December 2018 - Gnso-epdp-team

Notes, action items from EPDP Team Meeting #34 - 13 December 2018
by Caitlin Tubergen Dec. 13, 2018

Dec. 13, 2018

Dear All, Please find the notes from today’s EPDP Team call below. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- EPDP Team Call #34 Thursday, 13 December 2018 14:00 UTC High-level Notes/Actions Kurt to work with Support Staff to capture the geographic differentiation discussion and draft a policy recommendation for the EPDP Team to review. The draft recommendation will provide that research should be explored on the feasibility of a rules engine and following the delivery and outcome of the research, the EPDP Team may recommend further work (perhaps by another PDP WG). 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/ZwPVBQ 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect 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. Review of outstanding action items b. Other updates, if applicable Due to the potentially large expense of retaining external legal counsel, the Leadership Team met with the Project Cost Support Team (PCST) to discuss options for legal counsel. The proposed approach was used by the CCWG - WS2 The approach is to establish a sub-team, called the EPDP Legal Committee (LC), that will act as an intermediary b/w the EPDP Team and external/internal legal counsel The LC will filter, analyze, refine, and approve requests for legal advice Members would be practicing lawyers or individuals with legal training - preferably one member per team The rationale for the approach is previous success with CCWG-WS2, stewardship of budget, streamlined process Within the SOW, Kurt requested a certain number of business days SLA be included to ensure we get answers as soon as possible EPDP Feedback Concerns about approach - it is difficult for attorneys to be instructed by groups with divergent interests. This may involve a lot of time and money with little gain. Response: we plan to use this approach, but if it is not working, we will reassess. Can we get a degree of assurance that the group will actually take the legal advice received on board? Are the stakeholder groups willing to follow advice that may be against the stakeholder group's position? Response: we hope the Team will respect any guidance received and use it constructively Rather than asking questions, we could describe detailed scenarios and ask if the scenario is compliant with the GDPR. Use cases with proposed solutions would be ideal - is this proposed solution GDPR compliant? General questions may not result in helpful answers. 3. Continue review of list of topics for further discussion Geographic basis Amr recently forwarded recent EDPB guidance to the list - does this memo provide clarity to our discussion? These guidelines were shared by the EDPB a few weeks ago and are available for a public comment process now. A small team discussed the geographic differentiation issue, and the divergent viewpoints were captured in the Initial Report. Targeting criteria - just b/c a data subject is located within the EEA does not mean processing of data falls within GDPR. One criterion is the data subject is targeted by a controller. Geo localization activities may be relevant - also, online tracking (cookies) or personalized targeting. Establishment criteria - main establishment is not the only factor that applies Reading this document highlights additional questions Reading the guidelines shows there are a lot of areas where the GDPR does not apply This guidance is helpful in two ways: (1) putting responsibility on the controller, and the processing activity is not the controlling factor; (2) the guidance also provides some clarity regarding the location of the data subject The guidance pivots on the definition of roles. This introduces complexity for contracted parties, and this only applies to GDPR. This may be an area where we get very targeted legal advice The rules engine approach/chart could be helpful in this context - the guidelines narrow the questions we could ask Scenario-based questions are likely to be responded to with pro forma advice such as analysis would need to be done on a case-by-case basis If the guidance helps the team draw a box around data subjects, it will still be difficult to draw up 50+ rule sets. The guidance demonstrates that this is a complicated issue and shows the difficulty of digital vs. political borders. This appears to be a policy question, not a legal question - does the team want to create a policy where compliance can be enforced? While this looks like a legal question, it is not. This is really a question of dealing with requirements that transcend jurisdiction and gets into challenges that global technology firms are dealing with now. The team should get more legal advice and come to consensus on what is the lowest risk and practical application from a policy perspective The team is ignoring the cost to third parties that access WHOIS data. The EWG report was commissioned by the ICANN Board - once the Board received the report, it initiated the next generation RDS PDP, which was terminated after GDPR/initiation of EPDP. The Team does not have time to work through all of this right now, but needs to not just focus on costs to contracted parties The Team should also consider potential gaming, i.e. targeting customers in the EEA just to avoid publishing data Before the Team agrees to research a rules engine, we should be clear if it would be viable - the team needs to think this through more Ultimately, we will need a rules engine to apply multiple laws, but that is outside of our scope and should not be on our critical path. We need something simple that does not require elaborate rules. Researching does not necessarily mean the team will make this a policy - however analysis would be helpful, and the team could make recommendations to further explore this in a later phase Action: Kurt to summarize this discussion as a policy recommendation for the group to review and ultimately be included in the final report Why does the EPDP Team need to research this - shouldn't this be conducted by a different PDP? Perhaps this could be worked on in the future. This Team is talking about a policy that is not just GDPR compliant - that is why a rules engine is important - we should recommend that the work begin immediately The other thing the group has not yet discussed is the ICANN hub and spoke model Policy Change Impact Analysis Per the charter, there is a need to include a policy impact analysis. The analysis is meant to include metrics to be able to measure the effectiveness of the policy. If the team has ideas for what needs to be captured here, or if anyone wants to volunteer, that would be very helpful. During the charter drafting phase, Stephanie had a particular interest in this section, so she could be a starting point. The bullet points within the Initial Report show what the team is expected to produce It may be premature to determine if the policy achieved its goals given the stage we are in An action item could be to review this after policy recommendations are submitted and submit proposed metrics to the Council. It's difficult to conduct an analysis before we have specific policy recommendations Kurt may consider collaborating with staff to see if an independent resource could be tapped for this exercise. It's hard to dedicate time to this effort if something changes as a result of public comment Our next meeting to be scheduled for Tuesday 18 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC.

1 0

Doodle / Legal Committee Framework (only confirmed reps)
by Terri Agnew Dec. 13, 2018

Dec. 13, 2018

Hello all, Only the confirmed reps for each group, please complete the doodle to schedule a Legal Committee Framework call next week. Doodle: https://doodle.com/poll/2abn9v99y8kwu8hu I have enabled the time zone so that it can be changed to your zone. With kind regards, Terri From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of Berry Cobb Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2018 8:54 AM To: gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] ACTION REQUIRED - Legal Committee Framework Hi All, Per today's discussion on establishing the standing legal committee framework, please designate one member or alternate from your respective group. The preference is that committee members are currently practicing attorneys. Where one is not available in your group, then please chose a representative that you think is best capable to manage request for legal advice. Please provide the selection for your respective group to the mailing list by 18 December 2018 prior to our next EPDP call. The following list is a suggestion of who might join the committee, but ultimate a decision for you respective group: * Board - Leon * BC - Margie * IPC - Diane * ISPCP - Thomas * NCSG - Tatiana * RySG - Kristina * RrSG - Volker * GAC - Laureen * ALAC - Alan G. * SSAC - Benedict I've also attached the slide deck that outlines the LC framework, process, guidelines, and budget. Thank you. B Berry Cobb GNSO Policy Consultant @berrycobb

1 0

Meeting Invitation: Alternates & Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP call / Tuesday, 18 December 2018
by Andrea Glandon Dec. 13, 2018

Dec. 13, 2018

Dear all, Non-members can follow the EPDP call taking place on Tuesdays and Thursdays 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/BQvVBQ Thank you. Kind Regards, Andrea

1 0

ACTION REQUIRED - Legal Committee Framework
by Berry Cobb Dec. 13, 2018

Dec. 13, 2018

Hi All, Per today's discussion on establishing the standing legal committee framework, please designate one member or alternate from your respective group. The preference is that committee members are currently practicing attorneys. Where one is not available in your group, then please chose a representative that you think is best capable to manage request for legal advice. Please provide the selection for your respective group to the mailing list by 18 December 2018 prior to our next EPDP call. The following list is a suggestion of who might join the committee, but ultimate a decision for you respective group: . Board - Leon . BC - Margie . IPC - Diane . ISPCP - Thomas . NCSG - Tatiana . RySG - Kristina . RrSG - Volker . GAC - Laureen . ALAC - Alan G. . SSAC - Benedict I've also attached the slide deck that outlines the LC framework, process, guidelines, and budget. Thank you. B Berry Cobb GNSO Policy Consultant @berrycobb

1 0

Proposed Agenda - EPDP Team Meeting #34
by Caitlin Tubergen Dec. 12, 2018

Dec. 12, 2018

Dear All, Below, please find the proposed agenda for tomorrow’s EPDP Team call. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin EPDP Meeting #34 Agenda Thursday, 13 December 2018 Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes) Review of outstanding action items Other updates, if applicable Continue review of list of topics for further discussion Geographic basis Consider EDPB Guideline (see https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/guidelines/guidelines-3…) How does this guideline impact EPDP Team’s position on this topic? What changes, if any, should be considered for the Final Report? Policy Change Impact Analysis Review current language in Initial Report Discuss what other information this section should contain Volunteers to work on this section? Privacy/Proxy Services - how the P/P records appear in the public WHOIS Current Language in Temp Spec - Appendix A, Section 2.6: Notwithstanding Sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 of this Appendix, in the case of a domain name registration where a privacy/proxy service used (e.g. where data associated with a natural person is masked), Registrar MUST return in response to any query full WHOIS data, including the existing proxy/proxy pseudonymized email. Margie to introduce issue for discussion Proposed outcome: confirm requirement [BC/IPC support confirmation.] Discuss next steps Registrant Consent to Publication – option for registrants to request to have all of their RDS data published Current Language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3: As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should give the registrant the option to opt in to having their WHOIS Contact Data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC/Some members of RrSG also support confirmation.] Consent by the Registrant to Publish and/or Disclose for technical contact Current language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3 contains this requirement: Registrar MAY provide the opportunity for the Admin/Tech and/or other contacts to provide Consent to publish additional contact information outlined in Section 2.4 of Appendix A. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should seek consent from those listed as additional contacts (admin/tech) to having their information as reflected in the Contact data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC support confirmation.] Update from Leadership Team regarding approach to external legal counsel Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Tuesday 18 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

2 1

**Reminder** Meeting Invitation: Alternates & Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP call / Thursday, 13 December 2018
by Julie Bisland Dec. 12, 2018

Dec. 12, 2018

Dear all, Non-members can follow the EPDP call taking place on Tuesdays and Thursdays 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/AgvVBQ Thank you. Kind Regards, Andrea

1 0

Notes & action items - EPDP Team #33
by Marika Konings Dec. 11, 2018

Dec. 11, 2018

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 #33 Tuesday, 11 December 2018 Notes and Action Items High-level Notes/Actions: Action item #1: Proponents of accuracy discussion to put forward specific proposals / changes that should be considered by the EPDP Team. Action item #2: Leadership and staff support team to update and re-publish timeline to demonstrate anticipated timing of phase 2 launch. Action item #3: EPDP Team encouraged to further discuss topic of ‘optional’, as well as items deferred to next meeting (geographic basis, policy change impact analysis) on the mailing list and focus on possible recommendations associated with this topic for EPDP Team consideration. Questions for ICANN Org from the EPDP Team: None 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/ZwPVBQ. 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates * Attendance will be taken from Adobe Connect * 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. Status of letter to EDPB / External Legal Counsel * Agreed to hold off sending the letter for now. Letter has been drafted for GNSO Council to update them on the status in relation to the letter. Important to review previous letters sent by the EDPB - now is not an opportune time. * PCST meeting scheduled for tomorrow - in that meeting, further discussion expected re. procurement of legal service and proposed process. Conflicts will need to be considered in any procurement process. Process will be to develop written questions followed by written responses, which could be followed up by a conversation, if needed. Cost control will be another important aspect - arm’s length engagement should assist with that. Formulating the questions will be key. How to do that effectively should be focus. Could potentially be done through a small team, potentially consisting of lawyers from the group, which focus on formulating in an objective manner the questions. It would then be considered if the question has already been answered in existing memos, can be answered by ICANN legal or whether external counsel input is needed. ICANN would be responsible for developing the SOW, EPDP Team's focus should be on formulating the questions. b. Review of outstanding action items - see https://community.icann.org/x/NwSNBQ c. Other updates, if applicable * Small team meeting held yesterday to further discuss controller/joint-controller related issues. No agreement on whether a joint-controller situation exists - ICANN Org committed to further study the situation and provide feedback. It may also depend on the processing steps as different responsibilities may apply. Review current information in the Initial Report and see if/how this needs to be updated or further clarified. Important to document position so that the EPDP Team can further review what to include in the Final Report. * Accuracy - is it in scope, if it is, what is to be considered? What is the expected outcome / objective, changes in the current regime? Action item #1: Proponents of accuracy discussion to put forward specific proposals / changes that should be considered by the EPDP Team. 3. Preview of Phase 2 work items (15 minutes): a. Review mind map b. Confirm understanding of EPDP Team on where it is on meeting requirements to commence phase 2 work. c. Confirm next steps, if any * Mind map outlines the aspects of the charter that are expected to be covered in phase 2. This does not only include the system for standardized access to non-public registration data but also a number of topics that appear in the annex to the temporary specification ("important issues for further community action") * May be worth seeking clarification from the GNSO Council what they expect to receive in order to provide 'non-objection'. * The charter says "the threshold for establishing "answered" for the gating questions shall be the consensus of the EPDP Team and non-objection by the GNSO Council". May need to obtain clarification from the Council of what is meant with 'consensus' - is this on any recommendations in relation to gating questions or in relation to the aggregate of the gating questions? * Is there a risk in delaying the access discussion after Final Report on temp spec produced? What is the incentive for the EPDP Team to work and compromise on those issues in phase 2. Commitment to work in good faith. * Specific timeline is in place for phase 1 that cannot wait for phase 2 to complete. * Some of the outstanding questions may be addressed through the discussions on the system for standardized access. * May need to review timeline again to see how phase 2 fits in. * Charter questions were responded to in the Initial Report - is that sufficient to commence phase 2? May need to look at those responses again? * Final Report on Temporary Specification is due in 6 weeks and should be the priority for now. However, if work on that can be finalized ahead of time, work could start earlier and/or in parallel. * Mind map is intended to be a catalyst for subsequent discussion, not a block. * Need to work through issues that are on the critical path. Action item #2: Leadership and staff support team to update and re-publish timeline to demonstrate anticipated timing of phase 2 launch. 4. Continue review of list of topics for further discussion a. Topic List Item #7 – Definition of optional Recommendation #4: the EPDP Team is still considering whether optional also means optional for the registrar to offer the ability to the Registered Name Holder to provide these data elements, or whether it would be required for the registrar to offer this ability. (Initial Report) * Consider current requirements * Consider risk / compliance issues of requiring or not requiring registrars to request RNH to provide optional data elements * Confirm whether data that is optional, but which has been provided by RNH is to be transferred to the registry. * Confirm next steps, if any * There are a number of data elements listed as optional in the Initial Report: organization, phone ext, fax, fax ext, tech fields (name, phone, email), DNSSEC, validating RNH eligibility to register a domain name under certain TLDs. * No agreement yet on what 'optional' means in this context. * What is the impact of third party that is involved for tech contact? What is risk involved? * Is answer contingent on response provided by EDPB / external advice? What does 'informed' mean in relation to third parties that provide this information? If it is optional for CP to provide this option, would they ever offer it as there is always a risk involved. Need to understand what liability, if any, exists. * Further input may be received on this topic in response to public comment. * Some segments of client base want to provide this information - registrars may choose to accept this risk to serve these customers. Market driven may be a solution? * Note requirements to obtain consent - legal question that may need to be further clarified as the EDPB letter was not sufficiently clear on this point, what is exactly needed? Also issue of what happens if consent is withdrawn? Is informed sufficient or is informed consent required? Also need to consider article 14 in the context of collecting data from someone other than the data subject. * How to separate out transfer to registries? As even if one registrar requests this information, it would need to be supported by registries. What happens to data portability? Risk for data mismatch by having optional data elements. Making things optional for a registrar to collect doesn't solve "the problem" and really just complicates things more from an operational point. The value of the information itself is a separate debate. * What happens with legacy data? Would optional info get removed if registrars no longer offer it, would registrants be informed? Data that has been collected needs to be tested against GDPR requirements - if at the time of collection it was compliant with GDPR you can keep it, if not, it will need to be removed. Legacy data pools will need to be dealt with independent of this group's recommendations, this includes legacy data held by Registrars, Registries and third-party data aggregators. * If it is optional, why should it be collected in the first place? * High degree of likelihood that major registrars will offer this function as customers are asking for it, but not clear how many or for how long. No assurance that it is a permanent situation. How is the end user factored into this discussion? This has always been offered - what risks are imposed by GDPR? * What about other data elements that are optional (apart from tech contact data elements)? For example, organization. May need to build in two steps: need to have consent for collection of organization field if it includes personal data, and second step to obtain consent for publication. No protections associated with an organization. Organization info may be the link to personal information. Publication should be optional and only if it is the wish of the RNH that the info should be available in a public data base. Action item #3: EPDP Team encouraged to further discuss topic of ‘optional’, as well as items deferred to next meeting (geographic basis, policy change impact analysis) on the mailing list and focus on possible recommendations associated with this topic for EPDP Team consideration. b. Geographic basis * Consider EDPB Guideline (see https://edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/guidelines/guidelines-3… [edpb.europa.eu]) * How does this guideline impact EPDP Teams position on this topic? What changes, if any, should be considered for the Final Report? c. Policy Change Impact Analysis * Review current language in Initial Report * Discuss what other information this section should contain * Volunteers to work on this section? Items b and c are deferred to next meeting 5. Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday 13 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC a. Confirm action items b. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any 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, 11 December 2018
by Andrea Glandon Dec. 11, 2018

Dec. 11, 2018

Dear all, Please find the attendance and AC chat attached to this email, and the MP3 and AC recording below from the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP call held on Tuesday, 11 December 2018 at 14:00 UTC. These have also been posted on the agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/-wrVBQ MP3: https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-11dec18… AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p75ch1yt0s8/<https://participate.icann.org/p75ch1yt0s8/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=db14aa5e6c703b95…> ** 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, Andrea Glandon

1 0

Meeting Invitation: Alternates & Observers / GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP call / Thursday, 13 December 2018
by Andrea Glandon Dec. 11, 2018

Dec. 11, 2018

Dear all, Non-members can follow the EPDP call taking place on Tuesdays and Thursdays 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/AgvVBQ Thank you. Kind Regards, Andrea

1 0

Recordings, Attendance & AC chat from the EPDP Small meeting to further discuss controller issues call / Monday, 10 December 2018 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Dec. 11, 2018

Dec. 11, 2018

Dear all, Please find the attendance and AC chat attached to this email, and the MP3 and AC recording below from the EPDP Small meeting to further discuss controller issues call held on Monday, 10 December 2018 at 14:00 UTC. These have also been posted on the agenda wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/Lgb_BQ MP3: https://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-epdp-gtld-registration-data-specs-small-c… AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p985144rdrq/<https://participate.icann.org/p985144rdrq/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=1ec115fa280f150c…> ** 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 Julie Bisland Secretariat Operations Coordinator for the GNSO Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: julie.bisland(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.bisland@icann.org> Skype ID: 79613b691cb8a6c1 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy…>

1 0