Dear Councillors, In preparation for our council call tomorrow on the motion for the IDN EPDP charter, the leadership would like to draw your attention to the timeline of 12 months and the expectation it puts on the working group. Any extension deemed necessary would have to go through a PCR, this timeline will be part of our discussion and your views would be welcome. Regards, Philippe From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ariel Liang via council Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 3:15 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] IDNs EPDP Initiation Request & Charter GNSO Councilors, Following the motion submitted by Maxim Alzoba and in accordance with item 5 on the 20 May Council meeting agenda, please find attached the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on Internationalized Domain Names Initiation Request and the proposed Charter for your review. Staff would like to highlight the following elements in the Charter. More details will be provided during the presentation on the topic by Dennis Tan Tanaka, the Chair of the IDNs EPDP Drafting Team, prior to the Council vote. * Scope – This EPDP is expected to provide the GNSO Council with policy recommendations on: * The definition of all TLDs and the management of variant labels to facilitate the delegation of variant gTLDs in the root zone; and * How the IDN Implementation Guidelines, which Contracted Parties are required to comply with, should be updated in the future. * The scope of this EPDP may be expanded specifically as a result of the Operational Track. This EPDP is expected to provide the GNSO Council with recommendations to resolve issues for policy considerations in the IDN Implementation Guideline 4.0, IF and WHEN such issues are identified by the Operational Track Team and agreed to by the IDN Guidelines Working Group. * Principle – The charter questions were developed based on the following framework: * This WG should not revisit New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP (SubPro) recommendations in the context of future new gTLDs, but will consider questions asking whether such recommendations should be extended to existing gTLDs; * Where SubPro does not have a recommendation that corresponds to the Board approved recommendation related to IDNs, the charter will include questions about the impact of such recommendations on both future and existing gTLDs; * The SubPro’s Implementation Review Team (IRT) and this WG (including its future IRT) should coordinate on addressing implementation issues to achieve, to the extent possible, consistent solutions for new and existing gTLDs. * Charter question topics – At a minimum, the WG is expected to consider the following elements: * Consistent definition and technical utilization of RZ-LGR * “Same entity” at the top-level * “Same entity” at the second-level * Adjustments in registry agreement, registry service, registry transition process, and other processes/procedures related to the domain name lifecycle * Adjustments to objection process, string similarity review, string contention resolution, reserved strings, and other policies and procedures * Adjustments in registration dispute resolution procedures and trademark protection mechanisms * Process to update the IDN Implementation Guidelines * Expected completion timeframe – The WG’s last Final Report is expected to be delivered to the GNSO Council no later than 12 months after the WG convenes for its first meeting. * Working Group model – Representative + Open Model (Members + Participants + Observers) * Each of the following groups will be invited to appoint up to three (3) members to the WG: RySG, RrSG, IPC, BC, ISPCP, NCSG, ccNSO, ALAC, GAC, SSAC, RSSAC. No “Alternate” is envisioned in the WG composition. * In the event a group is unable to nominate a Member, at least one Participant should be responsible for keeping their respective group informed. * Participants will be able to actively participate in and attend all WG meetings, with the exception of the consensus designation process. * ccNSO is expected to appoint one (1) liaison to the WG, who may also serve as one of its Member(s). * ICANN Org GDS department is expected to appoint at least (1) staff liaison to the WG. * Each Member and Participant of the WG must acknowledge and accept the Statement of Participation. * For the purpose of assessing consensus, groups that do not fulfill their maximum membership allowance should not be disadvantaged. * Leadership structure – One (1) Chair + One (1) Vice Chair * The GNSO Council will appoint one (1) qualified, independent Chair (neutral, not counted as from the WG membership/participants) for the WG. * Staff is expected to publish a request for Expressions of Interest for the role of Chair. The GNSO Council leadership and Standing Selection Committee leadership will jointly review the responses and will propose a Chair to the GNSO Council. * The WG, once formed, may select one (1) Vice Chair to assist the Chair. The Vice Chair can be selected among the WG’s Members and Participants. If a Member is selected as the Vice Chair, this person shall change his/her Member status to Participant. Best Regards, Ariel Ariel Xinyue Liang Policy Sr. Specialist Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.