February 2021 - Gnso-epdp-team

**Updated duration | Meeting Invitation | Observers | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP-P2A call | Thursday, 11 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew 09 Feb '21

09 Feb '21

**Updated duration from 90 minutes to 60 minutes to accommodate those who would like to attend the SSR2 Webinar. As a result of various requests to facilitate observers to follow the EPDP Phase 2 deliberations in real time, zoom webinar room will be made available for the EPDP plenary meetings. As a reminder, the zoom recording, audio recording, chat transcript and transcript of the EPDP plenary meetings will be publicly posted as soon as available on the EPDP wiki page and GNSO master calendar. Dear all, The next meeting of the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A is scheduled on Thursday, 11 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 60 minutes. Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 Passcode: Z@S07?t=v5 Going forward, observers will now join via zoom webinar. 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. 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 Expected Standards of Behavior [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…> Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/j4gmCQ Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/y97xxrcy The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar/2021 [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…> If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile US: +13126266799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# or +13462487799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# Webinar ID: 921 8147 7886 Passcode: 3121016458 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI__;!!PtGJab4!p…> Thank you. Kind regards, Terri

1 0

Proposed agenda: EPDP Phase 2A Meeting #06 - 11 Feb 2021
by Caitlin Tubergen 09 Feb '21

09 Feb '21

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next EPDP Team meeting. As you will note, for agenda item #4, we want to introduce you to Jamboard – a tool that is intended to facilitate the group’s brainstorming with the objective to further develop and improve the different proposals for legal vs. natural through online collaboration. Some of you may already be familiar with the tool, but for those that aren’t, please click the link prior to the meeting and have a look around (or watch this brief intro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXwV5SlKLAE). For now, each Jamboard page<https://jamboard.google.com/d/1H3CDUTITCfgcS85WMjlvyLV07cb7_V7ksFz8lVjExPg/…> includes one of the proposals that has been put forward, and, in collaboration with Keith, we’ve added one hypothetical scenario to stimulate the group’s thinking. As indicated previously, the focus (for now) is best practice recommendations for CPs that want (or may need) to distinguish. Once these best practices have been further refined, the EPDP Team will turn to the question of whether, as a result of the work on best practices and a better understanding of the issue and potential risks, changes need to be made to the phase 1 recommendation on this topic. We hope you will find this tool useful, but, of course, if you have any other suggestions on how to stimulate online collaboration in between meetings, please share this with the group. Best regards, Berry, Marika, and Caitlin -- EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #06 Proposed Agenda Thursday 11 February 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) * Legal committee update on status of questions being considered for external counsel 3. Feasibility of unique contacts a. Definitions / Terminology – as proposed by Legal Committee (15 min) * Update from legal committee (Becky) * EPDP Team input * Confirm next steps b. Introduction of proposals (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e2-rVF2wh-821tct76O50QdWwn4ZcIqS/edit) for options to require unique contacts to have a uniform anonymized email address across domain name registrations that would not result in being treated as publication of personal data (15 min) · Proponents to introduce proposal * Brian King * Melina Stroungi, Chris Lewis-Evans · Q & A by EPDP Team · Confirm next steps 4. Legal vs. natural (30 minutes) a. Jamboard Brainstorming Experiment * Explain Jamboard concept * Test run Jamboard<https://jamboard.google.com/d/1H3CDUTITCfgcS85WMjlvyLV07cb7_V7ksFz8lVjExPg/…> on proposal #1 * Input from EPDP Team on this approach * Confirm next steps 5. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): a. Meeting #07 Thursday 18 February at 14.00 UTC. b. Confirm action items c. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 1

Absence Thursday
by Mueller, Milton L 09 Feb '21

09 Feb '21

Hello all, I became ill Thursday morning and had to skip the call. I have heard that Brian King did his very best to fill in for me, for which I am deeply grateful. I intend to return the favor sometime soon! In the next call, I will assume my rightful role as Milton Mueller and will happily replay any part of the agenda that our Chair needs. Dr. Milton L Mueller Georgia Institute of Technology School of Public Policy

2 1

REMINDER: EPDP Team homework
by Caitlin Tubergen 08 Feb '21

08 Feb '21

Dear EPDP Team: Support Staff has populated the legal v. natural proposals, which were discussed during the last plenary meeting, into the Google Doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N-3HyLJZTBq6tCVB4Ig3ws2Tfjb08RGFP1NTNe1…>. The five proponents (Laureen, Tara, Melina, Milton, and Margie) may wish to edit their proposals<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N-3HyLJZTBq6tCVB4Ig3ws2Tfjb08RGFP1NTNe1…> in light of Thursday’s discussion. As a reminder, EPDP Leadership has asked the EPDP Team to use the Google Doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N-3HyLJZTBq6tCVB4Ig3ws2Tfjb08RGFP1NTNe1…> to review the proposals and, using a constructive tone, provide input in the white columns, namely: 1. What concerns do you have about this proposed best practice? How could this concern be mitigated? 2. If there is support for the guidance provided (either in this form or modified form), what incentives could be provided to encourage the adoption by Contracted Parties of this guidance? Once EPDP Members have opined on the proposals, the Team will be better positioned to provide input in the orange column (should the Phase 1 rec be changed?). Please provide input by COB Wednesday, 10 February. Please let us know if you have any further questions. Best regards, Berry, Marika, and Caitlin

1 0

Notes and action items - EPDP Phase 2A Meeting #05 - 4 Feb 2021
by Caitlin Tubergen 04 Feb '21

04 Feb '21

Dear EPDP Team: Please find below the notes and action items from today’s EPDP Phase 2A meeting. The next meeting of the Legal Committee will be Tuesday, 9 February at 1400 UTC, and the next plenary meeting will be Thursday, 11 February at 1400 UTC. Thank you. Best regards, Berry, Marika, and Caitlin Action Items Please refer to the Google Sheet<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17qLMYb3HC7qGYPQveXbUq5ZSzvedrQ3t8Ad…> for Action Items. We will review the action items at the beginning of each call. Notes EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #05 Thursday 4 February 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) a. EPDP Phase 2A project package overview (Berry) * The EPDP Team provides a monthly status report to the Council re: the progress of the group. What you see on the screen is the first status report that will be sent to the Council. This will be the commitment to the plan that the Team is required to provide to the Council, including being committed to the delivery dates. The Team does have flexibility in terms of project change requests. * The first slide is a “poor man’s Gantt chart” or the summary timeline that includes delivery dates. This was first presented in early January and showed the original plan to deliver a report by 31 March. The key takeaway for the summary timeline is that the delivery date of the Initial Report has been extended to the end of May. The Chair’s update to the Council is still likely to occur at the ICANN70 virtual meeting, as it is still a requirement for Keith to provide this update on where the Team stands from a probability of meaningful progress perspective. * The reason why the plan has been extended by two months is partly b/c the Team got a slower start than anticipated, and there is greater demand from a legal advice perspective. It also takes into account that the Team is operating under a slower pace (one meeting per week), though, in effect, with the legal committee, there are now two meetings per week. * It should be noted that even though there are now two additional months, there is still very little meeting time, and the Team needs to be aggressive in its work and leverage offline interactions to meaningfully progress its work. * From a project manager perspective (not trying to presuppose an outcome), the plan is built to the end of a recommendations report being delivered to the Council. * This will be sent to the Council on Monday; it will likely be an AOB item during the Council’s next meeting on 18 Feb. * The other work products under PDP 3.0 include the PCST (project cost support team); because there is not a dedicated budget for this short-term effort, expenses are not tracked, and this will not be included in this project package. * There is also a situation report – the core of this document to understand is the status and health of the project. * The Gantt chart project plan looks like an eyesore on this screen, but it breaks down all of the Team’s work. * The last part of the package is the Google sheet<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17qLMYb3HC7qGYPQveXbUq5ZSzvedrQ3t8Ad…> to track meetings and action items. Please regularly check in on this, with particular attention to the open action items. * Follow-up question: the chair is still on the hook to give an update to the Council in March, but based on the progress we’re making so far, the Initial Report is targeted for May, and we are asking the Council to approve that as the team’s timeline? * Yes. As part of PDP 3.0, current and future working groups are required to commit to a set of target delivery dates, and this is the plan the leadership team agreed to. The update to the Council in March was a requirement from the beginning. * Is there anything the team should review or comment on re: the project package? * No, it’s pretty finalized, but the Team is welcome to ask questions or spot inconsistencies. In terms of the substance and target dates, those are set in stone – this is more of an FYI of what will be sent to the Council. * Regarding the March timeline, it’s not a formal consensus call, it’s rather a chance or probability of consensus determination from the chair – this is in line with GNSO Council’s requirement. b. Vice-chair confirmation (see https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2021-January/003650.html) * We received one expression of interest for a vice-chair from Brian Beckham. Brian submitted his EOI to the group. Historically, the vice-chair has been a member of the EPDP Team, and the team’s charter is unclear as to whether the vice-chair needs to be part of the team. * Accordingly, Keith will go to the Council for its non-objection to Brian being vice-chair as the Team has expressed no objection to the Brian’s appointment. c. Update from legal committee (Becky) * The Legal Committee met and started working its way through the draft questions received from the plenary. The approach is whether the Team has already received sufficient advice from B&B to answer the questions. If not, do the questions relate to items in scope of the EPDP Team? If so, would the question further the work of the group? So far, the Legal Committee is working on refining the questions received. * Feedback: last time around, the legal committee worked under an unanimity basis – is the methodology the same this time around? * The team was not looking for unanimity, but rather consensus of the small group. 3. Legal vs. natural a. Proposed approach for reviewing and refining proposals * See https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2021-January/003654.html * Team is asked to review the proposals and opine on the following questions in a constructive manner: * What concerns do you have about this proposed best practice? How could this concern be mitigated? * If there is support for the guidance provided (either in this form or modified form), what incentives could be provided to encourage the adoption by Contracted Parties of this guidance? * Does this guidance provide sufficient risk mitigation to consider changing the EPDP Phase 1 recommendation? If not, why not and what further risk mitigation would be needed to change your opinion? (Note: this column is meant to be filled out later in the process following assessment of the proposed risk mitigation.) * EPDP Team input & suggestions * This seems to focus only on guidance, but what the team should be focusing on is consensus policy. * Note: the rightmost column of the Google doc<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N-3HyLJZTBq6tCVB4Ig3ws2Tfjb08RGFP1NTNe1…> is reserved for consensus policy considerations, but leadership would like the team to first focus on best practices and guidance so that the team is better positioned to assess whether the best practices/guidance should become consensus policy. b. Continued introduction of proposals for guidance that can be provided to Registrars and Registries who differentiate or want to differentiate between registrations of legal and natural persons · Proponents to introduce proposal (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QlM4O_vwx7cQ11DJ_Lx2kqhyyRgDkMXG/edit) * Laureen Kapin (proposal #6) * This part of the proposal deals with whether the registrant provides personal information or not. It is proposing to leverage existing mechanisms that registrars use to communicate with their clients – education, clarification, confirmation, and ability to correct. * In terms of the discussion going on in the legal committee, Volker had suggested perhaps one option to deal with the risk of inadvertently disclosing personal information is to deal with this information via automatic disclosure through the SSAD. * Feedback: making the differentiation b/w personal data vs. legal v. natural is a more constructive approach. Most registrants have automatic renewal set up without anyone ever noticing anything. The more interaction that is required, the more disruptions that occur. In terms of voluntary updates the customer can make, that could be included in the WHOIS Data Reminder Policy (WDRP), that could work. As soon as this becomes a requirement where the customer has to react and do something, this creates chaos. * It only takes one or two issues before there is an existential business problem. Not every registrant pays attention to their domains or manages them as closely as they probably should. Instead of focusing on how to safely disclose data that is redacted, we could focus on building a mechanism for legal entities or natural persons who consent to publication to get them into a declaration state and focus on a path of mandatory redaction and build a safe publication process. * It’s impossible to prevent all registrants from making a mistake, and that is not the team’s goal. The goal is to put CPs in the best possible position to put the risk at near zero so that a registrant doesn’t have a case if data is disclosed because they were properly put on notice of the disclosure risks. * The voluntary publication is already part of Phase 1 – had previously asked if registrars already do this. The Team needs to understand if this is already being done. The question is: is this in place now, or has it been not implemented? * There will have to be some form of standardization because registrars still have to upload the data to some of the registries. If there is something in place industry-wide, there needs to be standardization. Registrars are dealing with a whole infrastructure that has to be taken into account. * The Phase 1 IRT is still doing its work re: Phase 1 recommendations. * Believe registrars already have implemented this, but it’s likely a bespoke process for each registrar. * The legal committee is discussing considering these recommendations via the SSAD in order to minimize risk – want to ensure this is captured as a discussion item. * Tara Whalen (proposal #8) * SSAC is looking for ways to publish appropriate data to help fight cyber-crime. * SSAC reviewed how this is done in other parts of the industry – particularly RIPE NCC and ARIN. * RIPE NCC’s registrants are legal persons, however sometimes natural persons data is published – RIPE NCC provides mechanisms for the removal and correction of personal data and created an acceptable use policy in line with this. * RIPE NCC needs to ensure contactability, which underpins their approach. The approach states that having contact details responsible for internet number resources facilitates internet coordination and is necessary when something goes wrong. * Proposal is to examine at the permission-based grant to see if this can be used for ICANN’s purposes. * This may already have been subject to previous guidance from B&B. See this memo: https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/EPDP+-P2+Legal+subteam?preview…). * Just b/c another guy jumps off a tenth-floor window, we shouldn’t do the same. * The language from the previous phase is helpful, but this question still merits further review. * Are there examples of actual legal actions against companies? * When we’re talking about new regulations, it’s difficult to have this certainty. In terms of increased risk, this is very subjective, and it may not be productive to ask this question. * Could there be data breaches b/c of registrant conduct? Yes, there can. But there can be transparency that mitigates this risk. * These are legally-speaking, very separate analyses. The previous memo deals with consent, and we agree that is a problem. That is a very different question than looking at it through a lens of identification of a legal entity. It would be useful to keep in mind that these are two separate questions. * Action to take this back to the legal committee. * Melina Stroungi (proposal #10) * The proposal is at the core of what the team is discussing – in order to assess whether this is feasible, it would be helpful to have a cost-benefit analysis. The question is what the risks and costs are. Laureen’s proposal, for example, shows how to mitigate the liability risks. There are not only risks when implementing something; there are also risks in not differentiating between legal and natural persons. This has not been included in the cost-benefit analysis. * The group needs to consider how the cost-benefit analysis should be structured and to assess whether this is reasonably possible within the timeframe the team has. * Milton Mueller (proposal #3) * Milton was not present on this call, so this proposal was not discussed. * Other * In terms of preliminary discussion going on in the legal committee, does the disclosure of legal person’s data through the SSAD help mitigate the risk of improper disclosure? * The risk is different from disclosure through the SSAD vs. the publication in WHOIS, such as harvesting of data. When the team looks at the disclosure of information – the ways it can be possible is better within SSAD instead of outside of it. * This would mitigate the risk of an inadvertent disclosure, but from the perspective of ensuring that non-personal information has no basis to be shielded, this still has an above-and-beyond layer, which means this proposal still suffers from the same risks as the status quo that data that is not entitled to protection is protected. Do acknowledge that automated disclosure is more streamlined, but this is still an overprotection of information since GDPR does not protect legal person data. * Whether this is outside of GDPR, if there is still a high risk that the data is inside GDPR, this may be a safeguard that we can consider, but we need to look at if the data is protected. * This proposal does not satisfy the needs of other stakeholders in that there is no ability to use the public information to do correlation. Doing a single query via the SSAD will not provide what is necessary to protect victims of a phishing attack. * An additional proposal developed by EWG, which is a verified contact approach, is something the team should consider. * In Phase 2, the team decided the minimum data that should be public. * It is not this team’s job to determine what is allowed with public data; there are certain freedoms that we have no control over. Using the SSAD to get legal data is something the Team discussed in Phase 2, but CPs noted this is still processing of data and therefore could not be automatically disclosed. * What correlation means is – when identifying potentially infringing domain names, there is a challenge to prioritize what to go after first – if a registrant has several infringing domain names, the problems can be more efficiently addressed. This kind of correlation is perfectly legal and is a useful practice that is no longer possible b/c of how ICANN has treated registration data post-GDPR. * The point is that others can use the same tools to figure out who owns a domain name that is politically inconvenient or persecuted speech in certain parts of the world. Cannot allow the case where registrants might get hurt from the same tools when used for evil instead of good. * The minimum data set was decided in Phase 1. During Phase 1, it was decided that differentiation would be decided later. That is what the team is dealing with now. · Q & A by EPDP Team · Confirm next steps 4. Feasibility of unique contacts (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e2-rVF2wh-821tct76O50QdWwn4ZcIqS/edit) – if time allows a. Introduction of proposals for options to require unique contacts to have a uniform anonymized email address across domain name registrations that would not result in being treated as publication of personal data · Proponents to introduce proposal * Brian King * Melina Stroungi, Chris Lewis-Evans · Q & A by EPDP Team · Confirm next steps 5. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): 1. Meeting #06 Thursday 11 February at 14.00 UTC. 2. Confirm action items 3. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A | Thursday, 04 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew 04 Feb '21

04 Feb '21

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call held on Thursday, 04 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/jIgmCQ> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…>. These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members and alternates can join the call as a panelist, observers can join as an attendee to listen. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/IYEpBQ>. Thank you. With kind regards, Terri

1 0

January 2021 - EPDP-P2A Project Package
by policy＠bacinblack.com 04 Feb '21

04 Feb '21

Dear All, Please find attached the 31 January 2021 EPDP-P2A Project Package. As noted on the call, this will be sent to the GNSO Council on 8 February and will act as the committed plan and milestone deliverable dates that we will be accountable to delivery of the project. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. B Berry Cobb GNSO Policy Consultant Principal | <http://bacinblack.com/> BAC in Black Consulting Mob: +1 (720) 839-5735 <https://twitter.com/berrycobb> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/berrycobb/>

1 0

Meeting Invitation | Observers | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP-P2A call | Thursday, 11 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew 04 Feb '21

04 Feb '21

As a result of various requests to facilitate observers to follow the EPDP Phase 2 deliberations in real time, zoom webinar room will be made available for the EPDP plenary meetings. As a reminder, the zoom recording, audio recording, chat transcript and transcript of the EPDP plenary meetings will be publicly posted as soon as available on the EPDP wiki page and GNSO master calendar. Dear all, The next meeting of the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A is scheduled on Thursday, 11 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 Passcode: Z@S07?t=v5 Going forward, observers will now join via zoom webinar. 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. 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 Expected Standards of Behavior [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…> Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/j4gmCQ Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/y97xxrcy The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar/2021 [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…> If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile US: +13126266799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# or +13462487799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# Webinar ID: 921 8147 7886 Passcode: 3121016458 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI__;!!PtGJab4!p…> Thank you. Kind regards, Terri

1 0

**Reminder** Meeting Invitation | Observers | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP-P2A call | Thursday, 04 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland 03 Feb '21

03 Feb '21

As a result of various requests to facilitate observers to follow the EPDP Phase 2 deliberations in real time, zoom webinar room will be made available for the EPDP plenary meetings. As a reminder, the zoom recording, audio recording, chat transcript and transcript of the EPDP plenary meetings will be publicly posted as soon as available on the EPDP wiki page and GNSO master calendar. Dear all, The next meeting of the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A is scheduled on Thursday, 04 February 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5E…> Passcode: Z@S07?t=v5 Going forward, observers will now join via zoom webinar. 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. 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 Expected Standards of Behavior [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resource…> Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/jIgmCQ Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/y9lengt8 [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/y9lengt8__;!!PtGJab4!vw-y-hh…> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: https://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar/2021 [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…> If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile US: +13126266799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# or +13462487799,,92181477886#,,,,,,0#,,3121016458# Webinar ID: 921 8147 7886 Passcode: 3121016458 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI [icann.zoom.us]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acVxz9PmJI__;!!PtGJab4!p…> Thank you. Kind regards, Terri

1 0

EOI for Vice Chair
by Drazek, Keith 02 Feb '21

02 Feb '21

Hi all, In preparation for Thursday’s EPDP Phase 2A plenary call, please find the Expression of Interest from Brian Beckham for the role of Vice Chair. Best, Keith From: BECKHAM Brian <brian.beckham(a)wipo.int> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 2:04 PM To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek(a)verisign.com> Cc: caitlin.tubergen(a)icann.org; Berry.Cobb(a)icann.org; marika.konings(a)icann.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [Ext] RE: Q re Phase 2a 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. Hi Keith, all, Please see the attached – I hope this covers the necessary bases, but do of course let me know if further detail would be required or if I can answer any questions. Brian

1 1