Gnso-epdp-idn-team
Threads by month
- ----- 2026 -----
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2025 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2024 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
September 2024
- 13 participants
- 22 discussions
Oct. 2, 2024
Dear EPDP Team Members,
On behalf of the leadership team, and as discussed during the Team meeting #118<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=371327501> on Thursday, 12 September 2024, this message is to notify you the opening of the Consensus Call process on the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs.
The leadership team has proposed a consensus designation for every final Output that the EPDP Team has finalized by 20 September 2024. These consensus designations are contained in the attached pdf document titled, “[P2 Final Report] Leadership Proposed Consensus Designation.”
This Consensus Call process opens today, Friday, 20 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, for a 10-day period, closing on Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC. In accordance with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-g…>, the EPDP Team Members are required to indicate via reply to this message whether they accept, or do not accept, the leadership team’s proposed consensus designations. If no objection is raised by any Member, the consensus designation is considered accepted by that EPDP Team Member. If you do not respond before Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, the leadership team will take this as acceptance of the consensus designations. If any objection is raised for any specific final Output(s), the leadership team is expected to reevaluate the consensus designation of such Output(s) and publish an updated designation to be reviewed by the EPDP Team.
In the event there is no disagreement by the EPDP Team with the proposed consensus designations, your Support Staff will incorporate the Final Outputs into the Phase 2 Final Report.
As set out in the EPDP Team Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2.+Charter?preview=/166265992/1…>, only Members appointed by their representative groups are expected to participate in the Consensus Call process. Participants and observers will not be able to participate.
For reference, please also see the attached document titled “[P2 Final] FINAL OUTPUTS (ONLY)” that contains the nineteen (19) Outputs to be included in the Phase 2 Final Report.
For more information about the Consensus Call, you may review the GNSO Working Group Guidelines<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-g…> or the EPDP Team Charter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/idns-epdp…> (Section VI: Decision Making Methodologies) (both documents also linked above).
Best regards,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
4
3
Feedback (Objections) for IG21 CLOSED | Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
by Saewon Lee Sept. 27, 2024
by Saewon Lee Sept. 27, 2024
Sept. 27, 2024
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team Members,
The deadline to provide feedback, including objections, for IG21 has now passed.
No objections were received. Addition of a new Implementation Guidance 21 to supplement Final Recommendation 20 was agreed by full consensus. Herewith attached are the amended “[P2 Final Report] Leadership Proposed Consensus Designation” form and the “[P2 Final] FINAL OUTPUTS (ONLY)” document (both in pdf).
The Consensus Call that started on 20 September 2024 will continue accordingly and the deadline will remain unchanged (Monday, 30 September 2024 at 22:30 UTC).
Kind regards,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the Leadership Team
From: Donna austin <DonnaAustin605(a)hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 at 11:11 AM
To: "Hickson, Nigel (DSIT)" <nigel.hickson(a)dsit.gov.uk>
Cc: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>, GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
Hi Nigel
I understand you’re disappointment—very similar to my initial reaction. However, we do have time to incorporate the new IG into our report and as I said in my previous email it’s not inconsistent with our discussions on the topic or our rationale.
Thanks again everyone.
Donna
Sent from my iPhone
On 24 Sep 2024, at 9:51 PM, Hickson, Nigel (DSIT) via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> wrote:
Saewon and colleagues
Good afternoon; it is somewhat of a disappointment to see this late request for change to a text which is under consensus call process.
In the spirit of compromise, however, we could agree to this if also agreed by others;
Best
Nigel
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Sent: 23 September 2024 23:39
To: gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
Dear EPDP Team Members,
Thank you to those that have already sent support in response to the ‘Leadership’s Proposed Consensus Designation.’ Though leadership recognizes that the consensus call is already in progress for EPDP-IDNs P2, another item has come up that needs the Team’s attention.
After the Team confirmed all Outputs last week, your support staff reached out to the ccNSO support staff for the ccNSO to be informed of the updates to Outputs 18-20 following the public comment process.
Unfortunately, they provided us with feedback requesting that ccNSO’s consideration process be included again to Final Recommendation 20, to become: “…approved by the GNSO Council after consulting the ccNSO Council, prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.” Their rationale was that though not directly affected, ccTLDs that register IDNs at the second-level will be affected by the Guidelines and are expected to abide by them. Hence, the request was for a consultation mechanism to be included in the Output to ensure that the ccNSO Council is involved while the ccTLDs are informed throughout the whole process.
To reflect ccNSO’s request while also considering the Team’s agreement, and so as not to interrupt the current work plan, the leadership proposes a new implementation guidance to supplement the current Final Recommendation 20, and the proposal is as follows:
Implementation Guidance 21: "The GNSO Council should consult with the ccNSO Council prior to taking action on any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines."
(Current language for Consensus Call) Final Recommendation 20: “Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.”
Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback through the mailing list by Thursday, 26 September 2024 at 23:59 UTC. If no objections are received by then, leadership will circulate the updated consensus designation document for the Team to continue participating in the consensus call (responding to the mailing list with accept or not accept) that started on 20 September 2024. The deadline of the consensus call will remain unchanged (Monday, 30 September 2024 at 22:30 UTC).
Thank you again for all your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org>>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org<mailto:saewon.lee@icann.org>>
Date: Friday, September 20, 2024 at 6:11 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org>" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org>>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Consensus Call for EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs: 20-30 September 2024
Dear EPDP Team Members,
On behalf of the leadership team, and as discussed during the Team meeting #118<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=371327501> on Thursday, 12 September 2024, this message is to notify you the opening of the Consensus Call process on the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs.
The leadership team has proposed a consensus designation for every final Output that the EPDP Team has finalized by 20 September 2024. These consensus designations are contained in the attached pdf document titled, “[P2 Final Report] Leadership Proposed Consensus Designation.”
This Consensus Call process opens today, Friday, 20 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, for a 10-day period, closing on Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC. In accordance with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…>, the EPDP Team Members are required to indicate via reply to this message whether they accept, or do not accept, the leadership team’s proposed consensus designations. If no objection is raised by any Member, the consensus designation is considered accepted by that EPDP Team Member. If you do not respond before Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, the leadership team will take this as acceptance of the consensus designations. If any objection is raised for any specific final Output(s), the leadership team is expected to reevaluate the consensus designation of such Output(s) and publish an updated designation to be reviewed by the EPDP Team.
In the event there is no disagreement by the EPDP Team with the proposed consensus designations, your Support Staff will incorporate the Final Outputs into the Phase 2 Final Report.
As set out in the EPDP Team Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2.+Charter?preview=/166265992/1…>, only Members appointed by their representative groups are expected to participate in the Consensus Call process. Participants and observers will not be able to participate.
For reference, please also see the attached document titled “[P2 Final] FINAL OUTPUTS (ONLY)” that contains the nineteen (19) Outputs to be included in the Phase 2 Final Report.
For more information about the Consensus Call, you may review the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> or the EPDP Team Charter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> (Section VI: Decision Making Methodologies) (both documents also linked above).
Best regards,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
_______________________________________________
Gnso-epdp-idn-team mailing list -- gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-epdp-idn-team-leave(a)icann.org
%(web_page_url)slistinfo/%(_internal_name)s
2
2
Dear EPDP Team Members,
We would like to remind you that, as set out in the EPDP Team Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2.+Charter?preview=/166265992/1…>, only ‘Members’ appointed by their representative groups are expected to participate in the Consensus Call process. ‘Participants’ and ‘observers’ will not be able to participate.
That said, we kindly ask that the ‘Members’ participating in the process respond on behalf of their representative groups. Members are expected to represent the view of their appointing organization and provide the official position of their appointing organization when participating in the consensus calls. For more details, please see ‘Section IV: Formation, Staffing, and Organization’ of the EPDP Team Charter<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/idns-epdp…>, which includes information on the ‘Working Group Model, Membership Structure, and the Membership Criteria.’
Much appreciated,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
From: Donna austin <DonnaAustin605(a)hotmail.com>
Date: Monday, September 23, 2024 at 10:15 PM
To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>, GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
Hi Everyone
Thanks for your indulgence on this one last request. We appreciate it is very late in the day, but given our previous discussions on this topic I don’t believe our approach to be controversial and therefore will be acceptable to everyone.
Leadership did consider a number of options on how to deal with the feedback received, but we believe this is the most appropriate course of action and should not impact our efforts to finalise the report and provide it to the GNSO Council for their consideration.
Many thanks for your understanding.
Donna obo the Leadership Team
Sent from my iPhone
On 24 Sep 2024, at 8:39 AM, Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org> wrote:
Dear EPDP Team Members,
Thank you to those that have already sent support in response to the ‘Leadership’s Proposed Consensus Designation.’ Though leadership recognizes that the consensus call is already in progress for EPDP-IDNs P2, another item has come up that needs the Team’s attention.
After the Team confirmed all Outputs last week, your support staff reached out to the ccNSO support staff for the ccNSO to be informed of the updates to Outputs 18-20 following the public comment process.
Unfortunately, they provided us with feedback requesting that ccNSO’s consideration process be included again to Final Recommendation 20, to become: “…approved by the GNSO Council after consulting the ccNSO Council, prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.” Their rationale was that though not directly affected, ccTLDs that register IDNs at the second-level will be affected by the Guidelines and are expected to abide by them. Hence, the request was for a consultation mechanism to be included in the Output to ensure that the ccNSO Council is involved while the ccTLDs are informed throughout the whole process.
To reflect ccNSO’s request while also considering the Team’s agreement, and so as not to interrupt the current work plan, the leadership proposes a new implementation guidance to supplement the current Final Recommendation 20, and the proposal is as follows:
Implementation Guidance 21: "The GNSO Council should consult with the ccNSO Council prior to taking action on any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines."
(Current language for Consensus Call) Final Recommendation 20: “Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.”
Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback through the mailing list by Thursday, 26 September 2024 at 23:59 UTC. If no objections are received by then, leadership will circulate the updated consensus designation document for the Team to continue participating in the consensus call (responding to the mailing list with accept or not accept) that started on 20 September 2024. The deadline of the consensus call will remain unchanged (Monday, 30 September 2024 at 22:30 UTC).
Thank you again for all your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, September 20, 2024 at 6:11 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Consensus Call for EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs: 20-30 September 2024
Dear EPDP Team Members,
On behalf of the leadership team, and as discussed during the Team meeting #118<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=371327501> on Thursday, 12 September 2024, this message is to notify you the opening of the Consensus Call process on the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs.
The leadership team has proposed a consensus designation for every final Output that the EPDP Team has finalized by 20 September 2024. These consensus designations are contained in the attached pdf document titled, “[P2 Final Report] Leadership Proposed Consensus Designation.”
This Consensus Call process opens today, Friday, 20 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, for a 10-day period, closing on Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC. In accordance with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…>, the EPDP Team Members are required to indicate via reply to this message whether they accept, or do not accept, the leadership team’s proposed consensus designations. If no objection is raised by any Member, the consensus designation is considered accepted by that EPDP Team Member. If you do not respond before Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, the leadership team will take this as acceptance of the consensus designations. If any objection is raised for any specific final Output(s), the leadership team is expected to reevaluate the consensus designation of such Output(s) and publish an updated designation to be reviewed by the EPDP Team.
In the event there is no disagreement by the EPDP Team with the proposed consensus designations, your Support Staff will incorporate the Final Outputs into the Phase 2 Final Report.
As set out in the EPDP Team Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2.+Charter?preview=/166265992/1…>, only Members appointed by their representative groups are expected to participate in the Consensus Call process. Participants and observers will not be able to participate.
For reference, please also see the attached document titled “[P2 Final] FINAL OUTPUTS (ONLY)” that contains the nineteen (19) Outputs to be included in the Phase 2 Final Report.
For more information about the Consensus Call, you may review the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> or the EPDP Team Charter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> (Section VI: Decision Making Methodologies) (both documents also linked above).
Best regards,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
_______________________________________________
Gnso-epdp-idn-team mailing list -- gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-epdp-idn-team-leave(a)icann.org
%(web_page_url)slistinfo/%(_internal_name)s
2
4
Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
by Saewon Lee Sept. 25, 2024
by Saewon Lee Sept. 25, 2024
Sept. 25, 2024
Dear EPDP Team Members,
Thank you to those that have already sent support in response to the ‘Leadership’s Proposed Consensus Designation.’ Though leadership recognizes that the consensus call is already in progress for EPDP-IDNs P2, another item has come up that needs the Team’s attention.
After the Team confirmed all Outputs last week, your support staff reached out to the ccNSO support staff for the ccNSO to be informed of the updates to Outputs 18-20 following the public comment process.
Unfortunately, they provided us with feedback requesting that ccNSO’s consideration process be included again to Final Recommendation 20, to become: “…approved by the GNSO Council after consulting the ccNSO Council, prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.” Their rationale was that though not directly affected, ccTLDs that register IDNs at the second-level will be affected by the Guidelines and are expected to abide by them. Hence, the request was for a consultation mechanism to be included in the Output to ensure that the ccNSO Council is involved while the ccTLDs are informed throughout the whole process.
To reflect ccNSO’s request while also considering the Team’s agreement, and so as not to interrupt the current work plan, the leadership proposes a new implementation guidance to supplement the current Final Recommendation 20, and the proposal is as follows:
Implementation Guidance 21: "The GNSO Council should consult with the ccNSO Council prior to taking action on any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines."
(Current language for Consensus Call) Final Recommendation 20: “Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.”
Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback through the mailing list by Thursday, 26 September 2024 at 23:59 UTC. If no objections are received by then, leadership will circulate the updated consensus designation document for the Team to continue participating in the consensus call (responding to the mailing list with accept or not accept) that started on 20 September 2024. The deadline of the consensus call will remain unchanged (Monday, 30 September 2024 at 22:30 UTC).
Thank you again for all your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, September 20, 2024 at 6:11 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Consensus Call for EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs: 20-30 September 2024
Dear EPDP Team Members,
On behalf of the leadership team, and as discussed during the Team meeting #118<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=371327501> on Thursday, 12 September 2024, this message is to notify you the opening of the Consensus Call process on the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs.
The leadership team has proposed a consensus designation for every final Output that the EPDP Team has finalized by 20 September 2024. These consensus designations are contained in the attached pdf document titled, “[P2 Final Report] Leadership Proposed Consensus Designation.”
This Consensus Call process opens today, Friday, 20 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, for a 10-day period, closing on Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC. In accordance with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…>, the EPDP Team Members are required to indicate via reply to this message whether they accept, or do not accept, the leadership team’s proposed consensus designations. If no objection is raised by any Member, the consensus designation is considered accepted by that EPDP Team Member. If you do not respond before Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, the leadership team will take this as acceptance of the consensus designations. If any objection is raised for any specific final Output(s), the leadership team is expected to reevaluate the consensus designation of such Output(s) and publish an updated designation to be reviewed by the EPDP Team.
In the event there is no disagreement by the EPDP Team with the proposed consensus designations, your Support Staff will incorporate the Final Outputs into the Phase 2 Final Report.
As set out in the EPDP Team Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2.+Charter?preview=/166265992/1…>, only Members appointed by their representative groups are expected to participate in the Consensus Call process. Participants and observers will not be able to participate.
For reference, please also see the attached document titled “[P2 Final] FINAL OUTPUTS (ONLY)” that contains the nineteen (19) Outputs to be included in the Phase 2 Final Report.
For more information about the Consensus Call, you may review the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> or the EPDP Team Charter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> (Section VI: Decision Making Methodologies) (both documents also linked above).
Best regards,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
5
6
Re: [Ext] RE: Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
by Saewon Lee Sept. 24, 2024
by Saewon Lee Sept. 24, 2024
Sept. 24, 2024
We recognize your concern, Nigel, but greatly appreciate your support in the meantime.
We will wait until this Thursday (26 Sep.) for feedback on IG21 from each group.
Much appreciated,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff
From: "Hickson, Nigel (DSIT)" <nigel.hickson(a)dsit.gov.uk>
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 7:52 AM
To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] RE: Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
Saewon and colleagues
Good afternoon; it is somewhat of a disappointment to see this late request for change to a text which is under consensus call process.
In the spirit of compromise, however, we could agree to this if also agreed by others;
Best
Nigel
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Sent: 23 September 2024 23:39
To: gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Leadership Proposal for IG21 (Additional Guidance to Supplement Rec.20)
Dear EPDP Team Members,
Thank you to those that have already sent support in response to the ‘Leadership’s Proposed Consensus Designation.’ Though leadership recognizes that the consensus call is already in progress for EPDP-IDNs P2, another item has come up that needs the Team’s attention.
After the Team confirmed all Outputs last week, your support staff reached out to the ccNSO support staff for the ccNSO to be informed of the updates to Outputs 18-20 following the public comment process.
Unfortunately, they provided us with feedback requesting that ccNSO’s consideration process be included again to Final Recommendation 20, to become: “…approved by the GNSO Council after consulting the ccNSO Council, prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.” Their rationale was that though not directly affected, ccTLDs that register IDNs at the second-level will be affected by the Guidelines and are expected to abide by them. Hence, the request was for a consultation mechanism to be included in the Output to ensure that the ccNSO Council is involved while the ccTLDs are informed throughout the whole process.
To reflect ccNSO’s request while also considering the Team’s agreement, and so as not to interrupt the current work plan, the leadership proposes a new implementation guidance to supplement the current Final Recommendation 20, and the proposal is as follows:
Implementation Guidance 21: "The GNSO Council should consult with the ccNSO Council prior to taking action on any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines."
(Current language for Consensus Call) Final Recommendation 20: “Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.”
Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback through the mailing list by Thursday, 26 September 2024 at 23:59 UTC. If no objections are received by then, leadership will circulate the updated consensus designation document for the Team to continue participating in the consensus call (responding to the mailing list with accept or not accept) that started on 20 September 2024. The deadline of the consensus call will remain unchanged (Monday, 30 September 2024 at 22:30 UTC).
Thank you again for all your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org>>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org<mailto:saewon.lee@icann.org>>
Date: Friday, September 20, 2024 at 6:11 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org>" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org>>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Consensus Call for EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs: 20-30 September 2024
Dear EPDP Team Members,
On behalf of the leadership team, and as discussed during the Team meeting #118<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=371327501> on Thursday, 12 September 2024, this message is to notify you the opening of the Consensus Call process on the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 Final Outputs.
The leadership team has proposed a consensus designation for every final Output that the EPDP Team has finalized by 20 September 2024. These consensus designations are contained in the attached pdf document titled, “[P2 Final Report] Leadership Proposed Consensus Designation.”
This Consensus Call process opens today, Friday, 20 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, for a 10-day period, closing on Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC. In accordance with the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…>, the EPDP Team Members are required to indicate via reply to this message whether they accept, or do not accept, the leadership team’s proposed consensus designations. If no objection is raised by any Member, the consensus designation is considered accepted by that EPDP Team Member. If you do not respond before Monday, 30 September, 2024 at 22:30 UTC, the leadership team will take this as acceptance of the consensus designations. If any objection is raised for any specific final Output(s), the leadership team is expected to reevaluate the consensus designation of such Output(s) and publish an updated designation to be reviewed by the EPDP Team.
In the event there is no disagreement by the EPDP Team with the proposed consensus designations, your Support Staff will incorporate the Final Outputs into the Phase 2 Final Report.
As set out in the EPDP Team Charter<https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2.+Charter?preview=/166265992/1…>, only Members appointed by their representative groups are expected to participate in the Consensus Call process. Participants and observers will not be able to participate.
For reference, please also see the attached document titled “[P2 Final] FINAL OUTPUTS (ONLY)” that contains the nineteen (19) Outputs to be included in the Phase 2 Final Report.
For more information about the Consensus Call, you may review the GNSO Working Group Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> or the EPDP Team Charter [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/…> (Section VI: Decision Making Methodologies) (both documents also linked above).
Best regards,
EPDP-IDNs Support Staff on behalf of the EPDP-IDNs Leadership Team
1
0
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies if the language below for IG15 with the double quotes created any confusion for you all. Kindly find the final draft for IG15 that is pending confirmation below:
[NEW Draft as of 12 Sep.] Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow a requestor to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, corresponding sponsoring registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the corresponding sponsoring registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 12, 2024 at 10:51 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] New Proposal for IG15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Please find the newly proposed language for Implementation Guidance 15 compared to the previous version below:
[NEW Draft as of 12 Sep.] Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow a requestor to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, "corresponding sponsoring" registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the "corresponding sponsoring" registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
[Draft as of 05 Sep.] Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an interested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for disclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Once again, leadership/staff greatly appreciate this new language to be taken back to each SG/C and confirm via mailing list by Wednesday, 18 September at 23:59 UTC, at the latest, if possible.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 6:15 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Update for IG17
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Contingent upon the Team’s agreement to the below Outputs (14-15), Implementation Guidance 17 will be updated as follows:
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 17:
“gTLD registry operators should publish policies, in a transparent manner, that reflect their implementation of the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 recommendations. In particular, such policies should reflect the implementation of Final Recommendations 1, 3-65, and 14 andas well as Implementation Guidance 2 and 15.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 5:28 PM
To: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: [Ext] Re: Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Thank you for raising an important point, Dennis, and what a good catch! 😊
Staff agrees that “exemption (grandfathering)” does not apply to the mechanism recommended in Rec.14. Please refer to the updated language, unless there are any objections:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 12:03 PM
To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Saewon, thank you for sending this.
Regarding Rec 14: I believe the last sentence could be removed (i.e., “the exempted variant domain name….”) as it is confusing and it is not applicable in this instance, in my opinion. Unless the intention is different but needs rewording. This is my rationale; the requirement is to develop a mechanism to communicate between RY and RR. This communication mechanism (e.g., protocol, query/response transaction) should be agnostic to any particular status of a domain name or variant name. The exempted domain names per Rec 3 are no different. The query/response mechanism should not exclude any domain name string. In fact, the RR will need to know the information to handle the exempted domain name in the right manner. That is, they will be handled per Rec 3.
Dennis
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 11:09 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per today’s Team Meeting, please find the suggested updates for Outputs 14-15 below:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Kindly note that while Staff is still waiting for ICANN org’s role related to the above suggestion(s), it may not need to be determined within the Outputs themselves but can be described within the rationales, if at all. Hence, please provide any feedback or comments, including any support, through the mailing list, if possible, so as to conclude the text for Outputs 14-15 by our next Team Meeting.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 12:45 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 1: Feedback Request for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1DccGVf4NJZQuMzYLV7…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1jdSB8vIKy6LzUBKqt0…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1AmCAqD71VIBEB54QK8…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1JjU96auePhN8Plkugy…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1ZqpXdMkOtPqN9HtbGi…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1ajzYMJy2Qw60LlYShs…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1YAd0nKhx93rTg5cy8E…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1SpkQdaf5QCZVWxauSX…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1iALLJYHS-JoAxLuQsH…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1W4x3DAF5DeOz7l7WJW…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
2
1
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Please find the newly proposed language for Implementation Guidance 15 compared to the previous version below:
[NEW Draft as of 12 Sep.] Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow a requestor to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, "corresponding sponsoring" registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the "corresponding sponsoring" registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
[Draft as of 05 Sep.] Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an interested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for disclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Once again, leadership/staff greatly appreciate this new language to be taken back to each SG/C and confirm via mailing list by Wednesday, 18 September at 23:59 UTC, at the latest, if possible.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 6:15 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Update for IG17
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Contingent upon the Team’s agreement to the below Outputs (14-15), Implementation Guidance 17 will be updated as follows:
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 17:
“gTLD registry operators should publish policies, in a transparent manner, that reflect their implementation of the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 recommendations. In particular, such policies should reflect the implementation of Final Recommendations 1, 3-65, and 14 andas well as Implementation Guidance 2 and 15.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 5:28 PM
To: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: [Ext] Re: Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Thank you for raising an important point, Dennis, and what a good catch! 😊
Staff agrees that “exemption (grandfathering)” does not apply to the mechanism recommended in Rec.14. Please refer to the updated language, unless there are any objections:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 12:03 PM
To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Saewon, thank you for sending this.
Regarding Rec 14: I believe the last sentence could be removed (i.e., “the exempted variant domain name….”) as it is confusing and it is not applicable in this instance, in my opinion. Unless the intention is different but needs rewording. This is my rationale; the requirement is to develop a mechanism to communicate between RY and RR. This communication mechanism (e.g., protocol, query/response transaction) should be agnostic to any particular status of a domain name or variant name. The exempted domain names per Rec 3 are no different. The query/response mechanism should not exclude any domain name string. In fact, the RR will need to know the information to handle the exempted domain name in the right manner. That is, they will be handled per Rec 3.
Dennis
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 11:09 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per today’s Team Meeting, please find the suggested updates for Outputs 14-15 below:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Kindly note that while Staff is still waiting for ICANN org’s role related to the above suggestion(s), it may not need to be determined within the Outputs themselves but can be described within the rationales, if at all. Hence, please provide any feedback or comments, including any support, through the mailing list, if possible, so as to conclude the text for Outputs 14-15 by our next Team Meeting.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 12:45 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 1: Feedback Request for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1DccGVf4NJZQuMzYLV7…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1jdSB8vIKy6LzUBKqt0…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1AmCAqD71VIBEB54QK8…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1JjU96auePhN8Plkugy…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1ZqpXdMkOtPqN9HtbGi…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1ajzYMJy2Qw60LlYShs…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1YAd0nKhx93rTg5cy8E…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1SpkQdaf5QCZVWxauSX…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1iALLJYHS-JoAxLuQsH…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1W4x3DAF5DeOz7l7WJW…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
7
9
Sept. 16, 2024
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Please find below our proposed agenda for our next Team Meeting scheduled for Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
IDNs EPDP Meeting #118
Proposed Agenda
1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2 mins)
2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5 mins)
3. Resolve Outstanding Outputs: Grandfathered, Recs.10-12, Rec.14-IG15, IG17, Recs.18 and 20 (80 mins)
4. Review of Proposed Table of Contents for P2 Final Report (10 mins)
5. Consensus Call Process Reminder (10 mins)
6. Work Plan and Next Steps (10 mins)
7. AOB (3 mins)
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Devan Reed via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Devan Reed <devan.reed(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 10:11 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC
Dear all,
The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours.
Please click link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFz…>
Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K
For Audio only:
One tap mobile :
US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775#
Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950
Passcode: 5259149775
International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH__;!!PtGJab4!v…>
If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…>
Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below!
ALL: Before joining the call
* Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only
* Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…>
* Visit the agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/DQIiFg
* Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/27due68j [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/27due68j__;!!PtGJab4!8WTmc5Q…>
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
Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
7
9
Sept. 12, 2024
Dear all,
All recordings for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Thursday, 12 September 2024 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/DQIiFg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master Calendar<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…>.
These include:
* Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list)
* Audio recording
* Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript, chat)
* Transcript
* Agenda & Notes/Action Items (if applicable)
For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.icann.org/hyperkitty/list/gnso-epd…> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/uAPpCQ>.
Thank you for all of your work!
Kind Regards,
Devan
1
0
15 MINUTES REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC
by Devan Reed Sept. 12, 2024
by Devan Reed Sept. 12, 2024
Sept. 12, 2024
Dear all,
The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours.
Please click link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFz…>
Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K
For Audio only:
One tap mobile :
US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775#
Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950
Passcode: 5259149775
International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH__;!!PtGJab4!v…>
If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…>
Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below!
ALL: Before joining the call
* Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only
* Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…>
* Visit the agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/DQIiFg
* Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/27due68j
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
Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
1
0
REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew Sept. 11, 2024
by Terri Agnew Sept. 11, 2024
Sept. 11, 2024
Dear all,
The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours.
Please click link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFz…>
Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K
For Audio only:
One tap mobile :
US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775#
Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950
Passcode: 5259149775
International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH__;!!PtGJab4!v…>
If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…>
Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below!
ALL: Before joining the call
* Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only
* Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…>
* Visit the agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/DQIiFg
* Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/27due68j
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
Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
1
0
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Contingent upon the Team’s agreement to the below Outputs (14-15), Implementation Guidance 17 will be updated as follows:
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 17:
“gTLD registry operators should publish policies, in a transparent manner, that reflect their implementation of the EPDP-IDNs Phase 2 recommendations. In particular, such policies should reflect the implementation of Final Recommendations 1, 3-65, and 14 andas well as Implementation Guidance 2 and 15.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 5:28 PM
To: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: [Ext] Re: Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Thank you for raising an important point, Dennis, and what a good catch! 😊
Staff agrees that “exemption (grandfathering)” does not apply to the mechanism recommended in Rec.14. Please refer to the updated language, unless there are any objections:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: "Tan Tanaka, Dennis" <dtantanaka(a)verisign.com>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 12:03 PM
To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>, "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Saewon, thank you for sending this.
Regarding Rec 14: I believe the last sentence could be removed (i.e., “the exempted variant domain name….”) as it is confusing and it is not applicable in this instance, in my opinion. Unless the intention is different but needs rewording. This is my rationale; the requirement is to develop a mechanism to communicate between RY and RR. This communication mechanism (e.g., protocol, query/response transaction) should be agnostic to any particular status of a domain name or variant name. The exempted domain names per Rec 3 are no different. The query/response mechanism should not exclude any domain name string. In fact, the RR will need to know the information to handle the exempted domain name in the right manner. That is, they will be handled per Rec 3.
Dennis
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 11:09 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per today’s Team Meeting, please find the suggested updates for Outputs 14-15 below:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Kindly note that while Staff is still waiting for ICANN org’s role related to the above suggestion(s), it may not need to be determined within the Outputs themselves but can be described within the rationales, if at all. Hence, please provide any feedback or comments, including any support, through the mailing list, if possible, so as to conclude the text for Outputs 14-15 by our next Team Meeting.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 12:45 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 1: Feedback Request for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1DccGVf4NJZQuMzYLV7…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1jdSB8vIKy6LzUBKqt0…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1AmCAqD71VIBEB54QK8…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1JjU96auePhN8Plkugy…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1ZqpXdMkOtPqN9HtbGi…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1ajzYMJy2Qw60LlYShs…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1YAd0nKhx93rTg5cy8E…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1SpkQdaf5QCZVWxauSX…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1iALLJYHS-JoAxLuQsH…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com] [secure-web.cisco.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/secure-web.cisco.com/1W4x3DAF5DeOz7l7WJW…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
2
1
Saewon, thank you for sending this.
Regarding Rec 14: I believe the last sentence could be removed (i.e., “the exempted variant domain name….”) as it is confusing and it is not applicable in this instance, in my opinion. Unless the intention is different but needs rewording. This is my rationale; the requirement is to develop a mechanism to communicate between RY and RR. This communication mechanism (e.g., protocol, query/response transaction) should be agnostic to any particular status of a domain name or variant name. The exempted domain names per Rec 3 are no different. The query/response mechanism should not exclude any domain name string. In fact, the RR will need to know the information to handle the exempted domain name in the right manner. That is, they will be handled per Rec 3.
Dennis
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 at 11:09 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Suggested Updates for Outputs 14-15
Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per today’s Team Meeting, please find the suggested updates for Outputs 14-15 below:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Kindly note that while Staff is still waiting for ICANN org’s role related to the above suggestion(s), it may not need to be determined within the Outputs themselves but can be described within the rationales, if at all. Hence, please provide any feedback or comments, including any support, through the mailing list, if possible, so as to conclude the text for Outputs 14-15 by our next Team Meeting.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 12:45 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 1: Feedback Request for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1DccGVf4NJZQuMzYLV7XUp6unVLF71PW21oC2F5aMhqh3t…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1jdSB8vIKy6LzUBKqt0kQlONj9bczyR0H9fepzJhc9DuS2…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1AmCAqD71VIBEB54QK8DyBEhzFR4cxfZ1F7kachhrTVLmp…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1JjU96auePhN8PlkugyfwbzwpO7UEd871xPXvFLvbwJDq_…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1ZqpXdMkOtPqN9HtbGirqVTjsVJ5I6y_HxoBSsO55GXZkt…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1ajzYMJy2Qw60LlYShsqTZjHeenAXdm6zXxt5-_Oy_gupP…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1YAd0nKhx93rTg5cy8EhvkM5FUTdNBLl5PcQnow-kp3Svy…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1SpkQdaf5QCZVWxauSXNz19uwr9LYhF8qIGa43P4sbvVq2…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1iALLJYHS-JoAxLuQsHa70I6W7Eu_JDieB352W7bdKmpgZ…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1W4x3DAF5DeOz7l7WJWqfYO5ik7UiXLU_UIp7R6TfFJYML…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
2
1
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per today’s Team Meeting, please find the suggested updates for Outputs 14-15 below:
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14 [from Dennis]:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to determine a mechanism to communicate between each other to facilitate the registration and management of variant domain namesprovide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfatheredexempted variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exemptexcluded from this requirement.”
(New Draft) Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end userinterested party to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should accept requests for and consider whetherdisclosure of this information and unless there are data privacy concerns, the information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrarICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registry operators should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
Kindly note that while Staff is still waiting for ICANN org’s role related to the above suggestion(s), it may not need to be determined within the Outputs themselves but can be described within the rationales, if at all. Hence, please provide any feedback or comments, including any support, through the mailing list, if possible, so as to conclude the text for Outputs 14-15 by our next Team Meeting.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 12:45 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 1: Feedback Request for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
1
0
Sept. 5, 2024
Dear all,
All recordings for the IDNs EPDP Team call held on Thursday, 05 September 2024 can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/JYBFF> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master Calendar<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…>.
These include:
* Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list)
* Audio recording
* Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript, chat)
* Transcript
* Agenda & Notes/Action Items (if applicable)
For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.icann.org/hyperkitty/list/gnso-epd…> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/uAPpCQ>.
Thank you!
Kind Regards,
Devan
1
0
Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC
by Devan Reed Sept. 5, 2024
by Devan Reed Sept. 5, 2024
Sept. 5, 2024
Dear all,
The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 12 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours.
Please click link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFz…>
Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K
For Audio only:
One tap mobile :
US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775#
Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950
Passcode: 5259149775
International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH__;!!PtGJab4!v…>
If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…>
Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below!
ALL: Before joining the call
* Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only
* Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…>
* Visit the agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/DQIiFg
* Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/27due68j
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
Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
1
0
15 MINUTES REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 05 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC
by Devan Reed Sept. 5, 2024
by Devan Reed Sept. 5, 2024
Sept. 5, 2024
Dear all,
The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 05 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours.
Please click link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFz…>
Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K
For Audio only:
One tap mobile :
US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775#
Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950
Passcode: 5259149775
International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH__;!!PtGJab4!v…>
If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…>
Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below!
ALL: Before joining the call
* Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only
* Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…>
* Visit the agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/JYBFF
* Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/2hswjm3c
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
Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
1
0
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
4
7
Re: Action Item 3: "Grandfathered" and Section 4 Updates - For Review and Discussion (Agenda Item #3 & #5)
by Saewon Lee Sept. 4, 2024
by Saewon Lee Sept. 4, 2024
Sept. 4, 2024
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Kindly note that the updates in pp.11-14 in Section 4 related to Final Recommendation 6 will be reviewed by leadership in parallel.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 at 4:01 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 3: "Grandfathered" and Section 4 Updates - For Review and Discussion (Agenda Item #3 & #5)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following the train of action items, leadership/staff would like to share the updated sections for “grandfathered”:
* Section 1 - Executive Summary (p.3): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kNdKZ_BwmvY7z4FQV-CHDjgcxwD0sXbkigb33gz… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1kNdKZ_BwmvY7…>
• This provides the introduction to the term “grandfathered” being updated to “exempted” through the public comment review process.
* Section 3 – Glossary (pp.5-7): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
• Entry replacement from “grandfathered” to “exempted”
* Section 4 – Final Recommendations (p.2, pp.5-6, and all throughout the document): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
• “Exempted” is first introduced in this section in p.2. More details are provided in the rationale of Final Recommendation 3 (pp.5-6) where the term is first introduced through the outputs. If this is sufficient, leadership/staff would like to suggest that all the footnotes are deleted, which are currently under each term, “exempted,” “excluded,” “exemption,” and “exemption period.” If the Team agrees that the footnote is necessary in addition to Exec.Summary, Section 3, and p.2, pp.5-6 of Section 4, the leadership/staff would like to suggest that it is only marked in the first usage of the term(s), not all throughout the document.
Also, please review the updates in pp.11-14 in Section 4 related to Final Recommendation 6 from our last week’s discussions.
We apologize that there is not much time for review until the next Team meeting, but we hope to conclude these items soon.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 5:59 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: Action Item 2: Feedback Request for Outputs 18 and 20
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
For the next item, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Final Recommendations 18 and 20 with the respective rationales for your review and feedback. Again, kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 5 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 18
Recommendation 18: Rationale for change
(Excerpt from Section 4 – Please note that the rationale portion was too long to share via email, thus only the relevant part has been extracted here for review. For further details, please see the working document via pp.34-37: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>)
“However, in accordance with the Public Comment input, the EPDP Team decided that the ICANN Board will have the ultimate oversight responsibility and be charged with developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines, rather than through its subset or its relevant successor, in consultation with the ICANN community. Moreover, the documented process must be conducted in consultation with the GNSO Council and the ccNSO Council.”
(Proposal) Final Recommendation 18:
“The existing process for developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines, that includes establishing a working group of community experts and ICANN org staff, under the governance of ICANN Board, must be maintained.
The process for developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be formalized and documented to enhance its predictability, transparency, rigor, efficiency, and effectiveness.
The ICANN Board will be responsible for documenting the process, in consultation with the ICANN community.
The documented process must be approved by the ICANN Board, in consultation with the GNSO Council and ccNSO Council.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 18:
(Again, only extracted the line in question here)
“The documented process must be approved by the GNSO Council, the ccNSO Council, and the ICANN Board..”
* Output 20
Recommendation 20: Rationale for change
“Though the ICANN Board has ownership of the documented process for developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines, as set out in Final Recommendation 18, the EPDP Team agreed that moving forward, any future versions of the Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board. This is a significant procedural change from the existing practice. As the Guidelines is a compulsory document for ICANN contracted parties (gTLD registries and registrars offering IDN registration) and contains contractual obligations, seeking GNSO Council’s approval of any new future version prior to the ICANN Board consideration is of critical importance. This will also help mitigate the challenging situation incurred when the final version of the proposed draft 4.0 was published for Board consideration, as explained in the rationale for Final Recommendation 18. Further, while ccTLD managers are not contractually required to adhere to the Guidelines, they are expected to be guided by it. Thus, seeking ccNSO Council's consideration during the approval process will also ensure that the other impacted party aligns with the proposed changes or updates in the future versions prior to Board consideration, ultimately ensuring consistency at the second-level.”
(Proposal) Final Recommendation 20:
“Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 20:
“Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council and the ccNSO Council prior to consideration and approval by the ICANN Board.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 12:45 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 1: Feedback Request for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
1
0
Action Item 3: "Grandfathered" and Section 4 Updates - For Review and Discussion (Agenda Item #3 & #5)
by Saewon Lee Sept. 4, 2024
by Saewon Lee Sept. 4, 2024
Sept. 4, 2024
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following the train of action items, leadership/staff would like to share the updated sections for “grandfathered”:
* Section 1 - Executive Summary (p.3): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kNdKZ_BwmvY7z4FQV-CHDjgcxwD0sXbkigb33gz…
• This provides the introduction to the term “grandfathered” being updated to “exempted” through the public comment review process.
* Section 3 – Glossary (pp.5-7): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg…
• Entry replacement from “grandfathered” to “exempted”
* Section 4 – Final Recommendations (p.2, pp.5-6, and all throughout the document): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj…
• “Exempted” is first introduced in this section in p.2. More details are provided in the rationale of Final Recommendation 3 (pp.5-6) where the term is first introduced through the outputs. If this is sufficient, leadership/staff would like to suggest that all the footnotes are deleted, which are currently under each term, “exempted,” “excluded,” “exemption,” and “exemption period.” If the Team agrees that the footnote is necessary in addition to Exec.Summary, Section 3, and p.2, pp.5-6 of Section 4, the leadership/staff would like to suggest that it is only marked in the first usage of the term(s), not all throughout the document.
Also, please review the updates in pp.11-14 in Section 4 related to Final Recommendation 6 from our last week’s discussions.
We apologize that there is not much time for review until the next Team meeting, but we hope to conclude these items soon.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 5:59 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: Action Item 2: Feedback Request for Outputs 18 and 20
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
For the next item, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Final Recommendations 18 and 20 with the respective rationales for your review and feedback. Again, kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 5 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 18
Recommendation 18: Rationale for change
(Excerpt from Section 4 – Please note that the rationale portion was too long to share via email, thus only the relevant part has been extracted here for review. For further details, please see the working document via pp.34-37: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj…)
“However, in accordance with the Public Comment input, the EPDP Team decided that the ICANN Board will have the ultimate oversight responsibility and be charged with developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines, rather than through its subset or its relevant successor, in consultation with the ICANN community. Moreover, the documented process must be conducted in consultation with the GNSO Council and the ccNSO Council.”
(Proposal) Final Recommendation 18:
“The existing process for developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines, that includes establishing a working group of community experts and ICANN org staff, under the governance of ICANN Board, must be maintained.
The process for developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be formalized and documented to enhance its predictability, transparency, rigor, efficiency, and effectiveness.
The ICANN Board will be responsible for documenting the process, in consultation with the ICANN community.
The documented process must be approved by the ICANN Board, in consultation with the GNSO Council and ccNSO Council.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 18:
(Again, only extracted the line in question here)
“The documented process must be approved by the GNSO Council, the ccNSO Council, and the ICANN Board..”
* Output 20
Recommendation 20: Rationale for change
“Though the ICANN Board has ownership of the documented process for developing and updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines, as set out in Final Recommendation 18, the EPDP Team agreed that moving forward, any future versions of the Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board. This is a significant procedural change from the existing practice. As the Guidelines is a compulsory document for ICANN contracted parties (gTLD registries and registrars offering IDN registration) and contains contractual obligations, seeking GNSO Council’s approval of any new future version prior to the ICANN Board consideration is of critical importance. This will also help mitigate the challenging situation incurred when the final version of the proposed draft 4.0 was published for Board consideration, as explained in the rationale for Final Recommendation 18. Further, while ccTLD managers are not contractually required to adhere to the Guidelines, they are expected to be guided by it. Thus, seeking ccNSO Council's consideration during the approval process will also ensure that the other impacted party aligns with the proposed changes or updates in the future versions prior to Board consideration, ultimately ensuring consistency at the second-level.”
(Proposal) Final Recommendation 20:
“Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council prior to consideration by the ICANN Board.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 20:
“Any future versions of the IDN Implementation Guidelines must be approved by the GNSO Council and the ccNSO Council prior to consideration and approval by the ICANN Board.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Friday, August 30, 2024 at 12:45 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Action Item 1: Feedback Request for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Per our Team discussion, leadership/staff would like to share the proposed language for Outputs 14-15 with the respective rationales again for your review and feedback. Kindly review the proposal together with your respective groups and provide feedback either through the mailing list or during the next Team meeting (5 September), if possible. Leadership/staff envisions the finalization of these Outputs by Thursday, 12 September, at 12:00 UTC.
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind cooperation.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 8:00 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Re: Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Adding on to the long list of homework, kindly find the updates to pp.39-47 in Section 4 for “Charter Questions with No Outputs”:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
We look forward to your kind review and feedback by Wednesday, 4 September, 2024, at 21:00 UTC.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 at 11:01 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Review Request and New Language for Outputs 14-15
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As we prepare for our next meeting on Thursday, 29 August at 12:00 UTC, this is a friendly reminder for the Team to review and provide feedback for “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-20, excluding 14-15, 17). The links to these documents are shared for your convenience again below:
* Grandfathered suggestions: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
* Section 3 (Glossary): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-20): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As for the Outputs 14-15, please see below the suggested new language and the reason behind each one, based on the Public Comment and Team’s discussions, for your review. The current language within the working document is also presented for you below. This item will be discussed during our meeting this Thursday and the new language will only be incorporated into the working document once the Team reaches an agreement:
* Output 14
Recommendation 14: Rationale for change
After EPDP Team deliberations, it became apparent that two concepts were being combined in PR 14 and IG 15. Firstly, registries and registrars need a mechanism to communicate between themselves, to determine what the allocated and allocatable variant domain names are for a given domain name, for a variety of reasons, but principally, to ensure that the same entity requirement is adhered to. Secondarily, an end user needs to be able to determine what the allocated variant domain names are (e.g., interest in registering a domain name or filing a URS complaint). Because of these two distinct purposes, it likely makes sense to delineate them into a separate recommendation and implementation guidance.
(New Draft) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the "same entity" principle and its implications for variant domain names, gTLD registry operators should work with ICANN-accredited registrars to provide information on the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Final Recommendation 14:
“To account for the “same entity” principle and its implications for variant domain names, ICANN org should work with relevant stakeholders to develop and enable a service to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, including an indication of the source domain name(s) and initial source domain name of the variant domain set. The grandfathered variant domain names pursuant to Final Preliminary Recommendation 3 are exempt from this requirement.”
* Output 15
Implementation Guidance 15: Rationale for change
Support staff reached out to ICANN Legal, to determine whether there may be data privacy concerns from disclosing the allocated variant domain names of a given domain name. Though the disclosure of allocated variant domain names may not directly expose personal data, it could reveal details about the registrant that may unintentionally compromise their privacy. As such, the recommendation from legal is to restrict public access to this information or avoid disclosure altogether. However, there are reasons that an end user may need this information.
(New Draft) Final Implementation Guidance 15:
“In order to allow an end user to discover the allocated variant domain names for a given domain name, registrars should accept and consider whether disclosure of this information should be granted. In considering whether to disclose the information, the registrar should balance the interest of the requestor with those of the data subject, where such balancing is required by applicable law.”
(Current Language within the Working Doc.) Implementation Guidance 15
“Final Recommendation 14 is intended as a minimum requirement. A registry or a registrar may choose to enhance the behavior of the service to provide additional information or enable other methods to provide the following information (e.g., bulk services):
15.1 the required data elements for the given domain name in accordance with the Registration Data Policy;
15.2 all the other allocated variant domain name(s) under a given gTLD and its delegated gTLD variant label(s), if any; and
15.3 the source domain name used to calculate the variant domain set.”
Thank you for your kind consideration and we look forward to the discussions soon.
Warm regards,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 6:58 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Cc: GNSO-Secs <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume 29 August (Usual Meeting Time)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope you are having a great 2-week break from the EPDP-IDNs!
Based on the result of the doodle poll as well as re-evaluating the progress of the remaining work, the Team Meeting will resume on Thursday, 29 August, at 12:00 UTC on the usual meeting time. As previously announced, if the Team needs extra time for further discussions, this will be scheduled for another week in September.
In addition, please review the updated language within Outputs 10-13, 16, 18-20 (pp.20-27, 29, 31-37). Kindly note that Outputs 14-15, and 17 are still a work in progress and will be flagged for review at a later date. Also, the Leadership will be reviewing the updated language in parallel with the Team: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
As a reminder, kindly also review and provide feedback to the other requests below, including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 7:48 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Meeting to Resume End of August (Week of 26 August)
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Sincere apologies for the abrupt announcement, but due to unforeseen circumstances which involve the absence of Leadership/several Team members, the EPDP-IDNs Team Meeting for this week and next (15 and 22 August) will be canceled, only to resume during the last week of August (Week of 26 August). The Leadership suggests that, if possible, the Team holds 2 meetings during the last week of August (possibly Tuesday, 27 August and the usual Thursday, 29 August), to not only pick up where we left off but to hopefully conclude the review of comments within the working document for all outputs and other public comment inputs.
A doodle poll will be sent out for another meeting during the last week, and if not possible to find the extra time, our meeting will still proceed on Thursday, 29 August. Further scheduling for September (if any more to be scheduled beyond 5 September, other than the Final Consensus Call) will be discussed on 29 August.
As another reminder, the updates for Recs.10-20 will be shared soon. In the meantime, please review and provide feedback to the requests below (as none have been provided yet), including “grandfathered” suggestions, Section 3 (Glossary), and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9), for a fruitful meeting when we resume.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 10:44 AM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] "Grandfathering" for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
As briefly mentioned via our last Team Meeting on 8 August, kindly find in the link ICANN org’s suggested updates to the term, “grandfathered” for your review: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-…>
The columns are arranged as follows:
* Column A: Relevant Output/Rationale (name/number) where the term is included
* Column B: Particular sentence/paragraph including the term(s)
* Column C: Replaced term(s)
* Column D: Revised sentence/paragraph
* Column E: Full text of the Output/Rationale to understand the context
* Column F: Notes
Upon Leadership/Staff’s revision of ICANN org’s suggested text(s), the Leadership has drawn the conclusion that ICANN org’s approach is the simplest and least disruptive in addressing org’s concerns about using the term, “grandfathered,” in our report. As you can see within the spreadsheet, the general term that was used to replace “grandfathered” was “exempted” (or in some cases, “excluded,” if duplicated within one sentence), which does seem to adequately convey the meaning or intent of the recommendations as drafted.
As a reminder, the terms instead of “grandfathered,” that were suggested from ICANN org and the Team via discussions were:
* Pre-existing domains
* Exempted domains
* Domains created before a certain date
* Right of Continuance
* Transitional exceptions
Also as a reminder, please review Section 3 and Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) within the working docs as requested in the emails below. The links are shared with you again for your convenience:
* Section 3 (Glossary) pp.8, 11-15: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
* Section 4 (Outputs 1-9) pp.3-20: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The updates for 10-20 and other general comments will be notified soon.
We look forward to your kind review and further discussions related to the terms and Outputs during our next Team meeting.
Kind regards,
Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee via Gnso-epdp-idn-team <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Reply-To: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 at 3:31 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-epdp-idn-team] Working Doc (Section 3) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
Following Section 4, please find the updated language for Section 3 (Glossary) based on the public comments received; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ3iHkh3UZyEKFhVi-oGFdcG-7dfg… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1DPjKUkbD6OUJ…>
The pages to focus on are pp.8, 11-15; Once again, please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) mainly on the aforementioned parts to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting.
Updates for other parts of the section (or overall) will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
From: Saewon Lee <saewon.lee(a)icann.org>
Date: Monday, August 5, 2024 at 6:32 PM
To: "gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org" <gnso-epdp-idn-team(a)icann.org>
Subject: Working Doc (Section 4) for Review
Dear EPDP-IDNs Team,
We hope this email finds you well.
Please find the updated language for Outputs 1-9 so far in the working doc., based on the discussions from the Public Comment Review; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqm…>
The pages to focus on are pp.3-19; please provide your feedback (sidebar comments only) to the aforementioned parts only to review together on Thursday, 15 August, during our Team Meeting. Please also note that more updates will occur post Rys’ feedback (post Tuesday, 6 August) and Section 3 updates will also be shared soon.
Updates for other parts of the section will occur at a later date.
Much appreciated,
Steve, Dan, and Saewon.
1
0
REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | IDNs EPDP Team | Thursday, 05 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew Sept. 4, 2024
by Terri Agnew Sept. 4, 2024
Sept. 4, 2024
Dear all,
The IDNs EPDP Team meeting is scheduled on Thursday, 05 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC for 2 hours.
Please click link to join the webinar: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFzMlpsYmh0NnFjTEQwOUV1dz09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/94276275950?pwd=dG5hanFz…>
Passcode: !!0tV0Wh&K
For Audio only:
One tap mobile :
US: +13017158592,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775# or +13126266799,,94276275950#,,,,*5259149775#
Webinar ID: 942 7627 5950
Passcode: 5259149775
International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/adP1jJ0gRH__;!!PtGJab4!v…>
If this is your first time with Zoom, please take a look here: Welcome to Zoom <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/polic…>
Members, participants, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below!
ALL: Before joining the call
* Please send dial out requests to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> only
* Please be sure you have read the ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…>
* Visit the agenda Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/JYBFF
* Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/2hswjm3c
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
Policy Team Supporting the GNSO
1
0
Proposed Agenda - IDN EPDP Meeting #117 - Thursday 5 September 2024 at 12:00 UTC + Notes from Meeting #116
by Daniel Gluck Sept. 4, 2024
by Daniel Gluck Sept. 4, 2024
Sept. 4, 2024
Hi All!
Please find below our proposed agenda for Thursday 5 September’s team call at 12:00 UTC.
IDNs EPDP Meeting #117<https://community.icann.org/x/JYBFF>
Proposed Agenda
1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2 mins)
2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5 mins)
3. Discussion on "Grandfathering" (30 mins)
4. Discussion on 14-15, 17 (15 mins)
5. Review of Comments on Working Document (55 mins)
* Section 3
* Section 4
1. Next Steps (10 mins)
* Work Plan
1. AOB (3 mins)
IDNs EPDP Meeting #116<https://community.icann.org/x/I4BFF>
Notes
1. Roll Call and SOI Updates (2 mins)
2. Welcome and Chair Updates (5 mins)
3. Discuss PR6 and Next Steps (15 mins)
* ICANN org presented on their rescinding of their request for PR6 to be finalized early
* The Chair noted that this will return the group to business as usual, but thanked the group for their efforts on this task
* EPDP Support Staff then presented the final text for PR6 and the text was agreed upon
i. The Chair thanked everyone for coming together on the text for this recommendation as it was a very contentious and important part of the work.
* The rationale was discussed for this recommendation, including specific points made for interoperability and uniformity.
i. Text was agreed upon on pages 11-13 in this document.<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj…>
1. Discussions on "Grandfathering" (15 mins)
* The team discussed the use and potential replacements for the term “grandfathering” in all of its different cases.
i. There was general agreement to make revisions according to the comments made in this document. <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EJdmbLg-mAst_ajV-P3DFRhzyE8O4vDKWdZ…>
1. Updates on 10-12 and Discussion on 14-15, 17 (30 mins)
* There are expected to be updates made by the next call for PR10
i. For Recs 14-15, this email was circulated <https://lists.icann.org/hyperkitty/list/gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org/thread…> and discussed
* The risk of personal data potentially being disclosed / exposed is of concern to ICANN org regarding Rec 15
* From the chat: “If there are data privacy concerns, it is problematic to force contracted parties to potentially violate data privacy laws via policy requirements.”
1. Review of Comments on Working Document (45 mins)
* Section 3: Glossary
* Section 4: Outputs 1-20 (pp.3-38)
i. See updates and comments in this document <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vVbsKNfzHoqmuBH6VF1jF73Xr4A_UK7ZXiGmRJj…>
1. Next Steps (5 mins)
* Reminder for Review on Remaining Parts (General/Other)
* Work Plan
1. AOB (3 mins)
Thanks!
Saewon, Steve, and Dan
1
0