Dear RDRS SC,

a kind reminder on below Action Item.

Action Item: RDRS SC members to review and provide input to Assignment 4 Exercise.  Populate the “Lessons Learned” column (where relevant and if not done already in Draft Chapter3) and provide assessment in “RDRS SC input” column. Deadline 29 May 2025

Kind regards,

Feodora

From: Feodora Hamza <feodora.hamza@icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, 20 May 2025 at 16:47
To: "gnso-rdrs-sc@icann.org" <gnso-rdrs-sc@icann.org>
Subject: 2025-05-19 RDRS Standing Committee - Meeting #33

Dear RDRS SC,

Please see below the notes and action items from the last meeting.

Action Item: RDRS SC members to review and provide input to Assignment 4 Exercise.  Populate the “Lessons Learned” column (where relevant and if not done already in Draft Chapter3) and provide assessment in “RDRS SC input” column. Deadline 29 May 2025

The next meeting is scheduled for 2 June at 17:30 UTC.

Kind regards,

Feodora and Caitlin

2025-05-19 RDRS Standing Committee - Meeting #33

Action Items: 

· RDRS SC members to review and provide input to Assignment 4 Exercise.  Populate the “Lessons Learned” (where relevant and if not done already in Draft Chapter3) and provide assessment on “RDRS SC input” column. Deadline 29 May 2025

· SC members to indicate for each EPDP Phase 2 Recommendation based on experience with RDRS:

· Retain as-is

· Modify

· No longer necessary

· Any other input or assessment

· Support Staff to update the Assignment 4 Exercise document based on 19 May RDRS SC discussion.

Agenda:

1. Welcome 

· John McElwaine opened the meeting, acknowledging Seb’s absence due to illness.

2. Continue discussion on Chapter 4

1. Chair Update

· Emphasized Assignment 4 of the RDRS Standing Committee Charter:

· Assess each EPDP Phase 2 recommendation using RDRS pilot data.

· Recommendations should be evaluated as:

· Retain as-is

· Modify

· No longer necessary

· Any other input

· Timely Need for Input:

· No SC member has yet completed the action items and review for Assignment 4.

· Chair urged timely participation, suggesting openness to revised approaches if members want to propose new ones.

· 18 EPDP Phase 2 recommendations need review.

· Proposed Timeline:

· Discuss 6 recommendations on 19 May and 2 June.

· Next 12 Recs to be reviewed during ICANN 83 (two 90-minute sessions).

· Target: Draft Final Findings Report by August for Public Comment.

2. GNSO Council Update

• Council leadership clarified:

1. This exercise is not policy-making but informed feedback.

2. EPDP recommendations are already adopted by GNSO Council and are pending Board review.

3. The committee’s role is to assess their implementation status (fully, partially, not at all).

4. Council wants clarity: retain/modify/reject, and note any divergence in perspectives.

• Some SC Members cautioned against “cherry-picking” from recommendations that were intended as a package.
• Emphasized the original group’s view that SSAD recommendations should be treated holistically.
• Some SC Members proposed two interpretations:

· Either all recommendations go forward

· Or none do, prompting a reset.

• SC Chair clarified that analysing Recommendations individually doesn't imply breaking up the package.

3. Discussion on Assignment 4 Exercise

· SC Members initiated a focused discussion on:

· EPDP Phase 2 Recommendation #1: Accreditation of requesters

· EPDP Phase 2 Recommendation #2: Accreditation of government entities

· Expressed uncertainty over the effectiveness and trade-offs in removing accreditation during the RDRS pilot.

· SC Members suggested distributed accreditation via trusted umbrella entities (e.g., FBI, Europol) rather than a centralized ICANN-managed system.

· Proposed direct interaction between registrars and accredited requesters, bypassing ICANN.

· SC Members proposed use of SAML tokens for identity assertions.

· Suggested that identity providers attest to member identities without ICANN managing every requester.

· SC Members asked for clarity on what authentication adds for different requester types.

· Suggested collecting data-driven lessons from RDRS and reflecting on whether authentication improved request handling.

· SC Members pointed to the NIS2 directive:

· Authentication confirms identity.

· Authorization decides disclosure rights.

· Suggested keeping terminology clear and separating identity from data access rights.

3. AOB

· No meeting on 26 May due to Public Holiday