[ccPDP4-IDNWG] NOTES | ccPDP4-IDN | 11 April 2023

Tue Apr 11 14:27:11 UTC 2023

NOTES | ccPDP4-IDN | 11 April 2023

  1.  Welcome

Welcome by Kenny

Sarmad sent his apology: will be 30 min late

2.            Administrative matters

a.            Action items

No open action items

b.    Update EPDP

Bart circulated section 5 GNSO IDN EPDP

Differences: scope, questions, and contect for EPDP, SubPro, fast track process, ccPDP. No legitimations, but reasons why there are sometimes different recommendations. Basic design criteria are mostly the same

Hadia: comparison necessary because of the board resolution for the recommendations to be consistent. Do not need to be identical. Differences are there, due to the nature and scope of ccNSO and GNSO.

3.            First reading updated policy document

a.            Additional sections and annexes

b.    Overview policy (page 3-5)

c.    Update footnote (page 14)

d.    Section 4.1.2.

Page 29

Irina: language consistency? ASCII

Bart: yes, should be consistent. To avoid ambiguity. Should be addressed, once we went through the full text.

Patricio: Perhaps you should refer to https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc20

Irina: confused about the last paragraph on page 31. Examples cyrillic script

Bart: the last one, with PY in cyrillic. If you look at the LGR for Latin and Cyrillic, they are considered variants. By the script community. Blocked. At the time, in 2014 there was no such thing. But this was the textbook case of confusing similarity. You could see a shift in time of what is considered CS, to variants. In order to provide an example, thanks to Pitinan, we came up with this example.

Bart: to include footnote in 1st example, that they are not considered blocked variants, and therefor are not excluded.

Irina: or remove the last paragraph

Bart: not mutually exclusive. To illustrate the overlap

Peter: not a fair assessment that CS has an impact on security and stability of the DNS

Bart: note that there are some WG members that have a fundamental issue?

One of those issues we cannot resolve

Peter: will think about it. Minority statements

See face to face meeting. Anomaly. No CS test for the 3166-1 codes. Does not want to introduce it. But might be worth mentioning. Not convinced it helps.

Bart: to be raised. It is an underlying discussion point from day 1.

Kenny: clarify whether we need additional statement. How to reach out that kind of validation?

Anna: different letters.

Peter: thanks, Bart; I do not expect this to change, but I’ll consider suggesting some text especially in the light of the “anomaly” or “asymetry” w.r.t. 2 letter alpha codes; it might make sense to just document that the wg discussed it. detailed wording TBD

on 4.2.1, this was

Page 34

Irina: for ease of reference, add where definitions can be found. Allocatable, delegatable.

Bart: defined elsewhere in the document

Jiankang: what is meant by scalability?

Bart: see intro, notes and observations.

Michael: is there an "of" missing in "comparison side ist report"?

Peter: the “nor” at the end of the first bullet item is confusing to me

e.    Section 5

Section 5.3.1.

Sarmad: It also impacts the time to respond to an application.

Bart: various implications. To be addressed in 2 weeks time

Bart: review is now validation.

Sarmad: to help those who apply, point them to tool. So there are no surprises. Point the tool in the report?

Bart: suggestion to include it in the implementation plan

Determination by the technical panel is what counts

Part of the broader assistance by icann org to the applicants

Kenny: technical tool to validate based on RZ-LGR. Support staff to run the tool to do the technical validation, instead of a panel?

Bart: task of the stability panel. Do not want to put icann in that position

4.            Next meetings

Bart: asks all to read sections 5.4 and 5.5 in advance of the meeting

Conclude stress testing by 16 May.

5.            AOB

6.            Closure

Joke Braeken
joke.braeken at icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken at icann.org>

= = =

ICANN77 links to bookmark now

  *   ccNSO Schedule
https://community.icann.org/x/IQM5Dg<https://community.icann.org/x/8IMFDQ>

  *   ccNSO Session Highlights
https://community.icann.org/x/RgI5Dg<https://community.icann.org/x/kYYFDQ>

  *   Tech Day
https://community.icann.org/x/MAM5Dg<https://community.icann.org/x/WIQ-DQ>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccpdp4-idnwg/attachments/20230411/31ca1ee0/attachment-0001.html>