[Ctn-crosscom] notes: CWG – Use of Country and Territory Names as top-level domains Monday 19 September 2016 at 21:00 UTC

Tue Sep 20 07:28:21 UTC 2016

Dear All,

Please find below the notes taken during the meeting of the CWG-UCTN on Monday 19 September 2016 at 21:00 UTC

Best regards,

Joke Braeken

ccNSO Policy Advisor

joke.braeken at icann.org

Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO

Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/

http://ccnso.icann.org

CWG – Use of Country and Territory Names as top-level domains

Monday 19 September 2016 at 21:00 UTC

Proposed Agenda

1. welcome and roll call

2. progress report

2.1. overview by staff

2.2. discussion recommendations

3. Discussion Draft Interim Report

3.1. overview by staff

3.2. next steps

4. Face-to-face meeting Hyderabad

5. AOB

6. Closure

Apologies: Sanna Sahlman

Notes and Action Items

1.      welcome and roll call

Apology:  Sanna Sahlman

Roll Call: All in AC room, no one only on the phone line.

Welcome by the chair of the meeting (Carlos Raul Guttierez)

Discussion on interim report shared

2.      progress report

2.1. overview by staff

Report itself non-contentious

Section 1 Scope of WG, updated following comments

Secondly groups discussion outlined

Input from other groups (survey to chartering organisations and other groups)

Helsinki cross-community sessions

No comments on body of progress report as shared

2.2. discussion recommendations

Recommendations as included in report

First recommendation: no comments

Second recommendation:

Annebeth Lange

Why Timo's suggestion is not taken into account      What is suggested to move into GNSO PDP. This might not resolve the fundamental issue of different issues of two -conflicting policy processes.

Substantive and process aspects: keep them separated

Rosalia Morales

Not only GNSO process, but a multi-stakeholder solution

Hope Alexander will speak up, since she agrees with what was written by him in the chat window.

Carlos Guttierez

clear development to discuss

Work track at different issues

Placeholder for the first round

Alexander Schubert:

Rosalia said it well: PDP and scope CTN are independent, there is overlap, but

PDP next round: do not address C&T and the ISO standard, will be addressed in working group

Group might have input, PDP should move forward.

This group will not provide any input for next round

Timo

The question about country codes and names can only be solved in well balanced cross community working groups.

I do not believe gNSO PDP is what suits here. So let’s list the flaws that did not allow this CWG to achieve its goals and propose to form a new and better one.

Heather

Support for Carlos his view

Group is not able to produce a harmonised framework, that is what set the direction.

PDP hold-off work.

Reserved working group. 2007 and 2008 work

GNSO does not see what has changed since, they will have discussion again.

Progress report

Not going forward without work of this group.

Annebeth

Agree with Heather, do what could be do to try feasibility. Does not solve the issue around the different decisions.

Heather

Draft wording: Keep recommendation as generic as possible.

Helpful to focus on recommendation 1 and 3?

Put recommendation 2 below the line and summarize

Concern are raised

Individual Version of recommendation

Recommendation 1 and 3 are agreed

3.      Discussion Draft Interim Report

3.1.  overview by staff

merged the strawman and the straw woman.   goes back to the background use country & territory names in the DNS. most substantive thing done until now.

Executive summary will be updated once the group agrees on progress report recommendations.  gives instructions on how to read the document as well.

chapter 1 : background information on formative years. RFC1591 was included. Everything since then described as well.

Functioning of maintenance agency. ISO-3166  and what is included? lots of myth around this, different interpretations and what people refer to.  You can see this in the work of ccNSO and GNSO dealing with country and terioty names. E.g. Fast track process. Lot of education needed to make sure it is understood what iso3166 is all about.

2001-2003: first new gTLD round. why were country and territory names excluded already at that time?

Annex B: recorded work of reserved names WG.

Has been expanded a lot.  Included here now: the GAC principles regarding use of country & territory names.  Dates back to 2007.

Recording history. use of country and territory names in the  AGB, and how this evolved over time.  It alluded to meaningful representations of country and territory names.  Comments from community, discussions in ICANN Board .... The way country and territory names were represented in AGB is recorded here : it changed over time.

As discussed with co-chairs: surveys are a nice way of expanding work of the WG. Go back to the community, to inform the discussions. Not as heavy-handed as a public comment, but at the same time seek as much input as possible.

Some elements to be still completed. Staff to finalise it as much as possible, WG members to comment on this. Easiest way to progress this. The interim report will then be ready before Hyderabad. This report is intended to seek comments from the community, via public comment round. Inputs will then be taken into account, and that is called the Draft Final Report, which will be sent to the chartering organisations.  Once they take a decision, the final report is adopted.  We should finalize this after ICANN57.

Carlos: look at what we achieved, and forget who can take advantage of this.

Heather: we need to recognise that this info is not new, but newly combined. the strawman paper set up format for this paper.  And the straw woman on 3 letter codes was simply added into this.   This is not a rush job, 2,5 years of work in this document.  Sincere thanks to staff.

Co-chairs saw this document a few days before you did. Just to make sure the integrity of the documents was maintained.  The format has worked.

Carlos hopes it is clear what the difference is between interim report and the progress report.

3.2.  next steps

comments? please send them to the list or to staff directly, so we can include them. Bart will be working on an update of this. Will be shared well ahead of time of the next call.

Direction of travel and what the WG will be underpinned.

1 or 2 next calls prior to ICANN57

1: finalise progress report

2. take a deeper step on the interim report and come up with real progress

4.      Face-to-face meeting Hyderabad

given expectations in community. co-chairs and staff discusses need of a face-to-face meeting in Hyderabad.

Based on what we have seen, tentatively looking at F2F meeting late afternoon on Saturday 5 November.  Final slot on that Saturday.

5.      AOB

6.      Closure

Thank you. next meeting in 2 weeks’ time.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ctn-crosscom/attachments/20160920/60ba68a1/attachment-0001.html>