August 2022 - Gnso-epdp-idn-team

Reminder: Draft Outcome: Group 3 Charter Questions Related to Variants' Impact on New gTLD Program
by Ariel Liang 31 Aug '22

31 Aug '22

Dear All, This is a reminder for reviewing the draft outcome language of Group 3 charter questions by Wednesday, 31 August. We look forward to further discussion during this Thursday’s meeting. Best Regards, Ariel From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, August 15, 2022 at 10:20 AM To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> Subject: Draft Outcome: Group 3 Charter Questions Related to Variants' Impact on New gTLD Program Dear All Please find the draft outcome language for Group 3 charter questions related to the variants’ impact on the New gTLD Program, which are: · D2 & D3: see pp.5-6 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… · E2 (part 1) & E5 (part 1): see pp.1-4 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RLvsyQvliafNEA9Ja1RCObywpAWfp1kTmte0WZl… Both documents are also posted on the wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/XwyHCg. Following the agreed format, the draft outcome language includes the following components: * Brief answer to the charter question * Recommendations and implementation guidance * Rationale for recommendations and implementation guidance Please note that for charter question E2 (Part 2) is being addressed by the String Similarity Small Group, and E5 (Part 2) is pending EPDP Team’s further deliberation on the strings ineligible for delegation topic. Please provide any input/suggestion for the draft outcome language on the mailing list by EOB Wednesday, 31 August. The EPDP Team is expected to discuss these draft languages during its call on Thursday, 1 September. Thank you for your review! Best Regards, Steve, Emily, Ariel

3 3

**REMINDER** Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 01 September 2022 at 13:30 UTC
by Julie Bisland 31 Aug '22

31 Aug '22

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 01 September 2022 at 13:30 UTC for 90 minutes. Please click link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFz…> Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K For Audio only: One tap mobile : US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950 Passcode: 5259149775 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH__;!!PtGJab4!v…> If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…> Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call * Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only * Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/MAYVD * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/2p8amrz2 [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/2p8amrz2__;!!PtGJab4!4cWY5xE…> ONLY for Members and Participants * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Please select Everyone, when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. Only for Observers: * Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. * Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands. Thank you. Kind regards, Devan

1 0

ICANN75 schedule is published / How to Get Organized
by Julie Bisland 30 Aug '22

30 Aug '22

Dear all, With ICANN75 just around the corner, please take a moment to read the information below for a seamless and successful meeting. REGISTER TODAY * Sign into Your ICANN Account, or create an account here [account.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/account.icann.org/login__;!!PtGJab4!_Q3w…>. * Register by selecting Meeting Registration. * Click on the Registration link. Click here [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…> for detailed instructions. Before creating your schedule, please read this page carefully: https://75.schedule.icann.org/participation-tools [75.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/75.schedule.icann.org/participation-tool…> CREATE YOUR MEETING SCHEDULE * If participating remotely, go here [75.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/75.schedule.icann.org/__;!!PtGJab4!_Q3wY…> and select the Schedule dropdown->Full Agenda->Scroll to the days and sessions you plan to attend and click the + to add the session to your agenda. * If participating on-site, please read the https://75.schedule.icann.org/health-safety [75.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/75.schedule.icann.org/health-safety__;!!…> page and then proceed to access to the schedule: https://75.schedule.icann.org/ [75.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/75.schedule.icann.org/__;!!PtGJab4!_Q3wY…>. Go to Schedule dropdown->Full Agenda->Scroll to the sessions you plan to attend and click the + to add the session to your agenda. * Please remember, for security purposes, participation links will be posted 24-hours prior to the session start times. There will be no calendar invitations sent, as the meeting schedule allows you to download all sessions of interest to you, to your individual calendars Review the Participation Tools and update Zoom * All sessions will use Zoom rooms. Access details are available 24hrs prior on the ICANN75 Meeting Schedule [75.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/75.schedule.icann.org/__;!!PtGJab4!_Q3wY…>. * Visit the Participation Tools page [75.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/75.schedule.icann.org/participation-tool…> for links to download the latest version of Zoom for access to the ICANN Meeting sessions. * Please see the *In-Person* or *Virtual* Participant How-To Guide for more information on how to get the most out of the virtual meeting tools. Links to Bookmark ICANN75 Meeting Schedule [75.schedule.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/75.schedule.icann.org/__;!!PtGJab4!_Q3wY…> GNSO ICANN75 Wiki Page<https://community.icann.org/x/cQcVD> GNSO Session agendas<https://community.icann.org/x/bwcVD> For all GNSO meeting-related queries (RP or others), please email us at: gnso-secs(a)icann.org and we will be more than happy to assist! Kind regards, GNSO SO/AC Support team -- Julie Bisland Policy Operations Sr. Coordinator (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype ID: 79613b691cb8a6c1 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

Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Meeting #50 - Thursday 1 September 2022 at 13:30 UTC
by Emily Barabas 30 Aug '22

30 Aug '22

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for our meeting on Thursday 1 September 2022 at 13:30 UTC. Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily IDN EPDP Meeting #50 Proposed Agenda 1. Roll Call & SOI (2 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair Updates (5 mins) - Update on String Similarity work – data collection 1. Strings ineligible for delegation (40 mins) 2. Second reading of Group 2 outcomes and second reading of Group 3 outcomes, if comments are received (40 mins) 3. AOB (3 min)

1 0

Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Confirm Edits: Group 2 Charter Questions Related to "Same Entity" Principle at Top-Level
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis 30 Aug '22

30 Aug '22

Ariel, et al Members of the RySG reviewed the proposed revision to the Rationale for Recommendation 2.6 which incorporates a reference to “usability goals for IDN variants”. We consider this addition to be inappropriate for two reasons. First, the language in the rationale should not be used to expand the intent (or scope) of the recommendation itself. In this case, Recommendation 2.6 refers to the technical and operational competence of a TLD registry operator, therefore the corresponding rationale should elaborate on the same terms. Second, the term “usability goals” is not defined which, if taken into consideration, can lead to subjective outcomes from an evaluation standpoint, which can impact predictability of the evaluation process. Therefore, the RySG respectfully rejects the latest revision to the language in the section Rationale for Recommendation 2.6. At the same time, we provide the following edits. Recommendation 2.6: The applicant will be required, as part of the application process, to explain the reason(s) why it needs to activate the applied-for variant label(s). In addition, the applicant will be required to demonstrate their ability to manage the primary IDN gTLD and the applied-for variant label(s) as a set from both a technical and operational perspective. Rationale for Recommendation 2.6: As IDN gTLDs and variant labels that are considered a set are yet to be delegated and operated at the root zone level, there is uncertainty about how athe set of variant TLDs will be managed and operated by athe registry operator from a technical and user perspective. Therefore, it will be important that applicants are able to explain their need for a set of IDN variant TLD label(s) as well as to demonstrate their technical capability to operate and manage the set of TLDs. Consequently Therefore, the applicant will be required to respond to additional application questions to address why they seek to activate those variant label(s) in addition to the primary new gTLD (i.e., necessity and expected usage of the variant labels), as well as how it plans to manage the set technically and operationally to achieve the security, stability, and usability goals for IDN variants as well as how it plans to manage the set operationally, with a view to ensuring a secure, stable, and consistent user experience. The applicant’s response to these questions is expected to be a critical component in the evaluation process. Evaluators with requisite expertise are expected to assess these responses. In addition, we ask the IDN EPDP working group to consider removing, or clarifying, the last two sentences (in green). They seem editorial in nature, and we are unsure as to what specifically these will accomplish. With respect to “The applicant’s response to these questions is expected to be a critical component in the evaluation process” Is the objective to promote IDN variant management competence questions over other aspects of the application? If the answer is no, then we don’t understand the need to make such an observation i.e., “critical component”. With respect to “Evaluators with requisite expertise are expected to assess these responses”, the RySG believes is a redundant and unnecessary statement as we expect that every step of the application process is undertaken in a professional and competent manner. However, if the intent is to provide instructions to the implementation team i.e., to seek ad hoc expertise, then we suggest making that clarification. The RySG does not have additional comments of the other remaining items. We are happy to continue this conversation over the course of the next working group meeting. Best, Dennis, on behalf the RySG IDN EPDP members From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, August 12, 2022 at 2:39 PM To: Dennis Tan Tanaka <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Confirm Edits: Group 2 Charter Questions Related to "Same Entity" Principle at Top-Level Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear All, During its meeting on 28 July<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1D9WAeo4A7tGzNRh7jMth-JcnjcXnvGtqYuUYgY8DQKQmJ…>, the EPDP Team discussed the input (mainly from RySG) for the outcome language of Group 2 charter questions. Members had preliminary agreement on the suggested edits discussed during the call. Since some members were not be able to make it to the 28 July call, staff are circulating the suggested edits for your review / confirmation. If no objection to the edits by EOB Friday, 19 August, we will regard these outcome languages stable. · Charter Question B2, Recommendation 2.3 and Rationale (p.2): https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… · Charter Question D1b (Part 2), Rationale for Recommendation 2.5 and 2.6 (p.3): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… Thank you for your review! Best Regards, Ariel From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com> Date: Friday, July 15, 2022 at 4:30 PM To: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Reminder: Draft Outcome: Group 2 Charter Questions Related to "Same Entity" Principle at Top-Level Ariel, et al On behalf the RySG members of the EPDP I would like to submit the following observations to the draft outcomes. · Summary of the redline: Adding clarifying language to reflect that allocation alone of a TLD to a same entity cannot guarantee avoiding denial of service failure mode. · Proposed language: Rationale for Recommendation 2.1: To support its consideration of charter question B1, the EPDP Team reviewed the SubPro PDP recommendation 25.5 and Staff Paper recommendation 2, as well as their rationale. The EPDP Team agreed that abiding by the “same entity” principle and having the same registry operator for all allocatable variant labels of an existing gTLD will help minimize, but not guarantee, the security risk associated with the “failure modes” – including denial of service and misconnection – when dealing with variant labels. Therefore, the EPDP Team affirms to extend the SubPro PDP and the Staff Paper recommendations to existing gTLDs. · Why the redline? Recommendation 2.1 is applied at the top level, not at the domain name level. Making a TLD label allocatable to a single entity (or withheld) does not directly avoid the failure mode of denial of service. Even if the gTLD variant is activated into the root, an actual domain name (second level.variantTLD) needs to be registered and operated, in all variant TLDs. So, while it can help to minimize denial of service problem, it cannot guarantee it due to downstream actions (by other entities different than the registry operator) that need to be implemented. Therefore, the inclusion of a caveat. Related to this. For special purpose TLDs (brand, geo, community based) if the variant set is held to the same requirements, then it is possible that allocatable variants do not meet the same eligibility requirements as the primary label (for example, a trademark record). Avoiding denial of service due to an inactive TLD variant (in this case) is not only improbable, but impossible. · Summary of the redline: a registry operator should not be expected to ensure consistent user experience because it does not host or manage content (e.g. website, email services). · Rationale for Recommendation 2.6: As IDN gTLDs and variant labels that are considered a set are yet to be delegated and operated at the root zone level, there is uncertainty about how the set will be managed and operated by the registry operator from a technical and user perspective. Therefore, it will be important that applicants are able to explain their need for a set of IDN variant label(s) as well as demonstrate their technical capability to operate and manage the set. Therefore, the applicant will be required to respond to additional application questions to address why they seek to activate those variant label(s) in addition to the primary new gTLD (i.e., necessity and expected usage of the variant labels), as well as how it plans to manage the set operationally, with a view to ensuring a secure, stable, and consistent user experience. The applicant’s response to these questions is expected to be a critical component in the evaluation process. Evaluators with requisite expertise are expected to assess these responses. · Why the redline? While the language is in the rationale and not the draft recommendation, it may be misconstrued in an implementation guideline. We are far away from discussing operational requirements, but the suggestion that a registry operator should be expected to “manage” and “ensure” a “consistent user experience”, we think it may be misleading. We suggest removing that sentence from the rationale which does not affect the overall intent. · Summary of the redline: Minor change for consistency in terminology. · Recommendation 2.3: If the registry operator operating a variant gTLD label changes its back-end registry service provider, all the variant gTLD label(s) in the set must also switch transition to the same new back-end registry service provider. · Why the redline? Harmonizing language with MSA change process [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Bro8B5l_Wcw-ezqU1OiQcoObazPmJzwJpUWFjkiiXES00…>, which uses the term “transition”. One additional note. On draft recommendation 2.8 (B5: special purpose TLDs) I have shared the draft outcome with our colleagues in the Brand Registry Group and GeoTLD Group. I’m working with them to get their insights, so I’d like to ask for your patience while I compile their input. Thank you, Dennis, on behalf the RySG IDN EPDP members From: Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 12:04 PM To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Reminder: Draft Outcome: Group 2 Charter Questions Related to "Same Entity" Principle at Top-Level Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear All, This is the final reminder for reviewing the draft outcome language for Group 2 charter questions by EOB Friday, 15 July (initial deadline extended by one week). Please see details below. FYI - the ALAC Team informed staff that they agree with the draft language for those questions. Best Regards, Ariel From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, June 24, 2022 at 11:43 AM To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> Subject: Draft Outcome: Group 2 Charter Questions Related to "Same Entity" Principle at Top-Level Dear All Please find the draft outcome language for Group 2 charter questions related to “same entity” principle at the top-level, which are: · B1, B2, B3, B5: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/125QVY2mWi6jyMF5qSWVo_aIiWbivCcQNGcDg4vsmBBg2a…> · D1a, D1b (Part 2): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1subCSwwrqimEMVMn-UKhDQDtVB11pJDsEcTHLRPJmt3ai…> Both documents are also posted on the wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/x/XwyHCg [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/12gAmWA9f-L3J1E-FfuWRHTwT1Awve1kIy7v1ecTEtezNz…>. Following the agreed format, the draft outcome language includes the following components: · Brief answer to the charter question · Recommendations and implementation guidance · Rationale for recommendations and implementation guidance Please note that for charter question D1b Part 1 (related to the process by which an existing TLD registry operator seeks to activate variants) has not be addressed; it depends on the survey responses from the Arabic/Chinese TLD ROs. Please provide any input/suggestion for the draft outcome language on the mailing list by Friday, 8 July. Best Regards, Steve, Emily, Ariel

3 2

September & October 2022 | IDNs EPDP Team
by Devan Reed 26 Aug '22

26 Aug '22

Dear all, Please find the .ics attachments and dates below for the IDNs EPDP Team calls taking place in September and October 2022. Please download them to your calendar. Calls take place every Thursday 13:30 UTC for 90 minutes. The dates are as follows: * Thursday, 01 September 2022 * Thursday, 08 September 2022 * Thursday, 15 September 2022 **CANCELLED** * ICANN75 Annual General Meeting 17-22 September * Thursday, 29 September 2022 **CANCELLED** * Thursday, 06 October 2022 * Thursday, 13 October 2022 * Thursday, 20 October 2022 * Thursday, 27 October 2022 The email invitation for each call will be sent out closer to the date of the meeting. The next call is taking place on 01 September 2022 and the invitation has been sent out. Thank you. Kind regards, Devan

1 0

IDNs EPDP Team meeting
by ICANN Policy Calendar 26 Aug '22

26 Aug '22

Meeting: IDNs EPDP Team meeting Pattern: Weekly on Thursday’s 06 October – 27 October 2022 at 13:30 UTC for 90 minutes Please click the link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K For Audio only: One tap mobile : US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950 Passcode: 5259149775 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…> Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call * Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only * Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the agenda wiki page (06 October): https://community.icann.org/x/PIKkD <https://community.icann.org/x/PIKkD%20(06> * For other places see (06 October): https://tinyurl.com/32wmcuvz ONLY for Members and Participants * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Please select Everyone, when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. Only for Observers: * Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. * Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands.

1 0

Notes and action items - IDNs EPDP Meeting #49- 26 August 2022
by Steve Chan 26 Aug '22

26 Aug '22

Dear all, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting on Friday, 26 August 2022 at 13:30 UTC. Kind regards, Ariel, Emily, and Steve Notes and Action Items - IDNs EPDP Call – 26 August 2022 Welcome & Chair Updates * Reminder to review Group 3 text (31 August) * Acknowledgment of input from RySG, expressing concerns and suggested edits to Group 2 text. * Team will not be meeting the week before and after the ICANN meeting. * Leadership team giving thought to how to utilize sessions at ICANN75. Considering utilizing a process flow/process map to help understand context of recommendations and potentially stress test them. Continued discussion of small group outputs on String Similarity Review and objection processes * Slides were developed to help provide the rationale for why the hybrid model was determined to be the most appropriate to mitigate misconnection risks. * Slide 3 – reminder of hybrid model. * Slide 4 – background papers that help provide rationale for mitigating risk as much as possible. Includes RFC 5891, RFC 6921, SAC089, and the staff paper. * Slide 5 – recap of the small team’s discussions. Notes reservations about including non-requested allocatable and blocked variant labels. Also notes that the hybrid model is identified to meet the singular goal of risk mitigation of failure modes which are 1) denial of service and 2) misconnection. The small team did not consider implementation complexity and deferred to EPDP Team. * Slide 6 – real world example of “denial of service” risk * Suggestion the denial of service in this context is misleading and should be something like “no expected service provided”. However, notes that the phrase is a known term and used in SAC060. * Slide 7 – real world example of “misconnection” risk. * https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-060-en.pdf - “Recommendation 7: Should ICANN decide to implement safeguards, it should distinguish two types of failure modes when a user expects a variant to work, but it is not implemented: denial of service versus misconnection.” * Notes that the misconnection risk in SAC060 is in the context of variant set but misconnection risk described here seems to be in the context of crossing variant sets/name spaces. * String similarity evaluation and objections are determined by people/evaluation panels, not strictly a technical perspective. Essentially, the hybrid model allows for identifying the misconnection risks but does no guarantee a certain outcome. Relying on a less restrictive model ensures that the risk will never be identified. * Misconnection risk can be motivated by string similarity. The end-user ending up at the wrong web site can potentially be exploited. * Reiterates that use of denial of service in SAC060 could be confusing versus distributed denial of service in SAC008. * Confirms that terms used by this EPDP will be included in a glossary. And the term does seem to express what happens to the end-user – the user cannot access the service. * Slide 8 – potential consequences of misconnection. Arriving at the wrong site can result in credential compromise and accidental exposure of information. And if the confusability is known by bad actors, it can be maliciously leveraged. * Slide 9 – Why should blocked variants be part of the string similarity review? Notes that while the blocked variants cannot be delegated, they do exist as words or terms in real life. End-users may not understand the distinction between a blocked variant versus a real world. * Slide 10 – Misconnection involving blocked variants. A blocked variant served as a bridge to misconnection in this scenario. * Slide 11 – Next steps are risk analysis (e.g., likelihood and impact of failure modes, especially the misconnection risk); operational impact of the hybrid model; cost/benefit of the hybrid model. * Slide 12 – 2012 New gTLD Program Implementation Review, which provides ICANN Org review of the program (including the String Similarity review). Helps to illustrate the scope of review in 2012, which did not have to contend with the hybrid model. This included two non-exact match IDN contention sets that were identified as a result of simplified and traditional Chinese characters. The volume of unique strings resulted in over a million combinations requiring evaluation. * Assumption that SubPro should have mitigated timing issue (e.g., results published only two weeks prior to objections deadline). Helps to consider impacts from the increased complexity that would come from the hybrid model. * IDN variants should be introduced successfully. Notes that cost and complexity are passed on to applicants based on the revenue neutral approach to the program. * Confusability, or lack thereof, is certainly a factor in potential success. The String Sim process will exist again, but perhaps IDN variants can be evaluated in a different manner – keep an open mind. * Question - Noting there were concerns from members on the hybrid model previously, do those concerns still exist? * The question may need to be considered in the context of the “next steps”. * At a minimum, could compare complexity of the hybrid model versus level 2 (primary TLD and requested allocatable variants). * Confirmation that the presentation helped illustrate why the “blocked variants matter”. Need to understand if impact to cost would be prohibitive. * Notes that comparing blocked variants versus blocked variants would be the most conservative and would result in exponential complexity. The hybrid model is intended to catch most cases, but lessen the complexity. The small team considered the hybrid model to be a compromise. * Notes that the hybrid model requires human analysis, which is where the operational impact comes from. Highlights that not all blocked variants are well formed. * Added that there are also mixed script blocked variants. Perhaps a hybrid model 2 would only include blocked variants that are valid labels. * Confirms that the tool could produce sets that remove ill formed and mixed script variants. * If two applicants apply for TLDs that are variants of each other, they would automatically be put in a contention set. * Notes that fully mitigating risks introduces a risk in itself, by preventing opportunity. * Important to consider the operational impact even of just level 2. Could the recommendation be that the evaluation be done in a layered way? Start preliminarily with just the primary labels, then work your way downward through allocatable and blocked variants. * Points out that once something is blocked, it can end up being blocked for a long time. Therefore, should be careful what this group blocks. * On the other hand, need to be sure not to block too little as there is little to no way to remedy that situation. * Suggestion that recommendation could concentrate on the goal to be achieved rather than the “how” (e.g., the hybrid model). * Seems that there appears to be comments leaning towards the hybrid model. Reminder that the policy level recommendations and/or hybrid model (e.g., the implementation, or the how) can be included in the initial report, which allows for course correction based on comments and potentially new information. * For now, we’ll set aside the risk analysis or cost/benefit analysis. AOB * None Steven Chan  Senior Director, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations 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

Canceled: IDNs EPDP Team meeting
by ICANN Policy Calendar 26 Aug '22

26 Aug '22

Meeting: IDNs EPDP Team meeting Pattern: Weekly on Thursday’s 30 June – 15 September 2022 at 13:30 UTC for 90 minutes Please click the link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K For Audio only: One tap mobile : US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950 Passcode: 5259149775 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…> Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call * Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only * Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/tQD5Cw * For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/5n7d3vxh ONLY for Members and Participants * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Please select Everyone, when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. Only for Observers: * Observers will have ability to view member chat and information shared in the zoom webinar room. * Observers will not be able to use chat or raise hands.

1 0

Post Call | IDNs EPDP Team call | Thursday, 26 August 2022
by Devan Reed 26 Aug '22

26 Aug '22

Dear all, All recordings for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Thursday, 18 August 2022 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/LgYVD> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master Calendar. <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…> 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) * Transcript For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/uAPpCQ>. Thank you! Kind Regards, Devan

1 0