March 2023 - Gnso-epdp-idn-team

Documents for Review / Input before Monday Meeting
by Ariel Liang April 3, 2023

April 3, 2023

Dear All, In preparation for the Monday, 3 April meeting, please find below the documents for your review and input, especially the ones under 1b, 2a, and 2b. 1. Draft Sections of the Phase 1 Initial Report: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nD-a82Bx_JIYzWcZwBQcD61Aqn_yBPQMVr1l3Ep… * You can find all draft sections of the Initial Report from the table of contents here i. Section 4, Annex C, and Annex E will be completed right before circulation of the full report to the EPDP Team ii. Staff plan to provide an overview of all these draft sections during the Monday meeting * Please specifically focus on the review of the following sections, as EPDP Team’s input are expected be discussed on Monday: i. Section 3 Glossary ii. Section 4 Introduction section to the Preliminary Recommendations iii. Section 5 Differences Between EPDP-IDNs and ccPDP4 Preliminary Recommendations * Leadership team may provide more substantive edits before the call 1. Redline and highlighted draft text that needs to be closed off: * A3 (pp.3-6): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… * D1b (pp.4-10): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… i. Please focus on the review of the revised Rec 2.25 and 2.29, and the rationale for Rec 2.7, 2.24-2.27, and 2.29 * B4 (Rec 2.13, p.4): https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… i. We missed to address the leadership comment during yesterday’s call * D8 (Rec 2.18, pp.17-18): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… i. We missed to address the updated text during yesterday’s call * A9 (Rec 1.12, p.17): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… i. The definition of the label states may need to be incorporated in the recommendation language based on agreement on the glossary In addition, on 16 March 2023, the ICANN Board adopted a substantial portion of the SubPro PDP Outputs. The Outputs adopted by the ICANN Board include all the IDN recommendations in Topic 25 of the SubPro PDP Final Report. See details here: https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-r…. This should have minimum impact on the EPDP preliminary recommendations, as our recommendations are consistent or align with the SubPro recommendations. Thank you all for your efforts for the final push. Have a nice weekend! Best Regards, Ariel

4 4

Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Meeting #76 - Monday 3 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours
by Ariel Liang April 1, 2023

April 1, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for our meeting on Monday, 3 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC (2 hour call). Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily IDN EPDP Meeting #76 Proposed Agenda 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2 mins) 2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5 mins) 3. Close off any remaining charter question discussions, e.g., A3 and D1b (40 mins) 4. Discuss Section 3 and Section 5 of Initial Report (40 mins) 5. Overview of Initial Report sections (30 mins) 6. AOB (3 mins)

2 1

Post Call | IDNs EPDP Team call | Thursday, 30 March 2023
by Devan Reed March 31, 2023

March 31, 2023

Dear all, All documents for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Thursday, 30 March 2023 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/qgP5DQ> (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) * There is no recording for this call. Please reference Notes/Action items. 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

REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Monday, 03 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 31, 2023

March 31, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Monday, 03 April 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/rQP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/42urhjbt [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/42urhjbt__;!!PtGJab4!6N2h_Ng…> 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 - IDNs EPDP Meeting #75 - 30 March 2023
by Emily Barabas March 30, 2023

March 30, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting on Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC. Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily Notes and Action Items - IDNs EPDP Call – 30 March 2023 Action Items Action Item 1: In public comment input form, change open-ended question “Are there any recommendations the EPDP Team has not considered?” to “Are there any issues pertaining to top-level variant gTLDs the EPDP Team has not considered?” Action Item 2: In header for Section 9 – Change “Variant Label State” to “Variant Label States” Action Item 3: Add additional question for each recommendation asking for any input on the rationale. Action Item 4: Revise Recommendation 1.5 to read: “In order to encourage a positive and predictable registrant experience, a framework for developing guidelines for the management of gTLDs and their variant labels at the top level by registries and registrars must be created during implementation.” In addition, change “best practice guidelines” to “guidelines” in Implementation Guidance 1.6. Action Item 5: Move suggested IG under Recommendation 2.2 to rationale for Recommendation 2.2. Action Item 6: Update Recommendation 2.24 with: “A future gTLD applicant applying for an IDN gTLD and up to [x] variant labels will incur the same base application fee as any other gTLD applicant who does not apply for variant labels in that round.” Action Item 7: Update Recommendation 2.25 to read: “An applicant or an existing registry operator from the 2012 round that exceeds [x] variant labels in their application may incur additional fees that ICANN org considers to be proportionate with any additional costs associated with evaluating the application and consistent with the cost recovery principle.” Add language also including the concept “or if the variant label(s) are applied for in more than one application round.” Action Item 8: Update Recommendation 2.29 to read: “As a one time exception for the immediate next new gTLD application round, the base application fee for allocatable variant labels by existing IDN gTLD registry operators from the 2012 round will be waived.” Action Item 9: Add an item to the glossary for label states. Action Item 10: EPDP Team members to suggest additional text to explain glossary item “same entity.” Action Item 11: Update definition of “string” to read: “A combination of characters / letters that form the top-level domain name.” Notes Welcome and Chair Updates * Today’s call will focus on reviewing text for the Initial Report. * We will try to get through remaining text today and Monday. If this is possible, we will cancel the call next Thursday, 6 April. Public comment input form * Overview of Public Comment Input Form (see attachment). * Form seeks to provide structure and direction for commenters, makes clear their level of support for recommendations, and collects specific input on recommendations. This approach makes review of comments more efficient. * The form follows a template provided by ICANN org. The first section of text is standard. * Section 1: Information about submission * Sections 2-9 list specific recommendations and implementation guidance from the Initial Report. For each recommendation, the form asks the commenter to respond with level of support for the recommendation, asks the commenter to provide revised wording and rationale for revised wording where applicable, and asks for the rationale for non-support if applicable. * Section 10 includes open ended questions that give an opportunity for broader input. Focus: any additional recommendations that the EPDP Team has not considered; feedback on the glossary; any other issues. Discussion points on public comment input form: * General support for the format. Question about how the review of public comments will be organized, noting that triage is important when the volume of comments is high. * Staff typically consolidates comments and arranges them in a logical manner to support review by the EPDP Team. On a future call, leadership will present on the proposed approach for reviewing comments for the initial report. * For open-ended question, “Are there any recommendations the EPDP Team has not considered?” suggestion to edit the question to: “Are there any issues pertaining to top-level variant gTLDs the EPDP Team has not considered?” Support expressed for this suggestion. Action Item 1: In public comment input form, change open-ended question “Are there any recommendations the EPDP Team has not considered?” to “Are there any issues pertaining to top-level variant gTLDs the EPDP Team has not considered?” * Introduction needs to make clear that this is a phase 1 report and that phase 2 work will follow. Action Item 2: In header for Section 9 – Change “Variant Label State” to “Variant Label States” Action Item 3: Add additional question for each recommendation asking for any input on the rationale. * Discussion of whether it is helpful to include line numbers in the report for commenters to reference in the comments. Agreement to leave them out for now as it may make the page look cluttered. Third reading of draft text * Leadership suggestion to streamline the text included in the main body of the report by moving responses to charter questions to an annex. Charter questions themselves will stay in the main body of the report. The charter question responses provide important context, but the focus is the recommendation text and the rationale. * Support expressed for this approach. Topic A: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… * Revisions to response to charter question A3 and associated recommendations: * Suggestion to remove: “In the event that an applied-for gTLD string, whose script is supported by the RZ-LGR, is deemed “invalid” or “blocked” (where the string is a variant label) by the RZ-LGR, such an application is ineligible to proceed in the application process.” Replace with text of Recommendation 1.17: “An applied-for gTLD string that has been accepted through the submission system and correctly assessed by the DNS Stability Review Panel as “invalid” or “blocked” (where the string is a variant label) is disqualified unless and until such a string is deemed valid and allocatable in a future version of the RZ-LGR, if any.” Some support expressed for this approach. * The text “(where the string is a variant label)” has been added throughout the section. * Second bullet in response to charter question A3 may need additional clarification based on feedback from Dennis. * First sentence of Recommendation 1.2, added text in brackets – “Only an applied-for gTLD string that conforms to the mandatory string requirements, including IDNA 2008 for IDN strings [and the RZ-LGR].” * Rationale for Recommendation 2.1 updated to for consistency with the principle of the integrity of the set. * Revisions to response to charter question A5 and associated recommendations: * Current text of Recommendation 1.5 reads “A framework for developing best practice guidelines in the management of gTLDs and their variant labels by registries and registrars must be formulated with a view to encourage a positive registrant experience.” * Suggested alternative: “In order to encourage a positive and predictable registrant experience, a framework for developing best practice guidelines for the management of gTLDs and their variants by registries and registrars must be created during implementation.” * Suggestion to use “acceptable practice” instead of “best practice.” * As a reminder, these will not be binding. * Best practices suggests a single right way to do things. There will be different views about how to manage variants operationally at the second level. Acceptable practices can guide good registrant experience without implying that there is one best approach. * IG 1.6: Suggestion to clarify that the practices are targeting registries and registrars. Action Item 4: Revise Recommendation 1.5 to read: “In order to encourage a positive and predictable registrant experience, a framework for developing guidelines for the management of gTLDs and their variant labels at the top level by registries and registrars must be created during implementation.” In addition, change “best practice guidelines” to “guidelines” in Implementation Guidance 1.6. * New sentence added to Rationale for Recommendation 1.5 and Implementation Guidance 1.6 (in brackets): The EPDP Team agreed that it would be valuable to develop best practice guidelines for the management of variant domains at the registry and registrar levels. [This is to address any unintended consequences of Recommendation 1.4, . . ] Topic B: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… * Revision to Recommendation 2.2: “Recommendation 2.2: The registry service provider for each one of the Critical Functions as defined in the base Registry Agreement for an existing IDN gTLD from the 2012 round must be the same as for its delegated variant labels. The Critical Functions are: DNS Service, DNSSEC proper resolution, EPP, RDDS, and Data Escrow.” * Suggested Implementation Guidance to go with Recommendation 2.2: “Registry operators may use different third party service providers for the provision of their Critical Functions. In the event that an existing IDN gTLD registry operator from the 2012 round applies for variant labels of their IDN gTLD in a future round, they will be required to use the same service provider for the provision of their respective critical functions, for example their Data Escrow provider must be the same for the existing IDN gTLD and the delegated variant labels and their DNS service provider must also be the same for their existing IDN gTLD and the delegated variant labels.” Action Item 5: Move suggested IG under Recommendation 2.2 to rationale for Recommendation 2.2. * New sentence added to Rationale for Recommendation 2.2: “The EPDP Team affirms that whichever registry service provider is used for a Critical Function for an existing IDN gTLD from the 2012 round, the same registry service provider must be used for providing such a Critical Function for its delegated variant label(s).” Topic D: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… * Addition of bracketed text to Implementation Guidance 2.28: “Criteria for evaluating the explanations submitted by applicants on [the need for variant label(s)] should be pre-identified and applied consistently by evaluators with the requisite expertise.” * Current text for Recommendation 2.24: “A future IDN gTLD applicant must be allowed to apply for up to [x] allocatable variant label(s) in the same application by paying the same base application fee. The base application fee for each such application must be the same base application fee as any other application.” Suggested alternative formulation of the recommendation: “Recommendation 2.24: A future gTLD applicant applying for an IDN gTLD and up to [x] variant labels will incur the same base application fee as any other gTLD applicant who does not apply for variant labels in that round.” Reason for the proposed alternative: Some might interpret this as inconsistent with the recommendation stating that there is no ceiling value. Action Item 6: Update Recommendation 2.24 with: “A future gTLD applicant applying for an IDN gTLD and up to [x] variant labels will incur the same base application fee as any other gTLD applicant who does not apply for variant labels in that round.” * Current text for Recommendation 2.25: “ICANN org should assess and charge additional application fees based on the “cost recovery” principle if the applied-for allocatable variant labels of a primary IDN gTLD string exceeds the threshold number of [x], or if the variant label(s) are applied for in more than one application round.” Suggested alternative language: “An applicant that exceeds [x] variant labels in their application may incur additional fees that ICANN org considers to be proportionate with any additional costs associated with evaluating the application and consistent with the cost recovery principle.” * Proposed alternative intends to make the recommendation language simpler. Text suggests that ICANN has the discretion about whether an application fees apply. Action Item 7: Update Recommendation 2.25 to read: “An applicant or an existing registry operator from the 2012 round that exceeds [x] variant labels in their application may incur additional fees that ICANN org considers to be proportionate with any additional costs associated with evaluating the application and consistent with the cost recovery principle.” Add language also including the concept “or if the variant label(s) are applied for in more than one application round.” * Current text of Recommendation 2.29: “As a one time exception for the immediate next application round, an existing IDN gTLD registry from the 2012 round must be allowed to apply for up to [x] allocatable variant label(s) of its existing IDN gTLD without paying the base application fee.” Alternative language proposed: “As a one time exception for the immediate next new gTLD application round, the application fee for existing IDN gTLD registry operators from the 2012 round will be waived.” * Suggestion that alternative needs to specify “up to [x] allocatable variant label(s)” * If we do include “up to [x] allocatable variant label(s)”, we need to include language about the proportionate fee. * Because there is still money left over from 2012, perhaps the cost of fees for existing ROs should be covered (no additional fee if there are more than x variants). * Existing IDN gTLD registry operators have been at a disadvantage. Do we want to carry the x value over to existing gTLD registry operators? * We should clarify in the language of this text that we are referring to variant labels, so that the recommendation can stand alone. * Should we change “application fee” to “base application fee” for clarity? * We say in 2.25 that ICANN can determine additional fees for additional costs, so the alternative language in 2.29 does not need to include language about additional fees. * For clarity, if we have a specific intention with respect to the application fee, it should be called out in the text. * Does 2.25 also apply to existing RO from 2012 who applies for x number of variants, or do we waive the fee? * Support for the idea that the only waiver the existing ROs should enjoy is a waiver on the base application fee. If they apply for more variants later, additional fee should apply. Action Item 8: Update Recommendation 2.29 to read: “As a one time exception for the immediate next new gTLD application round, the base application fee for allocatable variant labels by existing IDN gTLD registry operators from the 2012 round will be waived.” * New Recommendation 2.26: “The registry fixed fee for an IDN gTLD registry operator that operates the delegated gTLD label(s) from a variant label set must be the same as a gTLD registry operator of a single gTLD.” * New Recommendation 2.27: “The calculation of the registry-level transaction fee must be based on the cumulative number of domain name registrations of the combined under all of the delegated gTLD label(s) from a variant label set.” * Associated rationales are also newly added. Topic E: https://docs.google.com/document/d/115eSNnxBsCbUszEGU7i4xbzLwu1u8_UdaGEJD9C… * See new Table 3 submitted by Dennis. Review of Glossary * Glossary: https://docs.google.com/document/d/115eSNnxBsCbUszEGU7i4xbzLwu1u8_UdaGEJD9C… * There are a handful of acronyms that are used regularly in the report that are repeated in the glossary. * Glossary term “allocatable” – note that these variants may be also be generated from IDN tables at the second level. * Response: we may not want to introduce the second level in this report as it is focused on the top level. We need to be clear in the intro the context of the list. It is focused on the specific work of phase 1 and the way we use terms in the report. For phase 2, we can always adjust the text. * Comment that “Conservatism” may not be able to strike a balance between user needs and security and might lean towards security. * “Delegated” – suggestion that the first sentence may not be needed: “The subsequent status of a label after it has been Allocated to the entity that has applied for the label.” * Discussion of defining label states – there is a table included in the response to CQ A10 * Suggestion to expand on definition of Same Entity. * “String” – should this focus on the top level, because the Phase 1 report focuses on the top level? In the context of this report, we use it in this context. Action Item 9: Add an item to the glossary for label states. Action Item 10: EPDP Team members to suggest additional text to explain glossary item “same entity.” Action Item 11: Update definition of “string” to read: “A combination of characters / letters that form the top-level domain name.” * Suggestion to update “Variant Label Set” definition

1 0

Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Monday, 03 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 30, 2023

March 30, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Monday, 03 April 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/rQP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/42urhjbt 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 MINUTES REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 30, 2023

March 30, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/qgP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yckbznhw <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yckbznhw__;!!PtGJab4!60Gp8xO…> 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

REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 29, 2023

March 29, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/qgP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yckbznhw [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yckbznhw__;!!PtGJab4!60Gp8xO…> 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 - IDNs EPDP Meeting #74 - 27 March 2023
by Emily Barabas March 29, 2023

March 29, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting on Monday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC. Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily Notes and Action Items - IDNs EPDP Call – 27 March 2023 Action Items Action Item 1: EPDP Team members to review draft text for the Initial Report explaining areas of divergence between EPDP and ccPDP4 draft recommendations. Action Item 2: Leadership team will try to work through the Phase 2a questions, estimate the amount of time needed to work through those questions, and any data collection needs and will circle back with the EPDP Team. Notes Welcome and Chair Updates * Today’s meeting is primarily administrative in nature. There is limited attendance, but there will not be substantive deliberations on charter questions on this call. Items of divergence with ccNSO * The Board is in the process of identifying the difference between the EPDP’s recommendations and ccPDP4’s recommendations. The Board would like to have a section in the Initial Report explaining for each identified area of divergence: the nature of the divergence from the perspective of the EPDP, the rationale behind the EPDP recommendation, and the expected impact of the area of divergence. * Verbal summary provided by staff of the draft text for the Initial Report for this section related to divergence. The EPDP team will have an opportunity to review the full text: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bGc-Us2AYWPh8ZSnIumJtQnb-W7xUBwKDlvx4RZ… Action Item 1: EPDP Team members to review draft text for the Initial Report explaining areas of divergence between EPDP and ccPDP4 draft recommendations. * Focus is 7 topics that were identified by staff supporting the Board’s consideration of this issue: * Main items: 1. Variant label disposition values; 2. Limiting number of delegated variant labels; 3. Impact on delegated TLDs due to RZ-LGR update; 4. String Similarity Review * Additional items that this group may or may not need to analyze: * 5. Applying for strings in scripts not supported by RZ-LGR: SubPro addressed this topic, so the EPDP team did not. * 6. Single character TLDs: The EPDP Team recommended that these may be possible for Han script, but no application can be accepted until relevant guidelines implemented. ccNSO did not address this topic. This may be for the ccNSO to explain. * 7. Delegation of successfully evaluated TLD and its variants TLDs: EPDP Team recommended maintaining the timeframe for delegation that existing in the 2012 round. It is unclear how the variant ccTLD will be delegated if the primary TLD has not been delegated yet. This may be for the ccNSO to explain. Discussion points: * It is expected that the 7 points are the ones that the Board will relay to the EPDP and ccPDP teams, although this has not yet come through officially. * The expectation is that Edmon will provide communication from the Board. * Additional potential point of divergence/difference: second level considerations. It might be good to highlight that this EPDP will produce recommendations relevant to second level labels. The ccPDP discussed some items about the second level. Because of the remit of the ccNSO, these will not result in recommendations, but there may be considerations captured in the Final Report. * This might be a similar type of issue as #6 above. * This Initial Report will focus on the top level. We could potentially flag this item, noting that there won’t be any recommendations on the second level yet from the EPDP. * Reminder: It’s not necessarily a problem that recommendations differ between the two groups. gTLDs and ccTLDs operate under different frameworks and the scope of policy development is different in the two communities. We just need to be able to explain the differences. It is helpful if the EPDP and ccPDP have similar explanations of the inconsistencies in their respective reports. * Confirmation from the Board Liaison that the communication from the Board is likely to be very similar to what is being reviewed today. The Board would like an explanation of inconsistencies, but it is not necessarily a problem that there are differences. * Reminder: In the draft text, the “Rationale and Impact” for each item attempts to address why the difference is not a problem. Review potential 2a questions (as suggested by the EPDP leadership team) * Reminder, the Board passed a resolution during ICANN76 (https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-r…) – “Resolved (2023.03.16.08), the Board directs the ICANN Interim President and CEO, or her designee(s), to deliver the Implementation Plan to the Board no later than 1 August 2023. The timely delivery of the Implementation Plan requires the satisfactory completion of the following four deliverables by the last day of the ICANN77 Public Meeting (15 June 2023): . . . A project plan from the GNSO Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) Working Group (WG) identifying all charter questions that will impact the next Applicant Guidebook, along with considerations to ensure a consistent solution on IDN Variant TLDs with the ccPDP4 on IDN ccTLDs (in accordance with prior Board Resolution 2019.03.14.09<https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-r…>), and a timeline by when the IDNs EPDP WG will deliver relevant recommendations to the GNSO Council.” * The Board would like to understand the timeline for the EPDP Team’s work on “phase 2a” questions. These are phase 2 questions that have a dependency with finalizing the AGB. The leadership team has done some initial analysis and wants to work through that with the group. * As the group goes through the potential phase 2a charter questions, EPDP Team members should keep in mind the timeframe for working through deliberations on this group of CQs. * Consider whether it might be possible to have a Final Report that combines recommendations from Phase 1 and Phase 2a. * List of potential phase 2a questions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YfnJPAO7Ey6MRpVCR7N8uMPHmGWdnHcxioO… * The Board is considering a similar analysis that is included in the spreadsheet linked above. * Question: Is it correct that Column B is indicating that if any of the following is implicated, there is a dependency: AGB, application question, contract for future ROs, operational impact? * Response: The Board resolution specifically addresses impact on the AGB, so this group may want to refine its analysis to specify if it is a dependency with the AGB or other elements of the New gTLD Program, noting that it’s not completely clear what will be contained in the AGB itself. Best guess is that the scope of the AGB will be similar to 2012. * Some items will be referenced in the AGB but will live outside the AGB. * We may need to think about these charter questions from the very narrow perspective of impact on the AGB as opposed to impacting contracts etc. We may need further guidance from Council or org about what needs to be in scope for that analysis. Discussion points * C1: Clarification – because this CQ focuses on extending SubPro requirement to existing second level labels, it shouldn’t touch on the AGB or contracts for new applicants. It appears that C1 will not be necessary for the AGB. * Comments regarding the substance of the CQ: * It could be the case that there are second level variants that are currently not activated but blocked. There are also scenarios where two second level strings are already registered as separate strings, but they could be identified as variants. * Concerns raised about the legal implications of panelists who do not have legal obligations and policies whose decisions result in termination of contracts. * Reminder that we are not yet discussing substance. * C2: This item focuses on already activated IDN variant labels at the second-level, and therefore does not have an impact on the next round. * C3: This question refers to both existing and future gTLDs, so could have dependencies for the next round, but the question regarding mechanism could be an implementation issue that could be handled by the SubPro IRT. * Comment on substance of the CQ: ROID should be unique identifiers, so it should not be the same for two registrations of the same entity. ROID is not a good idea. * Comment that this is a charter question that informs the content of the AGB (potentially technical questions in the application). * Note that, for now, this should be marked as “yes.” * The mechanism to ensure the same entity principle at the second level may be referred to in the AGB or other implementation materials, but the level of detail that needs to be in the AGB is not yet clear to this group. * Will the AGB be developed by the IRT or separately? * IRT itself is comprised of community members. GDS (ICANN org staff) will draft the AGB. The IRT will validate the implementation (the AGB) is true to intent. * C3a: Focuses on whether additional mechanisms need to be developed to ensure that the same entity principle is observed at the second level. Conditional on the decision of the group to use ROID as the mechanism. This was initially marked as “no” because it goes into the details of implementation. * C3 will touch on managing the same entity principle. We need to be clear as to how we triage these questions. One might argue that any additional mechanism will need to be contractual agreement, which would make it a “yes,” but you might not need it per se for the AGB, in which case it may be a “no.” * C3a changed to a “maybe” because of the connection to C3. * C4: Initial analysis is that this is a “yes” because it impacts future registries when they apply. Harmonization will impact the IDN tables submitted by the applicants. * C4a: Focuses on second level domains under a single TLD that doesn’t have a variant at the top level and whether behavior needs to be the same. This was marked as “no” because it not about the top-level. SubPro already addressed this by saying that they don’t need to behave the same. * C5: Regarding mechanism for harmonizing IDN tables – initially categorized as a “no” because this is an implementation question. This might not even be an implementation issue but something that registries need to figure out themselves if harmonization is required. * C6: Focuses on IDN table format. IDN tables must be included with applications. Therefore, initial assessment is that this is a “yes.” No objection to keeping C6 as a “yes.” * D4: Addresses whether second level domain names should behave as a unit at different points in their lifecycle. This group needs to discuss the impact on the transfer phase. This question is also asking whether other statuses need to synchronized beyond transfers. This was initially sorted as “yes.” If there are labels that are registered by the same registrant, they could be renewed together or separately. If this group makes a recommendation about this, it would need to be in the AGB and/or other elements of the application process, so that applicants know they need to adhere to the requirements. No objections to keep as “yes.” * D5: Focuses on fees paid by contracted parties per registration. Links back to discussion on fees in phase 1 (under D1b). * If applicant needs to include financial model in the application, it is important for the applicant to have information about fees in advance. * 2012 AGB includes the draft RA at the time, draft RA may also be in the next version of the AGB. * D5 may need to be part of the AGB – change this item to “yes” * D6: Initially marked as “yes” -- due to a potential application question about registration life cycle and potential impact on AGB and contract. Note that this charter question anticipates coordination with RPMs work that has not yet been initiated. * D6a: Initially marked as “yes” as it is related to transfer, and references RPMs, so may have an impact on the AGB. * D7: Marked as “no” -- If one domain is suspended and the other exists, it won’t impact the same entity requirement. It won’t break the set. * If one variant is suspended, will it impact suspension of other variants in the set? This was initially marked as “no”. Changed to “maybe” because new language may be needed in the AGB if it is determined that the suspension of one variant impacts suspension of another. * Comment: If there is a consensus policy on IDNs, it shouldn’t be included in the RA. * D7a: same entity requirement for suspensions ordered by URS or other dispute resolution mechanisms. This was changed from “no” to “maybe” consistent with D7. * D8: Reminder of parking lot question from Edmon linked to this CQ: "What should be included in (or the behaviour of) WHOIS/RDAP for IDN variants, both the IANA whois and the Registry WHOIS?" D8 is preliminarily a “maybe.” * F1: Focuses on TMCH. Preliminarily categorized as “yes” because it is related to SAC060, which needs to be addressed before the next round and has a potential impact on the AGB. The group left it as a “yes.” * F2: Same as above. * G1 and G1a: Marked as “no” because it is not AGB-related. Action Item 2: Leadership team will try to work through the Phase 2a questions, estimate the amount of time needed to work through those questions, and any data collection needs and will circle back with the EPDP Team.

2 1

Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Meeting #75 - Thursday 30 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Emily Barabas March 29, 2023

March 29, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for our meeting on Thursday 30 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC (2 hour call). Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily IDN EPDP Meeting #75 Proposed Agenda 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2 mins) 2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5 mins) 3. Public comment input form (10 mins) 4. Third reading of draft text (60 mins) 5. Review of Glossary and other selected sections of the draft initial report (40 mins) 6. AOB (3 mins) For item 4: Topic A: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… A3 & A5: pp.3-5, 7-9 Topic B: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… B2: p.2 Topic D: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… D1b, D8: pp.4-9, 16-17 Topic E3: https://docs.google.com/document/d/115eSNnxBsCbUszEGU7i4xbzLwu1u8_UdaGEJD9C… pp.5-9 (table 3 created based on Dennis’s input) For item 5: Section 2 Working Group Approach: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TkYLu5Dztk3-L6i5C7QvG4zWI3kCnsrV7bEWrDa… Section 3 Glossary (cleaned up): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pVFaL0f9vJkPEuJ6UhA4Ix5X2fCY12nsP3GRcuB… Section 5 Divergence with ccPDP4 Draft Recommendations: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bGc-Us2AYWPh8ZSnIumJtQnb-W7xUBwKDlvx4RZ… Annex C Background: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PEiMbC21Yv1LgimcL-m7NBmTQCLRUvSeG7yrizo… Emily Barabas Policy Development Support Senior Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976 www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

Post Call | IDNs EPDP Team call | Monday, 27 March 2023
by Devan Reed March 27, 2023

March 27, 2023

Dear all, All recordings for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Monday, 27 March 2023 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/yAP5DQ> (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

2 1

Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 27, 2023

March 27, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/qgP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yckbznhw 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

ON NOW | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | MONDAY, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 27, 2023

March 27, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Monday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/yAP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu__;!!PtGJab4!_ZY79BX…> 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

10 MINUTES REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | MONDAY, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 27, 2023

March 27, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Monday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/yAP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu__;!!PtGJab4!_ZY79BX…> 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

Invitation - Global UA Day
by CEO NIXI March 25, 2023

March 25, 2023

Dear Sir/Madam, UASG (Universal Acceptance Steering Group) is created by ICANN in 2015 with the objective of promoting Universal Acceptance in Computing systems across the world. Till date, there is a budge among technical community, user community, Government and academia about the need of Universal Acceptance. However, Universal Acceptance ready systems are below 3% globally. Therefore, there is an urgent need for all of us to work together as a team, as a community to ensure that those who are left out from the Internet revolution should be brought within Internet fold to make use of a wonderful invention called “Internet”. We expect out of 2.7 billion left out citizens globally, at least 1.0 billion can be brought within Internet system using UA ready software and hardware. UASG has taken an initiative to make a big awareness programme of UA by celebrating Global UA Day on 28 th March which is led by India for 2023 and I am chairing the Implementation Committee for the same. Global objective of UASG which will not only result in adding more broadband users but also initiate several other positive outcomes like development of new softwares, upgradation of existing hardware and also creation of new jobs. It is also expected that global GDP may see a boost by adding more internet users in the system. I as Chair of UASG Comm. Working Group invite you to two days inaugural Global UA Day celebration at New Delhi. Details of programme with link to join are enclosed for your reference. With kind regards, Anil Kumar Jain CEO, NIXI Chair, UASG Communication Working Group Chair, Implementation Committee, Global UA Day celebration 2023 Chair, India Internet Governance Forum Vice Chair – IDN ccTLD W4 Liaison Officer between IDN ccTLDW4 & IDN gTLD EDP Member-IDN gTLD EPDP Member - IGLC Anil Kumar Jain CEO, NIXI [ https://rashtragaan.in/ ]

1 1

Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Meeting #74 - Monday 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Steve Chan March 24, 2023

March 24, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for our meeting on Monday 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC (2 hour call). Re: agenda item 4: You may have seen that in support of the ICANN Board’s resolution<https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-r…> to adopt the majority of recommendations from the Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP, the Board directed ICANN org to deliver an implementation plan no later than 1 August 2023, which amongst a number of activities, requires the completion of four specific deliverables. One of those deliverables requires this EPDP Team to identify all charter questions that will impact the next Applicant Guidebook and provide a revised project plan for the Council that is inclusive of Phase 1 already being worked on now and the so-called Phase 2a questions, to be discussed and agreed upon under agenda item 4. The need for this deliverable was also communicated by the Board to the Council via this letter<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/sinha-to-ducos-16mar23…>. Kind regards, Ariel, Emily, and Steve IDN EPDP Meeting #74 Proposed Agenda 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2 mins) 2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5 mins) 3. Items of divergence with ccNSO (50 mins) 4. Review potential 2a questions (as suggested by the EPDP leadership team) (50 mins) 5. Public comment format (10 mins) 6. AOB (3 mins) 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

CORRECTED REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | MONDAY, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 24, 2023

March 24, 2023

**Corrected subject of email to say the correct day of the week, Monday 27 March 2023. Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Monday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/yAP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu__;!!PtGJab4!_ZY79BX…> 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

REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 24, 2023

March 24, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Monday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/yAP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu__;!!PtGJab4!_ZY79BX…> 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 - IDNs EPDP Meeting #73 - 23 March 2023
by Emily Barabas March 24, 2023

March 24, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting on Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC. Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily Notes and Action Items - IDNs EPDP Call – 23 March 2023 Action Items Action Item 1: In recommendation 1.5, change “user” to “registrant” and add bracketed text [consistent] [predictable] as possible alternatives to [positive]. Action Item 2: For recommendation 2.2 - GDS team to come back to the group with clarification about its recommendation regarding “critical functions” in this text. Action Item 3: In recommendation 2.2, clarify language to state that whichever service provider provides for a function, that same provider should be used for both existing TLD and newly delegated variants. Action Item 4: Leadership team to refine Implementation Guidance 2.xx to make it consistent with Recommendation 2.6, clarifying that this question is not scored. Action Item 5: Replace “sanctity of the set” with “integrity of the set” in Rationale for Recommendations 2.16-2.18 and throughout the document. Action Item 6: Consolidate text of 2.16-2.18 to focus on the fact that any breach of the contract in any label removes the whole set. Action Item 7: Leadership team to draft new recommendations on base application fee based on today’s discussion (23 March 2023) and refine draft recommendation 2.24, 2.25, 2.26, and 2.27. Action Item 8: Leadership Team to revise draft recommendation 2.25 to reference a reduced fee based on a cost recovery basis for variants applied for beyond the set number that are included without additional costs with the primary. Notes Welcome and Chair Updates * The EPDP Team will meet twice a week for the next two weeks to get through the upcoming workload. Second Reading of Draft Text Charter Question A5: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… * Current text of Recommendation 1.5: “A framework for developing best practice guidelines in the management of gTLDs and their variant labels by registries and registrars must be formulated with a view to encourage a positive user experience.” * In last week’s discussion, concerns were expressed about the use of the term “positive user experience.” Discussion points: * ROs and registrars do not influence end user experience. That will depend on the usage of the domain. * In all agreements, from the user perspective, the only party is mentioned is the registrant. It is more logical to refer to the registrant in this text. * Support expressed for substituting “registrant” for “user.” * It was noted that the term “positive” is subjective. Predictable and consistent are possible alternatives. * It was noted that a registrant experience could be consistently negative, so in this regard, positive might be preferable for those advocating for a good user experience. Action Item 1: In recommendation 1.5, change “user” to “registrant” and add bracketed text [consistent] [predictable] as possible alternatives to [positive]. * Implementation Guidance 1.6: The framework should outline the scope and the steps involved in developing future best practice guidelines, which at a minimum should involve relevant stakeholders, such as registries, registrars, and registrants who have experience with IDNs and variant labels. * Written comment regarding IG 1.6: “Could the implementation team find a group of registrants that represents the needs of all? given that the variant definition is script-dependent, I'm thinking we would need at least a representative for each script community. An even then, they might have their own biases. Unlike the registries and registrars who have stakeholder groups who can review an opine of ongoing work, there isn't a registrant stakeholder group.” Discussion points: * It was noted that that this is implementation guidance, and some details may need to be sorted in implementation. * It was noted that ALAC, CSG, and NCSG could potentially serve as proxies for registrants. * Suggestion to add a caveat such as: “registrants, to the extent that is it is possible to find appropriate representatives for this group.” Charter Question B2: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… * Recommendation 2.2: All Critical Functions as defined in the base Registry Agreement for the existing IDN gTLD from the 2012 round and its delegated variant labels must be provided by the same registry service provider. The Critical Functions are: DNS Service, DNSSEC proper resolution, EPP, RDDS, and Data Escrow. * Suggestion to replace existing text with: “A gTLD operator, legacy or new, must use the same registry service provider to provide all Critical Functions to any given variant TLD set.” Discussion Points: * There are several TLD services that do not just use the DNS service of the RSP but use multiple service provides to have their DNS published. How would that work in that context if we restrict it to one service provider? * This text is attempting to capture that the entity that provides the service in the existing gTLD must also provide it in the variant labels. * The party generating the database of records must be the same. We shouldn’t conflate critical services of the operator and registry services. * The EPDP Team used “critical functions” in the text because it’s defined in the RA and in our scope. * If it’s in the RA, why would we try to cover off services not in those functions? Action Item 2: For recommendation 2.2 - GDS team to come back to the group with clarification about its recommendation regarding “critical functions” in this text. * Reference to critical functions in the text is unnecessary. If a registry does not follow rules for critical functions, it is in breach. If we say that the registry must use to same registry service provider for primary and variants, we are covered. * The goal is to say that the registry operator uses the same service provider for critical functions. * Reminder: Sub Pro recommended that going forward a primary and the variants need to have the same RSP. It doesn’t speak to the case where the primary is already delegated and then variants are requested later. The goal of this recommendation is to fill that gap. Action Item 3: In recommendation 2.2, clarify language to state that whichever service provider provides for a function, that same provider should be used for both existing TLD and newly delegated variants. Charter Question B5: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… * Editorial suggestions to response to charter question accepted. Charter Question D1b: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… * Suggested IG provided by ALAC: “Implementation Guidance 2.xx [for recommendation 2.6]: Criteria for evaluating the explanations submitted by applicants on the usability goals for the variant label(s) should be pre-identified and applied consistently by evaluators with the requisite expertise.” Suggested addition to the Rationale: “[The EPDP Team agreed] that Recommendation 2.6 is intended to ensure that the applicants’ usability goals for the variant label(s) sought help contribute to positive end user experiences. For this reason, the criteria for assessing the applicants’ explanations for the variant label(s) sought should be pre-identified and applied consistently by evaluators with the requisite expertise.” Discussion points: * ALAC raised concern that there needs to be checks and balances on the number of variants in a set. * Text regarding “requisite expertise” is not necessary. It cuts off existing ROs of gTLDs from participating, because there are no variants in management. Only ccTLD operators will have experience with variants. * When ICANN sources evaluators, it will determine the requisite expertise. The IG is just trying to make the point that certain things are important for IDN TLDs and variants and consistent rules need to be applied by evaluators. * General acceptance for the keeping the proposed text in the draft. * Recommendation 2.6 focuses on question in the application about why the applicant wants a variant label, which is similar to existing question 18a and 18b in the 2012 application. Recommendation 2.6 is envisioning a similar, unscored question. Is new IG 2.xx envisioning a scored question or just requesting additional detail? Action Item 4: Leadership team to refine Implementation Guidance 2.xx to make it consistent with Recommendation 2.6, clarifying that this question is not scored. Charter Question D8: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… * Rationale for Recommendations 2.16-2.18: Suggestion to replace “sanctity of the set” with “integrity of the set” in this instance and throughout the document. Action Item 5: Replace “sanctity of the set” with “integrity of the set” in Rationale for Recommendations 2.16-2.18 and throughout the document. * Regarding the following text in the Rationale for Recommendations 2.16-2.18: “Nevertheless, in the event a variant label is removed from the root zone as a consequence of its registry operator’s breach of the Registry Agreement, the primary IDN gTLD and its other delegated variant label(s) must also be removed from the root zone.” * Comment: “Is this scenario possible? a breach of a registry agreement that triggers removal of a variant label before its primary. If we accept one registry agreement for the set as a principle, then a breach of a registry agreement will affect not just one label in the set but all of it.” Discussion points: * The EPDP Team didn’t discuss the probability of this situation, but rather the consequence for the set. * This text could address the situation where the variant is delegated ahead of the primary. * Agreement that is ok to keep it for completeness. * Regarding Recommendation 2.18: “In the event that a variant label is removed from the root zone as a consequence of its registry operator’s breach of the Registry Agreement, the associated delegated primary IDN gTLD and its other delegated variant label(s) must also be removed from the root zone.” Suggestion that this outcome is too extreme if there are no security consequences to leaving the primary in the root. * This recommendation was drafted with guidance from GDS. * Reminder: 2.18 is one recommendation in a set that are all related. 2.16 focuses on the case where the primary is removed. 2.17 refers to the case where the delegated variant label is voluntarily removed. 2.18 refers to the case where a variant is involuntarily removed. * Suggestion to clarify that any breach of the contract for any label removes the whole set. It’s not so much focused on the variant triggering the breach, but the label within a set triggering removal for the whole set. Action Item 6: Consolidate text of 2.16-2.18 to focus on the fact that any breach of the contract in any label removes the whole set. Charter Question E5: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RLvsyQvliafNEA9Ja1RCObywpAWfp1kTmte0WZl… * Review of new Text in Rationale for Recommendation 3.2-3.3 – new revisions applied to final three paragraphs. Discussion points: * “From an implementation perspective, the EPDP Team envisioned that if an applicant enters a variant label of a Reserved Name as its applied-for gTLD string, the application system will recognize the variant label and will reject the application.” The text appears to imply that this is an automated process, but this needs to be a manual check, correct? * It is likely be part of the algorithmic check, but if we are not sure we can soften the language. * Algorithmic approach will only be able to find exact matches. Similarity check will not be possible via algorithm. * This text is talking about an exact match of a variant of a reserved name, which is anticipated to be an automated comparison. Discussion of variant label application fees applied to existing gTLD registry operators * Discussion Question: What should the base application fee be when an existing RO applies for variants of an already delegated primary string? * Agreement from ICANN76 – for future applicant, a single base application fee will apply for the primary and the variants as a set up to a certain number of variants. Discussion points: * Possible options: * Recommendation to waive the application fee for existing ROs * Recommendation that the applicant pay the application fee for the new round * Sliding scale fee * This will only apply to the 44 TLDs from the 2012 round. * The survey conducted of this 44 is not instructive, but it’s likely that not all 44 will apply for variants in the next round. * Do we need to make a special case here? Is this different from the case where in subsequent round 1 an applicant applies for a primary and then applies for variants in subsequent round 2 or 3? * It might make sense to have a single rule for any case where the applicant applies for the primary and variants in different rounds. * Counterpoint: The 2012 applicants were unable to apply for variants. In the future, it will be possible to apply for primary and variants in the same round. * Question: If we do have an exception, it would be one-off for existing ROs and in the next round only? * Suggestion that this would be a special case limited to the next round. * Perhaps for this case the application for variants should be free of charge to compensate for the period of time that variants are unavailable. * Suggestion that there is an exception for 2012 gTLD applicants, based on the fact that they paid the standard fee in 2012 and were unable to apply for variants. If they apply for variants in the next subsequent round, the application fee will be waived. * Some support expressed for this approach. * Do we also need a policy recommendation for cases where the 2012 applicant for a primary does not apply for variants in the next subsequent round but applies for variants in later subsequent rounds? * Reminder: In Cancun, the group reached general agreement that there should be a maximum limit to the number of variants that would be included in the single base fee. * Did this mean that if four variants are “free”, this is limited to a single round, or would it also be “free” if you apply for two variants with the primary and two more in a later round? It would cause a lot of work to spread this across rounds. Perhaps it should be limited to applications including variants within the same round that the applicant applies for the primary. * Suggestion that if you apply for more variants in a later round, perhaps a discount can apply (percentage of base application fee)? * Suggestion that we should try to have a mechanism to encourage applicants to apply for minimum number of variants instead of maximum number of variants - to focus on variants “needed”. If signing up for more variants earlier gives a financial reward, people might apply for more variants then are needed. * The expectation is that the applicant will apply for the primary and the variants in the same round that is optimal for their business needs. * It’s difficult without a factual evaluation method to determine how many variants is too many. * As a reminder, only the Arabic GP has not indicated a ceiling number. * While we don’t want to encourage excessive number of variants, there are real needs to meet for some language communities, therefore it makes sense to have a limited number of variants included in the fee. An additional fee for applications for variants beyond that might meet the goal of applications for excessive number of variants. Ultimately the applicant will still need to demonstrate why it is applying for variants and justify the need. Suggestion New Applications: ================= First application including 0-4 variants: Pay 200,000 USD First application including 5-8 variants: Pay 220,000 USD. Follow-up applications: ======================= Existing TLD with any number of variants. Apply for 0-4 additional variants: Pay 20,000 USD Existing TLD with any number of variants. Apply for 5-8 additional variants: Pay 40,000 USD Exemption for 2012 round: ========================= Apply for 0-4 additional variants: Free, no charge Apply for 5-6 additional variants: Pay 20,000 USD * Summary: We are headed to applying a proportion of the base fee if an applicant applies for additional variants in later rounds apart from the primary. Action Item 7: Leadership team to draft new recommendations on base application fee based on today’s discussion (23 March 2023) and refine draft recommendation 2.24, 2.25, 2.26, and 2.27. * As a reminder Arabic GP is going to be providing feedback on a reasonable number of variants in the Arabic script. * Question: for Recommendation 2.25 – how does the group expect the reduced fee to be structured? Current draft text: “Recommendation 2.25: If more than xx of variant labels are being applied-for in the same application, the applicant will be charged, in addition to the base application fee, [20%] of the base application fee to specifically cover the cost of evaluating each of the additional variant label(s) above the threshold number.” * Suggestion that the policy recommendation should not suggest a formula. The EPDP Team doesn’t regulate costs. * Rather than having a percentage, note in IG that the intent is that once the evaluation costs are known, ICANN will decide the additional fee. Action Item 8: Leadership Team to revise draft recommendation 2.25 to reference a reduced fee based on a cost recovery basis for variants applied for beyond the set number that are included without additional costs with the primary. * Additional redlines are available based on ICANN org feedback that are editorial in nature Review of recommendations in place, look at sequence and order * PDF was shared on the mailing list before ICANN76. * Charter questions are clustered by topic. In developing recommendations, it became clear that a different organization may be more logical for the reader. Suggestion: Order recommendations based on the process flow of the New gTLD Program. Principle-based recommendations are listed first. After the principle-based recommendations, sections follow the flow of the New gTLD Program. * Document also includes definition of underlying principles. * Question: Should there be a distinct section focused on an existing RO applying for variants in a future round or should this be included in the overall process flow? AOB * Leadership team will confirm tomorrow whether the group will cancel or go ahead with the meeting on Monday. * Leadership team had a meeting with some Board members at ICANN76. A communication has gone to Council requesting a timeframe from the EPDP on when the team can get the phase 2a charter questions done. These are the ones that have been pushed to phase 2 but have been identified as a dependency for developing the AGB. * Priority at the moment is to publish the Phase 1 Initial Report.

2 2

Post Call | IDNs EPDP Team call | Thursday, 23 March 2023
by Devan Reed March 23, 2023

March 23, 2023

Dear all, All recordings for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Thursday, 23 March 2023 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/pgP5DQ> (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

Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 23, 2023

March 23, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Monday, 27 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/yAP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yb5fstvu 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, 23 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 23, 2023

March 23, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/pgP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/m4k66baa <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/m4k66baa__;!!PtGJab4!9wMzztE…> 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

REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 22, 2023

March 22, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/pgP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/m4k66baa [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/m4k66baa__;!!PtGJab4!9wMzztE…> 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

Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Meeting #73 - Thursday 23 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Emily Barabas March 21, 2023

March 21, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for our meeting on Thursday 23 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC (2 hour call). Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily IDN EPDP Meeting #73 Proposed Agenda 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates 3. Second reading of draft text 4. Review of all recommendations and discuss their sequence / order 5. Discussion of variant label application fees applied to existing gTLD registry operators 6. Discussion of the tiered application fee structure (pending input from Arabic GP on the reasonable number of delegated variant labels) 7. AOB Emily Barabas Policy Development Support Senior Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976 www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

March - April 2023 | IDNs EPDP Team
by Devan Reed March 16, 2023

March 16, 2023

Dear all, Please find the .ics attachments and dates below for the IDNs EPDP Team calls taking place January - March 2023. Please download them to your calendar. Calls take place every Thursday 13:00 UTC for 2 hours. Two additional Monday meetings have been added during the same time slot. The dates are as follows: * 23 March 2023 * 27 March 2023 – Additional Monday call date * 30 March 2023 * 02 April 2023 – Additional Monday call date * 06 April 2023 * 13 April 2023 * 20 April 2023 The email invitation for each call will be sent out closer to the date of the meeting. The next call is taking place on 23 March 2023 and the invitation has been sent out. Thank you. Kind regards, Devan

1 0

Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 16, 2023

March 16, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 13:00 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 agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/pgP5DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/m4k66baa 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

IDNs EPDP Team meeting
by ICANN Policy Calendar March 16, 2023

March 16, 2023

Meeting: IDNs EPDP Team meeting Pattern: Weekly on Thursday’s 23 March 2023 – 20 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours Additional Dates: Monday, 27 March, 2023 & Monday, 03 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours 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 wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/XZE-DQ 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

IDNs EPDP Team meeting
by ICANN Policy Calendar March 16, 2023

March 16, 2023

Meeting: IDNs EPDP Team meeting Pattern: Weekly on Thursday’s 23 March 2023 – 20 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours Additional Dates: Monday, 27 March, 2023 & Monday, 03 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours 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 wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/XZE-DQ 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

IDNs EPDP Team meeting
by ICANN Policy Calendar March 16, 2023

March 16, 2023

Meeting: IDNs EPDP Team meeting Pattern: Weekly on Thursday’s 23 March 2023 – 20 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours Additional Dates: Monday, 27 March, 2023 & Monday, 03 April 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours 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 wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/XZE-DQ 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

Request from your Chair
by Donna austin March 16, 2023

March 16, 2023

Hi Team It was really great to see those of you who could attend our sessions in Cancun, and also a big thank you to those who took the time to participate remotely–I know how challenging that can be. We made some really good progress finalising a number of outstanding recommendations to be included in our Initial Report. However, as is often the case, we ran out of time to complete the second reading of the draft text. In addition, we also need to conduct a review of our Phase 1 recommendations and selected sections of the draft Initial Report, such as the glossary. As you all know, we are on a path to publish our Initial Report on 24 April 2023, and I am concerned that the deadline is at risk because we still have a considerable amount of work to do. I apologise for the short notice, and I understand that it may not be possible for everyone to attend, but to give us the best chance to publish our Initial Report on 24 April, I want to schedule two additional meetings: one on Monday, 27 March and one on Monday, 3 April at our usual time of 13:00-15:00 UTC. Please respond on the list if you have any concerns. We will also have an opportunity to discuss the additional meetings during our call next week. However, in the meantime I have asked the GNSO Secretariat to go ahead and schedule these additional calls. Thank you again to everyone for your contribution to this work so far–I appreciate that it’s difficult to maintain interest and momentum over such a long period of time. However, we are very close to achieving an important milestone in our work that will bring with it a short vacation for the team 😊 I wish you all safe travels home. Kind regards Donna Chair, IDN EPDP

6 5

Notes and action items - IDNs EPDP Meetings at ICANN76 - 11 March 2023
by Steve Chan March 13, 2023

March 13, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the notes and action items from Saturday’s meetings on 11 March 2023. Apologies for the delayed distribution. Best, Ariel, Emily, and Steve Notes and Action Items - IDNs EPDP Call – 11 March 2023 Action Items Action Item 1: Add Implementation Guidance or rationale to reflect that: some additional fees specific to IDN variants may be needed, beyond the application fee. Action Item 2: Draft language to capture outcome of single fee for both registry-level and transaction fees. Action item 3: Clarify language to specify between challenge to RZ-LGR versus the SubPro challenge mechanism. Specify three scenarios. Action item 4: Draft the latter part of Rec 1.2 more like a recommendation (or consider moving to rationale). Action item 5: Include the primary and disposition values as challengeable via the SubPro challenge mechanism. Action item 6: Investigate what a “reasonable” number of variant strings is for various scripts, based on learnings from the GPs. Roll Call and SOI Updates * None Welcome and Chair Updates * Background on this EPDP * Review of timeline to Phase 1 Initial Report. Noting need for drafting of glossary and review of text. Close Loop - D1b - flat application fee & registry level fee (fixed fee & transaction fee) * Slide 5 - Context of question * Slide 6 - New draft recommendation as a result of the previous call, related only to the application fee. * Language probably needs additional work, but the principle is that the primary string, plus any number of variants, should be subject to a single base application fee. * As a result of the hybrid model, the number of permutations will be quite high. Unclear if those costs would be borne by all applicants or just by the affected applicants. * May want to note that some additional fees specific to IDN variants may be needed, beyond the application fee. Action Item: Add Implementation Guidance or rationale to reflect that: some additional fees specific to IDN variants may be needed, beyond the application fee. * Reminder that we’re only talking about the application fee, and as well, that we need to consider existing gTLDs and how they apply for their variants. * Noted that this model is helpful in promoting the adoption of IDNs. * Reminder that variants are determined by the RZ-LGR. * As a principle, the primary string and all variants should be treated the same. * Noted that reviewing additional strings (variants), there is likely to be extra cost. The result of this recommendation is that those additional costs are borne by all applicants. * There are other examples of all applications that have different evaluation elements being subject to the same fee. ASCII and IDN applications, which have IDN tables, would have the same fee in 2012. Geo names are also part of the base application fee. * ASCII domains will have variants as well, so this is not just specific to IDNs. * Slide 7 - Reviewing RA language about registry-level fees, which is about the fixed fee and the transaction fee. * Slide 8 - Recommendations are in line with the integrity of the set. Because the primary gTLD and variant labels are recommended to be subject to a single agreement, should the registry-level fixed fee only be levied once or per delegated gTLDs? * There is also a technical level to consider. There are more zones set up and entries in the zone. Managing the set at a technical level, there is no fixed implementation that all registries will follow. * There might be a preference to just worry about the administrative level. * Clarification that for the technical level, this is more about the EPP side and the domain create, renewal, transfer. So, based on transactions. The DNS side is up to the RO to manage. * Support for single fee, based at least in part because of the principle of the set. The registry-level fee is already substantial and adding additional annual fees may further dampen interest. * Registry-level transaction fees should also be subject to a single fee. Action Item: Draft language to capture outcome of single fee for both registry-level and transaction fees. * Question about fees for names registered in each variant. This sounds like a second-level question? * Clarification question about what constitutes 50,000. Does each registration count, including variants, as a transaction? Some belief that the transactions would be based on the set. By way of example, 25,000 transactions under the primary gTLD and 25,000 transactions under variant 1, would total 50,000 transactions. * Not clear if there will be a new EPP command to create a set. Second Reading of Draft Text Circulated Prior to ICANN76 E3 (added variant labels to Reserved Names): https://docs.google.com/document/d/115eSNnxBsCbUszEGU7i4xbzLwu1u8_UdaGEJD9C… * Reviewing text in Google doc. Approach is to ask the commenters to explain and seek to resolve comments. * Question about the consistency of language and the model, in respect of blocked labels. There seems to be a gap/inconsistency for just Reserved Names. This was addressed in drafting the language. * Concern about the limitation of two-character strings. This limitation comes from the 2012 AGB and is affirmed by SubPro. It seems out of scope for this team to modify. However, is it not possible that a 1-char or 3-char string would be similar to a 2-char ASCII (which are reserved for potential ccTLDs)? This language therefore seems limiting. * Could use additional clarity around what “manifestly low level of visual confusability” * Is there also an exception for mixed script? Answer is no. Glossary will note that only valid labels will be included in the blocked variants list, except where there might be some exceptions. Implementation guidance may be useful. * Intent is to give discretion to the expert panelists. * Noted that allocatable variant labels for reserved names would be included in the string similarity review. * Table added to help provide a visual representation of the comparable combinations. If we want to include it, need to update it for accuracy. A8, B4a, E1, E2, E3a, E4, E7/B5: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iXaAy3uDyoVlZ4L9jYiY_8bzqpZR7I1xa9qUWen… * General agreement for text to be included in the Initial Report. A3 (added recs & rationale), A5, A7, A9, B4, B5, D1a, D1b, D8 (added rationale), E5 (revised rationale) Topic A: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… * There is a suggestion that the outcome of the challenge process would determine next steps. This bullet is specific to the RZ-LGR review process (outside of the SubPro challenge mechanism). * These sets of recommendations include both elements (applying even lacking RZ-LGR and when the RZ-LGR itself is being challenged). * There may be a third instance where the tool itself is improperly implemented. * Clarified that SubPro already has a recommendation about applying for a gTLD in a script that is not already a part of the RZ-LGR. * It seems that only the instance where an applicant is challenging the implementation of the RZ-LGR is relevant to this EPDP. However, can include the language about the challenge outside of the SubPro process (e.g., via the GPs). Action item: Clarify language to specify between challenge to RZ-LGR versus the SubPro challenge mechanism. Specify three scenarios. * Suggestion that the language in Rec 1.2 looks like rationale. Since this is the recommendation, there is opportunity to draft it more like a recommendation. Action item: Draft the latter part of Rec 1.2 more like a recommendation (or consider moving to rationale). * Rationale for Rec 1.17 has a question about validity of strings. There is a further question about the ability to challenge whether a variant string is blocked when they think it should be allocatable. Currently, the recommendation seems to only apply to the primary string. Action item: Include the primary and disposition values as challengeable via the SubPro challenge mechanism. * Rec 1.4 - agreement on clarifying language. Concern about this creating the perception that there is a ceiling value for variants. * Rationale for Rec 1.5 - Concern about user experience versus what may be more appropriate, the registrant experience. * Could specify that the user experience is outside of the control of registries and registrars. And thus, could specify that the framework is limited to best practices for registries and registrars deploying variants. * Clarification that for SSAC, the concern was about the registry managing too many variants, which would impact the registry, registrar, and registrant. * Re: Rec 1.5, understanding is that it was drafted in response to not impose a ceiling value for variants. This set of recommendations was drafted prior to the agreement by the WG to set a single base fee for the primary gTLD and all variants. Does this warrant revisiting Rec 1.4? Noted that applicants must explain need for variants. * The other significant factor is that only 7 scripts allow for allocatable variants and only Arabic has a high number of permutations. Chinese may also have a higher number of allocatable variants. * Suggestion that Rec 1.5 does not seem to connect to Rec 1.4. Would this mean that the framework is needed prior to the launch of the next round? Presumably the framework that is needed is to help potential applicants understand what is needed to manage variants. * Could make sense to separate between registry/registrar level considerations and then a more holistic set of guidance for variants (for registry, registrar, registrants). * Should highlight the elements that might limit uncontrolled applications for variants, considering the switch to a single application fee. * Could there be limitations on the single fee provision? Challenge is of course in determining what that arbitrary number might be. * The “arbitrary” number can be informed by the limits that the GPs imposed, so it will not be quite so arbitrary. Action item: Investigate what a “reasonable” number of variant strings is for various scripts, based on learnings from the GPs. Topic B: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… * N/A Topic D: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… * N/A Topic E: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RLvsyQvliafNEA9Ja1RCObywpAWfp1kTmte0WZl… * N/A Consolidated View of All Draft Phase 1 Recommendations: [Draft] Consolidated View of Draft Phase 1 Recommendations.pdf<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/231374910/%5BDraft%5D%20Co…> * N/A AOB * N/A 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

Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Sessions - ICANN76
by Ariel Liang March 9, 2023

March 9, 2023

Hello all, In preparation for the discussion of item 5 on the agenda, staff have developed a draft table that provides a consolidated view of the draft Phase 1 recommendations the EPDP Team has developed so far. The sequence of the recommendations is roughly based on the process flow of the New gTLD Program. The EPDP Team developed those recommendations to augment various stages/steps of the New gTLD Program on the basis of the overarching principles summarized in column E and explained on page 3 of the document. Please note the following: * The charter questions (column A) and recommendation text (column D) are the summarized version for brevity purposes (also as the EPDP Team is still refining the final wording for many recommendations) * The placement of some recommendations may not precisely fit into the New gTLD Program process flow, and it is due to the charter questions that served as the origin of those recommendations (e.g., recs under B4). * The underlying principles (column E) may not be precise for all the recommendations, and welcome EPDP Team’s input. * Column C is intentionally left blank as we need EPDP Team’s input on the sequence and reorganization of the recommendations before developing new numbers. Thank you for your review! Ariel From: Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Emily Barabas <emily.barabas(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 at 3:05 PM To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Sessions - ICANN76 Dear all, As a reminder the IDN EPDP Team will have two working sessions at ICANN76 on Saturday 11 March: * Session 1: 9:00 - 10:00 EST<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2023-03-11+ICANN76+Session+1+ID…> * Session 2: 10:30 - 12:00 EST<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2023-03-11+ICANN76+Session+2+ID…> The proposed agenda is as follows: 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates 3. Close Loop: * D1b - flat application fee & registry level fee (fixed fee & transaction fee) 4. Second Reading of Draft Text Circulated Prior to ICANN76 * E3 (added variant labels to Reserved Names) * A8, B4a, E1, E2, E3a, E4, E7/B5 * A3 (added recs & rationale), A5, A7, A9, B4, B5, D1a, D1b, D8 (added rationale), E5 (revised rationale) 5. Consolidated View of All Draft Phase 1 Recommendations 6. AOB We look forward to your participation! Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily Emily Barabas Policy Development Support Senior Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976 www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

3 2

Draft Output: A3, D8, E5, E3
by Ariel Liang March 7, 2023

March 7, 2023

Dear All, Please find the redlined draft text that was revised as a result of the discussion of last week’s meeting to close loops on recommendations that may have potential gaps. For the ease of your review, the revised redlined text are highlighted in yellow in the following documents: * A3, Rec 1.7, pp.3-5: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… * D8, Rationale for Rec 2.16-2.18, p.15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… * E5, Rationale for Rec 3.2-3.3, p.5: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RLvsyQvliafNEA9Ja1RCObywpAWfp1kTmte0WZl… * E3, added variant labels to Reserved Names, pp.2, 5 & 6: https://docs.google.com/document/d/115eSNnxBsCbUszEGU7i4xbzLwu1u8_UdaGEJD9C… === As a reminder, the previous batches of draft text circulated previously include the following: Batch 1: E3 (String Similarity Review) https://docs.google.com/document/d/115eSNnxBsCbUszEGU7i4xbzLwu1u8_UdaGEJD9C… Batch 2: E3a, E4, E2, B4a, E1, B5, E7, and A8: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iXaAy3uDyoVlZ4L9jYiY_8bzqpZR7I1xa9qUWen… Batch 3: Draft text revised as a result of the review of ICANN org’s substantive input Topic A: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bt0LT45UaLynFNverh1nJhyvq6q6NxgSFAOnOp2… · A5, Rec 1.5 and IG 1.6, pp.6-8 · A9, IG 1.15, pp.15-16 Topic B: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15YGISgNQYL_VfcVVZ6E97qbo42GPziP6x089bR3… · B2, Rec 2.2, p.2 · B5, Rec 2.8, pp.5-6 Topic D: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU… · D1a, Rec 2.4, IG 2.15, Rec 2.22, IG 2.23, pp.1-3 · D1b, Rec 2.6, IG 2.19, IG 2.20, IG 2.21, pp.4-6 · Note: Discussion of IG 2.xx is tabled, pending ALAC team’s input · D8, Rec 2.16, Rec 2.17, Rec 2.18, pp.13-14 You may notice some additional redlines on these draft documents that were not specifically called out. Those redlines intend to incorporate the editorial / non-substantive input from ICANN org, which the EPDP Team already discussed and agreed to let staff proceed with revisions. You are not required to review those redlines right now and they can be reviewed when the draft Initial Report is circulated. Please be so kind to complete your review of all these batches of draft text before ICANN76. The second reading and discussion of your input (if any) is expected to take place during ICANN76 EPDP-IDNs working sessions on Saturday, 11 March. Thank you for your review! Best Regards, Ariel, Steve, Emily

1 0

Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Sessions - ICANN76
by Emily Barabas March 7, 2023

March 7, 2023

Dear all, As a reminder the IDN EPDP Team will have two working sessions at ICANN76 on Saturday 11 March: * Session 1: 9:00 - 10:00 EST<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2023-03-11+ICANN76+Session+1+ID…> * Session 2: 10:30 - 12:00 EST<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2023-03-11+ICANN76+Session+2+ID…> The proposed agenda is as follows: 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates 3. Close Loop: * D1b - flat application fee & registry level fee (fixed fee & transaction fee) 4. Second Reading of Draft Text Circulated Prior to ICANN76 * E3 (added variant labels to Reserved Names) * A8, B4a, E1, E2, E3a, E4, E7/B5 * A3 (added recs & rationale), A5, A7, A9, B4, B5, D1a, D1b, D8 (added rationale), E5 (revised rationale) 5. Consolidated View of All Draft Phase 1 Recommendations 6. AOB We look forward to your participation! Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily Emily Barabas Policy Development Support Senior Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976 www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

2 1

Notes and action items - IDNs EPDP Meeting #72 - 02 March 2023
by Steve Chan March 2, 2023

March 2, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting on Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC. Kind regards, Ariel, Emily, and Steve Notes and Action Items - IDNs EPDP Call – 02 March 2023 Action Items Action Item 1: Include definition for Reserved Names in glossary. Action Item 2: Request input on questions in slides 10 and 11. Action Item 3: Nevertheless, prepare draft recommendation language to help understanding. Action Item 4: Members to provide opinions on options for close date on list. Welcome and Chair Updates * Last call before ICANN76. Please take note that this group’s sessions are first up on Saturday, and there are two of them. * Hopeful there is good turnout for the sessions, particularly in person (Michael, Satish, Dennis note they will be in person; Maxim, Zuan, Jerry will be remote). Planning to take a team photo if possible. * Slide 3: Reminder about text circulated for team review: * Items 1-3 are currently out for review. Input needed to develop Initial Report. * Editorial edits stemming from ICANN org input in progress. * Expectation is that substantive input stemming from member review of draft text will be form basis for ICANN76 session. Review of text is therefore imperative. Discuss Draft Recommendations with Potential Gaps * Slide 5: Discussing remaining fee elements which includes both the application fee and annual registration fees. Current rec 2.7 says that applications for variant label(s) should be subject to cost recovery. * Suggestion from leadership to include a new rec that relies on a single flat application fee, no matter how many variants. The rationale is that IDNs and variants are a priority for ICANN and the community. Could otherwise be a barrier to variants. * And the RO would only be subject to a single registry-level fee, same as a single gTLD RO. * This group is not intending to set the fees specifically but rather, the principles that a gTLD operator and its two variants for example, should not be charged the registry-level fees three times. * Re: the cost recovery principle, it was for the overall New gTLD Program collectively, not specific to each application. An ASCII gTLD application and an IDN gTLD application, or one that provided hundreds of IDN tables, would be subject to the same application fee. The RySG will consider this topic soon. * A clarification that this concept would seem to only apply when the primary gTLD and variants are applied for in a single round. Assumption that there would be a fee if an existing RO applies for just a variant. * Concerns that setting pricing would be against anti-monopoly laws in many countries. * Concern that suggested Rec 2.24 would create an unfair advantage for the RO with variants (in respect of the annual fees). * Noted that there is a draft recommendation that there is no ceiling for applying for variants. That recommendation is in part reliant on there being financial hurdles for additional variants, which would cause a RO to think carefully before applying for more variants than they might need. * Does the RO’s business model matter? If the registrant automatically get the variants, should each variant domain count against transaction fees? It may help to remember that variants are considered the “same”. * In new gTLD process in 2012, each application was for a single gTLD. Some support for draft Rec 2.24. For transaction fees, registrars may have to pay for variant second-level domains. Preference to have transaction fees based one a single domain name, with no additional fees for variants for registries or registrars. * This sort of pricing structure would be consistent with the concept of a set. * Concern raised in draft Rec 2.24 about the reference to a single RA. Belief that this is not decided yet by group. * Noted that Rec 2.24 makes sense in the context of “tight bundling” of sets, where the domains behave the same. The SubPro recommendation (25.8) notes that domains do not need to act or behave the same b/c each domain is an independent registration (technically). This implies that the bundling is “loose” as there is a good deal of flexibility available to contracted parties. * Suggestion that the EPDP might see this differently from SubPro, at least in respect of the fees aspect. * The context of SubPro’s rec is to allow flexibility for the registrant. The “tight bunding” concept is required at the CP level however. * For annual fees, suggestion that transactions are triggered by domain create. * Appears that there is agreement on the concept that the set should drive application fees (i.e., a single application fee). However, not agreement yet on the registry-level fees. * Suggestion to charge a delegation fee for variants. * Noted that nearly all ROs are subject to a uniform agreement. Concern that the concept of a single agreement may be problematic for existing ROs requesting a variant. A specification would make things easier. * Will need to revisit this topic before the Initial Report is completed. * Slide 7: Org question whether a gTLD can be applied for that is visually similar to a Reserved Name. * Input from Dennis that the rationale argues against the hybrid model. This would seem inconsistent. * Suggestion that the same rules should apply for consistency. * Noted that this rationale was developed before the hybrid model was agreed to, which is why we might need to revisit this language for consistency. * Currently, the hybrid model only compares against the Reserved Names list, not the variants. If changing the approach for Reserved Names, might need to adjust hybrid model. * Could potentially only include test and example, since there would be IDNs here. * Suggestion that there is a difference between ICANN-imposed reserved names versus the RO’s reserved names. However, we are talking about the top-level here. Need to be clear which list we are talking about. * We will need to come back to this question. Action Item: Include definition for Reserved Names in glossary. * Slide 8: Proposed new recommendations. * Proposal is to rely on “remove from the root zone” rather than revoked or un-delegated. Request that org evaluate whether this terminology is acceptable and addressed concerns. * May need implementation guidance to note that breach of RA doesn’t always result in removal from the root zone, it could be that EBERO is invoked. * Slide 9: Org input on “Revoked”. Revoked is a more precise term. Un-delegated could include a gTLD that is never delegated. * Slide 10: The question is about an ongoing RZ-LGR review. It was noted that this potential outcome could be dependent upon a4. * A4 notes that for existing gTLDs, all scripts are already integrated into RZ-LGR. * Not clear there is a dependency between a4 conclusion and this open item. * Clarifying question about what is being challenged: the outcome or the RZ-LGR? It is limited to challenging the algorithmic check. * It seems that the preliminary outputs may be sufficient. Action Item: Request input on questions in slides 10 and 11. Action Item: Nevertheless, prepare draft recommendation language to help understanding. Phase 1 Initial Report: Proposed Structure * Slide 13: Reviewing format of the Initial Report, which looks like the standard format for most other reports. * Section 3: Glossary is not always a standard inclusion. * Annex A for the hybrid model is also not a standard inclusion. * Clarification that the background section should be summary level and brief. * Section 4 will be the core of the report. Public Comment Timeline * Slide 15: Reviewing remaining time to get to Initial Report. * At ICANN76 will hold second reading and full view of all draft recs. * May cancel 23 March meeting based on travel back home. Aim is to complete P1 Initial Report draft on 24 March. * Support for keeping 23 March. * Discuss report on 30 March meeting (other than the draft recommendations, which have been subject to discussion for the past meetings). * Target date for public comment is 17 April with publish date on 24 April. * Therefore, aiming for agreement from EPDP Team for Initial Report on 7 April. * If a guided submission form is needed, 4 business days required to build. * The guided submission form helps with facilitating the public comment collection and review. * General support for guided submission form. * The closing date is important in respect of ICANN77. Option 1, a 5 June close date would occur just before ICANN77 (12-15 June). If after ICANN77, it could be Option 2, 26 June. * Could focus on Phase 2 questions instead during ICANN77. However, preference again is that the public comment input be reviewed. * Chair preference is Option 1. Because recommendations have been developed iteratively, they should not be a surprise to participating community groups. Hopefully this allows for the 42 calendar day period. * May need to extend time or schedule another meeting to gain agreement for publishing Initial Report. Action Item: Members to provide opinions on options for close date on list. 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

Post Call | IDNs EPDP Team call | Thursday, 02 March 2023
by Devan Reed March 2, 2023

March 2, 2023

Dear all, All recordings for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Thursday, 02 March 2023 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/cJE-DQ> (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

ON NOW | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 2, 2023

March 2, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 120 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/cJE-DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yc676yju <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yc676yju__;!!PtGJab4!4kAnlOq…> 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

Updated invitation: IDNs EPDP Team meeting @ Weekly from 16:00 to 18:00 on Thursday from Thu 5 Jan to Fri 3 Mar (MSK) (gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org)
by m.alzoba＠gmail.com March 2, 2023

March 2, 2023

This event has been updated Changed: Time IDNs EPDP Team meeting Weekly from 16:00 to 18:00 on Thursday from Thursday 5 Jan to Friday 3 Mar Moscow Standard Time - Moscow Location 13:00 UTC | https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 https://www.google.com/maps/search/13:00+UTC+%7C+https:%2F%2Ficann.zoom.us%… Meeting: IDNs EPDP Team meeting Pattern: Weekly on Thursday’s 05 January 2023 – 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours 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 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 only Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior Visit the agenda wiki page (05 January): https://community.icann.org/x/X5E-DQ For other places see (05 January): https://tinyurl.com/ywt5yekk 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. Organiser m.alzoba(a)gmail.com m.alzoba(a)gmail.com Guests m.alzoba(a)gmail.com- organiser Steve Chan Devan Reed Emily Barabas Ariel Liang Michelle DeSmyter Julie Bisland Nathalie Peregrine Terri Agnew Board Calendaring gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org View all guest info https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=XzZvcjNpZGhvNjRv… Reply for gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org and view more details https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=XzZvcjNpZGhvNjRv… Your attendance is optional. ~~//~~ Invitation from Google Calendar: https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ You are receiving this email because you are an attendee of the event. To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event. Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to the organiser, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of their own invitation status or modify your RSVP. Learn more https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding

1 0

15 MINUTE REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 2, 2023

March 2, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 120 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/cJE-DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yc676yju <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yc676yju__;!!PtGJab4!4kAnlOq…> 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

Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Meeting #72 - Thursday 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 2 hours
by Ariel Liang March 2, 2023

March 2, 2023

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for our meeting on Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC (2 hour call). In addition, please find attached the ICANN org response regarding the term “revoked”, which was discussed in the context of treatment of delegated variant labels of a primary IDN gTLD that is removed from the rootzone. See more details in draft text under D8 on pp.13-14: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6xKX87w2LtN4Is0mehuRgc1GqjKmbbhT14KbvU…. This ICANN org input will be discussed tomorrow under agenda item 3. Kind regards, Ariel, Steve, and Emily IDN EPDP Meeting #72 Proposed Agenda 1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2 mins) 2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5 min) 3. Discuss Draft Recommendations with Potential Gaps (70 mins) 4. Phase 1 Initial Report: Proposed Structure (10 mins) 5. Public Comment Timeline (30 mins) 6. AOB (3 mins)

2 1

REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC
by Devan Reed March 1, 2023

March 1, 2023

Dear all, The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 02 March 2023 at 13:00 UTC for 120 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/cJE-DQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/yc676yju <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/yc676yju__;!!PtGJab4!4kAnlOq…> 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