Jeff and Cheryl,

Regarding agenda item 3 – Initial Assessment of work required in response to the Final Consumer Confidence and Trust Review Team Report, I have the following preliminary questions:

 

1.       Regarding Recommendation 9 of CCT-RT, the draft response for our WG refers that matter to the RPM “PDP”.  However, my understanding is that the RPM Review is a required Review and not a Policy Development Process.  Is that incorrect?  Should the RPM Review results be incorporated into the work of the Sub Pro PDP or do they stand alone as separate policy recommendations to the GNSO?  In other words, what is the status of the mandated “Reviews” in relation to future gTLD policy?

 

2.       Regarding Recommendations 14 and 15 of the CCT-RT related to DNS Security Abuse and consideration of a possible DNS Abuse Dispute Resolution Policy, it appears the draft Responses says that such matters  are outside the “remit” of the Subsequent Procedures Working Group and not within the purview of the community.  It is stated that these are suggestions to be negotiated between ICANN and the Contracted Parties.  Has this been discussed in the full WG?

 

3.       Regarding Recommendations 14 and 16, the proposed Responses state that the Sub Pro PDP should look at the data that the CCT-RT has gathered rather than simply relying on the CCT-RT Recommendations.  Is the idea here that Sub Pro may elect to ignore CCT-RT Recommendations and form its own conclusions regarding DNS abuse?

 

4.       There appear to be several comments framing questions as to whether the Sub Pro PDP WG “agrees” with the CCT-RT recommendations.  Is that an exercise that has to be performed with respect to each Recommendation of CCT-RT?  If the Reviews represent separate policy recommendations to the GNSO, does GNSO have to resolve differences between the Reviews and the Sub Pro recommendations before making recommendations to the ICANN Board?

 

Thank you,

Anne

 

 

 

 

 

Dear WG Members,

 

Please find the proposed agenda for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG meeting scheduled for 2 October 2018 at 03:00 UTC, for 90 minutes.

 

1. Agenda review/SOIs
2. Supplemental Report: Review of sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 continued
   1. Draft of the additional Supplemental Report sections.
3. Initial assessment of work required for Final CCT-RT Report
4. AOB

    

For agenda item 2, please find the latest staff draft, which seeks to incorporate input received during past WG meetings. For item 2.a, please find an initial staff draft of the other sections intended to be included with the supplemental report. Staff has attempted to ensure that all required elements of an Initial Report are included, but done so in a streamlined fashion. For context, the documentation the WG has been reviewing the last few meetings (i.e., 1.1-1.5) will slot into section two (2) of this template.

 

For Item 3, please find attached an initial staff draft that seeks to assess the level to which the PDP WG has already addressed CCT-RT recommendations and where additional work may be needed. This analysis is similar to that done for SAC090.

  

Those signed up as Members to this PDP WG should have received meeting information from the SOAC Support team. If you did not receive these participation details or if you would like to send your apologies, please contact the SOAC Support team (gnso-secs@icann.org).

 

Best,

Steve

 

 

Steven Chan


Policy Director, GNSO Support

 

ICANN

12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536


Mobile: +1.310.339.4410

Office Telephone: +1.310.301.5800

Office Fax: +1.310.823.8649

 

Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.

 

Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO

Follow the GNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/

http://gnso.icann.org/en/