- RegDataPolicy.PreIRT - lists.icann.org

EPDP Phase 1 Board Resolution published; RegDataPolicy:Interim Policy publication to follow
by Dennis Chang May 18, 2019

May 18, 2019

Dear pre-IRT, The Board resolution for the EPDP Phase 1 has now been published: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-05-15-en Based on the Board resolution, I made a change to avoid potential confusion since Board did not adopt parts of some of the recommendations. A simple change in the last sentence in first paragraph: from “complete set of EPDP recommendations” to “Board-approved recommendations” in the last sentence first paragraph. The link to the Board resolution was also added. I left comments on the document to make it easy for you to spot the changes. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7… We will continue with our plan for publication of the Interim Policy. Thank you all for your excellent support for being prepared early. — 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 1

Interim Registration Data Policy published
by Dennis Chang May 17, 2019

May 17, 2019

Dear pre-IRT, Thank you and congratulations! The Interim Registration Data Policy for gTLDs has been published. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/interim-registration-data-policy-en The Consensus Policies page has been updated to add this new policy as well. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registrars/consensus-policies-en With this milestone accomplished,we will begin our transition from the pre-IRT to IRT. Please look for an announcement for the ”Call for IRT” next. — 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: [RegDataPolicy.PreIRT] draft Interim RegDataPolicy
by James M. Bladel May 6, 2019

May 6, 2019

Hello Dennis and PreIRT Team – I made two comments to the Google doc: First, I think we should be clear on when each Stage begins and ends, and that (especially for Stage 2) the pace of transitioning from Temp Spec to the RDS policy is at the discretion of the Contracted Party. Secondly, I believe we should explicitly state that Stage 3 means that the new RDS policy becomes operative, and the Interim Policy is no longer in force. I know that this is implied in the language, but this should be as clear as possible to avoid any confusion. Thanks- J. ------------- James Bladel GoDaddy From: "RegDataPolicy.PreIRT" <regdatapolicy.preirt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Dennis Chang <dennis.chang(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, April 29, 2019 at 13:27 To: "regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org" <regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org> Subject: [RegDataPolicy.PreIRT] draft Interim RegDataPolicy Dear Pre-IRT, IPT has drafted the Interim Registration Data Policy for gTLDs, which is expected to go into effect when the Temporary Specification expires on 20 May 2019 here in the pre-IRT team drive: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7…> The draft Interim Policy incorporates many of the suggestions from the pre-IRT and, previously, by the EPDP Team in Kobe. The draft Interim Policy is, essentially, a timeline that points to applicable requirements in other documents rather than a description of substantive requirements. This is drafted as a Policy, rather than a notice or advisory, to ensure that the applicable requirements are clearly identified in a formal document that is binding on contracted parties pursuant to their relevant agreements with ICANN org. We did not incorporate the language that was suggested that “Failure to respond within 30 days of this notice shall be considered acceptance of the terms herein will be considered acceptance,” for a variety of reasons, including that contracted parties are required to follow this recommended carryover of the Temp Spec as a matter of Policy-there is not an option to reject the requirements. We believe this is a straightforward implementation of Recommendation 28 and aligned with the recommendation. Please let us know if you note any inconsistency with the recommendation in the EPDP Phase 1 final report. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

4 3

Re: [RegDataPolicy.PreIRT] [Ext] Re: draft Interim RegDataPolicy
by Dennis Chang May 6, 2019

May 6, 2019

Thanks pre-IRT for your comments and feedback. It’s indeed good to see that the IPT captured what the EPDP Team had wanted to accomplish with the Recommendation #28. I agree that we are well aligned. Please note that we’ve responded to the comments with a few suggested changed based on your comments on clarity. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7…> Also, attached is an updated chart for our stages of policy. Beth gets her Rainbow Bridge! But you must cross the Blue Bridge to get to the Rainbow Bridge. Thanks Dennis Chang From: Matt Serlin <matt(a)brandsight.com> Date: Saturday, May 4, 2019 at 2:27 AM To: theo <gtheo(a)xs4all.nl>, "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang(a)icann.org>, "regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org" <regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [RegDataPolicy.PreIRT] draft Interim RegDataPolicy Want to just agree with the comments James put into the Google doc…think it will add some clarity to the text overall and avoid any confusion in the future. Other than those small comments, I did want to commend Dennis and team for pretty much capturing exactly what it was we wanted to accomplish with this recommendation so think we are well positioned once the temp spec expires this month. Have a good weekend all and safe travels to those headed to GDD next week. Regards, Matt From: "RegDataPolicy.PreIRT" <regdatapolicy.preirt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of theo <gtheo(a)xs4all.nl> Date: Friday, May 3, 2019 at 1:03 PM To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>, Dennis Chang <dennis.chang(a)icann.org>, "regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org" <regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [RegDataPolicy.PreIRT] draft Interim RegDataPolicy Agreed, confusion at this point would be bad. Theo Op 03-05-19 om 19:33 schreef James M. Bladel: Hello Dennis and PreIRT Team – I made two comments to the Google doc: First, I think we should be clear on when each Stage begins and ends, and that (especially for Stage 2) the pace of transitioning from Temp Spec to the RDS policy is at the discretion of the Contracted Party. Secondly, I believe we should explicitly state that Stage 3 means that the new RDS policy becomes operative, and the Interim Policy is no longer in force. I know that this is implied in the language, but this should be as clear as possible to avoid any confusion. Thanks- J. ------------- James Bladel GoDaddy From: "RegDataPolicy.PreIRT" <regdatapolicy.preirt-bounces(a)icann.org><mailto:regdatapolicy.preirt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Dennis Chang <dennis.chang(a)icann.org><mailto:dennis.chang@icann.org> Date: Monday, April 29, 2019 at 13:27 To: "regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org"<mailto:regdatapolicy.preirt@icann.org> <regdatapolicy.preirt(a)icann.org><mailto:regdatapolicy.preirt@icann.org> Subject: [RegDataPolicy.PreIRT] draft Interim RegDataPolicy Dear Pre-IRT, IPT has drafted the Interim Registration Data Policy for gTLDs, which is expected to go into effect when the Temporary Specification expires on 20 May 2019 here in the pre-IRT team drive: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> The draft Interim Policy incorporates many of the suggestions from the pre-IRT and, previously, by the EPDP Team in Kobe. The draft Interim Policy is, essentially, a timeline that points to applicable requirements in other documents rather than a description of substantive requirements. This is drafted as a Policy, rather than a notice or advisory, to ensure that the applicable requirements are clearly identified in a formal document that is binding on contracted parties pursuant to their relevant agreements with ICANN org. We did not incorporate the language that was suggested that “Failure to respond within 30 days of this notice shall be considered acceptance of the terms herein will be considered acceptance,” for a variety of reasons, including that contracted parties are required to follow this recommended carryover of the Temp Spec as a matter of Policy-there is not an option to reject the requirements. We believe this is a straightforward implementation of Recommendation 28 and aligned with the recommendation. Please let us know if you note any inconsistency with the recommendation in the EPDP Phase 1 final report. — Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Services & Engagement Program Director Telephone: +1 213 293 7889 Skype: dennisSchang www.icann.org [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.icann.org&d=DwMGaQ&…> _______________________________________________ RegDataPolicy.PreIRT mailing list RegDataPolicy.PreIRT(a)icann.org<mailto:RegDataPolicy.PreIRT@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/regdatapolicy.preirt

1 0

Re: [RegDataPolicy.PreIRT] ICANN65 IRT session
by Dennis Chang April 30, 2019

April 30, 2019

Dear pre-IRT, We’ve tentatively reserved a 90 minute block of time on Wednesday 26 June from 10.30 – 12.00. The time was selected to avoid conflict with the EPDP Team meetings. — 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

Prioritization of draft bridge policy review vs recommendation review
by Sarah Wyld April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Hello, Thank you all for a productive meeting today, I was very glad to see this team start going through the recommendations and confirming that #2 and #3 do not require IRT action. I'm also interested in the planned schedule for recommendation review, as Beth mentioned. We'd be happy to work ahead in the Google Sheet to provide input. That said, I want to emphasize again as discussed on our call today that I'd like to see a draft of the bridging Policy document before it is published. I strongly agree with Amr's point that*this draft Policy review should be the immediate priority for this team*, and I am curious about Dennis's comment that Rec. 28 was skipped on purpose. This bridging Policy is the first real hurdle for the IRT to clear, it needs to be completed before any recommendation analysis is due, and I do think that if a draft can be shared with the team in the next few days, we would have sufficient time to review and provide any feedback before it needs to be finalized in mid-May. Thanks, Sarah -- Sarah Wyld Domains Product Team Tucows +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392

10 20

draft Interim RegDataPolicy
by Dennis Chang April 29, 2019

April 29, 2019

Dear Pre-IRT, IPT has drafted the Interim Registration Data Policy for gTLDs, which is expected to go into effect when the Temporary Specification expires on 20 May 2019 here in the pre-IRT team drive: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oBGjh86oxCt5XHV0uxBXg1P6smomKjBC2Fe5yb7…> The draft Interim Policy incorporates many of the suggestions from the pre-IRT and, previously, by the EPDP Team in Kobe. The draft Interim Policy is, essentially, a timeline that points to applicable requirements in other documents rather than a description of substantive requirements. This is drafted as a Policy, rather than a notice or advisory, to ensure that the applicable requirements are clearly identified in a formal document that is binding on contracted parties pursuant to their relevant agreements with ICANN org. We did not incorporate the language that was suggested that “Failure to respond within 30 days of this notice shall be considered acceptance of the terms herein will be considered acceptance,” for a variety of reasons, including that contracted parties are required to follow this recommended carryover of the Temp Spec as a matter of Policy-there is not an option to reject the requirements. We believe this is a straightforward implementation of Recommendation 28 and aligned with the recommendation. Please let us know if you note any inconsistency with the recommendation in the EPDP Phase 1 final report. — 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

RegDataPolicy Implementation status brief to GNSO Council 20190418
by Dennis Chang April 23, 2019

April 23, 2019

Dear Pre-IRT, This is a note to let you know that there was status briefing to GNSO Council last week our project. I was out on vacation so Russ Weinstein kindly stepped in to brief the council. The message Russ delivered can be summed up as follows: 1. ICANN org has established a cross-functional team referred to as Implementation Project Team or IPT. Includes those staff members that participated in the EPDP plus others that are experts at bringing policy recommendations to implementation. 2. We has been reviewing the recommendations, defining the required deliverables and will be creating the implementation plan. We note the recommended effective date of 29 Feb 2020 and are developing workback plans accordingly, this is a new feature for policy recommendations, and we are still assessing the feasibility of this date. 3. In accordance with the Final Report’s recommendation, the Org has initiated a call for volunteers for “an Informal Implementation Review Team” from the community, being referred to as a “pre-IRT”. Typically, we don’t establish an IRT until after the Board has adopted the policy recommendations 1. The pre-IRT work is intended to focus on clarification of the recommendations to the IPT 2. You may have seen a recent email from my colleague Dennis Chang, asking the GNSO Council if it would like a council liaison in the Pre-IRT, as you typically do in IRTs. 4. The Informal Implementation Review Team or “Pre-IRT” has been assembled with 12 community members with affiliation with RySG, RrSG, IPC, BC, NCSG, and SSAC. All members have participated in the EPDP Phase 1 Policy Development and equipped to support the Implementation Project Team or “IPT” in the initial planning involving recommendations analysis and requirements definition. An observer email group for pre-IRT with read-only access has also been set up with 28 members and growing. The first pre-IRT meeting was held on 10 April 2019 to go over the roles of the pre-IRT, implementation process, and the three stages of policy. The pre-IRT agreed to meet every other week on Wednesdays at 1700 UTC for one hour to review the implementation planning work to support the IPT. The council had no commentary or questions to Russ’ briefing. Tomorrow, we’ll have our 2nd pre-IRT meeting. We’ll welcome a couple of new members joining the implementation team and switch the meeting tool from Adobe Connect to Zoom. You should have received the meeting invitation from Andrea already. Agenda published on the pre-IRT wiki. https://community.icann.org/display/RDPIPRP/2019-04-24+Registration+Data+Po… — 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

Call Materials | gTLD Registration Data Policy Implementation Informal pre-IRT Meeting | Wednesday, 10 April 2019
by Andrea Glandon April 16, 2019

April 16, 2019

Dear all, Please find all of the call materials from the gTLD Registration Data Policy Implementation Informal pre-IRT Meeting held on Wednesday, 10 April 2019, at the wiki link below. https://community.icann.org/x/MiBIBg Thank you! Kind Regards, Andrea Glandon

1 0

pre-IRT liaison for Registration Data Policy Implementation (EPDP Phase 1)
by Dennis Chang April 16, 2019

April 16, 2019

Dear GNSO Council, The EPDP Phase 1 Implementation, now called Registration Data Policy Implementation, requests the GNSO Council to consider assigning a liaison to the pre-IRT as an option. We had our first pre-IRT call last week. As we were discussing the role of the pre-IRT and how it would differ from the IRT, the subject of the GNSO Council Liaison came up. As you know, the IRT requires a liaison, but for the pre-IRT, we did not make this a requirement for expediency. Some of members of the pre-IRT suggested that the GNSO Council should consider assigning a member of the council to join the pre-IRT. As we expect the pre-IRT to transition as a team to the IRT, it would make for an efficient transition. Therefore, we decided to make the liaison role an option for the GNSO Council. If the GNSO Council wishes to assign a liaison, please have that member follow the instructions provided in the Call for Pre-IRT now posted on the pre-IRT wiki. https://community.icann.org/display/RDPIPRP/Registration+Data+Policy+Implem… The implementation team appreciates the support of the GNSO Council. — 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