- Gnso-epdp-team - lists.icann.org

A short note on possible outcomes re Natural, Legal or Unspecified
by Steve Crocker Aug. 9, 2021

Aug. 9, 2021

The attached note is a summary of the possible policies regarding Natural vs Legal vs Unspecified

4 12

Proposed Agenda - EPDP Team meeting #34 on Tuesday 10 August 2021 at 14.00 UTC
by Marika Konings Aug. 9, 2021

Aug. 9, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next EPDP Team meeting which is scheduled for Tuesday 10 August at 14.00 UTC. As a reminder, input on the discussion document for community question #5 and the additional comments is due by COB, today (Monday 9 August). Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #34 Proposed Agenda Tuesday 10 August 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes) 3. Initial Report Public Comment Review (65 minutes) * EPDP Team Question for Community Input #4 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/111EAx9BuJphPwM22wsvG_oRxj27-r20r/edit> · #2 (GAC, BC, ALAC) · #3 (ALAC, BC) · #5 (BC, ALAC) · #7 (IPC, BC, ALAC) · #9 (BC, RySG) · #12 (BC) · #14 (BC) · #16 (BC) · #17 (BC) · #18 (BC) · #20 (BC) · #21 (BC) * EPDP Team Question for Community Input #5 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18_TwHMQSnV9fWryJZJdTP0awO-FRUZ5L/edit> · [to be added prior to meeting, following deadline for EPDP Team input – Monday 9 August COB] * Additional Comments – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ido40sJSe2p1bRQirUg8wJ02DWL-me1-/edit> · [to be added prior to meeting, following deadline for EPDP Team input – Monday 9 August COB] 4. Next Steps & Approach (10 minutes) As a reminder: proposed timeline to get to Final Report 10 August – complete review of public comments 12 August – delivery of action items mediated conversations, confirm possible suggestions for further consideration. 17 & 19 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 24 & 26 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report 27 August – publish draft Final Report for EPDP Team review, consensus call. 30 August – deadline for minority statements 31 August – finalize report and address any outstanding items, if any. a. Proposed approach for reviewing possible suggestions and updates to recommendations b. Final Report minus section 3 available for review c. EPDP Team input d. Confirm next steps 5. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): a. EPDP Team Meeting #35 Thursday 12 August at 14.00 UTC b. Confirm action items c. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

1 0

**REMINDER** Meeting Invitation | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A call | Tuesday, 10 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 9, 2021

Aug. 9, 2021

Dear all, The GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call is scheduled on Tuesday, 10 August 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/9QEuCg * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/2txhts9s [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/2txhts9s__;!!PtGJab4!sh3uEyr…> 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 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

Draft Final Report minus section 3 posted for review
by Marika Konings Aug. 9, 2021

Aug. 9, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, As discussed during last week’s meeting, the staff support team has gone ahead and made the necessary updates to the Initial Report (minus section 3) to reflect the change from an Initial to a Final Report to allow for maximum time for review. You can find the pdf version with line numbers here<https://drive.google.com/file/d/13kVM4m-Sz9uRexhMrv5PRL608k8ELO3s/view?usp=…> with the input form posted here<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Il7T4x1nOXA5i8ru58zCwB3KlTg9aZ5h/edit>. If you prefer to receive a word version, please let us know off-list (but please make sure to refer to the line numbers in the pdf version at all times). Please provide your group’s input by 25 August at the latest. As noted, updates to section 3 (recommendations) will be dealt with separately so please do NOT use the input form for any comments or suggestions you may have in relation to that section. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika

1 0

Notes and action items - EPDP Phase 2A Meeting #33 - 5 August 2021
by Caitlin Tubergen Aug. 6, 2021

Aug. 6, 2021

Dear EPDP Team, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next EPDP Phase 2A meeting will be Tuesday, 10 August at 14:00 UTC. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- 🚨 📣 Action Items<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17qLMYb3HC7qGYPQveXbUq5ZSzvedrQ3t8Ad…> 📣 🚨 Please find a link to outstanding action items: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17qLMYb3HC7qGYPQveXbUq5ZSzvedrQ3t8Ad…. EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #33 Proposed Agenda Thursday 5 August 2021 at 14.00 UTC 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (15 minutes) a. Status of continuation of mediated conversations · Share proposed action items coming out of mediated conversations to date * If we have a path to consensus and need more time to finalize, that would be sufficient justification for submitting a project change request. Otherwise, a project change request is unlikely to help. * The Team will need a rationale by tomorrow if we need extra time. * Update from Melissa Allgood – * There is one more session today regarding dealing with uncertainty. Following the last call, leadership will propose a plan for how to handle the mediated discussions. * Leadership would like to expand the conversation regarding the data element. There was a lack of understanding regarding the benefits of a standardized data element and the operational challenges of having a standardized data element. Support Staff has created a document where benefits and burdens can be placed – the deadline to contribute to the document is Tuesday, 10 August. * Hearing that Team members have to go on the record again with the operational burdens is frustrating – how many times do we have to repeat the same things? Still believe there is a fundamental scope issue that has not been addressed with respect to the additional data element. * This is the last time groups will need to do this. If the issues have been stated before, it should not be a large lift to copy and paste again. * It is the chair’s view that the issues the Team is tackling are in scope. If the GNSO Council feels that the questions are out of scope, the Council can communicate this to the Team. Philippe has been monitoring the conversations closely. Believe what the Team has in the Initial Report is within the scope of the guidance given by the GNSO Council. * It’s important to document the different approaches on the new data element. 3. Initial Report Public Comment Review (50 minutes) a. EPDP Team Question for Community Input #3 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/17obZbKRbez851gYx2P-SQ2C5bF6V3TX9/edit> - The discussion tables were developed by the staff support team in an attempt to group similar comments to facilitate the review. Groups were asked to flag comments that require further discussion. b. Review items flagged for further discussion · #1 (IPC) – * This should be available for registrars to do – for the benefit of registries, it should be consistent across registrars. * There is already an element in RDAP that talks about “kind” and different elements that can be populated – individual, organization. Since it is already in existence, there should be a policy recommendation to standardize this. * This data element should not be conflated with the recommendation regarding differentiation. Part of the fear of having the standardized item is that differentiation should be required, but that is incorrect. * The RrSG is not opposed to this flag; however, not willing to accept a mandatory data element. * What some groups want is not what we will end up with; the initial report made it very clear to ask – should this element exist not should it be mandated. * There is an opportunity to agree on having a standardized data element available – the capability for CPs to differentiate in a standardized way. How it is done is important but not the critical question at this juncture. * If there is an optional choice on whether or not to differentiate, then creating a standardized data element is contradictory. Some organizations are already using the “kind” element – if it is called standardized, it implies mandatory. · #2 (RrSG, IPC) * Ruling from chair that this is in scope. · #3 (ALAC, BC) * The Team needs to make a clear recommendation to ICANN org that it is defined. If we are not mandating its use, it’s not consensus policy – but there are many recommendations coming out of PDPs that are not consensus policy. * Many examples of consensus policies where requirements are optional – setting aside the mandatory discussion, if it is used, it should be used consistently * There is considerable uncertainty about the nature of domain name registrations – the threshold of work for determining legally if this is a natural or legal person will either fall on the individual or registrar or both. Do not believe in creating meaningless data elements. * Thought the point of reviewing public comments was to flag new concerns or ideas. That is not what is happening right now – the conversation is moving back to policy disagreements. · #5 (BC) * There are a lot of benefits to the standardized data element that the group has not discussed before – for example, the users of the RDS could assess the veracity of the registrant’s designation. Plan to add these to the homework document. · #6 (RrSG, ALAC, IPC) * This is not new information, but ICANN org made important points regarding creation of clear policy language. * Important to address 17.3 as part the Team’s final report. * Hope ICANN org liaisons participate in flagging if the final report language is unclear. · #7 (GAC, ALAC, IPC) · #11 (BC) * Have heard CPs mention cost or resource issues is a barrier to the data element. The group should consider how to reduce these barriers. · #12 (IPC) * When the team discussed mandatory differentiation, we thought differently about what that would mean. Do not have concerns as a registrar if I am required to give the customer the option to self-designate. All that means is that a consistent data element is published in the RDS – that doesn’t mean their data is automatically published in the RDDS. The “kind” concept already exists in RDAP. · #13 (IPC) * Not a good idea to discuss the probability of consensus before we consider each other’s positions. · #14 (ALAC) * The comments are not from the public; they are from groups who are participating in this group. * c. EPDP Team Question for Community Input #4 – see PCRT<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/169444210/gnso-EPDP-P2A-pc…> and Discussion Table<https://docs.google.com/document/d/111EAx9BuJphPwM22wsvG_oRxj27-r20r/edit> · #2 (GAC, BC, ALAC) * Think about whether guidance is sufficient and consider expressly adding that GDPR does not apply to legal persons. * Also think that guidance should be updated to best practices – should discuss both of these items at the next call. · #3 (ALAC, BC) · #5 (BC, ALAC) · #7 (IPC, BC, ALAC) · #9 (BC, RySG) · #12 (BC) · #14 (BC) · #16 (BC) · #17 (BC) · #18 (BC) · #20 (BC) · #21 (BC) d. Looking ahead at next assignments: · EPDP Team Question for Community Input #5 · Additional Comments 4. Proposed timeline to get to Final Report (15 minutes): - 10 August – complete review of public comments - 12 August – delivery of action items mediated conversations, confirm possible suggestions for further consideration. - 17 & 19 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report - 24 & 26 August – consider suggestions for further consideration & agree on updates to report - 27 August – publish draft Final Report for EPDP Team review, consensus call. - 31 August – finalize report and address any outstanding items. · EPDP Team input · Confirm next steps * In the meetings from 12 August onward, the Team would work on updated language for inclusion in the Final Report. * There probably won’t be anything so dramatically different from the Initial Report that it would need another round of public comments. * Think the timelines are too aggressive and would request more time. * Do not think we need to extend the timeline – there is nothing new in the public comments. * If done, the Team would need to file a project change request by next Monday. The ultimate decision about granting more time belongs to the Council. If groups believe more time is needed – it would be helpful to provide the rationale for requesting more time to the leadership team. The rationale for requesting more time should be to the level that will convince the entire council that the additional time is warranted. If the PCR is submitted by the motion and documents deadline, this will allow councilors to have time to consult with their constituencies. Generally speaking, the Council will accept a PCR absent objection, but there is no guarantee in this instance. As a reminder, the conclusion of this effort will allow work to begin on accuracy. * The Council is not meeting until 19 August, so the Team will still need to work under its existing timeline as an extension is not guaranteed. Staff will attach the PCR to the notes, and groups asking for more time will be asked to fill in the highlighted areas. Staff will need this by Monday, 9 August by 16:00 UTC. 5. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes): a. EPDP Team Meeting #34 Tuesday 10 August at 14.00 UTC (tentative) b. Confirm action items * EPDP Team to review the public comments received for Preliminary Recommendations 5<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18_TwHMQSnV9fWryJZJdTP0awO-FRUZ5L/edit> and Additional Comments<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ido40sJSe2p1bRQirUg8wJ02DWL-me1-/edit>. Groups to use the Discussion Table Google Docs to indicate if new ideas are presented that warrant further discussion by the full team by COB Monday, 9 August. If EPDP Members believe a recommendation should be amended based on a public comment, EPDP Team members are strongly encouraged to provide proposed updates in the Google docs by COB Monday, 9 August. * EPDP Team members to indicate benefits and operational challenges of a (i) legal v. natural differentiation and (ii) standardized data element within the dedicated Google Doc <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L-SdgAb0tJlGJoBbuRWHuKSuZRIdXnia/edit> by COB Wednesday, 11 August. * Groups who believe the EPDP Team needs more time to deliver its Final Report to indicate rationale in the highlighted portion of the attached project change request by COB, Friday, 6 August. c. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any

2 1

**UPDATED | August 2021 | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A calls
by Terri Agnew Aug. 5, 2021

Aug. 5, 2021

**Added Tuesday meetings Dear all, Please find the ics attachments for the EPDP-P2A Team calls in August 2021 with scheduled start time of 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Please download them to your inbox calendars. The details of the calls are as follows: * Thursday, 05 August 2021 * Tuesday, 10 August 2021 (ics attached) * Thursday, 12 August 2021 * Tuesday, 17 August 2021 (ics attached) * Thursday, 19 August 2021 * Tuesday, 24 August 2021(ics attached) * Thursday, 26 August 2021 * Tuesday, 31 August 2021 (ics attached) Email invitations for each call will be sent out closer to the date of the meeting. As a reminder, the next meeting is scheduled on Tuesday, 10 August and invite has been sent. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri

1 0

GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call
by ICANN Policy Calendar Aug. 5, 2021

Aug. 5, 2021

Meeting: GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call Date/time: Recurring weekly Tuesdays & Thursdays from 29 July 2021- 31 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes Zoom room information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 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!q…> 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/g4gmCQ * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/eyd2tn22 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 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.

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A | Thursday, 05 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew Aug. 5, 2021

Aug. 5, 2021

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call held on Thursday, 05 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/34MZCg> 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

Meeting Invitation | GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP - Phase 2A call | Tuesday, 10 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC
by Terri Agnew Aug. 5, 2021

Aug. 5, 2021

Dear all, The GNSO Temp Spec gTLD RD EPDP – Phase 2A call is scheduled on Tuesday, 10 August 2021 at 14:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Zoom room information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/92181477886?pwd=TlJHTU5EY1d3bUxLV2s3UStPS2MxZz09 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/9QEuCg * Check your time zone: https://tinyurl.com/2txhts9s 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 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

"Kind" element in RDAP
by King, Brian Aug. 5, 2021

Aug. 5, 2021

Hi all, I’d like to share some thoughts on how we could leverage the "kind" attribute in RDAP to convey legal vs. natural registrant data. RDAP uses jCard<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…> (a json version of the vCard<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…> standard) to convey contact information about individuals and organizations in json formatted RDAP Responses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…>. The vCard<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…> spec (and thus jCard<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…>) does not mandate or require the inclusion of “kind”. Its inclusion is optional and if it is not present the kind of “individual” is to be assumed. From the vCard<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…> spec: 6.1.4<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…>. KIND Purpose: To specify the kind of object the vCard represents. Value type: A single text value. Cardinality: *1 [Exactly one instance per vCard MAY be present.] Special notes: The value may be one of the following: "individual" for a vCard representing a single person or entity. This is the default kind of vCard. "group" for a vCard representing a group of persons or entities. The group's member entities can be other vCards or other types of entities, such as email addresses or web sites. A group vCard will usually contain MEMBER properties to specify the members of the group, but it is not required to. A group vCard without MEMBER properties can be considered an abstract grouping, or one whose members are known empirically (perhaps "IETF Participants" or "Republican U.S. Senators"). All properties in a group vCard apply to the group as a whole, and not to any particular MEMBER. For example, an EMAIL property might specify the address of a mailing list associated with the group, and an IMPP property might refer to a group chat room. "org" for a vCard representing an organization. An organization vCard will not (in fact, MUST NOT) contain MEMBER properties, and so these are something of a cross between "individual" and "group". An organization is a single entity, but not a person. It might represent a business or government, a department or division within a business or government, a club, an association, or the like. All properties in an organization vCard apply to the organization as a whole, as is the case with a group vCard. For example, an EMAIL property might specify the address of a contact point for the organization. "location" for a named geographical place. A location vCard will usually contain a GEO property, but it is not required to. A location vCard without a GEO property can be considered an abstract location, or one whose definition is known empirically (perhaps "New England" or "The Seashore"). All properties in a location vCard apply to the location itself, and not with any entity that might exist at that location. For example, in a vCard for an office building, an ADR property might give the mailing address for the building, and a TEL property might specify the telephone number of the receptionist. An x-name. vCards MAY include private or experimental values for KIND. Remember that x-name values are not intended for general use and are unlikely to interoperate. An iana-token. Additional values may be registered with IANA (see Section 10.3.4<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_d…>). A new value's specification document MUST specify which properties make sense for that new kind of vCard and which do not. Implementations MUST support the specific string values defined above. If this property is absent, "individual" MUST be assumed as the default. If this property is present but the implementation does not understand its value (the value is an x-name or iana-token that the implementation does not support), the implementation SHOULD act in a neutral way, which usually means treating the vCard as though its kind were "individual". The presence of MEMBER properties MAY, however, be taken as an indication that the unknown kind is an extension of "group". ICANN could of course create and mandate a profile that describes how the jCard “kind” value can be used to distinguish between natural (“individual”) and legal (“org”) contacts. If we get pushback to re-using (or overloading) “individual” and “org” to indicate legal and natural, we could use the iana-token extension mechanism defined in the spec. Essentially this would allow us to create two new RDAP specific “kind” values. E.g. "legal" <We would create a definition that would detail what the kind value of “legal” means> "natural" <We would create a definition that would detail what the kind value of “natural” means> This would be accomplished by creating an internet-id and submitting to IANA (IPT) for approval. Lastly, there is an internet-draft being worked on in the “regext” working group in the IETF. The regext working group is where all the RDAP technical specs are defined. This internet-draft, called the RDAP jCard Profile Spec<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_id_draf…>, currently requires the use of kind in all RDAP jCard responses. 1. “Each jCard MUST contain a "kind" property. The value of that property MUST be "individual", "group", or "org".” Now I don’t know the status of this draft - but it could be used as a “vehicle” to standardize any changes ICANN may need - assuming they were needed. RDAP Response snippets that use “kind = individual” godaddy.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__godaddy.com&d=DwMGaQ&c=…> example (registrar = GoDaddy) "entities": [ { "objectClassName": "entity", "handle": "1", "vcardArray": [ "vcard", [ [ "version", {}, "text", "4.0" ], [ "kind", {}, "text", "individual" ], [ "org", { "type": "work" }, "text", "Go Daddy Operating Company, LLC" ], [ "adr", {}, "text", [ "", "", "", "", "Arizona", "", "United States" ] ] ] ], "roles": [ "registrant" ], "events": [ { "eventAction": "last update", "eventDate": "2021-06-22T11:49:32Z" } ], "remarks": [ { "title": "REDACTED FOR PRIVACY", "type": "object truncated due to authorization", "description": [ "Some of the data in this object has been removed." ] } ] }, namecheap.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__namecheap.com&d=DwMGaQ&…> example (registrar = eNom) "entities": [ { "objectClassName": "entity", "roles": [ "registrant" ], "vcardArray": [ "vcard", [ [ "version", {}, "text", "4.0" ], [ "kind", {}, "text", "individual" ], [ "lang", {}, "language-tag", "en" ], [ "adr", {}, "text", [ "", "", "", "", "AZ", "", "US" ] ], [ "contact-uri", {}, "uri", "https://tieredaccess.com/contact/ccfaafca-b98c-4a8f-8746-bdaa321c628d<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tieredaccess.com_conta…>" ] ] ], "remarks": [ { "title": "REDACTED FOR PRIVACY", "description": "Some of the data in this object has been removed", "type": "object redacted due to authorization" } ] }, Brian King He/Him/His Head of Policy and Advocacy T +1 443 761 3726 Time zone: US Eastern clarivate.com<http://www.clarivate.com> | Accelerating innovation Follow us on LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/clarivate>, Twitter<https://twitter.com/clarivate?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr…>, Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/clarivate/> and Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/clarivateofficial/?hl=en> Confidentiality note: This e-mail may contain confidential information from Clarivate. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete this e-mail and notify the sender immediately.

1 0