September 2021 - Gnso-epdp-team

GAC Minority Statement
by LEWIS-EVANS, Christopher Sept. 10, 2021

Sept. 10, 2021

OFFICIAL Dear Keith and colleagues Firstly the GAC small team would like to thank the entire EPDP team for their work during this very difficult time and as ever the GAC look forward to continuing its support to future processes. Talking of support a massive thank you to Keith and all the ICANN staff both those seen and unseen on the zoom calls for helping all of us to be able to do this work. Please find attached the GAC's Minority Statement also available here https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-minority-statement-epdp-2a-10sep… Best Regards Chris Lewis-Evans This information is supplied in confidence by the NCA. The NCA is not listed as a Public Authority under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Any information supplied by, or relating to, the NCA is also subject to an absolute exemption. It may also be subject to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, for example, under data protection legislation. Requests for disclosure to the public must be referred to the NCA FOI single point of contact, by email on StatutoryDisclosureTeam(a)nca.gov.uk. All email sent and received by the NCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by NCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring. Email may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within the NCA, on authority from the Director General or their Deputy for analysis. This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible.

1 0

EPDP-P2A // 03 Sep 2021 Milestone Project Package
by Berry Cobb Sept. 3, 2021

Sept. 3, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find a link below to Final Report milestone project package for the EPDP-P2A (03 Sep 2021). This package is a snap-shot at the delivery of the Final Report and developed by the leadership team to report on the EPDP Team’s activities and status at this phase of the project. It is also distributed to the GNSO Council to keep them informed as managers of the EPDP. The package is deposited on the wiki so that we can track access statistics. Link: https://community.icann.org/x/dggNCQ 1. Page 01 – Summary timeline 2. Page 02 – Project Sitrep – an extract from the Council’s Project List 3. Page 03 – Group roster 4. Page 04 – Group attendance for plenary and legal committee 5. Page 05 – Work and activity metrics 6. Page 06 – Project Plan, Gannt chart 7. Page 07-13 – Work plan & Action items for the project Key points: * The EPDP-P2A Team delivered its Final Report to the GNSO Council on 03 Sep 2021 Please let us know if you have any questions. Thank you B Berry Cobb Policy Development - Portfolio Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) berry.cobb(a)icann.org

1 0

EPDP Phase 2A Final Report
by Drazek, Keith Sept. 3, 2021

Sept. 3, 2021

Dear Philippe, In my capacity as Chair of the EPDP 2A effort, I am pleased to submit the attached Final Report to the GNSO Council for its consideration. I would like to briefly share my observations and assessment of our work, my consensus designations on the Final Report, and my gratitude for the contributions of community members and staff who supported this work. 1. The EPDP 2A work was chartered and launched following very intense community work on EPDP Phase 1 and Phase 2, both of which presented significant challenges and difficult negotiations. As the new Chair, I had concerns at the outset of the 2A effort that the team's recent experience would make reaching consensus in this phase unlikely, at best. I am pleased to note that the EPDP 2A Team was able to engage and work constructively, from very different starting point and under challenging circumstances, to reach consensus on the recommendations and guidance contained in the Final Report. 2. While the Final Report and its recommendations have the consensus support of the EPDP 2A Team, it's important to note that certain groups feel that the work did not go as far as needed, or did not include sufficient detail, while other groups feel that certain recommendations were not necessary. Additionally, during the final stage of our work, some groups would have preferred an opportunity to assign more granular consensus-level designations to component parts of the recommendations. In this context, I urge all readers of the EPDP 2A Final Report to also read the minority statements submitted by each group, which will be appended to the Final Report and historical record of our work. This Final Report constitutes a compromise that is the maximum that could be achieved by the group at this time under our currently allocated time and scope, and it should not be read as delivering results that were fully satisfactory to everyone. This underscores the importance of the minority statements in understanding the full context of the Final Report recommendations. 3. Over the last eight months, the EPDP 2A team worked in challenging circumstances, including fully remote engagement and without the benefit of face-to-face interaction or dialogue. This proved to be a real challenge, and one that should be acknowledged in planning for future GNSO policy processes. In the experience of EPDP Phase 1 and Phase 2, there is no doubt that face-to-face engagement was crucial in constructively advancing the work of the group. During Phase 2A, in lieu of in-person meetings, the Leadership Team and Staff worked with Melissa Allgood of ICANN Org to set up facilitated conversations, outside the plenary setting, to try to replicate the less formal engagement of a face-to-face meeting. I feel that effort was helpful in generating dialogue and in bringing divergent perspectives and positions to a point where consensus was possible, even if on a limited set of recommendations. 4. In my assessment, the EPDP Phase 2A Final Report has consensus of the EPDP Team, and each of its recommendations have secured consensus. Over the last two weeks, we worked through and resolved our "can't-live-with" items and I want to acknowledge and thank all who contributed concrete suggestions and text edits that helped us resolve remaining differences and come together. While I believe we could have designated the recommendations as having "Full Consensus," many groups indicated that they will submit minority statements, which are typically used when there are dissenting views. As such, I feel that a "Consensus" designation is more appropriate, which will acknowledge and make room for explanatory text to be submitted outside the four corners of the Final Report body to provide important context around our deliberations and recommendations. Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank all EPDP Team members, alternates, support groups, and very importantly our ICANN staff colleagues who contributed tirelessly to this EPDP effort over the course of several years. Our Phase 2A work is the culmination of the EPDP as originally chartered and made necessary by the Temporary Specification. There may yet be future work needed on these important issues, but I'm pleased to report that we have concluded this phase and can be proud of our work to deliver the current recommendations, even if the results were not fully satisfactory to all. That is the nature of compromise and consensus-building, and I am confident we achieved the most we could under challenging circumstances. Sincerest regards, Keith

1 0

Proposed Chair Statement and Consensus Designations
by Drazek, Keith Sept. 2, 2021

Sept. 2, 2021

Hi all, In my capacity as Chair of the EPDP 2A effort, I would like to share my observations and assessment of our work and my consensus designations on the Final Report and our recommendations to the GNSO Council. 1. The EPDP 2A work was chartered and launched following very intense community work on EPDP Phase 1 and Phase 2, both of which presented significant challenges and difficult negotiations. As the new Chair, I had concerns at the outset of the 2A effort that the team's recent experience would make reaching consensus in this phase unlikely, at best. I am pleased to note that the EPDP 2A Team was able to engage and work constructively, from very different starting points, to reach general consensus on the recommendations and guidance contained in the Final Report. 2. While the Final Report and its recommendations have the general support of the EPDP 2A Team, it's important to note that certain groups feel that the work did not go as far as needed, or did not include sufficient detail, while other groups feel that certain recommendations were not necessary. In this context, I urge all readers of the EPDP 2A Final Report to also read the minority statements submitted by each group, which will be appended and become part of the Final Report and historical record of our work. By way of example, one of the key differences of opinion among EPDP 2A groups was the question of whether differentiation between legal and natural person registration data should be mandatory or optional, and these differences of opinion are largely unchanged by the recommendations in the Final Report. Rather, the Final Report text constitutes a compromise that is the best that could be achieved by the group at this time under our currently allocated time and scope, and it should not be read as delivering results that were fully satisfactory to everyone. This underscores the importance of the minority statements in understanding the full context of the Final Report recommendations. 3. Over the last eight months, the EPDP 2A team worked in challenging circumstances, including fully remote engagement and without the benefit of face-to-face interaction or dialogue. This proved to be a real challenge, and one that should be acknowledged in planning for future GNSO policy processes. In the experience of EPDP Phase 1 and Phase 2, there is no doubt that face-to-face engagement was crucial in constructively advancing the work of the group. During Phase 2A, in lieu of in-person meetings, the Leadership Team and Staff worked with Melissa Allgood of ICANN Org to set up facilitated conversations, outside the plenary setting, to try to replicate the less formal engagement of a face-to-face meeting. I feel that effort was helpful in generating dialogue and in bringing divergent perspectives and positions to a point where consensus was possible, even if on a limited set of recommendations. 4. In my assessment, I believe that the EPDP Phase 2A Final Report has consensus of the EPDP Team, and each of its recommendations have secured consensus. Over the last two weeks, we worked through our "can't-live-with" items and I want to personally thank all who contributed concrete suggestions and text edits that helped us resolve remaining differences and come together. While I believe we could designate the recommendations as having "Full Consensus," I note that many groups have indicated that they will submit minority statements, which are typically used when there are dissenting views. As such, I feel that a "Consensus" designation is more appropriate, which will acknowledge and make room for explanatory text to be submitted outside the four corners of the Final Report body to provide important context for our deliberations and recommendations. To appropriately capture the dynamics of the group discussions, at a high level, I propose to include the following introductory text in the Final Report: While this Final Report and its recommendations have the general support of the EPDP 2A Team, it is important to note that some groups felt that the work did not go as far as needed, or did not include sufficient detail, while other groups felt that certain recommendations were not appropriate or necessary. In this context, all readers of the EPDP 2A Final Report should also read the minority statements submitted by each group, which have been appended and are part of the Final Report and historical record of our work. Beyond the consensus reached on the Final Report recommendations, there are several areas where the EPDP 2A groups did not fully agree, including whether differentiation between legal and natural person registration data should be mandatory or optional, and whether publication of legal person registration data was appropriately balanced against the risk of inadvertent disclosure of personal data associated with legal person registrations. These differences of opinion and perspective are largely unchanged by the recommendations in the Final Report. This Final Report constitutes a compromise that is the best that could be achieved by the group at this time under our currently allocated time and scope, and it should not be read as delivering results that were fully satisfactory to everyone. This underscores the importance of the minority statements in understanding the full context of the Final Report recommendations. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all EPDP Team members, alternates, support groups, and very importantly our ICANN staff colleagues who contributed tirelessly to this EPDP effort over the course of several years. Our Phase 2A work is the culmination of the EPDP as originally chartered and made necessary by the Temporary Specification. There may yet be future work needed on these important issues, but I'm pleased to report that we have concluded this phase and can be proud of our work to deliver the current recommendations, even if the results were not fully satisfactory to all. That is the nature of compromise and consensus-building, and I am confident we achieved the best we could under challenging circumstances. Sincerest regards, Keith

3 5

Notes and action items - EPDP 2A Meeting #41 - 2 Sep 2021
by Caitlin Tubergen Sept. 2, 2021

Sept. 2, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find the below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. Thank you again to everyone for getting us to this point! Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- Action Items<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17qLMYb3HC7qGYPQveXbUq5ZSzvedrQ3t8Ad…> 1. Keith to revisit the Chair’s statement in light of concerns from Alan G. and Marc A. and circulate revisions to the EPDP Team (if applicable) as soon as possible. EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #41 Proposed Agenda Thursday 2 September 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) * If any groups are planning to submit minority statements today, please flag this today to assist in Support Staff’s preparation of the Final Report. 3. Consider input received on the Chair’s statement and consensus designations (see https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2021-September/004126.html) a. Consider EPDP Team input * One word could be edited. “That is the best that could be achieved” should be changed to “that is the maximum that could be achieved” as best seems like a value judgment that some may disagree with. * “associated with legal person registrations” – that is not accurate. The concern is broader – proposed removing those five words – as there is also a concern if inadvertently publishing the personal data of a natural person. * We have been talking about the rights of registrants and the rights of internet users – we have been talking about legal persons data; we were not talking about the fear of personal data in general. * Perhaps because legal person data is already mentioned in that sentence, the second reference is unnecessary. * With respect to consensus designations, the ALAC will support Rec.1 but reluctantly. This is because ALAC strongly supports establishing the basis for the technical field. The reason for wanting to object – is to separate out the various aspects of the field, particularly the requirement or lack thereof, to use the field if the registrar chooses to differentiate. There are those who will have this field, but they are not required to use it. The may instead of must for those who are differentiating is not acceptable to ALAC – this should be mandatory to those who choose to differentiate – not necessarily published, but consistent. * These concerns will be noted in ALAC’s minority statement, but the group made the wrong decision to specifically identify what is supported because the process was reasonably followed and what is supported because it was liked. * BC also shares these concerns and will note these in a minority statement. * Perhaps a minor edit could include the inability to split support on recommendation 1 has been raised – the lack of ability to state positions in a more granular way was problematic. * It is not for this group to speculate how someone else who is liable as the controller purports how to deal with data that they control. * Concern with ALAC’s suggestion – this seems to be a slippery slope. The Team is now well aware of the RySG’s discomfort with the word should over may. Would it have been necessary to have more granularity there? RySG voiced its concerns but agreed to not object to the overall recommendation but to raise the concern in the minority statement. The same reasoning should apply for recommendation 1. b. Confirm next steps * Keith to consider adding language to the Chair’s statement to address the issue in a way that considers Alan and Marc’s suggestions 4. Confirm minor edits – see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Il7T4x1nOXA5i8ru58zCwB3KlTg9aZ5h/edit) a. Consider EPDP Team input * Agree that something needs to indicate where the field goes, the footnote tries to do this. What if the footnote is changed to “where this field or fields can be used within EPP and the RDDS.” * This is acceptable. * Is there a reason this text can’t just be included in the recommendation? * Add “in the RDDS” at the end of the recommendation. * Last-minute editing is making me uncomfortable. The proposed edit to add RDDS to the last sentence seems to make the footnote redundant. * If anyone objects to changes proposed, the previous text will remain. * This addition is about standards not about mandating use. * Suggest keeping the footnote and adding RDDS in the footnote. * Instead of “applied the advice received”, change to “considered the advice received” * Prefer to keep applied over considered * Do not think the entirety of the advice was applied. * Do not object to the proposed change to considered. * How about “applied key aspects” instead of “applied” * Do not accept “applied key aspects” – would be OK as “considered” * “Consider and partially applied” * Not all agree with the change to “considered” so will revert to original language of “applied” * Proposed change from “disclosure” to “publication” * Some have said this is clarified in two places – could someone point where this is clarified? * Just because data is not protected by the GDPR does not mean you have the right to disclose it. Do not support publication of civil rights’ groups information when it could lead to abuse. * No agreement to change – will leave disclosure instead of publication. * Should be “must coordinate with the technical community” * Concern raised regarding disclosure was raised in the remainder of the sentence. * If the word is disclosure is kept, IPC would remove support from this recommendation. * Some believe this to be an editing error; others have argued that this is not an editing error. * The addition of RDDS changes the meaning of the sentence and do not support. * Proposed edit: The EPDP Team recommends that a field or fields MUST be created to facilitate differentiation between legal and natural person registration data and/or if that registration data contains personal or non-personal data. “Created” in this context means that ICANN org MUST coordinate with the technical community, for example the RDAP WG, to develop any necessary standards associated with using this field or fields within EPP and the RDDS. * When this was a footnote, it was referencing back to “must be created”. * Agree to the above language with the crossed-out text. b. Confirm next steps 5. Confirm next steps * 2 September – placeholder for EPDP Team meeting to allow for resolution of any remaining issues and/or objections to consensus designations * 2 September – deadline for submission of minority statements * 3 September – submission of Final Report to GNSO Council * 10 September – final deadline for minority statements (any minority statements submitted after 2 September will be added to the Final Report, with the updated version to be submitted to the Council in time for the September meeting document deadline) 6. Wrap up * This is a significant milestone. Thank you to everyone for all of the effort on this.

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A | Thursday, 02 September 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew Sept. 2, 2021

Sept. 2, 2021

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call held on Thursday, 02 September 2021 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/RgFmCg> 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

**Starting in 15 minutes | Meeting Invitation | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A call | Thursday, 02 September 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew Sept. 2, 2021

Sept. 2, 2021

**Starting in 15 minutes Dear all, The GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call is scheduled on Thursday, 02 September 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Zoom room information: 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 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!u…> Members, alternates, 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 [icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-s…> * Visit the Wiki agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/RgFmCg * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/24bpt7ts [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/24bpt7ts__;!!PtGJab4!vuUe494…> ONLY for Members and Alternates * Please join via the above Main Zoom Webinar link and staff will promote you to panelist. * Alternate replacement confirmations – In order to keep track of alternate replacements, use the google form [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_a_ican…> to communicate who the alternate is replacing and for which period. This information will be publicly posted so that the EPDP Team is aware at any time who is active. Alternate Assignment – EPDP Phase 2A wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/h4jzC>. * Members (and alternates replacing members), please select Panelists and Attendees, or Everyone, when posting to the chat in order for everyone to see and to be captured afterwards. * Alternates not replacing a member: Please rename your line by adding THREE Zs - (zzz) before your name and add, in parentheses at the end, (your affiliation - alternate). To rename in Zoom, hover over your name and click ‘rename’. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat (apart from private chats) or use any of the other zoom room functionalities such as raising hands or agreeing / disagreeing. 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, Terri

1 0

Text error in current Final Report draft
by Mark Svancarek (CELA) Sept. 2, 2021

Sept. 2, 2021

Hi, in reviewing the current text, I've discovered an error in line 156. I've included the surrounding text for context. Lines Current Text Corrected Text 152 - 156 The GDPR protects natural persons in relation to the processing of their personal data. The GDPR does not cover the processing of personal data which concerns legal persons and in particular undertakings established as legal persons, including the name and the form of the legal person and the contact details of the legal person[Recital 14, GDPR] The GDPR protects natural persons in relation to the processing of their personal data. The GDPR does not cover the processing of personal data which concerns legal persons and in particular undertakings established as legal persons, including the name and the form of the legal person and the contact details of the legal person[Recital 14, GDPR] 156 - 160 This generally allows for disclosure of legal persons' data because it is outside the remit of GDPR; however, when processing legal persons' data, Contracted Parties should put safeguards in place to ensure that personally identifying data about a natural person is not disclosed within data marked as a legal person, as this is an example of information that is within the scope of GDPR. This generally allows for publication of legal persons' data because it is outside the remit of GDPR; however, when processing legal persons' data, Contracted Parties should put safeguards in place to ensure that personally identifying data about a natural person is not disclosed within data marked as a legal person, as this is an example of information that is within the scope of GDPR. 160 - 162 For more information on this distinction, please refer to the letter from the European Data Protection Board, beginning on p. 4. For more information on this distinction, please refer to the letter from the European Data Protection Board, beginning on p. 4. Thanks in advance for fixing this. Mark Svancarek Principal Program Manager, Corporate Standards Group Privacy & Regulatory Affairs Microsoft marksv(a)microsoft.com<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com> www.linkedin.com/in/marksv<http://www.linkedin.com/in/marksv> T: [+1] 425-706-2773 [cid:image001.gif@01D79F69.77A51910]

2 1

Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Proposed agenda - EPDP Team meeting #41 on Thursday 2 September at 14.00 UTC
by LEWIS-EVANS, Christopher Sept. 2, 2021

Sept. 2, 2021

OFFICIAL Morning Keith the GAC will be submitting a minority statement on the 10th. Many Thanks Chris From: Gnso-epdp-team [mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Drazek, Keith via Gnso-epdp-team Sent: 01 September 2021 15:33 To: gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Proposed agenda - EPDP Team meeting #41 on Thursday 2 September at 14.00 UTC Hi all, For planning purposes, please advise today, or during the plenary call tomorrow, whether your respective groups will submit minority statements, and if they will be submitted tomorrow or by the 10th. This will help us prepare for the finalization of the package to be delivered to Council on Friday. Thanks in advance! Keith On Sep 1, 2021, at 7:28 AM, Marika Konings via Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org> wrote: 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 Team, Please find below the agenda for the next EPDP Team meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 2 September at 14.00 UTC. As a reminder, the latest version of the Final Report can be found in the EPDP Team google drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1TW3Z-s6DzS2QsV_VwJ6iUQTvKVIXQrmG. The only remaining element (apart from adding the date and including the updated attendance records) is the Chair’s statement which will be discussed under item #3. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika ===== EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #41 Proposed Agenda Thursday 2 September 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) 3. Consider input received on the Chair’s statement and consensus designations (see https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2021-September/004126.html<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1O8kjOvg6ZlRlnp2ms14s6XfXaAlNQ6dILJrReNwrrILeo…>) a. Consider EPDP Team input b. Confirm next steps 4. Confirm minor edits – see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Il7T4x1nOXA5i8ru58zCwB3KlTg9aZ5h/edit) a. Consider EPDP Team input b. Confirm next steps 5. Confirm next steps 2 September – placeholder for EPDP Team meeting to allow for resolution of any remaining issues and/or objections to consensus designations 2 September – deadline for submission of minority statements 3 September – submission of Final Report to GNSO Council 10 September – final deadline for minority statements (any minority statements submitted after 2 September will be added to the Final Report, with the updated version to be submitted to the Council in time for the September meeting document deadline) 6. Wrap up _______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team(a)icann.org https://secure-web.cisco.com/1q20rLmj3ZqLje3WbDDQIkjXLWWEkJGYnj2G49IuhGPj1x… _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://secure-web.cisco.com/1ulsTZJaW3bW6YC8OkeffpihpPPvoc66pQ60DvlF76XWJx…) and the website Terms of Service (https://secure-web.cisco.com/1NHcSCHWJJ5IUNLMrkIt5jaq8Lxp_FWfMMsOJN3LnvK3hS… You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. This information is supplied in confidence by the NCA. The NCA is not listed as a Public Authority under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Any information supplied by, or relating to, the NCA is also subject to an absolute exemption. It may also be subject to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, for example, under data protection legislation. Requests for disclosure to the public must be referred to the NCA FOI single point of contact, by email on StatutoryDisclosureTeam(a)nca.gov.uk. All email sent and received by the NCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by NCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring. Email may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within the NCA, on authority from the Director General or their Deputy for analysis. This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible.

1 0

Proposed agenda - EPDP Team meeting #41 on Thursday 2 September at 14.00 UTC
by Marika Konings Sept. 1, 2021

Sept. 1, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the agenda for the next EPDP Team meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 2 September at 14.00 UTC. As a reminder, the latest version of the Final Report can be found in the EPDP Team google drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1TW3Z-s6DzS2QsV_VwJ6iUQTvKVIXQrmG. The only remaining element (apart from adding the date and including the updated attendance records) is the Chair’s statement which will be discussed under item #3. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika ===== EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #41 Proposed Agenda Thursday 2 September 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) 3. Consider input received on the Chair’s statement and consensus designations (see https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2021-September/004126.html) * Consider EPDP Team input * Confirm next steps 4. Confirm minor edits – see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Il7T4x1nOXA5i8ru58zCwB3KlTg9aZ5h/edit) * Consider EPDP Team input * Confirm next steps 5. Confirm next steps 2 September – placeholder for EPDP Team meeting to allow for resolution of any remaining issues and/or objections to consensus designations 2 September – deadline for submission of minority statements 3 September – submission of Final Report to GNSO Council 10 September – final deadline for minority statements (any minority statements submitted after 2 September will be added to the Final Report, with the updated version to be submitted to the Council in time for the September meeting document deadline) 6. Wrap up

5 4