November 2023 - Gnso-epdp-idn-team

Propose F2F Workshop Agenda & Prep Materials
by Ariel Liang 01 Dec '23

01 Dec '23

Dear All, In preparation for the EPDP-IDNs F2F workshop, leadership and staff have developed the draft agenda for your review: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VmIQ9DO0XmTo77iEgr6ycQqgpYgi-f5zJDQ2BR7… On this document, we have included prep materials based on topics / corresponding charter questions. We would like to draw your attention to three items: 1. ICANN org Report on Languages and Scripts in the TMCH: This report was done in November 2021 as part of the data/metrics gathering effort to support the EPDP deliberation on charter question F1. It was circulated to the list in 2021, but we are re-sending the report (attached) for your review. 2. Phase 2 Draft Glossary<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NaDttdqEdrNeWPxZVWm2JA565zN3beFx7ZGbYlQ…>: This is slated for discussion in Day 3 of the workshop, but you are welcome to review the document in advance and suggest edits or comments on the Google doc. 3. Deferred items from IDN Implementation Guidelines v4.0 (see Annex<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2022/correspondence/fouqu…>): This is related to the charter questions G1/G1a. The ICANN Board and GNSO Council had lengthy discussion about v4.0 from 2018-2022. The outcome of this discussion is that several items from v4.0 were deferred for Board adoption because they overlap with topics for the EPDP-IDNs Team to address. Though the GNSO Council did not explicitly ask the EPDP Team to deliberate on these items, we carved out some time to review them in Day 3 to confirm the EPDP Team’s deliberations have indeed covered these items. Some additional notes: * Leadership / staff will aim to share the presentation slides with the team by the end of next week. * Once the team dinner (Wed 6 Dec) location is confirmed, we will also share with the group. Lunch and coffee breaks are catered. * As we will be in full day working sessions, we may ask icebreaker questions or conduct a talent show to spice things up! Happy Thanksgiving break to those who celebrate! We will be in touch, and see you soon! Best Regards, Ariel, Steve, Dan Ariel Xinyue Liang Policy Research Senior Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

2 2

ICANN78 Policy Outcomes Report is now available
by Devan Reed 21 Nov '23

21 Nov '23

Dear all, The ICANN78 Policy Outcomes Report is now available: https://go.icann.org/outcomes78. The report will also be published in Thursday’s Community Digest. Thank you! Kind regards, Devan Reed Secretariat Operations Coordinator Policy Development Team Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) www.icann.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMGaQ&…> [signature_2826840852]

1 0

Notes and Action Items from IDN EPDP Meeting #103
by Daniel Gluck 17 Nov '23

17 Nov '23

Hi all, Please see below for the notes and action items from yesterday’s EPDP IDNs Call #103<https://community.icann.org/x/FQGfE> on 16 November at 12:00 UTC. Thank you! Ariel, Steve, and Dan ACTION ITEMS * Leadership and Staff will review the comment from the team member regarding ROID and find new language to convey the option presented for registrars without making it seem like there is a prohibition on their actions. * The chair asked the team to review this document <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UrrckzbPNL1Z8fUtH5Q5WqUWglxbD-SbihX8o8V…> before the F2F meeting so that language can be finalized. * Staff will flag areas that are still contentious for review on the mailing list. * Staff will include time in the workshop to go over RySG discussions on PR6. NOTES * Roll Call and SOI Updates (2min) * Welcome and Chair Updates (5min) * The Chair welcomed everyone to the call and provided a reminder to the team of the upcoming Face to Face meeting in Kuala Lumpur. * Staff reminded the team that a security briefing sheet was sent to them in the past few days for their review. * In light of the former Vice Chair stepping down, the Chair nominated Farell Folly to the position of Vice Chair for the remainder of the EPDP. * At this time there were congratulations sent to Farell and if there are any other thoughts from team members on the appointment, they will send them to the Chair directly. * Review of Phase 2 Text (110min) * Staff started to go through the Phase 2 Preliminary Recommendations. First, it was noted that there is an unresolved comment in Preliminary Recommendation 1. The first updates that were incorporated from previous discussions began in the rationale for PR 1. “Registration” was removed, with “Activated” being used instead. “Consistent” replaced “same”. Edits were included to avoid confusion between Harmonization with the Same Entity Principle. * There were no objections to these changes. * The next changes were located in the C1 EPDP Team Response, with “Activation” once again being added where “Registration” or “Allocation” were present. * There were no objections to these changes, but a few team members asked for time to review these updates as there is concern that “allocate” and “activate” are still used interchangeably. * In an example for domains at the second level at a registry, the point of control for variant domain names is at the registration level. That is where it is checked for availability and there is no allocation table for the registry. Registries will check for availability and if the registration meets the criteria for the same entity and other ideas, then they will activate the domain name. This may help staff identify where to use allocate vs activate. * There are three different states for domains and they should not be equivalent per a team member, but they also cautioned there may not need to be a change in the language for the document. * RDAP and WHOIS queries, there are discussions at the registry level for what needs to be provided to registrars and registrants about what is needed for variant domain name sets. EPP responses are going to need to be modified to include more information. Now that a domain name can have an extended set and the extended set is now available for anybody, then registries need to accommodate a signal so that registrars know what is happening at the transaction level. There are going to be changes in how the contracted parties interact with variant domain names, but these are early conversations. * A staff member agreed with that recommendation language may not need to be changed due to qualifiers in the document. * The chair commented that they believe the language is acceptable and they should proceed but give everyone a chance to review after this meeting. * The word “registration” was replaced with “domain name” as to account for variants possibly not being new registrations, but instead other transactions that can be accounted for by using the phrase domain name in the text. Also of note, were the global change for activation instead of registration and the softening of a recommendation to better capture a nuance in PR 3. * There were no objections from the team to these changes on page 7. * On page 9 there were updates to the rationale to better explain the context around the example in the text in a way that enhances the clarity. There were other changes to reflect the suggestions of a team member to add another example for how grandfathered cases factor into this process. * There were no objections from the team to these changes. * Staff added context of some drawbacks to ROID usage and provided some further updates for clarity * A team member thanked staff for their comprehensive recap * One team member in chat posted: “Under C3, I was uncomfortable with the use of the phrase "may not", because it could be read as if it is forbidden". In this text "The Registry Agreement only requires unique-per-object ROID; the same ROID may not be assigned to the same registrant across gTLDs managed by the registry operator, and the registrars may not reuse contact objects for different domain names of the same registrant." I suggest replacing all the "X may not do Y" (which could be misinterpreted as "it is forbidden for X to do Y" with something that better conveys the idea that "X is not required to do Y". For example, "The Registry Agreement only requires unique-per-object ROID; different ROIDs may be assigned to the same registrant across gTLDs managed by the registry operator, and the registrars may use unique contact objects for different domain names of the same registrant." * The intention is that the registrar “may do this or may do something different” but the reader could interpret that as a prohibition. It should not be interpreted that way, but it possibly will. * This received approval from multiple team members. * ACTION ITEM: Leadership and Staff will review the comment from the team member regarding ROID and find new language to convey the option presented for registrars without making it seem like there is a prohibition on their actions. * ACTION ITEM: The chair asked the team to review this document <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UrrckzbPNL1Z8fUtH5Q5WqUWglxbD-SbihX8o8V…> before the F2F meeting so that language can be finalized. * On page 12 and 13, there were further “global” edits on activate vs allocate and other updates for clarity for D4. * A few team members requested that on page 12 allocated may fit better over activated. * Per another team member, the lifecycle is for registered domains. Before registration it is not applicable. “activated = registered , allocated - has a potential to be activated” * When there are variant domains with their own lifecycle, are there any other sources that bound the process? * The chair responded that the same entity principle keeps the set together. It is acknowledged that there are circumstances where the registrant may no longer want the source domain and leaves it up to the registry and registrar on what to do. * The team discussed this in Hamburg and decided not to make any explicit recommendations on what to do with the source domain in this case. It is not believed that registries would allow this domain to be re-allocated, but there are no explicit recommendations made to this effect. * A team member commented “The EPDP Team also had extensive discussion around whether the source domain name can be changed or deleted. One member proposed that it should be possible to delete or change a source domain name as long as its activated variant domain name(s) remain allocatable. The ultimate agreement among the team was to not to prescribe any policy recommendation pertaining to this matter. The EPDP Team understood that the specific details in the domain name lifecycle management are discretionary on part of registry operators and registrars, in accordance with their policies and practices. In addition, registry operators would not allow a situation where an activated variant domain name becomes “blocked” due to the change or deletion of the source domain name, as this would likely become a non-compliance issue with the IDN Table implementation.” * Another team member suggested that there should always be a primary label in a set. If the primary domain is removed, another should be identified and flagged. * The chair commented that as long as the source exists, even if it's not used, then the variants will still be operational. * A different team member cautioned against explicitly mentioning instructions. * A comment in chat stated: “Agree with thinking of this scenario as deactivation of source domain name instead of deletion if this intent is to allow the remaining variants of the set to still 'exist' in the same disposition value.” * This comment received additional approval in chat. * It was also cautioned that the team should not create new situations, rules, or terminology, * The chair commented that this is a challenge the team faces. There was an agreement not to dictate how the registries and registrars operate in these scenarios, but the discussions at this moment may be trying to challenge this agreement. * ACTION ITEM: Staff will flag areas that are still contentious for review on the mailing list. * Discussions will be tabled for this, and staff will create a glossary for review in KL to hopefully assuage the concerns created by this discussion. * A team member commented: “As we are using these terms in policy recommendations, it will be useful to disambiguate all these terms: registration, allocation, activation.” * Another team member commented “I don’t disagree, but I also don’t want to recreate those definitions if they already exist. Does ICANN have a working definition on these terms? Perhaps, let’s start there.” § Staff will investigate and report back at the workshop * Edits were described for PR6 and its rationale. These edits covered different areas throughout the lifecycle. * A team member from the registries detailed discussions being held (and those that are scheduled) regarding the lifecycle as well as the Simultaneous / Same time discussion. * ACTION ITEM: Staff will include time in the workshop to go over registry discussions on PR6. * Pending these conversations, the first paragraph on page 19 may need additional edits * Additional comments in PR7 were discussed regarding court orders and staff consulted experts from the Transfer Policy PDP WG. There is a comment and footnote that the current transfer policy covers certain areas and that it does not have to be expanded upon further in the document. * A team member asked staff to add “URS” after “UDRP” to cover possible circumstances. * Staff will review the transfer policy to see if URS is included. If not, it will not be included in the PR7 text. * A team member mentioned that URS remedies do not include transfer. Only suspension of the domain name * URS will not be added to this text. * In C4a, terminology was updated for the global change (pending discussions at workshop). * The D5 EPDP Team response was then described. * AOB (3min) * The chair asked the team to read through the text once again before the F2F so that everything is approved expeditiously in KL. * The leadership team will finalize the agenda for the F2F next week. * The chair wished everyone safe travels and thanked everyone for their efforts. * The chair also reminded the team of the upcoming GNSO Council meeting at 21 UTC today, 16 November.

1 0

Post Call | IDNs EPDP Team call | Thursday, 16 November 2023
by Devan Reed 16 Nov '23

16 Nov '23

Dear all, All recordings for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Thursday, 16 November 2023 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/FQGfE> (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 recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript, chat) * Transcript * Agenda & Notes/Action Items (if applicable) 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

ON NOW | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 16 November 2023 at 12:00 UTC
by Devan Reed 16 Nov '23

16 Nov '23

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 16 November 2023 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours. 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 page: https://community.icann.org/x/FQGfE * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/mupkv6xb [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/mupkv6xb__;!!PtGJab4!7I9OWcz…> 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

15 MINUTE REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 16 November 2023 at 12:00 UTC
by Devan Reed 16 Nov '23

16 Nov '23

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 16 November 2023 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours. 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 page: https://community.icann.org/x/FQGfE * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/mupkv6xb [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/mupkv6xb__;!!PtGJab4!7I9OWcz…> 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

Security Advisory for Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
by Ariel Liang 15 Nov '23

15 Nov '23

Hello everyone, The ICANN org security team conducted a security / human rights assessment on Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia for our upcoming workshop. This is a required practice for any ICANN sponsored event to assess the security risks of the planned location. We will have a staff member from the security team to support us remotely and help address questions/issues, if any. Please find attached the Key Info Sheet provided by the security team for your information. Thank you, Ariel

1 0

REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 16 November 2023 at 12:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew 15 Nov '23

15 Nov '23

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 16 November 2023 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours. 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 page: https://community.icann.org/x/FQGfE * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/mupkv6xb [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/mupkv6xb__;!!PtGJab4!7I9OWcz…> 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

Notes and Action Items from IDN EPDP Meeting #102 + Proposed Agenda for IDN EPDP Meeting #103 Thursday, 16 November 2023 at 12:00 UTC
by Daniel Gluck 13 Nov '23

13 Nov '23

Hi All, Please find below the notes and action items from last Thursday’s IDN EPDP Meeting #102<https://community.icann.org/x/EQGfE> and the agenda for this upcoming Thursday’s Meeting #103.<https://community.icann.org/x/FQGfE> Thank you! Ariel, Steve, and Dan IDNs EPDP Meeting #102 ACTION ITEMS * The RySG and RrSG will bring the language in “Transfer” back to the groups for their review regarding “simultaneously” * Leadership will review the Prelim. Rec. 6 Rationale and report back with potentially updated language for bullets such as “Pending Deletion” * Leadership will review the document for use of “ownership” to ensure correct and consistent usage as compared with the word “sponsorship” NOTES * Roll Call and SOI Updates * Justine Chew and Hadia Elminiawi updated their statements of interest * Welcome and Chair Updates * The chair informed the team that the GNSO Council Liaison to the team, Farrell Folly, has departed the GNSO Council and Manju Chen has replaced them in this role. Farrell will stay with the team as a member of the NCSG. * Congratulations were in order for the team reaching consensus designation for the final phase 1 report recommendations and for the transmission of the phase 1 report to the GNSO council on 8 November. * The chair also informed the team that there will be a call on 16 November, but then no meetings until the face to face in Kuala Lumpur. * A member of the team asked if there will be remote participation available for the face to face, which was answered in the affirmative. * Review of Phase 2 Text (Starting at Prelim Rec. 6) * ICANN Policy Development Support Staff started to review preliminary recommendations, starting with No. 6. * One participant mentioned that they were confused about the domain lifecycle. They had thought that the lifecycle only applies to registered domains as until a domain is registered it is not live. * Staff replied that this explicitly refers to activated instead of allocatable domains and asked if that is acceptable? * As long as activated and registered have similar definitions, then this should be fine. “if we use activated = registered , why no[t]” * Staff described the decision to use activated in this context which did not generate any push back. * There was a discussion of some redline text in Preliminary Rec. 6. In the bullet point for “Transfer”, the use of the word “simultaneously” was challenged, including background from how a certain registrar processes activities. * The team supported removing “simultaneously” as it was interpreted as being made to happen at the exact same time * There is a possibility that this is not interpreted like that and instead meant as a synonym to consecutively or just expeditiously. It was suggested that the contracted parties should go back to their groups and check if the language is acceptable * ACTION ITEM: The RySG and RrSG will bring the language in “Transfer” back to the groups for their review regarding “simultaneously” * Would it be possible to say something like “almost simultaneously”? The understanding is that it cannot happen exactly at the same time but need a word for it. * One team member reported that it will be important to ensure that all other activities / changes to the set do not happen during the time of transfer. * No disagreement here from members of the team, but the matter of timing and what can be achieved is important to note, per other team members. * Another team member recommended “If all variants can be transferred, then they should be transferred simultaneously/same time. Otherwise, this should be made known to the requestor beforehand and an agreement now whether to proceed or not” * Other language recommendations from team members included: * “And the structure of the variant set does not change as a result of such transfer” * “Must also be transferred to the same gaining registrar in a single atomic transaction” * In the Preliminary Recommendation 6 rationale, “Redemption” there was objection to use the qualifier “Which is an extremely rare occurrence in practice” which was universally supported by the team. * This is the same in the “Pending Deletion” bullet. The above quote will be deleted. * For the “Pending Deletion” bullet, there was discussion on if the text remains valid and if the remaining language makes sense. * One team member mentioned that if the source is deleted, the set can fall apart. * Staff reminded that this may not be true at the second level * Another member discussed their argument for dealing with * The integrity of the set must be investigated, per a different team member * One team member commented “the understanding that the re-election of source will be left to registry/registrar policy” * There was a comment submitted “If the domain name being deleted is the source or primary domain name it may have an impact of the rest of the set. This sentence seems to imply there should not be an impact, to which we have said, leave it to registry policy.” * ACTION ITEM: Leadership will review the Prelim. Rec. 6 Rationale and report back with potentially updated language for bullets such as “Pending Deletion” * Moving to Prelim. Rec. 7, there was an agreement to remove “Either voluntarily or involuntarily” from the text and to change “allocated” to “activated”. * There was a discussion about initiating the transfer process for the domain * Some alternative text was proposed * “… for a domain name, which is a member of a variant domain name set, the process…” * This was generally agreed to. There was some dissent as it may not be necessary, but it was agreed to by all under the condition that if it made it more clear, then it should be added. * Staff made this change in real time. * In the rationale for Prelim. Rec. 7, the hierarchy for importance in the steps were discussed in terms of using “the most important step”. “The most” was removed to remove confusion. * Also discussed was the use of sponsorship vs ownership. To avoid confusion in different jurisdictions, ownership will be replaced by sponsorship in this case. * ACTION ITEM: Leadership will review the document for use of “ownership” to ensure correct and consistent usage as compared with the word “sponsorship” * In the last paragraph of the P.R.7 rationale, there was a discussion for what can be deleted * One team member left a comment for proposed text that received approval from the chat, but a different team member suggested deleting the text as it complicated things. It was suggested to leave this up to the registry or registrar to implement. There were no objections to deleting the three sentences in the proposed text. * This was completed in real time. * A comment from a team member stated: “"together" might be a good term to replace" simultaneously", "at the same time", "atomic transaction" in an earlier recommendation.” * AOB * The chair and staff hope to complete the charter questions next week before the F2F. * The vice chair updated the team that she is stepping down from the EPDP team. She will not be able to make the face to face meeting but thanked everyone for their efforts throughout the EPDP and sent her gratitude to everyone for allowing her to serve as vice chair. * Many messages in chat were sent in response, all of them in support of and appreciation for Justine and her efforts with the EPDP. IDNs EPDP Meeting #103 Proposed Agenda 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2min) 2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5min) 3. Review of Phase 2 Text (110min) 4. AOB (3min)

1 0

Updated Phase 2 Draft Text
by Ariel Liang 13 Nov '23

13 Nov '23

Dear All, Following our second reading of the draft text, staff have updated this google doc based on the agreement from the team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UrrckzbPNL1Z8fUtH5Q5WqUWglxbD-SbihX8o8V… The plan is to go through these updates for any final comments during the upcoming meeting this week, before we move onto new topics in the F2F workshop. I would like to highlight the following update to facilitate your review: 1. Overarching update: * the term “activate/activation/activated” is now used consistently throughout the document, replacing terms such as “allocate/allocated” and “register/registered” after a case-by-case review * the term “together” is now used to replace the terms “simultaneously” and “at the same time” in the context of inter-registrar transfer 2. New Text: C3 Response (pp.10-11), C3a Response (p.12), and D5 Response (pp.21-22) were developed as a result of the ICANN78 working session 3. Recommendation 5 Rationale: New text around the source domain name (pp.13-15) was added as a result of ICANN78 discussion 4. Recommendation 6 Rationale: New text around “Pending Deletion” (p.17) was developed following last week’s call 5. Recommendation 7 Rationale: The last paragraph (p.19) regarding the circumstances where the integrity of the set may be compromised was revised to align with Transfer Policy language We understand the time for review is short, and would appreciate if you could include any comment or suggest edits ahead of the call. If it is not feasible, we can go through the update during the call on Thursday. Thank you all! Ariel

1 0