Dear TPR WG members,

Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting.

The next meeting will be during ICANN74 on Monday, 13 June at 8:30 UTC.

Best regards,

Emily, Julie, Berry, and Caitlin

Action Items:

1. I.A.3.7.1:  Re: "Evidence of fraud or violation of the Registrar’s domain use or anti-abuse policies." Not later than 24 hours from the 07 June WG meeting: WG members are requested to review the language.  See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1clAqB1wBeOf9ZC5RMMxKrrUTs3N2WyaVYTIyVy_ODs4/edit page 6.
2. Re: Charter Question b4): Standard TTL revised language: Not later than 24 hours from the 07 June WG meeting: WG members are requested to review the revised language.  See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-iMcSboPsoTCHYye_u0uVmaVgNiOP7FKYXkO3FWhY2c/edit.
3. Staff to submit the final version of the Initial Report to the WG for reference with revisions as noted above.
4. ICANN74 Preparation – Change of Registrant topic: WG members are encouraged to review the relevant section of the Final Issue Report before the session so they are ready to discuss.  See: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-issue-report-pdp-transfer-policy-review-12jan21-en.pdf  3.1.3. Change of Registrant (“CoR”) or Inter-Registrant Transfers, page 20.

Notes:

Transfer Policy Review Phase 1(a) - Meeting #50

Proposed Agenda

07 June 2022

1. Roll Call & SOI updates

2. Welcome and Chair Updates

• I.A.3.7.1 Transfer Denial Reason:
  • Remind WG members that as there wasn’t disagreement we are going with the language "Evidence of fraud or violation of the Registrar’s domain use or anti-abuse policies."
  • In the next/final version of the report, staff will provide a slightly adjusted rationale to correspond to the text update in the recommendation.  
  • WG members are requested to review within 24 hours.  See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1clAqB1wBeOf9ZC5RMMxKrrUTs3N2WyaVYTIyVy_ODs4/edit page 6.
• Email from Farzaneh Badii, NCSG regarding sanctions and transfer fees:
  • These topics are likely out of scope, they’ve been touched on previously by the WG without any proposed recommendations, and any comments can be submitted as public comment.
• Comments from Jim Galvin, RySG: on the question for community input regarding enforcement of TTL: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-iMcSboPsoTCHYye_u0uVmaVgNiOP7FKYXkO3FWhY2c/edit
  • Re: “It is a maximum because the TAC can only be used once.” Jim: This may need more explanation.  May be okay to drop this sentence.  Could leave as “maximum standard TTL”.
  • Remove the last suggested sentence.
  • WG members are requested to review within 24 hours.  See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-iMcSboPsoTCHYye_u0uVmaVgNiOP7FKYXkO3FWhY2c/edit

3. Preview of Public Comment Form – see: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ekTphFh2vXYzGkK2QNrIxlK_bjnvjwtz/edit

• Goals of the Target Public Comment Forum/Survey Format:
  • Make sure comments are linked to specific text in the Initial Report.
  • Ensure that there is rationale for comments.  Will be helpful look at the rationale and the thinking behind those positions.
  • Greatly improves efficiency and accuracy of public comment analysis.
• Format:
  • Section 1: Name, affiliation, etc.
  • Each section is broken down by topic with page number references.
  • Section 2: Preliminary recommendations 1-4: Questions for each are the same for each:
    • Please choose your level of support for Preliminary Recommendation 1: [single select, optional]
      • Support Recommendation as written
      • Support Recommendation intent with wording change
      • Significant change required: changing intent and wording
      • Recommendation should be deleted
      • No opinion
  • Section 3: Preliminary Recommendations 5-13 on Transfer Authorizations Codes (TAC)
  • Section 4: Preliminary Recommendations 14-15 on EPDP Phase 1, Recommendation 27, Wave 1 Report Items
  • Section 5: Preliminary Recommendations 16-22 on Denying (NACKing) Transfers
  • Section 6: Other Comments and Submission
• Two questions for community input – see: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-iMcSboPsoTCHYye_u0uVmaVgNiOP7FKYXkO3FWhY2c/edit
• Names are required to submit a public comment.  Anyone can submit a comment (even if they are representing a group), but the person does have to create an account.
• Target open for the public comment forum is 20 June and closing on 01 August.  We are on track to meet this timetable.

4. AOB

• Next session is at ICANN74: Monday 13 June at 8:30 UTC.
• Format of the ICANN74 session: Intro to Change of Registrant as a topic, including first charter questions d1 and d2:
  • d1) According to the Transfer Policy Review Scoping Team Report, the Change of Registrant policy “does not achieve the stated goals” and “is not relevant in the current & future domain ownership system.” To what extent is this the case and why? Are the stated goals still valid? If the Change of Registrant policy is not meeting the stated goals and those goals are still valid, how should the goals be achieved?
  • d2) Data gathered in the Transfer Policy Status Report indicates that some registrants find Change of Registrant requirements burdensome and confusing. If the policy is retained, are there methods to make the Change of Registrant policy simpler while still maintaining safeguards against unwanted transfers?
• WG members are encouraged to review the relevant section of the Final Issue Report before the session so they are ready to discuss.  See: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-issue-report-pdp-transfer-policy-review-12jan21-en.pdf  3.1.3. Change of Registrant (“CoR”) or Inter-Registrant Transfers, page 20.