October 2018 - Gnso-epdp-team

Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Please review - action items and outstanding items
by Marika Konings 01 Nov '18

01 Nov '18

Dear All, Please note an updated link for action item #3 as on the original link the redlines were not visible. Do also note that this version now includes the additional changes that Kristina referred to during the meeting. See https://drive.google.com/a/icann.org/file/d/1tamJeyaq4nC8HHQelSeln_BB8fnVlz…. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, October 25, 2018 at 1:29 PM To: EPDP <gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] Please review - action items and outstanding items Dear EPDP Team, Following this week’s EPDP Team meetings, please find below and attached the outstanding action items and related deadlines, outstanding charter questions (not yet discussed) and punch list of items in relation to the data elements workbooks. Please take note that Staff’s provision of an updated and comprehensive data matrix and updated Initial Report draft is dependent on timely delivery of input on the below items. If you believe anything is missing from the list below, please let us know. Thank you for all your support - safe travels home! Caitlin, Berry and Marika =================== EPDP Team Action items ICANN63 Action item #1 – CPH to confirm whether or not purpose A strikethrough language can be removed by Thursday 25 October. (COMPLETED – deletion of strikethrough language confirmed) Action item #2 - Each group (SG/C/AC) to express the group's views and/or proposed edits on small team #1 responses to charter questions and preliminary recommendations with the mailing list by Monday 29 October. (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U6POLQhFNGu1Bo1k0rCluiaVZ27-OKIPpU8K8N1…). Action item #3 - Each group (SG/C/AC) to express the group's views and/or proposed edits on the revised responses of the small team #2 charter question responses with the mailing list by Monday 29 October. (see https://drive.google.com/a/icann.org/file/d/1tamJeyaq4nC8HHQelSeln_BB8fnVlz…). Action item #4 – Each group (SG/C/AC) to review latest versions of data elements workbooks and flag any issues that need to be reviewed prior to publication of Initial Report by Friday 2 November. (see https://community.icann.org/x/5AC8BQ). Action item #5 – Each group (SG/C/AC) to review the responsible parties overview for all purposes and identify which designations need to be further considered by Monday 29 October. (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-rdfchOwpANFVKOtnM_9bPp-zT4JAvTN8dJqebd…) Note: Staff’s provision of an updated and comprehensive data matrix and updated Initial Report draft is dependent on timely delivery of the above feedback. Outstanding Charter Questions (not discussed yet or addressed through ongoing work) q) Sun-setting WHOIS Contractual Requirements q1) After migration to RDAP, when can requirements in the Contracts to use WHOIS protocol be eliminated? q2) If EPDP Team’s decision includes a replacement directory access protocol, such as RDAP, when can requirements in the Contracts to use WHOIS protocol be eliminated? b) Collection of registration data by registrar: b3) How shall legitimacy of collecting data be defined (at least for personal data collected from European registrants and others in jurisdictions with data protection law)? k) ICANN's responsibilities in processing data k2) In addition to any specific duties ICANN may have as data controller, what other obligations should be noted by this EPDP Team, including any duties to registrants that are unique and specific to ICANN’s role as the administrator of policies and contracts governing gTLD domain names? l) Registrar's responsibilities in processing data l4) What are the registrar's responsibilities to the data subject with respect to data processing activities that are under ICANN’s control? m) Registry's responsibilities in processing data m4) What are the registry's responsibilities to the data subject based on the above? Outstanding items in data elements workbooks Purpose B Punch List: * Confirm staff-suggested responses for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm data elements (note: Purpose B data elements are dependent on the completion of all other workbooks, as Purpose B only references data already collected) Purpose C Punch List: * Confirm staff-suggested response for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm staff-suggested note re: definition of optional (footnote 2 in workbook) * Confirm data elements Purpose E (Registrar Data Escrow) Punch List: * Confirm Collection Processing Activity (Purpose does not necessarily require collection) * Confirm data elements Purpose F Punch List: * Confirm staff-suggested response for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm data elements Purpose M Punch List: * Determine inclusion/exclusion of RDDRP, PDDRP, and PICDRP RPMs within the purpose statement (adjust PAs if excluded) * Confirm staff-suggested responses for Purpose Rationale questions * Confirm Processing Activities structure, especially Disclosure and Retention * Confirm Data Elements Purpose N Punch List: * Determine if Purpose Statement is an ICANN Purpose (note Collection PA indicates ICANN as a Joint Controller) * Confirm Processing Activities structure, especially Disclosure and Retention * Confirm Data Element (Other Data) Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses…> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>.

3 2

Proposed Agenda for EPDP Team meeting - Thursday, 1 November 2018
by Caitlin Tubergen 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda for the EPDP Team Meeting on Thursday, 1 November at 1300 UTC. Best regards, Marika, Berry and Caitlin EPDP Meeting #22 Agenda Thursday, 1 November 2018 Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes) Reminder to complete F2F Doodle Poll Review of outstanding action items Other updates, if applicable Purpose E Data Elements Workbooks (Escrow) Objective of discussion: Confirm Collection Processing Activity Confirm data elements Review Purpose E Data Elements Workbook (see https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/e.+Data+Elements+Workbooks?pre… and https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/e.+Data+Elements+Workbooks?pre…) Confirm content of purpose E Data Elements Workbook Confirm next steps, if any Draft Initial Report Overview of Initial Report template Open issues and explanation of highlighted items Approach for EPDP Team edits to Initial Report Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Tuesday, 6 November at 1400 UTC. Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

Clarifying Question to ICANN Regarding Purpose M
by Amr Elsadr 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Hi, During yesterday’s EPDP Team call, I volunteered to take a first stab at drafting a question directed to ICANN staff regarding how gTLD Registration Data is useful in the context of the PDDRP and RRDRP. Here it is for everyone’s consideration. Thanks. Amr > The Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data EPDP Team is currently considering language on a “[Purpose M](https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/e.+Data+Elements+Workbooks?… regarding ICANN’s role in coordinating the development and implementation of policies concerning ICANN’s dispute resolution processes in the context of domain name registrations. Two of the processes currently being considered within scope of this purpose are the [PDDRP](https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/pddrp-2014-01-09-en) (Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Process) and the [RRDRP](https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rrdrp-2014-01-09-en) (Registry Restrictions Dispute Resolution Process). > It would particularly be very helpful and important to the EPDP Team if ICANN could provide clarification on any point within the processes of PDDRPs and RRDRPs where processing of gTLD Registration Data is necessary for the dispute resolution processes to be completed. This clarification should identify which (if any) data elements within gTLD Registration Data are necessary, as well as all parties involved in the processing activities.

1 0

Next face-to-face meeting
by Kurt Pritz 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Hi Everyone: Thank you again for your time, effort and thought during the ICANN meeting. While others were visiting the various great sites that Barcelona has to offer, we were all not visiting the various great sites that Barcelona has to offer. Yesterday, I met with Nick Tomasso who heads the ICANN meetings team to develop some options for the next face-to-face meeting. At various times during the past week, many of you approached me with the following points: Our results are significantly better in a face-to-face format The proverbial clock is ticking We should strive to maintain the momentum we have, therefore We should hold our next meeting as soon as possible. With that in mind, Nick said he could support the following two options, a meeting In the first or second week in December In the second or third week of January [Meetings less than 90 days away require Göran’s approval, but Nick believes he can obtain this. Nick is checking on venues with which he is familiar in Brussels now, although the meeting location is not certain.] I am of two minds on this but do have an opinion and would appreciate your feedback over the next few days so that I can get back to Nick the first of next week. 1) The January meeting is more or less timed for us to take into account the first round of public comment. 2) Te December meeting allows us to keep working after the initial report is issued (or to wrap up the initial report in the worse case). I think the December meeting is the better option for us. We are not going to stand down after the initial report is issued. There is a lot of work to be done. It is better, I think, to meet and consider unsettled issues, rather than meet to discuss the effect of public comment. If we are serious about finishing on time, I don’t think we can stop. So despite the inconvenience (and it will be very inconvenient for me), I think we should meet sooner rather than later. Of course, this all depends on the ICANN meetings team pulling this off, which is no small feat, Let me know your thoughts, I will write to Nick on Tuesday. Best regards, Kurt

18 35

Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] [Ntfy-gnso-epdp-team] ***UPDATED DOODLE LINK*** Face to face meeting poll on behalf of Kurt Pritz
by Arasteh 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Dear Kurt From legal point of view ,no meeting to be held in a country which directly or I directly put general BAN on the nationals of other countries Thus is nit a matter tone out to the doodle It is the principle of universality,inclusduvebess, transparency, non discriminative and democratic actions One can not put the rights if millions of peoples of banned countries to the vote of others which has no interest on that right You would be questioned to reply To any inappropriate action and mismanagement of this super critical and top delicate legal issue Pls exclude USA from the list of doodle . Distinguished chair of GAC is requested to defend my very legitimate right I was excluded once but strongly object to be excluded again Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone > On 31 Oct 2018, at 15:34, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> wrote: > > Dear Kavouss, > > Please find below the link to the doodle poll for you to complete. You should have received this email from the ntfy-gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org address. > > Best regards, > > Marika > > From: Ntfy-gnso-epdp-team <ntfy-gnso-epdp-team-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Michelle DeSmyter <michelle.desmyter(a)icann.org> > Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 6:09 AM > To: "ntfy-gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org" <ntfy-gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org> > Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> > Subject: [Ntfy-gnso-epdp-team] ***UPDATED DOODLE LINK*** Face to face meeting poll on behalf of Kurt Pritz > > > Hi everyone: > > Please complete the following doodle poll to help determine the best dates for our next face-to-face meeting: https://doodle.com/poll/yad2rwnncrvi7hd9 [doodle.com]. A face-to-face meeting, if held, will last three full days. > > Given the response to the last letter on this topic, it is more likely than not that the meeting will be held in January. However, if stock-taking over the next few days (including a review of the draft initial report) indicates that at face-to-face meeting is required sooner in order to ensure a timely conclusion to our work, we have included December dates to determine availability. Otherwise, a January meeting seems better timed for review of public comment. (I am not convinced a face-to-face meeting for review of public comment is necessary but will know better when the methodology for reviving and reviewing public comment in our case is developed.) > > Please respond with your availability and without regard to your preference / opinion for a meeting time as to do otherwise would skew the results and unfairly disadvantage others. > > For your information, if the meeting is to be held in December, it is likely to occur in Brussels. If it is held in January, it might be held in North or Central America, or Europe - wherever total costs are lowest. > > Please respond within 48 hours. The meeting time will be based on: > The state and needs of our work > The availability of the greatest percentage of our members (excluding alternates) > In cases of clashes with other ICANN meetings, I think this EPDP work takes precedence. (some of these dates may conflict with national and/or religious holidays, if so, please point this out in the comments to the doodle poll). > > Best regards, > > Kurt Pritz > > > _______________________________________________ > Ntfy-gnso-epdp-team mailing list > Ntfy-gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ntfy-gnso-epdp-team

2 3

**REMINDER** Meeting Invitation: Alternates & Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP call / Thursday, 01 November 2018 at 13:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland 31 Oct '18

31 Oct '18

Dear all, Non-members can follow the EPDP call taking place on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 13:00 UTC via the audio cast or view only Adobe Connect room. As requested and discussed on Tuesday's (14 August 2018) meeting, please note that an additional Adobe Connect room has been created for use by interested alternates and observers to be able to view-only the main EPDP Team Adobe Connect room. The view-only room will also broadcast the audio of the EPDP Team AC room, however, those in the view-only room will not be heard. Note that the audio cast stream will also remain available for now for those that prefer to use that option to listen live to the EPDP Team meeting. View-Only Adobe Connect room for alternates and observers: https://participate.icann.org/gnso-epdp-observers Meeting Audio Cast (for alternates and observers) To join the event, click on the link: Listen in browser: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01 [stream.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01.m3u [stream.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/pg68BQ Thank you. Kind Regards, Julie

1 0

Major issue in the Data Elements workbooks
by Mueller, Milton L 30 Oct '18

30 Oct '18

I've gone through three workbooks now (Purposes A, B and C) and have noticed a significant error in all three of them. Whoever did the last revision of these documents has confused the question whether something is within ICANN's mission with the question whether it is lawful under GDPR. For example, in Purpose A, Purpose Rationale 1 asks, "1) If the purpose is based on an ICANN contract, is this lawful as tested against GDPR and other laws?" The answer provided has struck out all the appropriate language about 6.1.b vs 6.1.f, and has inserted: "Yes, this purpose is lawful based on ICANN's mission to coordinate the allocation and assignment of names in the root zone of the Domain Name System." It goes on to cite the RAA. Something similar has happened with Purposes B and C. Language about lawfulness under GDPR has been replaced with language about ICANN's mission or contracts. This is a mistake, and cannot stand. References to ICANN's mission and contracts tell us nothing about whether something is "lawful as tested against GDPR and other laws." Perhaps the staff and Kurt can clarify how this happened. NCSG members are preparing modified versions of the workbooks which correct the error, but it might be easier if whoever made these modifications would systematically reverse them. My problem is that I do not know what exact language regarding purpose rationale was accepted before these changes were made. Dr. Milton L. Mueller Professor, School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology

3 3

Notes and action items from today's EPDP Team meeting
by Marika Konings 30 Oct '18

30 Oct '18

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s EPDP Team meeting. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika ======================== EPDP Team Meeting #21 Tuesday, 30 October 2018 Notes and Action Items High-level Notes/Actions: Action item #1: Margie to provide further details in relation to potential disclosure to complainant in relation to possible UDRP filing, in particular, distinguishing such a disclosure from that already provided for in Purpose B. Action item #2: Staff to produce updated clean version for Purpose M for EPDP Team adopting the recommendations made by Kristina and Diane. Amr to create clarifying question to ICANN staff regarding reasons for including or excluding PDDRP and RRDRP from this purpose. Action item #3: Kristina to connect with Milton and Amr to see how concerns can be addressed in relation to Purpose N, particularly whether Purpose N should be included in this policy, and suggest updates accordingly. Questions for ICANN Org from the EPDP Team: None Notes & Action items Notes & Action items These high-level notes are designed to help the EPDP Team navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/2IpHBQ. 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) * Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect * Please remember to mute your microphones when not speaking, and state your name before speaking for transcription purposes. * Please remember to review your SOIs on a regular basis and update as needed. Updates are required to be shared with the EPDP Team. 2. Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes) a) Recap of ICANN63 meetings * The Team made meaningful progress on Purposes A, B and C, particularly in reference to the purpose statements. * Additionally, the Team reviewed language from the small teams re: geographic basis, reasonable access, and natural vs. legal persons. b) Update on F2F planning * Following Kurt's message to the Team, many people identified conflicts. * We will send a doodle poll to identify preferred dates. c) Review of outstanding action items * Please refer to Marika's email of Thursday, 25 October for action items. Important for groups to provide input as soon as possible. d) Other updates, if applicable 3. Purpose M Data Elements Workbook (Resolution of Disputes) Objective of discussion: (1) Determine inclusion/exclusion of RDDRP, PDDRP, and PICDRP RPMs within the purpose statement (adjust PAs if excluded) (2) Confirm staff-suggested responses for Purpose Rationale questions (3) Confirm Processing Activities structure, especially Disclosure and Retention (4) Confirm Data Elements a) Review Purpose M Data Elements Workbook (see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/96207076/Purpose%20M%20-%2…) b) Confirm content of purpose M Data Elements Workbook c) Confirm next steps, if any * See updated version circulated by Diane * Proposed to refer in purpose statement to coordinate, operationalize and facilitate * Also added 'future developed domain name registration related dispute procedures' to make it future proof. * Distinct lawful basis depending on dispute resolution process * Update RRDRP (misspelled in current version) * See also ICANN Org response: The RDDRP, PDDRP, and PICDRP <https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/pddrp> are dispute resolution procedures where the gTLD registry operators themselves are the respondents. Under the Registrar Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/tdrp-2016-06-01-en> the respondents are registrars. This is different from URS and UDRP proceedings where individual domain registrants are the respondents. (Note: gTLD registry agreements may also contain other dispute resolution procedures, for example, .NAME has an “Eligibility Requirements Dispute Resolution Policy” <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/appendix-11-2013-07-08-en>.) * PII may be involved in these registry dispute resolution procedures. * ROs are the respondents in PDDRP and RRDRP. ROs could also be the Complainants, but that seems very unlikely - esp. w/r/t PDDRP. RDPR procedures specify that the parties to the procedures are "harmed established institution and the gTLD registry operator." * Disclosure to complainant - should this be covered here? How is situation different from pre-GDPR, for example privacy/proxy registrations? Prior to filing there is no dispute, so doesn't this then fall under Purpose B? Need to be able to investigate prior to filing to avoid frivilous filings, but at the same time, avoid disclosure for other reasons ("fishing expedition"). Complainant needs to be able to establish that it has trademark rights in a registration. Action item #1: Margie to provide further details in relation to potential disclosure to complainant in relation to possible UDRP filing, in particular, distinguishing such a disclosure from that already provided for in Purpose B. Action item #2: Staff to produce updated clean version for Purpose M for EPDP Team adopting the recommendations made by Kristina and Diane. Amr to create clarifying question to ICANN staff regarding reasons for including or excluding PDDRP and RRDRP from this purpose. 4. Purpose N Data Elements Workbook (Validation of gTLD registration policy eligibility criteria) Objective of discussion: (1) Determine if Purpose Statement is an ICANN Purpose (note Collection PA indicates ICANN as a Joint Controller) (2) Confirm Processing Activities structure, especially Disclosure and Retention (3) Confirm Data Element (Other Data) a) Review Purpose N Data Elements Workbook (see https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/96207076/Purpose%20N%20-%2…) b) Confirm content of purpose N Data Elements Workbook c) Confirm next steps, if any * See latest version shared. * Would be lawful under 6(1)b for registrars and 6(1)f for registries. Depends on whether it is voluntary or whether it flows from the registry operator contract. * Is it necessary to include this information in the RDDS for Registry Operators? Brand registry group - to the extent that it is important for customer trust to be able to have some signal that the registrant is in fact who they say there are, there would be value in that. Similar responses from Registry SG members. * That doesn't seem to align with the purpose as described as it is not about trust - why should this be included in the RDDS? * Allowing registry operator to be transparent and accountable - aren't there other ways in which this can be done? How does it fit with the work of the EPDP Team? * This appears to be between Ry and Rr, no disclosure involved and only for the purpose limited to validation. * For any community restrictions, these are included in the contracts. Need to find a balance that doesn't add more into the policy recommendations then what is needed, but also allow registry operators to innovate within their TLDs. * Does it concern mainly legal persons? Mostly, but some do allow for natural person registration, for example .NYC. * Consider adding a question to the Initial Report to ask for input on whether this is needed or not? * Consider adding to the purpose statement "in order to", to provide some further explanation. * Registry operators will need to collect this information and will need to do so in compliance with GDPR. * Disclosure is not foreseen outside applicable registry operators and ICANN compliance, if necessary. Consider addressing this in data elements workbook. * If it is a registry purpose and not an ICANN purpose, does it belong here? But if it is in compliance with an ICANN contract, maybe it does? ICANN does not impose policies on any registry to have an eligibility policy. They choose it. Action item #3: Kristina to connect with Milton and Amr to see how concerns can be addressed in relation to Purpose N, particularly whether Purpose N should be included in this policy, and suggest updates accordingly. 5. Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday 1 November at 13.00 UTC. a) Confirm action items b) Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any * For meetings next week, time will change to 14.00 UTC to accommodate for day light savings changes. Apologies to those who are not affected by DST. Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings(a)icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses…> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gn…>.

1 0

Recordings, Attendance & AC chat / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP / Tuesday, 30 October 2018
by Julie Bisland 30 Oct '18

30 Oct '18

Dear all, Please find the attendance and AC chat attached to this email. The MP3 and AC recording below from the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP call held on Tuesday, 30 October 2018 at 13:00 UTC. These have also been posted on the agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/ow68BQ MP3: https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-30oct18… AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p8y7q0pni87/<https://participate.icann.org/p8y7q0pni87/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=847b74aafca1ee2e…> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives of the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP : https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/ Main wiki page for the working group: https://community.icann.org/x/IYEpBQ Thank you. Kind Regards, Julie Bisland

1 0

Meeting Invitation / Alternates & Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP call / Thursday, 01 November 2018 at 13:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland 30 Oct '18

30 Oct '18

Dear all, Non-members can follow the EPDP call taking place on Tuesday’s and Thursday’s at 13:00 UTC via the audio cast or view only Adobe Connect room. As requested and discussed on Tuesday's (14 August 2018) meeting, please note that an additional Adobe Connect room has been created for use by interested alternates and observers to be able to view-only the main EPDP Team Adobe Connect room. The view-only room will also broadcast the audio of the EPDP Team AC room, however, those in the view-only room will not be heard. Note that the audio cast stream will also remain available for now for those that prefer to use that option to listen live to the EPDP Team meeting. View-Only Adobe Connect room for alternates and observers: https://participate.icann.org/gnso-epdp-observers Meeting Audio Cast (for alternates and observers) To join the event, click on the link: Listen in browser: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01 [stream.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Listen in application such as iTunes: http://stream.icann.org:8000/stream01.m3u [stream.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stream.icann.org-3A8000…> Agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/pg68BQ Thank you. Kind Regards, Julie

1 0