August 2019 - IRT.RegDataPolicy

Rec 23 Analysis Review
by Dennis Chang 14 Aug '19

14 Aug '19

Dear IRT, Recommendation #23 Analysis for regarding URS and UDRP is ready for the IRT review and added to the Task List as: 34 Review Recommendation 23 Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C2X9kgKb4hKwz2JJr_OiLtmptfKSBaPRRSRPuIc…> 20190826 — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

2 3

Rec 16 (geo basis) analysis review reassigned with a new approach
by Dennis Chang 12 Aug '19

12 Aug '19

Dear IRT, Recommendation analysis for Rec 16 – geo is reassigned for IRT review with a revised due date. 28 Review Recommendation 16 Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zF45EV9YhCMTkg7rfk81Hbga26Qj_PyO8PG9EC-…> 20190802 20190820 Reassigned with a new approach on 12 Aug 2019 — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Additional Thoughts Re yesterday's Rec. 7 discussion
by Margie Milam 09 Aug '19

09 Aug '19

Hi All – After our IRT call, I reread Rec 7 and the supporting appendices, per Marc A’s suggestion. Rec 7 links to the Data Elements Matrix on Page 10 (attached for your convenience) , which clearly describes what data is required to be transferred to the registry from the registrar, and what data is optional. The 3rd page of the Data Elements Matrix (Transfer from Registrar to Registry), clearly notes an R (Required) for the contact data fields that are required to be transferred, which include all of the registrant contacts except for: * the Org field * the Tech Contact Name and Email Address , which are listed as O-RNH (Optional for the Registered Name Holder) for the purposes listed on the matrix (including, Purpose 2). As a result, the new policy continues the “thick WHOIS” requirements and our implementation needs to be consistent with Thick WHOIS, especially in light of the Board’s resolution and its anguage in the scorecard. Also, please note that this data elements matrix is also relevant to our prior discussion regarding what “optional” means with regard to the Tech Contact and the Org Contact in Rec. 5, footnote 7. Rec 5 also links to this Data Elements Matrix, and clarifies whether a field is optional to the registrar, registry or registered name holder. Since the data elements of Tech Field and Org Field are clearly marked as O-RNH and do not include O-Rr (Optional for Registrar), our prior conclusions on Rec .5 need to be revisited in light of this documentation. I propose we discuss this at our next IRT meeting. All the best, Margie

6 6

R22 Analysis Review
by Dennis Chang 09 Aug '19

09 Aug '19

Dear IRT, Recommendation #22 Analysis is ready for your review and added to the IRT Task list as 33 Review Recommendation 22 Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JBzpxcp1UK4eU5L32buREH7LXEwolLMi4qfEECu…> 20190823 — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Additional Thoughts Re yesterday's Rec.7 discussion
by mail＠berrycobb.com 08 Aug '19

08 Aug '19

Hi All, Adding to Marc’s discovery, yes there is an error in the final report. Below the tables for Rec #5 and Rec #7 there is illustrative pointer text to an outdated version of the consolidated data elements tables. Note, the tables attached to the recommendations are indeed the correct ones as extracted from the version 1.8 of the Excel version on the community wiki. Thank you Marc for the correction and apologies for the error. B Berry Cobb @berrycobb GNSO Policy Consultant From: IRT.RegDataPolicy <irt.regdatapolicy-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of Anderson, Marc via IRT.RegDataPolicy Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 14:25 To: dennis.chang(a)icann.org; irt.regdatapolicy(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Additional Thoughts Re yesterday's Rec. 7 discussion IPT and IRT members, The version 1.4 of the Data Elements Matrix that Margie references is an old version. The correct final version of the Data Elements Matrix is 1.8 and can be found on the Data Elements Workbooks page of the ePDP wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/e.+Data+Elements+Workbooks In looking at the final report, I see that the link provided for “illustrative purposes” at the end of recommendation #7 (page 10) goes to the old version 1.4 of the Data Elements Matrix. I hadn’t noticed this before as I have been referring exclusively to the Data Element workbooks found in Appendix D (which start on page 92 of the Final Report). I suggest everyone make sure you are looking at the correct version 1.8 of the Data Elements Matrix, or better yet stick with the workbooks contained in the Final Report (Appendix D). These are consistent with version 1.8 of the Matrix document. Best, Marc From: IRT.RegDataPolicy <irt.regdatapolicy-bounces(a)icann.org <mailto:irt.regdatapolicy-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Margie Milam Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 1:07 PM To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang(a)icann.org <mailto:dennis.chang@icann.org> >; IRT.RegDataPolicy <irt.regdatapolicy(a)icann.org <mailto:irt.regdatapolicy@icann.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Additional Thoughts Re yesterday's Rec. 7 discussion Hi All – After our IRT call, I reread Rec 7 and the supporting appendices, per Marc A’s suggestion. Rec 7 links to the Data Elements Matrix on Page 10 (attached for your convenience) , which clearly describes what data is required to be transferred to the registry from the registrar, and what data is optional. The 3rd page of the Data Elements Matrix (Transfer from Registrar to Registry), clearly notes an R (Required) for the contact data fields that are required to be transferred, which include all of the registrant contacts except for: * the Org field * the Tech Contact Name and Email Address , which are listed as O-RNH (Optional for the Registered Name Holder) for the purposes listed on the matrix (including, Purpose 2). As a result, the new policy continues the “thick WHOIS” requirements and our implementation needs to be consistent with Thick WHOIS, especially in light of the Board’s resolution and its anguage in the scorecard. Also, please note that this data elements matrix is also relevant to our prior discussion regarding what “optional” means with regard to the Tech Contact and the Org Contact in Rec. 5, footnote 7. Rec 5 also links to this Data Elements Matrix, and clarifies whether a field is optional to the registrar, registry or registered name holder. Since the data elements of Tech Field and Org Field are clearly marked as O-RNH and do not include O-Rr (Optional for Registrar), our prior conclusions on Rec .5 need to be revisited in light of this documentation. I propose we discuss this at our next IRT meeting. All the best, Margie

1 0

Meeting schedule
by Sarah Wyld 07 Aug '19

07 Aug '19

Hello Dennis and Team, Should we consider moving to weekly 1-hour meetings, instead of 1.5 hours every two weeks? This may help us maintain momentum and finish our work closer to our deadline. Thanks, -- Sarah Wyld Domains Product Team Tucows +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392

13 21

Rec 24 / FOA
by Rubens Kuhl 07 Aug '19

07 Aug '19

Hi there IRT members. How are we going regarding Rec. 24 and FOA ? Council asked me to see how the group thinking is on this issue, but if we haven't got there yet, it's fine; just to put a marker down that this is a topic of particular interest to Council. Rubens

2 1

Rec21 Review
by Dennis Chang 02 Aug '19

02 Aug '19

Dear IRT, Recommendation #21 analysis is ready for your review and added to the IRT workbook as 32 Review Recommendation 21 Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PkxUNXPdSBMnDid4QAh-7Ejm9wn_YhbjvUERTs8…> 20190816 I’ll monitor the doc to ensure you are getting in. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec20 Analysis Review
by Dennis Chang 02 Aug '19

02 Aug '19

Dear IRT, Thanks to those responding quickly to the assignment. Please try again for access to the document. 31 Review Recommendation 20 Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K44an-05R3RAv5x-QlVoDJEGmYtFk8otK0hFFuh…> 20190816 For future reference, all task assignments are capture in the IRT workbook. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r8yMMEFIFS-KHGMsnLdVbdn0O_GWhf7vNLl… Thanks Dennis Chang From: "IRT.RegDataPolicy" <irt.regdatapolicy-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Dennis Chang <dennis.chang(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, August 2, 2019 at 4:50 PM To: "IRT.RegDataPolicy" <irt.regdatapolicy(a)icann.org> Subject: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec20 Analysis Review Dear IRT, Recommendation 20 analysis is provided for your review and added to the IRT Task list as: 31 Review Recommendation 20 Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K44an-05R3RAv5x-QlVoDJEGmYtFk8otK0hFFuh…> 20190816 Thank you for your continued support. Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0

Rec20 Analysis Review
by Dennis Chang 02 Aug '19

02 Aug '19

Dear IRT, Recommendation 20 analysis is provided for your review and added to the IRT Task list as: 31 Review Recommendation 20 Analysis<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HMB5goMZZlexSd_EAJpaJSOZhu--wIcl1brYuMd…> 20190816 Thank you for your continued support. Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

1 0