[Ccpdp-rm] NOTES | ccPDP3- RM WG | 16 December 2020 (05:00 UTC)

[Joke Braeken]

Hello,

Some high-level notes from today’s ccPDP3-RM WG meeting, held on 16 December at 5 UTC.

Best regards,

Joke Braeken



ACTION ITEMS


Action item #1

  *   Stephen to send heads up to the membership, that a cleaned up table is coming soon, and deadline for comments is end of year

  *   Bernie to circulate a cleaned up table.


NOTES


  1.  Welcome and roll call


Welcome by Chair Stephen Deerhake.

Recordings and all materials will be posted on https://community.icann.org/x/N43zC

Thank you for your contributions this year.


2.                  Administrative announcements, if any


None. Quorum requirement is met.

Carve-out process ccPDP3-ret ongoing


3.                  Action items


None

Bernard: implicit action item of updating the spreadsheet. Completed. On the agenda today


4.                  Continue discussion: revised table/spreadsheet


Final review.


⇒ Delegation

Remaining question. If one party is chosen, and the other wants to appeal. Should there be conditions to resolve a last minute application?

We need to determine the limits. Not necessarily now.


  *   No board decision

Talks with Ombuds: would not be a viable path as an alternative mechanism. Conversation with Kim as well: PTI internal escalation mechanism. But, this is not an official mechanism.

1st: PTI internal escalation

2nd: mediation

As required before going into a full appeals procedure.


  *   Board decision

If there is a Board decision, it can go through a reconsideration process. It is in the bylaws. We officially opted out of CET and IRT. What the icann board approves, is that PTI has done its job. What will a reconsideration request bring in this case? Unclear.

Problematic: between the time board approves a delegation and the TLD goes in the root, there is very little time. Will we allow people to take advantage of that?


=> Transfer

No change. Only the participants in the transfer can apply.  Goes to Board for a confirmation.


  *   PTI action not completed in reasonable time

Will only apply in delegation of a new ccTLD or a transfer. Otherwise driven by iana.

Need to establish a minimum threshold. What are the guardrails? Do not create a system that creates more problems. We could use PTI internal escalation, mediation, or if really needed an appeals mechanism. Rarely used, most likely, but we need to build a system for the future.

Maarten: struggling with this. What is the procedure for revocation?  Can only be used in the case of delegation/transfer.


=> Retirement

2 phases. PTI would not seek Board approval to send a retirement notice in this case. Process takes min. 5 years. PTI would seek board approval when it is ready to remove the ccTLD from the root. In that case there would be a reconsideration request possibility.

Kim D: caveat: there is no retirement policy today. PTI will be tasked to create implementation once the policy is in place.


=> Revocation

We need to understand what the process would be.   Issue: we have not seen what the process for a revocation looks like.

Eberhard: a delegation can be moved from incumbent manager to a new one:

  *   With consent
  *   Without consent: if there is substantial misconduct. See final report FOI WG. RFC1591 is not written very clearly.

Maarten: usually there is a trigger, which is a complaint at PTI. We do not take that into account with our appeals mechanism. Complainant might feel a revocation should take place. If PTI says no, the only thing you can do is go back to PTI and repeat your complaint.

Kim D: practical reality, where a revocation request is usually accompanied by a transfer request. See row 6 of the spreadsheet: failure to accept a transfer request.

Eberhard: RFC1591 is where we come from. We are writing this for ccTLD managers, if aggrieved by decisions of PTI and ICANN. Third parties can intervene in revocation requests for no cause? That is not an option, we cannot make this happen.

Irina: Why the term "transfer" is used here? It is a new delegation that follows the revocation, isn't it?

Bernard: tweaks needed to the table, following today’s conversation

Before we go further, we need clarity on the process

Eberhard: maarten’s question is legitimate, no solution for that. Would PTI do something independently? Third party to submit notification? Rare occurrence, probably never happened before

Kim: reactive, rather than pro-active. Scenario where it would be in our mission to proactively seek a revocation? Cannot think of anything. Highly unlikely

Eberhard: if PTI has a notice of substantial misconduct, PTI contacts ccTLD manager.

Bernie: people want to see a formal procedure. And that will be one of the challenges for PTI. how to make sure they can meet these requirements? Regardless of the appeals mechanisms.  In the IRP, the bylaws provide guidance. We should not tell PTI what it’s processes should be. But PTI might need to review some of its procedures, based on the appeals mechanisms.

Stephen: share on the mailing list and ask for objections. Otherwise give a timeline for consent on this. This will be our roadmap going forward.

Bernie: final clean-up of the document needed before we send it to the mailing list.


5.                  AOB


Bart: when will the table be cleaned up?

Bernie: by Friday. We will circulate it to the group by Monday. Deadline: end of the year.

Bart suggests Stephen to send a heads-up to the mailing list: cleaned up version is coming, and the deadline for comments is end of the year.


Action item #1

  *   Stephen to send heads up to the membership, that a cleaned up table is coming soon, and deadline for comments is end of year

  *   Bernie to circulate a cleaned up table.


6.                  Next meetings


6 January 2021 - 13:00 UTC

20 January 2021 – 21:00 UTC


Thank you all. Bye



Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
joke.braeken at icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccpdp-rm/attachments/20201216/a8db3dd1/attachment-0001.html>