October 2019 - gnso-council-IDN-scoping

Re: [GNSO-Council-IDN-Scoping] Alternative Time for 10 October Meeting
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis Oct. 4, 2019

Oct. 4, 2019

It’s fine with me, Ariel. Thanks, Dennis From: gnso-council-IDN-scoping <gnso-council-idn-scoping-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Ariel Liang via gnso-council-IDN-scoping <gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 3, 2019 at 2:43 PM To: "gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org" <gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [GNSO-Council-IDN-Scoping] Alternative Time for 10 October Meeting Dear All, Per action item, staff would like to check whether scoping team members are available for a call at 13:00 UTC on Thursday, 10 October as an alternative meeting time. It is not too late in Hong Kong (evening) and during the day time for Europe (afternoon) and North America (morning). If no objection, staff will schedule the call according to the suggested time. Best Regards, Ariel

2 1

Alternative Time for 10 October Meeting
by Ariel Liang Oct. 3, 2019

Oct. 3, 2019

Dear All, Per action item, staff would like to check whether scoping team members are available for a call at 13:00 UTC on Thursday, 10 October as an alternative meeting time. It is not too late in Hong Kong (evening) and during the day time for Europe (afternoon) and North America (morning). If no objection, staff will schedule the call according to the suggested time. Best Regards, Ariel

1 0

Post call | IDN Scoping Team call | Thursday 03 October 2019 at 08:00 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Oct. 3, 2019

Oct. 3, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the IDN Scoping Team call held on Thursday, 03 October 2019 at 08:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/UIcCBw> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-council-idn-scoping/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/b4HkBg>. Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie

1 0

FW: Request to forward: Recommendations on Technical Utilization of RZ-LGR
by Steve Chan Oct. 3, 2019

Oct. 3, 2019

Dear IDN Scoping Team, FYI, just forwarded the attached documents around the Recommendations for the Technical Utilization of the Root Zone Label Generation Rules (RZ-LGR) to the GNSO Council leadership team. Edmon and Dennis will of course already be familiar with them. Please see the note to Council leadership for additional context. Best, Steve From: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, October 2, 2019 at 10:34 AM To: <gnso-chairs(a)icann.org> Subject: FW: Request to forward: Recommendations on Technical Utilization of RZ-LGR Keith, Pam, Rafik, As noted by Sarmad below, “Please find attached the Recommendations for the Technical Utilization of the Root Zone Label Generation Rules (RZ-LGR) developed by the RZ-LGR Study Group (SG) and a cover note by the SG for the SO/AC chairs.” Per the cover letter, the next step is publication of the report and recommendations, along with Board consideration. If these technical recommendations are adopted by the Board, they should be considered in conjunction with the IDN variant recommendations already adopted and being discussed by the IDNs Scoping Team. At this time, I do not believe there is any action needed and these documents are being sent in advance of publication as a courtesy, though we may want to also forward to the IDN Scoping Team. We’re happy to do so if you agree. Best, Steve From: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 at 7:31 AM To: Steve Sheng <steve.sheng(a)icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>, Heidi Ullrich <Heidi.Ullrich(a)icann.org>, Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> Subject: Request to forward: Recommendations on Technical Utilization of RZ-LGR Dear all, Please find attached the Recommendations for the Technical Utilization of the Root Zone Label Generation Rules (RZ-LGR) developed by the RZ-LGR Study Group (SG) and a cover note by the SG for the SO/AC chairs. May I request you to please help forward these to the chairs of the respective SOs and ACs which you support (SSAC, ALAC, GNSO and ccNSO) on behalf of the SG. I would appreciate if you can confirm sending this across, for me to report back to the SG. Regards, Sarmad

1 0

Proposed agenda 3 October 2019, 08:00 UTC
by Steve Chan Oct. 2, 2019

Oct. 2, 2019

Dear All, With apologies, I just realized I neglected to send an agenda for the IDN Scoping team call, I think partially because it’s likely rather clear what we will discuss. However, please find the proposed agenda below: Welcome, roll call & staff update Continued: Identifying problems/issues with IDN variant TLD recommendations AOB For item 2, it may be helpful to think of that item in the context of the questions posed to the list and responded to by both Dennis and Edmon (which I see was only sent to Dennis, Ariel, and me). You can find Edmon’s response below. Best, Steve From: Edmon <edmon(a)registry.asia> Date: Thursday, September 26, 2019 at 12:11 AM To: "'Tan Tanaka, Dennis'" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>, Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>, Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: [GNSO-Council-IDN-Scoping] Actions & Notes: GNSO IDN Scoping Team Meeting 12 September 3:00 UTC Apologies again for the change in schedule, and thanks for the flexibility to accommodate the change. Am currently at the CDNC meetings in Taipei. Thanks also Steve for kicking off the discussions. Please do take a look and give your thoughts. In general, as mentioned at the end of last meeting, I am in rough agreement with the conclusions. And the roughness is due to a big uncertainty about the integrity of the IDN Variant concept of considering the base/primary IDN and its corresponding IDN Variants as an integral application/registration/etc by policy. In short I personally think that it is important for the community to go through the Policy process to make this clarification and direction more concrete (even though the concept has been included in the previous GNSO Policy within the IDN Outcomes report) or if it is to be . Most of the gaps in the recommendations can be addressed I think in implementation except for this overarching issue. But I think a PDP (whether E or not) would make sense to not only clarify this overarching concept (integrity of base/primary IDN with its set of IDN Variants as defined by the relevant LGR) as well as the other recommendations should be useful. The previous IDN Outcomes report is in any case more than 10 years old and should be updated, even though when I read it recently many of the principles remain relevant. My personal view of it, but I am hoping to get other’s thoughts on Steve’s questions as well. Edmon From: gnso-council-IDN-scoping [mailto:gnso-council-idn-scoping-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Tan Tanaka, Dennis via gnso-council-IDN-scoping Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 9:36 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org>; Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org>; gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [GNSO-Council-IDN-Scoping] Actions & Notes: GNSO IDN Scoping Team Meeting 12 September 3:00 UTC Steve, all Thanks for setting this up and appreciate this week’s meeting being rescheduled for next week. I will have more time to prepare. About the below questions. I agree, they are a good starting point. Best, Dennis From: gnso-council-IDN-scoping <gnso-council-idn-scoping-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Steve Chan via gnso-council-IDN-scoping <gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Steve Chan <steve.chan(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, September 23, 2019 at 7:46 PM To: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org>, "gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org" <gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [GNSO-Council-IDN-Scoping] Actions & Notes: GNSO IDN Scoping Team Meeting 12 September 3:00 UTC Hello Team, The agenda of the upcoming meeting will focus on continuing the discussion from last meeting: Identifying problems/issues with IDN variant TLD recommendations. In advance of the next meeting, staff thought it might be useful to try and get conversation started on this topic over email, which from our perspective was helpful to think along the lines below as identified in the last meeting. In respect of the IDN Variant TLD Implementation [icann.org] 1) Is there disagreement with the conclusions? if so, which ones and why 2) Is there additional research and analysis needed? 3) Do you agree with the recommendations, but think there are details or precision missing? In other words, are there gaps in the recommendations? This is not intended to limit the discussion in any way but rather to initiate discussion and hopefully streamline the conversation during the actual meeting. The logic in thinking through the issues and expected level of work is that you then have better information to make a decision on the proper policy development vehicle (i.e., new PDP, new EPDP, leverage in-flight PDPs). Best, Steve From: gnso-council-IDN-scoping <gnso-council-idn-scoping-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Ariel Liang via gnso-council-IDN-scoping <gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 8:44 AM To: "gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org" <gnso-council-idn-scoping(a)icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-Council-IDN-Scoping] Actions & Notes: GNSO IDN Scoping Team Meeting 12 September 3:00 UTC Dear All, Please find below the action items and notes captured during the IDN Scoping Team call on Thursday, 12 September at 3:00-4:00 UTC. Staff has posted to the wiki space the action items and notes. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording and chat room records, which are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/VY7kBg Best Regards, Ariel == Action Item None Notes 1. Welcome, roll call & staff - Katrina sent a letter to the ICANN Board, requesting the Board to officially end ccNSO PDP2, so that ccNSO can launch PDP4 which focuses on outlining the difference between string similarity and IDN variant, as well as selection of IDN ccTLD strings, etc. https://ccnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/field-attached/sataki-to-chalab… [ccnso.icann.org] - Will better understand the timeline of ccNSO PDP4 following the ccNSO Council meeting next Thursday. GNSO staff will keep coordinating with the ccNSO staff and keep the scoping team informed about the timeline. 2. Conclude identifying problems/issues related to the IDN guidelines/IDN tables (2nd level) - On sending liaison(s) to the ccPDP on IDN ccTLDs, the scoping team plans to ask the GNSO Council to call for volunteer(s) to serve as liaison(s) with the understanding that 1) the liaisons should have some expertise on the subject matter and, 2) not be limited Council members. - There may be some limitations on the number of people who will volunteer for the liaison position. - When the ccNSO PDP4 working group charter is being developed, the liaison aspect will be integrated. GNSO & ccNSO staff will also discuss the number of liaisons in the next coordination call. - For PDPs, the Council usually only assigns a single liaison. - Liaison represents one mechanism for coordination between the ccNSO and GNSO. The Scoping Team may consider holding off sending the Council the request to call for volunteer, and thinking about other mechanisms for coordination. GNSO Council does not need to rush to select liaison(s) yet. - Working conclusion of the IDN Tables/IDN Implementation Guidelines (2nd level): On the topic of ICANN IDN Implementation Guidelines the Scoping Team will propose for the GNSO to set up 2 working groups: 1) an expert group that should include policy/legal and technical/operations expertise to address outstanding issues of the implementation of the guidelines 4.0 and its implications on operations, change of backend registry and the Registry Agreement in particular as it relates to Exhibit A and Spec 6; 2) a policy working group that would look into the appropriate future processes and updates of the IDN Implementation Guidelines, including where it may be appropriate to distinguish/separate from the ccNSO, and how it fits into the broader policy context and technical/operational requirements of gTLDs. - Good to give the Council some indication on the progress and provide an update on the preliminary recommendations for the IDN Tables/IDN Implementation Guidelines. - Staff have been updating the option paper by adding the problem definition outline and will make it compatible with Edmon’s phrasing about the working conclusions. 3. Identifying problems/issues with IDN variant TLD recommendations - Presentation by Sarmad on IDN Variant TLD recommendations - Now is time to consider developing policy regarding the allocation and delegation of the variant TLD recommendations. It may be safe to say that a PDP is probably required. A PDP should probably start from the staff documents for the IDN Variant TLD recommendations. - The scope of work will help inform the selection of mechanism. Helpful questions to think of 1) is there disagreement with the conclusions? if so, which ones and why 2) is there additional research and analysis needed? 3) do you agree with the recommendations, but think there are details or precision missing? in other words, are there gaps in the recommendations? - For example, if additional research and analysis are not needed, then an Issue Report can be skipped and can request the Council to launch an EPDP, and the staff paper could serve as the Issue Report. - What would be the outcome of the GNSO PDP? Even if people agree with all the IDN variant TLD management recommendations, we will still need an official process to validate the recommendations. We could potentially rely on some inflight PDPs (RPM, SubPro) to validate those recommendations. - Maybe some part of the recommendations can be deliberated by SubPro, but some other parts cannot work, as it is forward looking. GNSO Council can also change the scope of SubPro PDP, if necessary.  - One of the problems with the recommendation is about the multiple applicant for variant TLDs. 4. AOB

1 0