Hi Working Group, I was reviewing the TEAC recs and have a question for the group. Draft Preliminary Recommendation: Once a Gaining Registrar has provided an initial non-automated response to a TEAC communication as described in Section I.A.4.6.3 of the Transfer Policy, the Gaining Registrar must provide additional, substantive updates by email to the Losing Registrar every 72 hours / 3 calendar days until work to resolve the issue is complete. These updates must include specific actions taken by the Gaining Registrar to work towards resolution. Was our intent specifically to have these updates happen only every 72 hours/3 days, or was that the maximum time that could pass before an update is given? Are we intending to restrict against more prompt/frequent updates (e.g. after two days)? I do think that would be an effect of this current text. If we’re saying that 72 hours/3 days is the maximum time that can pass between updates which could also be more frequent, we could just add in “at least” (“updates by email to the Losing Registrar at least every 72 hours / 3 calendar days”) Thanks, -- Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E Policy & Privacy Manager Pronouns: she/they swyld@tucows.com From: Caitlin Tubergen Sent: July 10, 2023 10:05 AM To: gnso-tpr@icann.org Subject: [GNSO-TPR] Proposed Agenda - TPR WG Meeting #96 - 11 July 2023 Dear Working Group members, Please find below the proposed agenda for the next meeting scheduled to take place on Tuesday, 11 July at 16:00 UTC. 🛎️ Outstanding Action Items 🛎️ 1. Working Group to review updated text for questions f5, and g3, g4, and g5 in advance of next meeting on Tuesday, 11 July. See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zBYIaFTF5bRrUdhnGiftP5CGHvuOoHqKPOhGnU46... [docs.google.com] andhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1I2DNZLxCKfmoSyffCiUL7lot3V3Zk96X5Q3ea1rE... [docs.google.com] Kind regards, Emily, Julie, Berry, and Caitlin -- Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #96 Proposed Agenda 11 July 2023 1. Welcome and Chair updates 2. Discussion of Charter Question i1 ICANN-Approved Transfer (Bulk Transfers): i1) In light of these challenges described in section 3.1.7.2 of the Final Issue Report, should the required fee in Section I.B.2 of the Transfer Policy be revisited or removed in certain circumstances? a) Overview of numbers related to ICANN-approved Bulk Transfers from 2018 – 2022 b) Questions for consideration based on initial reactions from Working Group o The $50,000 fee is a requirement from BTAPPAs that existed in a pre-New gTLD world? Accordingly, what fee considerations (if any) should be made now that bulk transfers could involve multiple TLDs? o Are there instances where the $50,000 fee(s) should be waived? (Examples could include involuntary bulk transfer arising from involuntary bulk transfer resulting from RAA terminations). o Should tiered fees depending on volume be considered in ICANN-approved bulk transfers? o Should additional carve-outs be considered for involuntary transfers - for example - premium names? 3. AOB