Dear DNSAM PDP1,

please see below the high-level notes and action items from todays call.

The session recording can be found here: https://icann.zoom.us/recording/detail?meeting_id=T7r3Qf8yTNm0QjfqG5q2Lg%3D%3D

Our next meeting is scheduled for Monday, 13 April at 12:30 UTC.

Kind regards,

Feodora

Action Items: 

• Staff to update straw person incorporating discussion on Q1 and 2
• WG to Review updated straw person and propose language adjustments toward convergence as well as rationale
• WG to provide input on business models and potential impact/considerations e.g. Clarify direct vs. reseller models and any others to inform association criteria.

Important Documents:

• Collaboration Document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GxM-Yrgv6sZPEYU8ikW4cRM5YqWsJuWGiQyO39pLqNE/edit?usp=sharing
• WG wiki/ Session Slides: https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DAMP1/pages/935755777/2026-04-07+DNS+Abuse+Mitigation+PDP1+WG
• Recording: https://icann.zoom.us/recording/detail?meeting_id=T7r3Qf8yTNm0QjfqG5q2Lg%3D%3D

High Level Notes:

1. Welcome (2 min)
2. Decision on WG Meeting Schedule & holidays (3 min)

• Meeting schedule and holiday adjustments are “locked in”. Meetings to continue Mondays at 12:30 UTC. Some meeting conflicting w major holidays have been moved to Tuesday 12:30. Meeting invites have been updated. Please check your inbox.

3. Update on Workplan (5 min)

· Work plan submitted to Council; expected to be discussed/acknowledged on 16 April.

· Board liaisons confirmed: Jim Galvin, Chris Buckridge

4. Updates on CQ 1 (25 min)

• Preliminary recommendation (strawperson): When a registrar has actionable evidence and has taken mitigation under 3.18.2, registrar must perform an associated domain check.

• No convergence seems to exist on the following areas:

· Disagreement on whether action must occur before conducting ADC.

· Whether one abusive/malicious domain is sufficient trigger/threshold.

· Some noted the risk of potentially low threshold, workload, and “guilt by association”.

· Please see link to collaboration document for more details on proposed language: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GxM-Yrgv6sZPEYU8ikW4cRM5YqWsJuWGiQyO39pLqNE/edit?usp=sharing

5. Continue Deliberations to CQ 2 and CQ 3 (50 min)

• Seems to be alignment on:

· Association criteria should be flexible, non-prescriptive, and adaptable.

· Avoid a fixed checklist, prefer examples/best practices.

· Recognize variation across registrar models and evolving threat behaviour.

· Further discussion needed on the relationship between “indicators” and contractual requirements?

6. AOB (5 min)