January 2023 - GNSO-TPR - lists.icann.org

Reminder: Input Due 23 January: Draft Revisions to Recommendations 10-22
by Emily Barabas Jan. 16, 2023

Jan. 16, 2023

Dear all, As discussed on our last call, there has been an extension on the deadline to review the latest redline edits to the recommendations (see attached). Your input is now due on Monday 23 January. As a reminder, please focus your attention on the specific draft redlines made to recommendations 10-22 for this round of review. If you have any questions, please share them on list. Kind regards, Caitlin, Berry, Julie, and Emily From: GNSO-TPR <gnso-tpr-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Emily Barabas <emily.barabas(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 12:02 To: "gnso-tpr(a)icann.org" <gnso-tpr(a)icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-TPR] Input Due 16 January: Draft Revisions to Recommendations 10-22 Dear working group members, As discussed on yesterday’s call, staff had an action item to provide an updated redline revision of the Initial Report reflecting agreed updates to Recommendations 10-22 (see pages 26-39), as well as revisions resulting from the last round of input on the previous redline and strawman (see highlighted text on pages 17-19, 21, and 24). The document is attached. Please carefully review this document in coordination with the groups you represent. If you feel that there are items that need to be revised, please enter them here [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1Zoh8D2GuulpI…>. For each item, please include: * Report version (the date listed in the header of the document) and applicable line numbers ( these are listed along the left margin of the document). * Name and group you represent: If multiple WG members represent a group, input should be in coordination with these other members. * Rationale: please provide a clear explanation for why you are proposing the revision. * Specific proposed revision: Provide the language you would like to see added/removed/edited. The deadline for submitting input is 16 January 2023. After the deadline, the working group will discuss the items submitted in the input document. Following review of those items, the text will be considered stable. Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions about the review process. Kind regards, Caitlin, Julie, 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

Proposed agenda for meeting #77 on Tuesday 17 January 2023 at 16:00 UTC
by Emily Barabas Jan. 16, 2023

Jan. 16, 2023

Dear Working Group members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next meeting scheduled to take place on Tuesday 17 January at 16:00 UTC. Kind regards, Caitlin, Berry, Julie, and Emily Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #77 Proposed Agenda 17 January 2023 1. Roll Call & SOI updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates 3. Updated Transfer Process Swimlane (see attached) 4. Proposed redline from Small Group on Exemption for Recommendation 17 (see attached) 5. Proposed Language from ICANN Contractual Compliance on Record Keeping (see https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-tpr/2023-January/000740.html) 6. Possible Minor Modification to Losing FOA, time permitting (see bracketed text below) 7. AOB Preliminary Recommendation 2: The working group did not reach agreement to eliminate or substantially change the Obligations of the Registrar of Record described in Section I.A.3.1 - I.A.3.6 of the Transfer Policy. Therefore, the working group anticipates that these requirements will largely remain in place. The working group recommends the following minor modifications: * The term [“Transfer Confirmation”] must be used in place of “Standardized Form of Authorization (FOA).” * [The [Transfer Confirmation] must include the Gaining Registrar’s IANA ID] * [The [Transfer Confirmation] must include both an opportunity for the RNH to proactively accept the transfer AND an option to cancel the transfer] * [The [Transfer Confirmation] must be provided in English and the language of the registration agreement and may also be provided in other languages]

1 0

Proposed language from ICANN Contractual Compliance Regarding Record Keeping
by Emily Barabas Jan. 16, 2023

Jan. 16, 2023

Dear all, Following the WG’s review of ICANN org public comments on the topic of record keeping, ICANN’s Contractual Compliance Team agreed at the WG’s suggestion to draft recommendation language on this topic for further consideration. The following will be a topic of discussion on tomorrow’s WG call: Registrar shall retain all records pertaining to the provision of the TAC to a Registered Name Holder, as well as all notifications sent per the requirements under this Transfer Policy. At a minimum, the records retained in accordance with this section shall document the date/time, means and contact(s) to whom the TAC and notifications are sent. Registrar shall maintain these records for the shorter of two (2) years or the longest period permitted by applicable law, and during such period, shall provide such records to ICANN upon reasonable notice. Kind regards, Caitlin, Berry, Julie, 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

Please read: ICANN Org ALL HANDS meeting February 6 - 9 2023
by Julie Bisland Jan. 13, 2023

Jan. 13, 2023

Dear all, As per the Board resolution<https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-r…> passed in November 2022, ICANN org plans to hold the first ICANN Org All-Hands meeting in Los Angeles, California, from 6 – 9 February 2023. As such, call and email coverage during that week will be minimal, and responses may be delayed. If you do already have calls scheduled that week, please confirm whether they will still need to go ahead so we can coordinate support accordingly. Thank you for your understanding, Kind regards, Nathalie

1 0

Small Team Output: Draft revision to Recommendation 17
by Emily Barabas Jan. 12, 2023

Jan. 12, 2023

Dear Working Group members, On behalf of Zak, Keiron, and Owen, I am sharing the proposal the small group has developed to revise recommendation 17. Please review the attached and feel free to share comments on list in advance of our next WG call. Kind regards, Emily

1 0

Re: [GNSO-TPR] Notes and action items - TPR WG Meeting #76 - 10 January 2023 at 16:00 UTC
by Emily Barabas Jan. 10, 2023

Jan. 10, 2023

For those who might like to take a closer look at the slides on the proposed work plan revisions, please see attached. From: GNSO-TPR <gnso-tpr-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 10 January 2023 at 18:24 To: "gnso-tpr(a)icann.org" <gnso-tpr(a)icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-TPR] Notes and action items - TPR WG Meeting #76 - 10 January 2023 at 16:00 UTC Dear TPR WG members, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next meeting will be on Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 16:00 UTC. Best regards, Emily, Julie, Berry, and Caitlin ACTION ITEMS/HOMEWORK: 1. Small Team on Exemption for Recommendation 16 and 17 to send proposed language and rationale to the list before the next meeting. 2. Small Team on TTL enforcement to send proposed rationale to the list before the next meeting. Notes: Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #76 Proposed Agenda 10 January 2023 1. Roll Call & SOI updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates 3. Proposed Work Plan Update & Project Change Request * Plan for the PDP looking at the subjects in the charter, timeline, and what was planned. * GNSO Council agenda for 19 January to provide an update on the work plan and proposed Project Change Request. Summary: Original phased approach: Phase 1(a): * Form of Authorization (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 FOA issues) * AuthInfo Codes * Denying (NACKing) Transfers Phase 1(b): * Change of Registrant (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 Change of Registrant issues) Phase 2: * Transfer Emergency Action Contact * Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 TDRP issues) * Reversing transfers * ICANN-approved transfers As a reminder, the phased approach initially seemed logical for two reasons: * The phased approach is consistent with PDP 3.0 Guidelines, Enhancement 11, which provides “a PDP should have a narrow scope and, in those cases where a subject is broad, it needs to be broken into manageable pieces.” * It also allowed for the possibility of implementation work for Phase 1 recommendations in parallel with Phase 2 policy development work. Original timing: Phase 1A Initial Report June 2022 (complete) Phase 1B Initial Report March 2023 Combined Phase 1 Final Report August 2023 Phase 2 Initial Report TBD Phase 2 Final Report January 2026 (approximate) Why is a change needed? * The Working Group identified dependencies between the Phase 2 and Phase 1 work. Specifically, the working group will need to make substantial progress on Phase 2 topics TDRP and/or TEAC before it can finalize Phase 1A and 1B recommendations pertaining to inter-registrar and inter-registrant transfers. The current project plan anticipates two fully independent phases, but this is not workable in practice. * Phase 1A preliminary recommendations have been substantially revised following the public comment period and may be revised further following discussion of TDRP and/or TEAC. Additional community input through public comment is warranted on these revisions. * Phase 1A is behind schedule due to a public comment extension and the need to consider a number of substantive comments, which has also resulted in Phase 1B work falling behind schedule. A work plan adjustment would be needed for this reason alone, independent of the above points. Proposed change: Combine Phase 1 and Phase 2 into a single body of work, with a combined Initial Report and Final Report covering all topics. Reorder the sequence in which topics are addressed by the PDP to account for dependencies between topics. Proposed work plan: Milestone Target Date Phase 1A Initial Report June 2022 (complete) Combined Phase 1A (revised), 1B, and 2 Initial Report (75 day public comment) August 2024 Combined Phase 1A (revised), 1B, and 2 Final Report February 2025 Benefits of the proposed change: * Allows the working group to deliberate on all topics iteratively and consider the dependencies between recommendations in different topic areas. * Allows the community to review all draft recommendations as a single package, taking into account dependencies between recommendations in different topic areas. * A single, extended public comment period of the combined Initial Report will allow ample opportunity for the community to review the package of draft recommendations and provide input. * Fewer public comment periods and combination of outputs will allow the working group to reduce the overall timeline of the PDP. * Reduces burden on the volunteers, as the PDP no longer anticipates a Phase 1 IRT in parallel with Phase 2 policy development. In addition, only a single IRT will now be needed. Additional Considerations: * The draft revision of the work plan anticipates that the PDP will conclude in Q1 2025. Some working group members may not be able to commit for the full length of the PDP. * The working group may want to consider if there if there is a logical point in the PDP in which groups are invited to adjust their membership. * Given that participation in the PDP is already uneven in terms of both membership and attendance (e.g. real-time participation) and attendance overall is trending downward, this may be a good moment for groups to consider how they can best ensure sustained engagement through the life of the PDP. Next steps: * PDP update and preview of the Project Change Request during 19 January GNSO Council meeting. * Wrap up discussion on Phase 1A topics by end of January. * Briefly revisit status of Phase 1B discussions, including any touchpoints with Phase 2 Topics in early February. * Begin Phase 2 deliberations in early February. * GNSO Council vote on Project Change Request during 16 February GNSO Council meeting. Discussion/Questions: * Question: Is ICANN approved transfers a topic for discussion? Yes, for bulk transfers. We aren’t changing any of the original charter questions. There are a couple relating to bulk transfers in Phase 1a. ICANN-approved transfers has always been part of Phase 2. Said we would talk about bulk transfers later at the same time as ICANN-approved transfers. This is about changing the plan to make sure the work is sequenced in a logical way. * Should help to minimize the lost cycles – good change. * We aren’t changing the scope, just trying to be more efficient. * Hopefully the extended, consolidated comment period reduces the concerns from those beyond this group who'd have preferred two comment periods. 4. Proposed redline from Small Group on Exemption for Recommendation 16 and 17 * On final edits and hope to get the proposal out today. * Steinar: discussion in At-Large WG – If you have the opt out feature it could encourage registrar jumping. No consensus but will discuss again tomorrow. See Google doc of comments at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1O3vBcIr-mkDcdF5hX8jRcLXu0DoIWDTgMl4HrUQ… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1O3vBcIr-mkDc…>. ACTION ITEM: Small Team on Exemption for Recommendation 16 and 17 to send proposed language and rationale to the list before the next meeting. 5. Rationale for Recommendation 13 - Registry enforcement of TTL Enforcement * Here is a draft rationale for registry enforcement based on the public comments received at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wq4dHcIFR5XogoutSh0klkCyhZFUlS1z7cl2ilv… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1Wq4dHcIFR5Xo…> and here: Draft Rationale: The purpose of the standard TTL is to enforce security around unused TACs (e.g., requested/received but not used), in a situation where the TAC may be stored in a registrant’s email or other communications storage. The working group supports the CPH TechOps conclusion that the TAC TTL should be no more than 14 calendar days and notes that a 14-day period is appropriate in order to accommodate transfer-related business processes associated with different registrar models. The working group extensively discussed whether the Registry or Registrar should enforce the 14-day TTL and requested community input on this question through public comment on the Phase 1A Initial Report. The working group recommends enforcement by the Registry for the following reasons: * The Registry is the central authority for registrations, and therefore is the appropriate party to enforce a standardized and consistent TTL. * It is a more secure and streamlined approach due to the lesser number of Registry Operators as compared to ICANN-accredited Registrars. * The TAC is set at the Registry, and therefore it is logical for the Registry to set the TTL and enforce the 14-day limit through the system as soon as the TTL expires. With respect to 13.2, the working group acknowledged that there may be a variety of circumstances in which the Registrar of Record and the registrant may want to mutually agree to reset the TAC to NULL prior to the end of the 14th calendar day. The working group included this language to ensure that Registrars are permitted to do so under relevant circumstances. Discussion: * Question: In Rec #3 We proposed “Date and time that the TAC was issued and information about when the TAC will expire”, will the expire be given by the Registry? * 13.2 came up because a 14-day window may seem large to some people and that’s why it says agreement of the registrar and the RNH. * Left some flexibility to shorten the time, but didn’t define how much time the registrant had for the transfer. We did find that there is a diversity among registrars for various shorter periods. * One of the reasons the TTL was proposed was to stop having no limit – the longer side, to make sure it didn’t live forever. * Small Team and registries are likely to shorten the draft rationale language. * Trying to make as few changes as possible to a complex process. * Basically, some registrars might implement the NACK by setting TAC to NULL , either to ensure no transfer could be initiated or to be thorough, with or without the eligibility statuses. * Having a TTL is a key security feature. * The idea of including the TTL in the TAC was discussed in the review of public comments and not adopted because of security issues relating to gaming the system. * Did not consider where the TTL would be stored at the registry – that should be private for security reasons, and because we are talking about making modest changes. * Recommendation #3 does require that the expiration is notified to the RNH. * Small Team will suggest a revised rationale to the WG on the list before the next meeting. ACTION ITEM: Small Team on TTL enforcement to send proposed rationale to the list before the next meeting. 6. AOB: Revised Swimlane – see attached. * Request was for staff to update the Swimlane. * Staff will send a revised version (see also attached). * Extend the deadline for the review of the redline of the Phase 1a recommendations to 23 January. This is not meant to be a big exercise -- just focus on the specific redline edits to the recommendations based on the review of the public comments and the WG’s preliminary agreement.

1 0

Post Call | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG | Tuesday, 10 January 2023
by Julie Bisland Jan. 10, 2023

Jan. 10, 2023

Dear all, All recordings for the Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call held on Tuesday, 10 January 2023 at 16:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/HIw-DQ> (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. NOTE: Chat Messages tab is not displaying properly, see Zoom chat transcript attached) * 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

Meeting Invitation | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call | Tuesday, 17 January 2023
by Julie Bisland Jan. 10, 2023

Jan. 10, 2023

Dear all, The next Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call is scheduled for Tuesday, 17 January 2023 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/H4w-DQ * For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/2cstkh8m 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. * 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…>. * 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 3 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

Notes and action items - TPR WG Meeting #76 - 10 January 2023 at 16:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Jan. 10, 2023

Jan. 10, 2023

Dear TPR WG members, Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting. The next meeting will be on Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 16:00 UTC. Best regards, Emily, Julie, Berry, and Caitlin ACTION ITEMS/HOMEWORK: 1. Small Team on Exemption for Recommendation 16 and 17 to send proposed language and rationale to the list before the next meeting. 2. Small Team on TTL enforcement to send proposed rationale to the list before the next meeting. Notes: Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #76 Proposed Agenda 10 January 2023 1. Roll Call & SOI updates 2. Welcome and Chair Updates 3. Proposed Work Plan Update & Project Change Request * Plan for the PDP looking at the subjects in the charter, timeline, and what was planned. * GNSO Council agenda for 19 January to provide an update on the work plan and proposed Project Change Request. Summary: Original phased approach: Phase 1(a): * Form of Authorization (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 FOA issues) * AuthInfo Codes * Denying (NACKing) Transfers Phase 1(b): * Change of Registrant (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 Change of Registrant issues) Phase 2: * Transfer Emergency Action Contact * Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy (including Rec. 27, Wave 1 TDRP issues) * Reversing transfers * ICANN-approved transfers As a reminder, the phased approach initially seemed logical for two reasons: * The phased approach is consistent with PDP 3.0 Guidelines, Enhancement 11, which provides “a PDP should have a narrow scope and, in those cases where a subject is broad, it needs to be broken into manageable pieces.” * It also allowed for the possibility of implementation work for Phase 1 recommendations in parallel with Phase 2 policy development work. Original timing: Phase 1A Initial Report June 2022 (complete) Phase 1B Initial Report March 2023 Combined Phase 1 Final Report August 2023 Phase 2 Initial Report TBD Phase 2 Final Report January 2026 (approximate) Why is a change needed? * The Working Group identified dependencies between the Phase 2 and Phase 1 work. Specifically, the working group will need to make substantial progress on Phase 2 topics TDRP and/or TEAC before it can finalize Phase 1A and 1B recommendations pertaining to inter-registrar and inter-registrant transfers. The current project plan anticipates two fully independent phases, but this is not workable in practice. * Phase 1A preliminary recommendations have been substantially revised following the public comment period and may be revised further following discussion of TDRP and/or TEAC. Additional community input through public comment is warranted on these revisions. * Phase 1A is behind schedule due to a public comment extension and the need to consider a number of substantive comments, which has also resulted in Phase 1B work falling behind schedule. A work plan adjustment would be needed for this reason alone, independent of the above points. Proposed change: Combine Phase 1 and Phase 2 into a single body of work, with a combined Initial Report and Final Report covering all topics. Reorder the sequence in which topics are addressed by the PDP to account for dependencies between topics. Proposed work plan: Milestone Target Date Phase 1A Initial Report June 2022 (complete) Combined Phase 1A (revised), 1B, and 2 Initial Report (75 day public comment) August 2024 Combined Phase 1A (revised), 1B, and 2 Final Report February 2025 Benefits of the proposed change: * Allows the working group to deliberate on all topics iteratively and consider the dependencies between recommendations in different topic areas. * Allows the community to review all draft recommendations as a single package, taking into account dependencies between recommendations in different topic areas. * A single, extended public comment period of the combined Initial Report will allow ample opportunity for the community to review the package of draft recommendations and provide input. * Fewer public comment periods and combination of outputs will allow the working group to reduce the overall timeline of the PDP. * Reduces burden on the volunteers, as the PDP no longer anticipates a Phase 1 IRT in parallel with Phase 2 policy development. In addition, only a single IRT will now be needed. Additional Considerations: * The draft revision of the work plan anticipates that the PDP will conclude in Q1 2025. Some working group members may not be able to commit for the full length of the PDP. * The working group may want to consider if there if there is a logical point in the PDP in which groups are invited to adjust their membership. * Given that participation in the PDP is already uneven in terms of both membership and attendance (e.g. real-time participation) and attendance overall is trending downward, this may be a good moment for groups to consider how they can best ensure sustained engagement through the life of the PDP. Next steps: * PDP update and preview of the Project Change Request during 19 January GNSO Council meeting. * Wrap up discussion on Phase 1A topics by end of January. * Briefly revisit status of Phase 1B discussions, including any touchpoints with Phase 2 Topics in early February. * Begin Phase 2 deliberations in early February. * GNSO Council vote on Project Change Request during 16 February GNSO Council meeting. Discussion/Questions: * Question: Is ICANN approved transfers a topic for discussion? Yes, for bulk transfers. We aren’t changing any of the original charter questions. There are a couple relating to bulk transfers in Phase 1a. ICANN-approved transfers has always been part of Phase 2. Said we would talk about bulk transfers later at the same time as ICANN-approved transfers. This is about changing the plan to make sure the work is sequenced in a logical way. * Should help to minimize the lost cycles – good change. * We aren’t changing the scope, just trying to be more efficient. * Hopefully the extended, consolidated comment period reduces the concerns from those beyond this group who'd have preferred two comment periods. 4. Proposed redline from Small Group on Exemption for Recommendation 16 and 17 * On final edits and hope to get the proposal out today. * Steinar: discussion in At-Large WG – If you have the opt out feature it could encourage registrar jumping. No consensus but will discuss again tomorrow. See Google doc of comments at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1O3vBcIr-mkDcdF5hX8jRcLXu0DoIWDTgMl4HrUQ…. ACTION ITEM: Small Team on Exemption for Recommendation 16 and 17 to send proposed language and rationale to the list before the next meeting. 5. Rationale for Recommendation 13 - Registry enforcement of TTL Enforcement * Here is a draft rationale for registry enforcement based on the public comments received at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wq4dHcIFR5XogoutSh0klkCyhZFUlS1z7cl2ilv… and here: Draft Rationale: The purpose of the standard TTL is to enforce security around unused TACs (e.g., requested/received but not used), in a situation where the TAC may be stored in a registrant’s email or other communications storage. The working group supports the CPH TechOps conclusion that the TAC TTL should be no more than 14 calendar days and notes that a 14-day period is appropriate in order to accommodate transfer-related business processes associated with different registrar models. The working group extensively discussed whether the Registry or Registrar should enforce the 14-day TTL and requested community input on this question through public comment on the Phase 1A Initial Report. The working group recommends enforcement by the Registry for the following reasons: * The Registry is the central authority for registrations, and therefore is the appropriate party to enforce a standardized and consistent TTL. * It is a more secure and streamlined approach due to the lesser number of Registry Operators as compared to ICANN-accredited Registrars. * The TAC is set at the Registry, and therefore it is logical for the Registry to set the TTL and enforce the 14-day limit through the system as soon as the TTL expires. With respect to 13.2, the working group acknowledged that there may be a variety of circumstances in which the Registrar of Record and the registrant may want to mutually agree to reset the TAC to NULL prior to the end of the 14th calendar day. The working group included this language to ensure that Registrars are permitted to do so under relevant circumstances. Discussion: * Question: In Rec #3 We proposed “Date and time that the TAC was issued and information about when the TAC will expire”, will the expire be given by the Registry? * 13.2 came up because a 14-day window may seem large to some people and that’s why it says agreement of the registrar and the RNH. * Left some flexibility to shorten the time, but didn’t define how much time the registrant had for the transfer. We did find that there is a diversity among registrars for various shorter periods. * One of the reasons the TTL was proposed was to stop having no limit – the longer side, to make sure it didn’t live forever. * Small Team and registries are likely to shorten the draft rationale language. * Trying to make as few changes as possible to a complex process. * Basically, some registrars might implement the NACK by setting TAC to NULL , either to ensure no transfer could be initiated or to be thorough, with or without the eligibility statuses. * Having a TTL is a key security feature. * The idea of including the TTL in the TAC was discussed in the review of public comments and not adopted because of security issues relating to gaming the system. * Did not consider where the TTL would be stored at the registry – that should be private for security reasons, and because we are talking about making modest changes. * Recommendation #3 does require that the expiration is notified to the RNH. * Small Team will suggest a revised rationale to the WG on the list before the next meeting. ACTION ITEM: Small Team on TTL enforcement to send proposed rationale to the list before the next meeting. 6. AOB: Revised Swimlane – see attached. * Request was for staff to update the Swimlane. * Staff will send a revised version (see also attached). * Extend the deadline for the review of the redline of the Phase 1a recommendations to 23 January. This is not meant to be a big exercise -- just focus on the specific redline edits to the recommendations based on the review of the public comments and the WG’s preliminary agreement.

1 0

**AT THE TOP OF THE HOUR** Meeting Invitation | Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call | Tuesday, 10 January 2023
by Julie Bisland Jan. 10, 2023

Jan. 10, 2023

**AT THE TOP OF THE HOUR** Dear all, The next Transfer Policy Review PDP WG call is scheduled for Tuesday, 10 January 2023 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/HIw-DQ * For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/2b9x28mt [tinyurl.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tinyurl.com/2b9x28mt__;!!PtGJab4!51dhvwz…> 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 3 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