- Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl - lists.icann.org

Materials, Agenda for 5 Sept PP IRT Meeting
by Amy Bivins Sept. 1, 2017

Sept. 1, 2017

Hello, All, Attached is the first IRT discussion draft of the privacy/proxy provider suspension and de-accreditation procedure, which we will be discussing during Tuesday's IRT meeting. Please review this document prior to our meeting on Tuesday. In addition, we plan to discuss the issue raised on-list by Sara Bockey, regarding the draft PPAA's requirement for 24/7/365 monitoring of a provider's abuse contact (modeled on the RAA). We are also planning to discuss next steps on data retention. As a reminder, please send any additional feedback you have regarding the issues discussed during Tuesday's meeting to the list this week. Thanks, and have a great weekend. Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

2 1

Answer to Compliance-related question raised on Tuesday's IRT call
by Amy Bivins Aug. 31, 2017

Aug. 31, 2017

Hello, All, A question was raised on Tuesday's Privacy/Proxy IRT call about the auditing of PP data in registrar data escrow deposits (is there a check to conform that registrations listed as privacy-protected are included in the data escrow deposit, i.e., a completeness check?). I checked with the Compliance team and have a bit more information to share with you. Section 2.5 of the RAA Specification on Privacy and Proxy Registrations requires registrars to include P/P Customer contact information in Registration Data Escrow deposits, and the Registrar Data Escrow Specifications does allow for registrars to escrow both sets of data; but, there is nothing built into the existing DEA agreements that requires the DEA to follow a specific audit process that is unique to privacy and proxy registrations. The DEA does follow-up with registrars to fix any issues when there are audit failures due to discrepancies in data, and sometimes, these could be due to failure of registrars to escrow both sets of data. In the recent RFP that was published to identify one or more additional ICANN designated Registrar Data Escrow (RDE) agent(s), one of the requirements is that the proposals should account for privacy and proxy registration escrow requirements, https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rfp-icann-agent-rde-services-17… I hope this helps, but please let me know if you have any other clarifying questions/concerns. Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Notes, action items from today's Privacy/Proxy IRT call
by Amy Bivins Aug. 30, 2017

Aug. 30, 2017

Hi All, Thanks for your attendance and participation on today's Privacy/Proxy IRT call. If you couldn't attend, I encourage you to listen to the recording, which is available on the wiki, https://community.icann.org/display/IRT. We have several updates and action items today. Please review this list carefully. 1. Last week's IRT poll re: PSWG-proposed edit to PP disclosure framework. The poll results, attached as JPG screenshots, are similar to the feedback received on last week's IRT call. A few IRT members supported the adoption of the PSWG proposal, but most IRT members expressed a preference to keep the language in the current PPAA draft as-is. We have sent these results to the PSWG and asked whether the PSWG would like to discuss potential compromises any further. We'll determine next steps after hearing back from the PSWG. 2. The PPAA issues list (attached) has been updated to reflect all IRT input received on the list over the past week and today's IRT call. 3. Data Escrow: Any additional feedback on the issues raised on today's call should be sent to the list no later than this Friday, 1 September. In particular, please consider whether the proposed elements of the specification that Francisco presented seem to be going in the intended direction, or whether you believe changes are needed. 4. RDDS Labeling: Any additional feedback on the issues raised on today's call should be sent to the list no later than this Friday, 1 September. 5. Agenda for 5 Sept IRT call: De-accreditation process proposal (to be sent to the list this week); PPAA issue 26 (new! Suggested on-list by Sara Bockey, re 24/7 monitoring of abuse contact); next steps on data retention (possible) 6. Any IRT feedback on comments from list from Margie Milam re: IP framework (attached) should be sent to list no later than this Friday, 1 September. 7. Any IRT feedback on comments from list from Steve Metalitz on PPAA Sect. 3.5.4 should be sent to list no later than this Friday, 1 September. 8. Please note that draft PPAA_17July (attached) has not been updated to reflect IRT discussions to date (this is the original sent to the IRT). Once we have completed the issues list, we will distribute an updated draft v2 that reflects all changes made per the IRT's feedback, for the IRT's review. Finally, as many of you are probably aware, I am preparing to go out on maternity leave in about 3 weeks (for 12 weeks). I should be around through 22 Sept, but I wanted to alert you to this in case I'm unexpectedly out before then. Caitlin Tubergen will be providing backup support for this project while I'm away (thanks, Caitlin!), and every effort has been made to keep this project moving at the current pace in my absence. Thanks to all your hard work and dedication, this IRT's work should be ready to publish for public comment while I'm away, barring any unexpected developments. I'll be following your work while I'm out, and will be back either the week before the ICANN holiday break or the first week of 2018. Thanks for your understanding and please don't hesitate to contact me if you have questions. Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

2 1

Off-List Re: Notes, action items from today's Privacy/Proxy IRT call
by Pam Little Aug. 29, 2017

Aug. 29, 2017

Hi Amy I have not been able to join these calls due to time zone issue (the meeting time is midnight in Sydney) but try to keep an eye on the developments. Thank you for the "notice" on your maternality leave. I thought that was very considerate of you and I hope everything goes well. All the best to you and your family! Kind regards, Pam ------------------------------------------------------------------From:Amy Bivins <amy.bivins(a)icann.org>Time:2017 Aug 30 (Wed) 02:12To:gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org>; Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen(a)icann.org>Subject:[Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Notes, action items from today's Privacy/Proxy IRT call Hi All, Thanks for your attendance and participation on today’s Privacy/Proxy IRT call. If you couldn’t attend, I encourage you to listen to the recording, which is available on the wiki, https://community.icann.org/display/IRT. We have several updates and action items today. Please review this list carefully. Last week’s IRT poll re: PSWG-proposed edit to PP disclosure framework. The poll results, attached as JPG screenshots, are similar to the feedback received on last week’s IRT call. A few IRT members supported the adoption of the PSWG proposal, but most IRT members expressed a preference to keep the language in the current PPAA draft as-is. We have sent these results to the PSWG and asked whether the PSWG would like to discuss potential compromises any further. We’ll determine next steps after hearing back from the PSWG.The PPAA issues list (attached) has been updated to reflect all IRT input received on the list over the past week and today’s IRT call.Data Escrow: Any additional feedback on the issues raised on today’s call should be sent to the list no later than this Friday, 1 September. In particular, please consider whether the proposed elements of the specification that Francisco presented seem to be going in the intended direction, or whether you believe changes are needed.RDDS Labeling: Any additional feedback on the issues raised on today’s call should be sent to the list no later than this Friday, 1 September. Agenda for 5 Sept IRT call: De-accreditation process proposal (to be sent to the list this week); PPAA issue 26 (new! Suggested on-list by Sara Bockey, re 24/7 monitoring of abuse contact); next steps on data retention (possible)Any IRT feedback on comments from list from Margie Milam re: IP framework (attached) should be sent to list no later than this Friday, 1 September.Any IRT feedback on comments from list from Steve Metalitz on PPAA Sect. 3.5.4 should be sent to list no later than this Friday, 1 September. Please note that draft PPAA_17July (attached) has not been updated to reflect IRT discussions to date (this is the original sent to the IRT). Once we have completed the issues list, we will distribute an updated draft v2 that reflects all changes made per the IRT’s feedback, for the IRT’s review. Finally, as many of you are probably aware, I am preparing to go out on maternity leave in about 3 weeks (for 12 weeks). I should be around through 22 Sept, but I wanted to alert you to this in case I’m unexpectedly out before then. Caitlin Tubergen will be providing backup support for this project while I’m away (thanks, Caitlin!), and every effort has been made to keep this project moving at the current pace in my absence. Thanks to all your hard work and dedication, this IRT’s work should be ready to publish for public comment while I’m away, barring any unexpected developments. I’ll be following your work while I’m out, and will be back either the week before the ICANN holiday break or the first week of 2018. Thanks for your understanding and please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have questions. Best,Amy Amy E. BivinsRegistrar Services and Engagement Senior ManagerRegistrar Services and Industry RelationsInternet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.orgwww.icann.org

1 0

Re: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Notes, Action Items from 22 August PP IRT Call [PLEASE complete poll]
by Darcy Southwell Aug. 29, 2017

Aug. 29, 2017

My apologies, but I won’t be able to make today’s meeting. Best, Darcy ---------------- Darcy Southwell | Compliance Officer M: +1 503-453-7305 │ Skype: darcy.enyeart From: <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Amy Bivins <amy.bivins(a)icann.org> Reply-To: <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 7:00 AM To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Notes, Action Items from 22 August PP IRT Call [PLEASE complete poll] Hello, All, Thanks so much for your active participation on yesterday’s Privacy/Proxy IRT call. For those of you would could not attend, I encourage you to please listen to the recording, available on the wiki, https://community.icann.org/display/IRT/22+August+2017. Several action items resulted from this meeting: IRT: Please complete this linked poll regarding the proposed edit to the LEA framework, specification 4 of the draft PPAA, https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2F5BGBG, no later than next Monday, 28 August. Please read the background before the first question carefully. The IRT discussion on this topic yesterday continued to demonstrate a division among the group regarding this proposed edit. The results of this poll will not be counted as a vote but are intended to ensure that we have a complete record and understanding of all IRT participants’ opinions on this topic. This is important. Please participate. There are only two substantive questions. IRT: Please provide any additional feedback no later than Monday, 28 August, on the “record-keeping” topic, issue 24 on the issues list. IRT: Please provide any additional feedback you have no later than Monday, 28 August, on the IP framework (issue 20 on the issues list), particularly the issue raised on the call, regarding the proposed addition of language from the framework’s introduction in the Final Report. IRT: Please provide any additional feedback you have no later than Monday, 28 August, on the “business dealings” section of the PPAA draft (issue 25 on the issues list). ICANN will review the “business dealings” section of the PPAA draft, per IRT feedback, to ensure that the language (when read in consultation with the rest of the contract) will not result in duplicative notice requirements (ie, customers should receive one notice (e.g. data accuracy notices), either from the provider or registrar—not both). Finally, you will notice that we are moving fairly quickly to the end of the issues list (albeit with many action items to follow up on). Please send any additional points related to the PPAA draft that you would like to discuss to the list. Once we reach the end of the issues list, if we have no further suggestions from you, we will move on to other topics. For next week’s call, we are planning to discuss data escrow and RDDS labeling. I will confirm this by Monday morning Eastern Time at the latest (we are currently working to finalize an updated draft specification for your review). Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org www.icann.org _______________________________________________ Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl mailing list Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl

2 1

Notes, Action Items from 22 August PP IRT Call [PLEASE complete poll]
by Amy Bivins Aug. 29, 2017

Aug. 29, 2017

Hello, All, Thanks so much for your active participation on yesterday's Privacy/Proxy IRT call. For those of you would could not attend, I encourage you to please listen to the recording, available on the wiki, https://community.icann.org/display/IRT/22+August+2017. Several action items resulted from this meeting: * IRT: Please complete this linked poll regarding the proposed edit to the LEA framework, specification 4 of the draft PPAA, https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2F5BGBG, no later than next Monday, 28 August. Please read the background before the first question carefully. * The IRT discussion on this topic yesterday continued to demonstrate a division among the group regarding this proposed edit. The results of this poll will not be counted as a vote but are intended to ensure that we have a complete record and understanding of all IRT participants' opinions on this topic. This is important. Please participate. There are only two substantive questions. * IRT: Please provide any additional feedback no later than Monday, 28 August, on the "record-keeping" topic, issue 24 on the issues list. * IRT: Please provide any additional feedback you have no later than Monday, 28 August, on the IP framework (issue 20 on the issues list), particularly the issue raised on the call, regarding the proposed addition of language from the framework's introduction in the Final Report. * IRT: Please provide any additional feedback you have no later than Monday, 28 August, on the "business dealings" section of the PPAA draft (issue 25 on the issues list). * ICANN will review the "business dealings" section of the PPAA draft, per IRT feedback, to ensure that the language (when read in consultation with the rest of the contract) will not result in duplicative notice requirements (ie, customers should receive one notice (e.g. data accuracy notices), either from the provider or registrar-not both). Finally, you will notice that we are moving fairly quickly to the end of the issues list (albeit with many action items to follow up on). Please send any additional points related to the PPAA draft that you would like to discuss to the list. Once we reach the end of the issues list, if we have no further suggestions from you, we will move on to other topics. For next week's call, we are planning to discuss data escrow and RDDS labeling. I will confirm this by Monday morning Eastern Time at the latest (we are currently working to finalize an updated draft specification for your review). Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

5 9

Action items from today's PP IRT call
by Amy Bivins Aug. 22, 2017

Aug. 22, 2017

Hello, All, Thanks so much for your participation on today's IRT call. I've updated the issues list (attached) with the input we received on this morning's call. We have several outstanding discussion topics that we are requesting your feedback on via the list this week (requested deadline of 21 August): 1. Any additional feedback on PPAA issue 1: definitions (outlined in detail in attached slides from this week's meeting) 1. Any additional feedback on PPAA issue 3: amendment/negotiation process. Edits were proposed by ICANN this week to allow proposed amendments to the PPAA to be considered by a working group convened by the GNSO or the Privacy/Proxy Stakeholder Group (if one is ever created). During today's call, it was recommended by an IRT member that this should be limited, such that if there is ever a stakeholder group, its members can participate in the GNSO-convened group, but would not replace the GNSO-convened group in the PPAA amendment negotiation process. For reference, for the RAA negotiation process, the "working group" for negotiations is convened by the RrSG (See 2013 RAA Section 7.4.1). IRT feedback is requested on the proposed edits as well as the recommendation raised on today's call. 1. Any additional feedback on PPAA issue 21: RAA synchronization. The IRT was asked whether any future updates to the RAA involving sections that are adapted in the PPAA should result in automatic updates to the PPAA. It was recommended on today's call that updates could be synchronized with the PPAA, but this should not be automatic. Any proposed updates to the PPAA as a result of RAA updates should be presented to the working group (referenced in Item 2, above) for approval. IRT feedback is sought on the topic of synchronization in general, as well as the recommendation made on today's call. In addition, feedback is sought on whether, if we do decide to have an approval mechanism before changes go into effect, the working group should always be the approval mechanism or whether other means, such as a public comment forum, could also be used. 1. Leading into next week's continued discussion of the LEA framework, additional IRT feedback is requested on the proposed edit from the PSWG, that would reduce the time to review requests from LEA from 2 business days to 24 hours (See PPAA Issue 19 in attached issues list). IRT feedback on this topic has not produced a clear consensus on this topic. Please consider this issue and come prepared to discuss this topic on next week's call, with the goal of reaching a resolution on this topic. 1. Customer Data Accuracy (See item 15 in issues list). It was noted on-list and on today's call that the requirements in the draft Customer Data Accuracy Specification and Section 3.5.4.1, including pending updates based on IRT input, may result in some inconsistencies or lack of clarity surrounding requirements for providers. Please provide any further input on this topic. ICANN will revisit these provisions, taking into account IRT feedback, and propose language to clarify these requirements. Thanks so much in advance for your consideration of these items. For next week's call, we are planning to discuss: * The PSWG-proposed update to the LEA framework, * Proposed next steps on data retention based on IRT feedback, * The IP framework, * ICANN reporting requirements, and * Any IRT feedback on the "business dealings" section of the PPAA (section 3.5)(this was a topic suggested by an IRT member). If you have questions or comments in the interim, please don't hesitate to send them to the list. Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

3 4

Re: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Action items from today's PP IRT call
by Margie Milam Aug. 22, 2017

Aug. 22, 2017

Hi- In advance of tomorrow’s call, here are a few issues to consider related to the IP related text: * The Final Report states: Given the balance that this Policy attempts to strike, evidence of the use of high-volume, automated electronic processes for sending Requests or responses to Requests (without human review) to the systems of Requesters, Providers, or Customers in performing any of the steps in the processes outlined in this Policy shall create a rebuttable presumption of non-compliance with this Policy. I may have missed this, but it seems the Agreement should include an obligation on the Provider to conduct a human review of the requests. Also, is there language regarding the rebuttable presumption of noncompliance if there are high-volume automated electronic responses to a request? * How does the IP requester know where to send the requests or that the domain name is a privacy/proxy registration? Specification 3 doesn’t seem to include a unique label for P/P Providers nor does it include the Abuse Point of Contact information for the Provider. All the best, Margie From: <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Amy Bivins <amy.bivins(a)icann.org> Reply-To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 12:40 PM To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Action items from today's PP IRT call Hello, All, Thanks so much for your participation on today’s IRT call. I’ve updated the issues list (attached) with the input we received on this morning’s call. We have several outstanding discussion topics that we are requesting your feedback on via the list this week (requested deadline of 21 August): 1. Any additional feedback on PPAA issue 1: definitions (outlined in detail in attached slides from this week’s meeting) 1. Any additional feedback on PPAA issue 3: amendment/negotiation process. Edits were proposed by ICANN this week to allow proposed amendments to the PPAA to be considered by a working group convened by the GNSO or the Privacy/Proxy Stakeholder Group (if one is ever created). During today’s call, it was recommended by an IRT member that this should be limited, such that if there is ever a stakeholder group, its members can participate in the GNSO-convened group, but would not replace the GNSO-convened group in the PPAA amendment negotiation process. For reference, for the RAA negotiation process, the “working group” for negotiations is convened by the RrSG (See 2013 RAA Section 7.4.1). IRT feedback is requested on the proposed edits as well as the recommendation raised on today’s call. 1. Any additional feedback on PPAA issue 21: RAA synchronization. The IRT was asked whether any future updates to the RAA involving sections that are adapted in the PPAA should result in automatic updates to the PPAA. It was recommended on today’s call that updates could be synchronized with the PPAA, but this should not be automatic. Any proposed updates to the PPAA as a result of RAA updates should be presented to the working group (referenced in Item 2, above) for approval. IRT feedback is sought on the topic of synchronization in general, as well as the recommendation made on today’s call. In addition, feedback is sought on whether, if we do decide to have an approval mechanism before changes go into effect, the working group should always be the approval mechanism or whether other means, such as a public comment forum, could also be used. 1. Leading into next week’s continued discussion of the LEA framework, additional IRT feedback is requested on the proposed edit from the PSWG, that would reduce the time to review requests from LEA from 2 business days to 24 hours (See PPAA Issue 19 in attached issues list). IRT feedback on this topic has not produced a clear consensus on this topic. Please consider this issue and come prepared to discuss this topic on next week’s call, with the goal of reaching a resolution on this topic. 1. Customer Data Accuracy (See item 15 in issues list). It was noted on-list and on today’s call that the requirements in the draft Customer Data Accuracy Specification and Section 3.5.4.1, including pending updates based on IRT input, may result in some inconsistencies or lack of clarity surrounding requirements for providers. Please provide any further input on this topic. ICANN will revisit these provisions, taking into account IRT feedback, and propose language to clarify these requirements. Thanks so much in advance for your consideration of these items. For next week’s call, we are planning to discuss: * The PSWG-proposed update to the LEA framework, * Proposed next steps on data retention based on IRT feedback, * The IP framework, * ICANN reporting requirements, and * Any IRT feedback on the “business dealings” section of the PPAA (section 3.5)(this was a topic suggested by an IRT member). If you have questions or comments in the interim, please don’t hesitate to send them to the list. Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMFAg&…>

2 1

Action items, request for additional IRT input after 8 August IRT call
by Amy Bivins Aug. 15, 2017

Aug. 15, 2017

Dear Colleagues, Thanks so much for your active participation on today's IRT call. If you were unable to attend, I encourage you to listen to the recording, which is available on the wiki, https://community.icann.org/display/IRT/08+August+2017 Attached, you will find an updated "issues list" that includes a detailed summary of all the PPAA-related topics discussed to date, including those raised on the call today. A very short summary of the input received today and the significant outstanding questions is also available below. Please review the topics discussed today and submit any additional feedback you have no later than next Monday, 14 August. Your feedback is especially needed on the LEA Framework and Data Retention topics. Proposed upcoming IRT discussion schedule: 15 August: PPAA definitions, PPAA amendment/negotiation process (updated per IRT feedback), RAA synchronization, request suggestions for future discussion topics 22 August: LEA framework, data retention, IP Framework, business dealings 29 August: Data escrow, labeling (new draft specification modeled on RAA requirements to be provided, per IRT feedback) Summary of Discussion on Today's Call * PPAA Issues 18-19: LEA Framework: * Updates to definitions to conform with rest of PPAA: no further edits suggested by IRT * Proposed edit to Section 3.2.1 from PSWG, editing the section as follows: [cid:image002.png@01D3105C.76955490] * Summary of proposed edit: This would reduce the period required for a provider to initiate a review of a law enforcement request from 2 business days to 24 hours. However, this would also eliminate any requirement for the provider to respond to the LEA requester within 24 hours. * PSWG rationale: This edit was made to align more closely with RAA requirement (See Section 3.18.2<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-2013-09-17-en> RAA-"Well-founded reports of Illegal Activity submitted to these contacts must be reviewed within 24 hours by an individual who is empowered by Registrar to take necessary and appropriate actions in response to the report." * Summary of IRT feedback thus far: Some IRT members said 24 hours is too short a period; possibly 1 business day would be preferable; Other IRT members supported edit and alignment with RAA. See issues list for detailed feedback. * PPAA Issues 4, 23: Data Retention Requirements * Summary of IRT Feedback: Proposed required data elements appear generally OK; retention period appears to create issues under global data protection laws notwithstanding proposed reduction from RAA's 2-year requirement to 1-year requirement proposed for PPAA * Proposed solution raised by IRT member: Edit to require retention based on maximum period allowed under applicable law. * PPAA Issue 12: Accreditation Agreement Term * Summary of IRT Feedback: IRT members who commented supported the inclusion of a 5-year term for the contract, as is done for the RAA. * Customer Data Accuracy Specification: * Summary of IRT Feedback: Questions raised regarding how third-party providers would comply with these requirements. * IRT is requested to comment further on this specification, specifically, if a third-party provider cannot comply with these requirements, how should this be handled in the contract? Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

3 5

Updates, action items following 1 August PP IRT call
by Amy Bivins Aug. 8, 2017

Aug. 8, 2017

Dear Colleagues, Thanks so much for your active participation on today's Privacy/Proxy IRT call. We made a lot of progress. If you were unable to attend, the recording and materials are available on the wiki, https://community.icann.org/display/IRT/01+August+2017. I've updated the issues list (attached) for the topics discussed today (Issues 5, 6, 9, 10, 13) based on your feedback. IRT Action Items 1. Please provide any additional input you have on issues 5, 6, 9, 10, and 13 no later than next Monday, 7 August. In particular, please consider the following questions that arose during today's meeting: * Regarding issue 6 (Section 3.5.4.1 of the draft PPAA), should we consider reducing the required period from 15 days to some shortened period? If yes, do you have recommendations for what the shortened time period should be? * Regarding issue 13 (PPAA section 5.7.1): (i) Is it feasible for a registrar to block new registrations from a suspended provider (provided that provider is identified by its ICANN ID during the registration process)? (IRT input on this point has been mixed); (ii) If the answer to (i) is yes, is any additional language required with respect to Point 5 raised during the call ("sounds like we need an EPP for PP Providers")? 2. Please complete the IRT poll re: data escrow and additional PPAA discussion topics no later than Friday, 4 August, https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/62XCMSS Next Week Next week, we plan to discuss Issues 4 and 23(data retention), 12 (accreditation term), 15 (Customer Data Accuracy Spec), 17-19 (LEA Specification). We will discuss data retention and the LEA specification first, to ensure we can discuss both of these while we have our PSWG colleagues on the call. Thanks in advance for your continued consideration of the issues discussed today and your completion of the poll. If you have questions or comments before our next meeting, please send them to the list. Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins(a)icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins@icann.org> www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

7 10