. Whereas, the Board recognizes that the COVID-19 pandemic has already impacted other planned opportunities for the ICANN community to further their work in-person. ICANN67 proceeded as a virtual meeting; the Middle East DNS Forum was canceled; the GDD Summit (planned for May 2020) is postponed; an intersessional meeting for the Nominating Committee has been cancelled; no other intersessional meetings are able to be scheduled at this time. As much as possible, ICANN org has been in communication with the ICANN community on these schedule changes. Whereas, at this time, it does not appear possible or feasible to convene an in-person ICANN68 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia as planned. Whereas, ICANN org successfully moved ICANN67 to a virtual meeting, providing a useful test for the ICANN community on how to plan, schedule and execute an ICANN Public Meeting in a fully virtual setting. In ICANN org's consultations with ICANN's Community Leaders, ICANN org sought the community's feedback about how to use the lessons from ICANN67 to design future virtual meetings as the pandemic might necessitate, taking into consideration the purpose of each Public Meeting. Whereas, ICANN org reports that, due to current social distancing requirements, ICANN org is unable to execute a virtual meeting from a single location, and that a decentralized execution model might necessitate changes to the format. In addition, and in light of the fact that ICANN68 is intended to be the yearly Policy Forum, the Community Leaders have indicated general support for a flexible, modified virtual meeting format that focuses on cross-community dialogues on key policy topics, supplemented by a program of topical webinars and regular online working meetings scheduled around the key sessions. Whereas, ICANN org reports to the Board that it continues both its internal operational planning as well as consultation with the community on how to best design a Policy Forum that achieves the intended purpose and that supports the community's ongoing policy advice and development work. Whereas, the Board understands the import of the face-to-face interactions as provided for at ICANN's Public Meetings. Resolved (2020.04.08.01), the Board confirms that ICANN68 shall not proceed as an in-person meeting, and directs the ICANN President and CEO, or his designees, to take all steps necessary to cancel the facilities and arrangements made for an in-person meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Resolved (2020.04.08.02), the Board directs the ICANN President and CEO, or his designees, to coordinate with the ICANN community on the best way forward for ICANN68 to meet the expected outcomes of an ICANN Policy Forum, including the furthering of ICANN policy development and advice work, reporting on milestones and community-agreed priorities for the meeting. The ICANN President and CEO is also directed to continue internal operational planning in order to support the delivery of the ICANN68 Policy Forum in a distributed manner to meet the expected outcomes as much as is practically feasible. Resolved (2020.04.08.03), the Board thanks ICANN org and the ICANN community for their attention to this important issue. The Board also thanks the hosts and venues planned for ICANN68 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia for their understanding of the need to cancel the in-person plans for ICANN68. We hope that there is a future time that we will be able to come back and visit your city to host an ICANN Public Meeting. Rationale for Resolutions 2020.04.08.01 – 2020.04.08.03 The Board takes this action today in as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak, considered a pandemic by the World Health Organization. While the Board recognizes and upholds the value of face-to-face interactions at ICANN's Public Meetings, and the advancement of ICANN community work that happens at these meetings, we cannot move forward with an in-person meeting at the cost of the health of attendees, ICANN org staff members, and the host country. Just as the Board has previously considered in moving meetings due to the emerging Zika virus, health and safety must be the paramount concern. At the time of the Board decision, the December 2019 COVID-19 outbreak now stands at nearly 1,400,000 confirmed cases across 184 countries and territories. Each day, there is updated news on the spread of the virus and the worldwide response. Globally, a high number of people are under some form of a "stay at home" or lock-down order, directed to avoid contact with others except to receive essential services such as medical care or to purchase supplies. Schools and offices are closed, gatherings are prohibited, and international travel is largely on pause. Across ICANN org, all offices are closed (except for essential items) and personnel are working from home. Those with school-aged children are expected to care for and, in many cases, take on the education of their children. Many within the ICANN community are experiencing these same impacts. Many may also be dealing with infection amongst their family and friends. The pandemic is impacting us all. As it relates specifically to Malaysia, there is a Movement Control Order in force at least until 14 April 2020 that prohibits meetings such as ICANN68. The duration of the Movement Control Order has already been extended once. Just as we cannot know today if global citizens will be in a position to travel in June 2020, we cannot know if the Movement Control Order will remain in force at the time planned for ICANN68. Taking the global reality into account, there is no way that ICANN can responsibly plan to host an in-person meeting for ICANN68. After the Board's February 2020 decision canceling the in-person component of ICANN67 and directing ICANN org to proceed with a virtual meeting, a virtual ICANN67 was convened. Many valuable lessons were learned from that experience. The ICANN Board is asking ICANN organization to continue its consultation with ICANN's Community Leaders about how to use the lessons from ICANN67 to design future virtual meetings as the pandemic might necessitate, taking into consideration the purpose of each Public Meeting. To date, the Community Leaders have indicated general support for a flexible, modified virtual meeting for the ICANN68 Policy Forum format, a schedule that focuses on cross-community dialogues on key policy topics, supplemented by a program of topical webinars and regular online working meetings scheduled around the key sessions. ICANN org itself will need plan differently for how to execute a virtual Policy Forum that achieves the intended purpose and that supports the community's ongoing policy advice and development work. Because of the social distancing requirements as well as the inability to travel, ICANN org will not be able to plan for a centralized hub of operations to deliver on the ICANN community's needs. ICANN org instead is planning on distributed operations for a meeting, which requires significant logistical coordination. Prior to taking this decision, the Board received briefings from ICANN org, on areas including the impact of COVID-19, conversations with the ICANN community, and operational planning for a distributed meeting. We thank the ICANN community for its commitment to concluding a successful ICANN67 and for your continued dedication in developing a meaningful and productive ICANN68 Policy Forum even while we cannot meet in person. The ICANN community has shown great leadership already in a global move towards virtual collaboration. The ICANN Board thanks the host committee as well as our community in the Asia Pacific Region (APAC) who worked tirelessly to host this meeting in Kuala Lumpur. We appreciate their understanding and look forward to returning to the APAC region as soon as we are able. This action is within ICANN's mission and the public interest, as it is the only path to assure that the work of the ICANN community continues as planned. It is the proper decision on many levels, from not putting ICANN org staff at risk; risking the need to divert the resources and attention of ICANN org to a response to a COVID-19 outbreak amongst ICANN org or the community; to taking a responsible and proper measure to protect against contributing to the global pandemic. This decision has resource implications that are being quantified. However, the resources needed to support an ICANN68 Policy Forum as can be appropriately designed are expected to be within or below the resources that have already been allocated for ICANN68 within ICANN's budget. This decision has no impact on the security, stability, or resiliency of the Internet's DNS.

1 0

FYI: [ICANN Community Leaders] 9 April 2020
by Michelle DeSmyter 09 Apr '20

09 Apr '20

FYI: [http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=82cde1c8-804c-453a-ae8d-716b0c6f9d0d&a=1122025…] Thursday, 9 April 2020 ICANN Community Leadership Digest [https://files.constantcontact.com/304b3fd3501/31f30ab5-1445-45c3-aef7-c0ea4…] The ICANN org Policy Development Support function publishes this twice-weekly digest to help ICANN community leaders track requests and follow updates. Table of Contents Information Sharing · NEW: PIR Transaction and Proposed Public Interest Commitments Update · NEW: Addressing Recent Zoom News · ENDS TOMORROW: Your Feedback about this Digest · REMINDER: Call for Expressions of Interest: Standing Panel for ICANN’s Independent Review Process Public Comment · CLOSES MONDAY: Revised Community Travel Support Guidelines · Proposal for Chinese Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules · Proposal for Bangla Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules · Phase 1 Initial Report of the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Policy Development Process · Addendum to the Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – Phase 2 · Guidelines for Developing Reference Label Generation Rules (LGRs) for the Second Level Version 2 Information Sharing NEW: PIR Transaction and Proposed Public Interest Commitments Update Executive: Göran Marby, ICANN President and CEO Since Public Interest Registry (PIR) formally notified ICANN of the proposed change of control transaction on 14 November 2019 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>, the ICANN org and Board have worked together to thoughtfully and thoroughly evaluate the proposed acquisition to ensure that the .ORG registry remains secure, reliable, and stable. Throughout this process, ICANN has urged PIR, the Internet Society (ISOC), and Ethos Capital (Ethos) to engage and consult with the .ORG community, and to provide full transparency regarding the proposed transaction. Today, ICANN is publishing [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> PIR's recently updated Public Interest Commitments (PICs), which were received by ICANN on 7 April 2020. PIR proposes that these PICs be added to the .<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001ksZaHYpLxs73N74vLz88Vq0p2eY7hNPIUETQItxPS1zF…>ORG Registry Agreement [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>should ICANN approve the change of control request submitted by PIR. Two versions of the PICs are being published: a "clean [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>" version and a "redline [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>" version that shows changes made by PIR from its 16 March 2020 version submitted to ICANN following PIR's Public Engagement process. [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> The revised PICs that ICANN is publishing today are in response to additional questions posed by ICANN as part of its diligence around the change of control request. On 3 April 2020, ICANN provided PIR with two sets of questions. One set of questions are in follow-up to previous ICANN inquiries designed to further understand the proposed transaction and its potential effect on PIR and the .ORG top-level domain (TLD). The second set of questions relate specifically to the proposed PICs. PIR has indicated that it is working to answer all of the questions from ICANN. It is ICANN's intention to post PIR's responses to these questions when they are available, subject to any appropriate requests for confidentiality made by PIR. Many people have questioned the enforceability of PICs by ICANN. To be clear, PICs are enforceable by ICANN. Any Internet user may submit complaints to ICANN Contractual Compliance. In addition, ICANN Contractual Compliance may identify an issue through its proactive monitoring. ICANN's follow-up questions to PIR seek to ensure that ICANN has a clear understanding of each commitment within the PICs, such that it could be enforced should the need arise. The ICANN Board continues to have reservations regarding the enforceability of PIR's proposed PICs. The .ORG Registry Agreement stipulates a specified time period for ICANN to approve or withhold consent of the proposed change of control of PIR. ICANN and PIR have agreed to extend the deadline several times since the original deadline in mid-January, and the deadline for ICANN's response is now 20 April 2020. Similar to when voluntary commitments in the form of PICs were proposed by applicants for new generic TLDs, ICANN is providing PIR's proposed PICs to the ICANN community with this public notice. Given the fast-approaching deadline for ICANN to make a decision to approve or withhold consent on the requested change of control of PIR, the typical 30-day public notice period has been condensed to seven days. We recognize the full engagement of the .ORG community in PIR's consultation process, but wanted to ensure ICANN remained fully transparent in what is being considered, the concerns still present in the Board's review, and what the Board will be reviewing. How to Participate: Feedback may be submitted as a comment to this blog [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> or through correspondence to me or the ICANN Board. We thank the ICANN community for its active participation in this matter and remain committed to keeping you informed of new developments. NEW: Addressing Recent Zoom News Executive: Ashwin Rangan, Senior Vice President, Engineering and Chief Information Officer ICANN’s video conferencing platform, Zoom, has been in the news quite a bit. With shelter-in-place and work-from-home becoming more familiar, not only for the ICANN community but the world at large, Zoom has become a vital tool for many businesses. With this recent increase in Zoom usage, we’ve also seen a number of bugs, flaws, and security vulnerabilities come to light. It’s natural that a hugely popular system like Zoom will be poked and prodded, and it’s likely that alarming bits of information will continue to be revealed in the coming weeks and months. However, it’s important to remember that almost any piece of software has bugs and glitches. What’s vitally important in these moments is how the software vendor reacts to receiving such information. In this regard, ICANN applauds Zoom for their efforts. Every time a new vulnerability has been exposed, Zoom has reacted swiftly by releasing patches within a day or two, while remaining transparent about the nature of the underlying issues. If you care to learn more about any specific vulnerability or how Zoom has responded, we highly recommend taking a look at Zoom’s blog, which is available here [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>. As stated before, it’s likely that this won’t be the last time we will hear about Zoom’s flaws, either from security researchers or new attack vectors. While we continue to monitor developments, ICANN remains committed to Zoom. We strive to offer the best solutions to our community, and at this time, we are still confident that Zoom fits the bill. If you have any questions or comments regarding Zoom and how it may relate to you, please do not hesitate to reach out to mts(a)icann.org<mailto:mts@icann.org>. ENDS TOMORROW: Your Feedback about this Digest Executive: David Olive, Senior Vice President, Policy Development Support Reflecting on the first year of the ICANN Community Leadership Digest, the ICANN org Policy Development Support function seeks your feedback. Please take this brief survey [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> by Friday, 10 April 2020. REMINDER: Call for Expressions of Interest: Standing Panel for ICANN’s Independent Review Process Announcement [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> On 31 March 2020, ICANN opened a call for Expressions of Interest for panelists to serve on the omnibus Standing Panel for ICANN's Independent Review Process (IRP). The deadline to submit Expressions of Interest is 31 July 2020 at 23:59 UTC. Candidates for the IRP omnibus Standing Panel should review the Expressions of Interest document [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…>before submission. The document includes the following information: · Panel Position Description · Required or Highly Preferred Skills · Required or Highly Preferred Experience · Time Commitment · Compensation and Selection Expressions of Interest should be submitted to IRP-Standingpanel-EOI2020(a)icann.org<mailto:IRP-Standingpanel-EOI2020@icann.org> by 23:59 UTC on 31 July 2020. Public Comment CLOSES MONDAY: Revised Community Travel Support Guidelines [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 13 April 2020 Proposal for Chinese Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 20 April 2020 Proposal for Bangla Script Root Zone Label Generation Rules [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Thursday, 23 April 2020 Phase 1 Initial Report of the Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Policy Development Process [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Monday, 27 April 2020 Addendum to the Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – Phase 2 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Tuesday, 5 May 2020 Guidelines for Developing Reference Label Generation Rules (LGRs) for the Second Level Version 2 [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> Close Date: Tuesday, 12 May 2020 Volume 2, Issue 29 | Archive [r20.rs6.net]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r20.rs6.net_tn.jsp-3Ff-…> | Next Issue: Monday, 13 April 2020

1 0