Dear all,

Thank you to those that were available to participate in today’s DT meeting. As there is little time left before people start travelling, please take note of the action items below. The objective is to submit the template to the full WG by the end of day on Thursday so the DT will need to have completed its work by then. As per action item #3, please find attached the latest draft of the legal action DT. The latest draft of the regulatory & contract enforcement can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NvoYYmMsjqgt48mAYt5nCr8uPk-E-2IngGt50wDkaFU/edit. As noted, these DTs may have some overlap with the purpose described by this DT.

Best regards,

Marika

Notes – DT7 Meeting on 24 October 2017:

1. Roll call / Welcome

• On call today: Dick Leaning, Marc Anderson, Raoul Plommer, Rod Rasmussen

2. Review, discuss and confirm support and understanding of all input received to date (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/19fUlV3HEyZ0IYFOY-r4KGoN25ICHPf1wDjUA_ZMx3yc/edit#heading=h.gjdgxs[docs.google.com])

• See latest version at link above
• Initial draft expanded by adding a number of additional use cases to give a broader flavor of this particular purpose, both for individual investigations as well as automated processes.
• RDAP protocol would facilitate automated process
• Description has been provided for each use case as well as the overall structure and distinction between different use cases (individual investigations vs. automated processes and various stages of an investigation)
• Around automated processes for reputation services - is an area that hasn't really been discussed in the larger WG, so might be of broader interest to highlight that use case.
• Is a separate category needed for copyright infringement - likely covered by another DT, but may be worth flagging to ensure that it is not lost. May need to conduct a gap analysis once all DTs have presented their work to make sure nothing is forgotten. Similarly content on web-sites (e.g. pharma) may fall in different categories even though they may follow similar steps and/or require similar information. Difference may be in the asking to determine in which DT it belongs. Info-sec and other private actors aren't usually interested in attribution, so that's a big difference.

Action item #1: Rod to add additional use case concerning compromise of account / hijacking / domain shattering

Action item #2: All to review template and aim to flesh out use cases to ensure a comprehensive overview and understanding of data elements required for criminal investigation / DNS Abuse Mitigation purpose.

Action item #3 - Staff to share latest drafts of enforcement and legal actions DT so that the DT can see what is being covered in other DTs and flag accordingly what may require further attention.

Action item #4 - DT encouraged to ask questions should certain aspects not be clear to make sure that the template is understandable for a broad audience

3. Confirm what further updates / edits need to be made prior to submission to the full WG (deadline Thursday 26 October)

4. Identify team members who will attend ICANN60 sessions:

Saturday 28 October and Wednesday 1 November

In person or remote

Volunteer to introduce the team's output?

• Consider having a high level overview on a slide - Rod to discuss with Lisa
• Rod and Dick normally available to present
• Aim to ensure that Rod is available to present as he is the expert

Action item #5 - Rod to check breaks for SSAC session so that DT7 update could be scheduled in accordance with the breaks

Action item #6 – Staff to work with the leadership team to schedule the DT7 update at a time that works with Rod’s schedule

Marika Konings

Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 

Email: marika.konings@icann.org

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO

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