October 2022 - GNSO-TPR - lists.icann.org

Notes and action items - TPR WG Meeting #63 - 25 October 2022 at 16:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund 25 Oct '22

25 Oct '22

Dear TPR WG members, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next meeting will be in two weeks on Tuesday 08 November at 16:00 UTC. Best regards, Emily, Julie, Berry, and Caitlin ACTION ITEMS/HOMEWORK: 1. Jothan Frakes, Jim Galvin, Jody Kolker, and Rick Wilhelm have volunteered to compile a list of attack vectors and how the recommendations solve for them, or where they are out of scope. 2. For Recommendation #3 -- WG members to review the language in the Implementation note and suggest improvements. See page 4 in the Working Document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SaEV9vjiSZONjHvnXj3zbPVTTflDTo4WphZrbqD…. Notes: Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #63 Proposed Agenda 25 October 2022 1. Roll Call & SOI updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates * No call next week (01 November) due to the CPH Summit, starting up twice-a-week meetings the following week (with 10 November). Timeline see: https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP/2022-10-25+Transfer+Policy+Revie… * Berry: * First, this is very much conceptual in nature and doesn’t cover all of the mechanics of doing a domain transfer. * Three depictions – current, Initial Report, proposed. * Depicts fake phases. Just trying to focus on when the transfer is eligible for transfer – all issues are cured. What is good about this approach versus the swimlane diagram, which can’t represent all of the timeframes. * At the top: current state, with the Gaining FOA and authorization can’t happen because of GDPR. Interesting in going back when a transfer was initiated at the Gaining Registrar it could live up to 60 days. If there is no NACK at the end of the process the default approval is set at 5 days. * In the middle: based on the recommendations in the Initial Report – what is interesting here is you can see what the preliminary recommendations do to the current process. No easy way to show that the TAC gets submitted to the Gaining Registrar could wait until just under 14 days before the TTL expires. But the moment the TAC is submitted to the Gaining Registrar the transfer is initiated. * Last row: Under consideration based on public comments – does not represent that there is a final decision (orange boxes), just for discussion. Timing depends on when they submit the TAC to the Gaining Registrar. 3. Continue Discussion of Comments on Elimination of the Losing FOA – Recommendation 2 (see Public Comment Review Tool<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…> and Working Document [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1gyy9xfe0-ymW…>) * Proposal based on Public Comment adds complexity to the process. * Gives RNH them a window of time to NACK – either in a 5-day window or shorter. As today, it is an auto-ACK process; if no NACK it will be ACKed. * Issue with the proposal: The Losing FOA – there is no pending transfer. Doesn’t really do anything because the transfer has already gone through. Putting them back in the process continues to do nothing. Like the option to NACK up front because the minute the TAC is released the transfer is live. * The idea is that the orange box goes back to what it is today. * The RNH must inform the Gaining Registrar about the TAC to start the transfer. * So we have to now define a pending Transfer period then. * Issue is that the TAC is vulnerable for up to 14 days. If you put the NACK at the end the RNH can still stop it. * Clarification: regarding the rationale for what was done with the TAC – the security of the AuthInfo code in the current system was a message – long period of vulnerability; changes in the Initial Report have addition security measures when setting the TAC. * If we are going to recommend additional requirements also see if we can address the issue that when a TAC is requested it is not automatically generated. You can bypass the problem of the Losing FOA by getting an ACK/approval when the TAC is requested. * Some comments noted that there is a window from when the TAC is provisioned/communicated when the TAC is given to the Gaining Registrar the Registry processes it and it is gone. The functionality that gives the RNH the ability to stop the transfer once the Gaining Registrar is known is critical to some commenters. There still is the problem of TAC vulnerability once provisioned and putting the NACK at the end (once the Gaining Registrar is known) addresses this problem. * If an account is breached, all options are out the window, as it's already breached, regardless of which process we decide. * Suggested 'step' simply adds a verification option, which gives a Registrant a chance to deny. Since there's no room to deny later in the process. * The losing FOA is a warm fuzzy option at this option. My take away from the public comment is that people don’t really understand how the security profile is implemented and how what we have is actually better than what was had before. I’m hoping that the text that the small team will propose will make this more clear and if so we can add it to the document and it will help others too. * If this is solving extreme scenarios not sure it is worth the effort. * Not sure about the 'adding dev cycles' since we're already sending a 'notice of TAC provision' this simply modifies that so instead of delivering the TAC initially, it informs the registrant of the request and how to deny it, if ignored it will be sent within the 120 hour window. * If we move it forward from where it is today, it will require more development. * Do we need to see what the small team will give us before we make a decision? The small team is looking at just the different threats that can occur and how they are solved or not. * Compliance data regarding unauthorized transfers. Transfer complaints previously provided to the WG can be found here: https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP/Metrics * If we move the NACK to the front everyone has work to do, or if we leave it where it’s at we still get the security advantage without the extra work. * Reminder, Registrars will still have to educate their customers on the new process regardless. * Not sure how At-Large will address it, but in discussion in the CCWG is that we want as secure a process as possible, without being complex or lengthy, but this doesn’t lie in the policy but in the registrar processes. We have to identify what we initially agreed in the WG in the preliminary recommendations was a great step forward. * BC/Zach will get back after consulting with his group. * The issue is not whether this functionality should exist or not, even if some think it’s fluffy, just where it should happen/lie in the process --- beginning or where it is now. 4. Continue Discussion of Notification of TAC Provision – Recommendation 3 (see Public Comment Review Tool<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…> and Working Document [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1SaEV9vjiSZON…>) * One of the considerations for Recommendations #3 and #4 is whether we will keep these notifications. If we assume that – regardless of Recommendation #2 – then we can dive into the specifics. * Recommendation #3 has to exist regardless of whether we retain the Losing FOA. * Public Comments Review: * First few are about the Losing FOA. * About the tech contact being an important recipient -- that was assuming that contact would receive the notice of TAC provision (not the TAC). Question of who that contact would be – admin contact is going away. Having a database of additional contacts is a risk. * The principle of notifications is essential – when to notify either at provision or at request – it depends on how far apart are there two steps. If there is a gap then there should be two notifications. The second part is whether you should notify more than one person – from a security perspective it would be good to have more than one notification, but not mandatory – SHOULD and not MUST. * If the group changed course and sent the notification to multiple contacts, the notice would have to be distinct from the provision of the TAC itself. * Having an optional additional contact might be helpful, but having the contact on file doesn’t add anything. * Adding contacts who aren’t customers sounds a complex issue for GDPR. The current recommendations don’t preclude from doing this. Or could be optional but not required. * What if one contact NACKs the transfer and one ACKs it? Only one should get the option to NACK/ACK. * Does this need to be policy? * Summary: Leave it as a MUST for notification to the RNH and leave the other options out of the policy. * Number of comments about how the recommendations don’t address a customer using a privacy/proxy service. Staff drafted text for an implementation note: Potential next step: Strawman revision: Recommendation 3: The working group recommends that the Registrar of Record MUST send a “Notification of TAC Provision” to the RNH, as listed in the registration data at the time of the TAC request, without undue delay but no later than 10 minutes after the Registrar of Record provides the TAC. Implementation Note: For the purposes of sending the notification, the Registrar of Record should use contact information as it was in the registration data at the time of the TAC request. In cases where a customer uses a Privacy/Proxy service, the Registrar of Record should send the notification directly to contact information associated with the underlying customer where it is possible to do so * Question: Should this only refer to Proxy service? Proxy service is RNH, whereas for Privacy service, the underlying customer is RNH. * No registrar would send the TAC to the proxy service. * My concern is that the proxy service should not be doing the transfer- it should be the underlying customer/domain registrant. * Do we need the implementation note? * Not sure the distinction between privacy and proxy is necessary if you are talking about the underlying customer. * Think what we are saying is for the recommendation we can strike out “as listed in the registration data at the time of the TAC request”. If we have an Implementation note we could improve the language to call out the issue of the underlying customer is known. * If keeping the note, we still have to realize that Registrars may not have access to underlying data. ACTION ITEM: For Recommendation #3 -- WG members to review the language in the Implementation note and suggest improvements. See page 4 in the Working Document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SaEV9vjiSZONjHvnXj3zbPVTTflDTo4WphZrbqD…. For next meeting – review comment from ICANN org: “Include additional elements required to be included in the “Notification of TAC Provision” such as: * An element that explains that the TAC will enable the transfer of the domain name to another registrar. * The deadline by which the RNH must take action if the request is invalid so that the registrar has sufficient time to NACK the transfer, where applicable (note that, at the time the RNH receives the “Notification of TAC Provision”, the TAC may have already been provided and the transfer command sent to the registry operator). * Required actions registrars must take (and by when) upon receiving notification by the RNH of an invalid request.” 6. AOB -- Work Plan for Reviewing Public Comments – see attached and below: * Suggestion is to go through the recommendations sequentially. * Will adjust the work plan as we go after each meeting. * Try to wrap up the public comment review by the end of the year. Work Plan 25-10-22: Meeting #63 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Recs #2, #3, #4 TPR WG 10/25/22 In Progress PC review 08-11-22: Meeting #64 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Recs #3, #4, and Question for Community Input on Rec #4 TPR WG 11/08/22 Not Started PC review 10-11-22: Meeting #65 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Recs #5, #6, #7 TPR WG 11/10/22 Not Started PC review 15-11-22: Meeting #66 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Rec #7, #8 TPR WG 11/15/22 Not Started PC review 17-11-22: Meeting #67 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - #9, #10, #11, #12 TPR WG 11/17/22 Not Started PC review 22-11-22: Meeting #68 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - #13, #14, and Question for Community Input on Rec #14 TPR WG 11/22/22 Not Started PC review 29-11-22: Meeting #69 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Question for Community Input on Rec #14, [no comments on #15], #16, #17 TPR WG 11/29/22 Not Started PC review 01-12-22: Meeting #70 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Rec #16, #17 TPR WG 12/01/22 Not Started PC review 06-12-22: Meeting #71 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Rec #18, #19 TPR WG 12/06/22 Not Started PC review 08-12-22: Meeting #72 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Rec #20, #21, #22 TPR WG 12/08/22 Not Started PC review 13-12-22: Meeting #73 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - Charter Questions and Report Text; Additional Suggested Topics and Proposals TPR WG 12/13/22 Not 15-15-12-22: Started PC review 20-12-22: Meeting #74 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A - WG Processes and Modalities; Additional Input TPR WG 12/15/22 Not Started PC review 22-12-22: Meeting #75 - Review of public comments for Phase 1A

1 0

Meeting Invitation | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call | Tuesday, 08 November 2022
by Julie Bisland 25 Oct '22

25 Oct '22

Dear all, The next Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call is scheduled for Tuesday, 08 November 2022 at 16:00 UTC for 90 minutes. * If unable to attend, members must communicate their alternate replacement using this google form<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScXP3-H…>. To join - Zoom Information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/95363727469?pwd=N3A3OWFSaTlUME9wZzlGajk5VUI3QT09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/95363727469?pwd=N3A3OWFS…> Passcode: @TP/^*4wg# If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile: US: +19294362866,,95363727469#,,,,*7490739013# or +13017158592,,95363727469#,,,,*7490739013# Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 929 436 2866 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or 888 788 0099 (Toll Free) or 877 853 5247 (Toll Free) Webinar ID: 953 6372 7469 Passcode: 7490739013 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acdLFXPLp6 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acdLFXPLp6__;!!PtGJab4!v…> Members, alternates, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call: * Please send apologies and 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<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en> * Visit the Wiki Agenda meeting page: https://community.icann.org/x/7wnVD * For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/85n96utc ONLY FOR MEMBERS & ALTERNATES: * Staff will promote members and alternates to panelist once joined. * Chat: Please select Everyone so everyone can see your chat, and so it’s captured in the recording. * Alternate assignments will be publicly posted to the Alternate Log-Transfer Policy Review PDP<https://community.icann.org/x/V4aUCQ> wiki page. * Alternates (not replacing a member): Rename your line by adding THREE Zs (zzz) before your name and add, your affiliation - alternate after your name. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat 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, Julie

1 0

Post Call | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG | Tuesday, 25 October 2022
by Julie Bisland 25 Oct '22

25 Oct '22

Dear all, All recordings for the Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call held on Tuesday, 25 October 2022 at 16:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/EwVpD> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calen…> . These include: * Attendance * Audio recording * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript, chat) * 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-tpr/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/P4aUCQ>. Thank you. With kind regards, Julie

1 0

**AT THE TOP OF THE HOUR** Meeting Invitation | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call | Tuesday, 25 October 2022
by Julie Bisland 25 Oct '22

25 Oct '22

**AT THE TOP OF THE HOUR** Wiki Agenda meeting page: https://community.icann.org/x/EwVpD Dear all, The next Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call is scheduled for Tuesday, 25 October 2022 at 16:00 UTC for 90 minutes. * If unable to attend, members must communicate their alternate replacement using this google form<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScXP3-H…>. To join - Zoom Information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/95363727469?pwd=N3A3OWFSaTlUME9wZzlGajk5VUI3QT09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/95363727469?pwd=N3A3OWFS…> Passcode: @TP/^*4wg# If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile: US: +19294362866,,95363727469#,,,,*7490739013# or +13017158592,,95363727469#,,,,*7490739013# Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 929 436 2866 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or 888 788 0099 (Toll Free) or 877 853 5247 (Toll Free) Webinar ID: 953 6372 7469 Passcode: 7490739013 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acdLFXPLp6 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acdLFXPLp6__;!!PtGJab4!v…> Members, alternates, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call: * Please send apologies and 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<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en> * Visit the Wiki Agenda meeting page: https://community.icann.org/x/EwVpD * For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/3j5dsa3f [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/3j5dsa3f__;!!PtGJab4!7MtOiLB…> ONLY FOR MEMBERS & ALTERNATES: * Staff will promote members and alternates to panelist once joined. * Chat: Please select Everyone so everyone can see your chat, and so it’s captured in the recording. * Alternate assignments will be publicly posted to the Alternate Log-Transfer Policy Review PDP<https://community.icann.org/x/V4aUCQ> wiki page. * Alternates (not replacing a member): Rename your line by adding THREE Zs (zzz) before your name and add, your affiliation - alternate after your name. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat 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, Julie

1 0

Re: [GNSO-TPR] Draft Timeline Diagram - Transfer Steps
by Berry Cobb 25 Oct '22

25 Oct '22

Hi All, A few comments with respect to the attached draft timeline of transfer process that Emily just sent to the list. A few things to consider when reviewing this: * This is conceptual in nature and should not be viewed as a represented process flow, as it divides up the process in stages that we don’t normally use when thinking about the transfer process from start to finish from a policy development perspective. * It is a challenge to accurately reflect what actually occurs within the transfer process when dealing with timeframes (0 to 14 days) when something can be triggered at any point within that window. * It is not drawn to scale given the various durations of the process steps, but conceptually we can see how the proposed changes reduce the length and offer opportunities for efficiency. * We can also see how the removal of the Gaining FOA removes the authorization requirement in the current state version. * The Initial Report version does reveal a gap from the time the TAC is revealed to when it is processed at the Gaining Registrar to completion of the transfer. * We also can see a shift of EPP commands to initiate the transfer from current state to proposed state. * And finally, the light-orange steps in the last version of the timeline are placed there to just spark discussion and it should not be perceived as a final outcome that the group has already agreed to. I hope you find this helpful to complete deliberations on this aspect of the proposed recommendations. We’ll review this in detail at the beginning of today’s call. Thank you. B Berry Cobb Policy Development – Senior Program Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +1 424 443 8960 Phone: +1 202 570 7240 Fax: +1 202 789 0104 Twitter: @berrycobb www.icann.org<https://www.icann.org/> From: GNSO-TPR <gnso-tpr-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Emily Barabas <emily.barabas(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, October 25, 2022 at 08:43 To: "gnso-tpr(a)icann.org" <gnso-tpr(a)icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-TPR] Draft Timeline Diagram - Transfer Steps Dear WG members, Staff had an action item following our last meeting to produce a visualization the timeline of transfer steps currently, in the draft recommendations in the Initial Report, and in a potential future process in which the Losing FOA is retained. Please see attached. There will be an opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback during today’s call. Kind regards, Julie, Caitlin, Berry, and Emily Emily Barabas Policy Development Support Senior Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976 www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

Draft Timeline Diagram - Transfer Steps
by Emily Barabas 25 Oct '22

25 Oct '22

Dear WG members, Staff had an action item following our last meeting to produce a visualization the timeline of transfer steps currently, in the draft recommendations in the Initial Report, and in a potential future process in which the Losing FOA is retained. Please see attached. There will be an opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback during today’s call. Kind regards, Julie, Caitlin, Berry, and Emily Emily Barabas Policy Development Support Senior Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976 www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

1 0

REMINDER | Meeting Invitation | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call | Tuesday, 25 October 2022
by Devan Reed 24 Oct '22

24 Oct '22

Dear all, The next Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call is scheduled for Tuesday, 25 October 2022 at 16:00 UTC for 90 minutes. * If unable to attend, members must communicate their alternate replacement using this google form<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScXP3-H…>. To join - Zoom Information: Main Zoom Webinar link: https://icann.zoom.us/j/95363727469?pwd=N3A3OWFSaTlUME9wZzlGajk5VUI3QT09 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/j/95363727469?pwd=N3A3OWFS…> Passcode: @TP/^*4wg# If you are joining via audio only: One tap mobile: US: +19294362866,,95363727469#,,,,*7490739013# or +13017158592,,95363727469#,,,,*7490739013# Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 929 436 2866 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or 888 788 0099 (Toll Free) or 877 853 5247 (Toll Free) Webinar ID: 953 6372 7469 Passcode: 7490739013 International numbers available: https://icann.zoom.us/u/acdLFXPLp6 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/icann.zoom.us/u/acdLFXPLp6__;!!PtGJab4!v…> Members, alternates, and observers all have different access and participation directions, please read below! ALL: Before joining the call: * Please send apologies and 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<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en> * Visit the Wiki Agenda meeting page: https://community.icann.org/x/EwVpD * For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/3j5dsa3f [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/3j5dsa3f__;!!PtGJab4!7MtOiLB…> ONLY FOR MEMBERS & ALTERNATES: * Staff will promote members and alternates to panelist once joined. * Chat: Please select Everyone so everyone can see your chat, and so it’s captured in the recording. * Alternate assignments will be publicly posted to the Alternate Log-Transfer Policy Review PDP<https://community.icann.org/x/V4aUCQ> wiki page. * Alternates (not replacing a member): Rename your line by adding THREE Zs (zzz) before your name and add, your affiliation - alternate after your name. * Alternates (not replacing a member) are not allowed to engage in the chat 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, Julie

1 0

Proposed agenda for meeting #63 on Tuesday 25 October at 16:00 UTC
by Emily Barabas 20 Oct '22

20 Oct '22

Dear Working Group members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next meeting scheduled to take place on Tuesday 25 October 2022 at 16:00 UTC. Prior to the call, please re-read pages 16-20 of the Working Group’s Phase 1A Initial Report<https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/inter-registrar-transfer-policy-irtp/tra…> and review the following: * Public Comment Review Tools for Recommendations 2<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…>, 3<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…>, and 4<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…>. * Public Comment Working Documents for Recommendations 2<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gyy9xfe0-ymW-irtY2gKSEy3za8IcG-GrF8EcCG…>, 3<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SaEV9vjiSZONjHvnXj3zbPVTTflDTo4WphZrbqD…>, and 4<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RDMBC4fdaltByzRw-fDAydljx49vLjwGBy2bepk…>. Kind regards, Julie, Berry, Caitlin, and Emily Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #63 Proposed Agenda 25 October 2022 1. Roll Call & SOI updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates 3. Continue Discussion of Comments on Elimination of the Losing FOA – Recommendation 2 (see Public Comment Review Tool<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…> and Working Document<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gyy9xfe0-ymW-irtY2gKSEy3za8IcG-GrF8EcCG…>) 4. Continue Discussion of Notification of TAC Provision – Recommendation 3 (see Public Comment Review Tool<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…> and Working Document<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SaEV9vjiSZONjHvnXj3zbPVTTflDTo4WphZrbqD…>) 5. Start Discussion of Notification of Transfer Completion – Recommendation 4 (Public Comment Review Tool<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/201949311/gnso-TPR-P1A-pcr…> and Working Document<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RDMBC4fdaltByzRw-fDAydljx49vLjwGBy2bepk…>) 6. AOB

1 0

ICANN75 Policy Outcomes Report is now available for Download
by Terri Agnew 20 Oct '22

20 Oct '22

Dear all, As announced in the ICANN Community Digest, the ICANN75 Policy Outcomes Report is now available for download: https://go.icann.org/outcomes75 [go.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.icann.org/outcomes75__;!!PtGJab4!5_do…> Happy reading! Kindest regards, Terri

1 0

**Updated with Thursdays** October, November & December 2022 calls | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG
by Julie Bisland 18 Oct '22

18 Oct '22

**We are sending in advance to get dates on everyone’s calendar. Thursday calls have been added below: Dear all, The calls for October (remaining weeks), November and December 2022 for the Transfer Policy Review PDP WG are listed below. The calls take place at 16:00 UTC for 90 minutes. The first 2 .ics attachments are recurring orders – one for Oct and the second for Nov/Dec, please be sure to download them as “recurring” vs. a one-time event to ensure all the dates show up on your calendar. In addition, there are 5 new .ics attachments for the 5 Thursday calls just added. * Tuesday, 25 October 2022 (invite has been sent) * Tuesday, 08 November 2022 * Thursday, 10 November 2022 * Tuesday, 15 November 2022 * Thursday, 17 November 2022 * Tuesday, 22 November 2022 * Tuesday, 29 November 2022 * Thursday, 01 December 2022 * Tuesday, 06 December 2022 * Thursday, 08 December 2022 * Tuesday, 13 December 2022 * Thursday, 15 December 2022 (conflicts with GNSO Council SPS) * Tuesday, 20 December 20222 Future invitations will be sent out closer to the date of the call. Thank you. With kind regards, Terri

1 0