<div dir="ltr">Dear Janis, <div><br></div><div>We would like to echo the sentiments of Volker, and our registrar colleagues. We understand that we are being pressed upon by numerous outside forces to move matters along; however, not only are such matters best served by time to consider the question or statement posed, more practically speaking, and as has been noted previously, we are merely representatives of much larger groups and cannot provide meaningful approval to many substantive matters in the span of seconds. In matters of substance, we may find ourselves unable to provide comment, one way or the other, without time to canvass our broader groups, for discussions and instructions. This may appear as silence, but we assure that it is neither indicative of assent nor dissent, merely an indicator that we are not in a position to yet comment without further reflection.</div><div><br></div><div>We understand the need to move matters along, and indeed, in non contentious matters, I can accept that silence will be acceptable, but, we do expect that in matters of a more substantive nature, including and for example, where comments to a document are to serve as the basis for draft policy recommendations, we would expect that such matters are to be decided on a more affirmative basis and we cannot support silence as being a valid indicator of approval in such instances. </div><div><br></div><div>Thank you for your continuing patience,</div><div><br></div><div>Alan </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><table style="padding:0px;margin:10px 0;border:none"><tbody><tr><td style="vertical-align:middle;padding:0px 7px 0px 0px"><a href="http://donuts.domains" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img alt="Donuts Inc." height="75" src="https://storage.googleapis.com/signaturesatori/customer-C02zzlf7k/images/-54f9d8ac97e7f575bf497d10ac1f1aafafddf8afceab5f269d49034f01b3217b.png" width="75"></a></td><td style="vertical-align:middle;padding:0px 7px 0px 0px;text-align:left">
                        <div style="font-family:'tahoma',sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:17px;font-weight:bold;color:black"><span style="font-size:12px"><span style="font-family:'arial','helvetica',sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">Alan Woods</span></span></span></div>

                        <div><span style="font-size:12px"><span style="font-family:'arial','helvetica',sans-serif"><span style="color:#333333">Senior Compliance & Policy Manager, Donuts Inc.</span></span></span>

                        <hr><span style="font-size:11px"><span style="font-family:'arial','helvetica',sans-serif"><span style="color:#333333">The Victorians, </span></span></span></div><div><font color="#333333" face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:11px">15-18 Earlsfort Terrace<br style="background-color:rgb(34,34,34)">
                        Dublin 2, County Dublin</span></font><br style="color:rgb(214,214,214);font-family:'open sans';font-size:12px;background-color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font color="#333333" face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:11px">
                        Ireland</span></font><br>
                        <span style="font-size:11px"><span style="font-family:'arial','helvetica',sans-serif"></span></span><br>
                        <span style="line-height:36px"><a href="https://www.facebook.com/donutstlds" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://storage.googleapis.com/signaturesatori/icons/facebook.png"></a>  <a href="https://twitter.com/DonutsInc" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://storage.googleapis.com/signaturesatori/icons/twitter.png"></a>  </span><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/donuts-inc" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:14px"><img src="http://storage.googleapis.com/signaturesatori/icons/linkedin.png"></span></a></div>
                        </td></tr></tbody></table><br>
</div><div><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">Please NOTE: This electronic message, including any attachments, may include privileged, confidential and/or inside information owned by Donuts Inc. . </span><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Cambria,serif">Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Thank you.</span><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 5:38 PM Volker Greimann <<a href="mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net">vgreimann@key-systems.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>Just to add to my previous mail, we will be adding in some
      comments into the document today, but this is not to say there
      will not be further comments down the road. Also note that not
      commenting does not mean agreement.</p>
    <p>We also did not register the action on the call, which is
      probably why we did not object then.<br>
    </p>
    <p>Best,</p>
    <p>Volker<br>
    </p>
    <div class="gmail-m_-599757340101471059moz-cite-prefix">Am 26.07.2019 um 18:28 schrieb jk:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      
      
      
      <div class="gmail-m_-599757340101471059WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Volker,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Your concern is
            noted. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">We will discuss
            submitted early inputs in one of the next plenary meetings.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I would like to use
            this opportunity to encourage team members raise their voice
            during the meetings if you are not sure about the proposal
            of the Chair. Without seeing body language, it is hard to
            say if proposal is acceptable. I take silence as approval.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Best regards<u></u><u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)">JK<u></u><u></u></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><a name="m_-599757340101471059__MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></a></p>
        <div>
          <div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
            <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;color:windowtext">
                Gnso-epdp-team [<a class="gmail-m_-599757340101471059moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org</a>]
                <b>On Behalf Of </b>Volker Greimann<br>
                <b>Sent:</b> Friday, July 26, 2019 6:20 PM<br>
                <b>To:</b> <a class="gmail-m_-599757340101471059moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-epdp-team@icann.org</a><br>
                <b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] Notes and action
                items from EPDP Meeting #12 - 25 July 2019<u></u><u></u></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
        <p>Hi Ariel,<u></u><u></u></p>
        <p>we are concerned with your assumption under Action Item 1. <u></u><u></u></p>
        <p>We were working under the understanding that this would be
          subject to another plenary session and we did not have
          sufficient time to deliberate the eqarly input document with
          the entire group.  Also, just because no clarifying questions
          have been raised does not mean that the contents of the
          document are a consensus position agreed by all. No questions
          means just that, no questions. But not necessarily agreement.
          <u></u><u></u></p>
        <p>We may very well end up agreeing with the contents of the
          document, but we are not there yet. <u></u><u></u></p>
        <p>We therefore respectfully request that this not be taken as
          basis for drefting the initial report quite just yet.<u></u><u></u></p>
        <p>Best regards,<u></u><u></u></p>
        <p>Volker Greimann<u></u><u></u></p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal">Am 26.07.2019 um 17:10 schrieb Ariel
            Liang:<u></u><u></u></p>
        </div>
        <blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Dear EPDP
              Team:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Below,
              please find the notes and action items from yesterday’s
              EPDP Team Meeting.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">As a
              reminder, the next EPDP Team Meeting will be Thursday, 1
              August at 14:00 UTC.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><br>
              Best regards,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt">Marika,
              Caitlin, Berry (and Ariel – assisted with notetaking)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt">EPDP
                Phase 2 - Meeting #12</span></b><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt">Thursday,
                25 July 2019</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt"> at
              14:00 UTC</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><b><u><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">Action Items: </span></u></b><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If
                no further clarifying questions are submitted in
                response to the early input document by the deadline (25
                July 2019), staff to consider the comments in the
                development of the draft policy recommendations and
                draft Initial Report. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Staff
                to set up survey for the EPDP Team to rank and identify
                the most representative case in each group of the use
                case categorization. EPDP Team to complete the survey by
                COB <b>Monday, 29 July</b>. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Staff
                to compile the input submitted on
                automation/accreditation to assist the EPDP Team in its
                substantive discussions during next week’s call and
                future calls. Leadership team to develop initial
                thoughts paper on accreditation to kick start
                discussions.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chris
                Lewis-Evans to incorporate input received from the EPDP
                Team and continue fine tuning the use case (GAC
                LEA1-13719-1), which is expected to be attached in the
                annex to the Initial Report. Updated version to be
                posted on the Wiki and the leadership to make a further
                recommendation for how to finalize the use case. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">In
                meeting on Thursday, 1 August, the EPDP Team to devote
                part of the meeting to discuss initial reaction from
                members on the SSAC Crime-Abuse Investigation Use Case.
                EPDP Team to provide input by writing no later than <b>14:00
                  UTC on Monday, 29 July</b>. More detailed discussion
                about this use case will take place in the meeting on 8
                August. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ol>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></b><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt">Notes </span></b><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="font-variant-caps:normal;text-align:start;word-spacing:0px"><i><span style="font-size:11pt">These high-level notes are
                designed to help the EPDP Team navigate through the
                content of the call and are not meant as a substitute
                for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3,
                transcript, and chat are provided separately and are
                posted on the wiki at:<span class="gmail-m_-599757340101471059apple-converted-space"> <a href="https://community.icann.org/x/l6ajBg" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/x/l6ajBg</a>
                </span></span></i><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5
              minutes)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Attendance
                will be taken from Zoom<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Remember
                to mute your microphones upon entry to Zoom, which is
                typically the first icon on the left on the bottom
                toolbar.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Please
                state your name before speaking for transcription
                purposes.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Please
                remember to review your SOIs on a regular basis and
                update as needed. Updates are required to be shared with
                the EPDP Team<u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">2. Confirmation of agenda (Chair)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">No
                objections <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">3. Welcome and housekeeping issues
              (Chair) (10 minutes)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">a) Update from Legal Committee</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Started
                out by reviewing prior session’s action items and
                questions <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Reviewed
                the remaining questions, narrowed down the scope, and
                those questions will be evaluated based on the needs of
                Phase 2. Near term goal is to understand all the legal
                requirements and try to develop sizing for requesting
                additional resources from the Board. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Next
                LC meeting is 6 August. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">b) Early input review status
              (deadline 25 July)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">A
                number of groups responded to the EPDP Team’s request
                for early input. This input was subsequently organized
                by staff in the form of an early input review tool. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Following
                EPDP Team discussion, input regarding SSAD has been
                incorporated into SSAD worksheet for EPDP Team review.
                In addition, the EPDP Team agreed to review the input
                received and document any clarifying questions in the
                google doc that was created.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Deadline
                for clarifying questions on the early input was Thursday
                25 July. No comments/questions were received at the time
                of the call. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">ACTION
                ITEM: If no further clarifying questions are submitted
                in response to the early input document by the deadline
                (25 July 2019), staff to consider the comments in the
                development of the draft policy recommendations and
                draft Initial Report. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">4. Use Cases Categorization (10
              minutes)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">a) Review proposed categorization
              put forward by small team</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">A
                small group of volunteers agreed to work with staff.
                Based on the original staff categorization and
                incorporating input from NCSG, BC and IPC,
                staff/volunteers went through a number of iterations to
                review the use cases. Important to note that no use case
                has been eliminated as a result of this exercise.
                Objective is to identify the most representative case
                for each category as a starting point for the
                deliberations. Following review of the most
                representative use case in each category, the EPDP Team
                can then decide whether additional cases need to be
                reviewed. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">5
                groups, as noted on the document. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Appreciation
                to Milton, Margie, Chris, and Brian for their
                contributions to this exercise. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chair’s
                proposal: Identify in each group, the most
                representative use case that the EPDP Team should look
                at first, starting from Group 1. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">We
                have already made decisions where to start. First group
                1. After that, group 2, move to group 4 and then group 3
                or 5. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Staff
                to put in survey format and ask EPDP Team members to
                respond to the survey by COB Monday, 29 July. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Review
                the representative use case first, and see whether any
                issue associated other use cases that warrant being
                reviewed. Not sure whether there is time to do an in
                depth review of each of them. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">For
                the rest of the cases, maybe only look at the
                differences instead of an in depth review. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Would
                it be useful to map the stages (e.g., a series of
                questions) that a compliant organization must go through
                as it determines whether it is a legitimate request for
                information. Who? What scope? Under what authority? Etc.
                Left column of the use cases are geared toward answering
                those questions and providing a framework for
                discussions. In reality we are talking about rather
                simple system. Supply is the Registry/Registrar, and
                they have the building blocks. Going through the use
                cases is to understand each of the building blocks. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">b) Confirm proposed categorization</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">No
                objection <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">c) Confirm new ranking survey &
              deadline to determine most representative use case in each
              category</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Staff
                to set up survey for the EPDP Team to rank and identify
                the most representative case in each group of the use
                case categorization. EPDP Team to complete the survey by
                COB Monday, 29 July. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt;background:rgb(252,252,252)"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">5. Use case – first reading: </span><a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/111386876/SSAC%20Crime-Abuse%20Investigation%20Use%20Case%20-%2011%20July%202019.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1562865007000&api=v2" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(0,82,204)">Investigation
                of criminal activity where domain names are used. 
                Typical specific example: phishing attack</span></a><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)"> (60 minutes)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chair’s
                proposal: EPDP Team to identify the difficulty in the
                first reading of the case (SSAC Crime-Abuse
                Investigation Use Case), present them in writing and
                share on the mailing list. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Defer
                the discussion of the use case till 8 Aug due to Greg’s
                absence during next week’s meeting? Provide initial
                overview during today’s meeting with ability for EPDP
                Team to share initial observations during today’s and
                next week’s meeting, followed by in depth review during
                8 August EPDP Team meeting.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Review
                a set of tasks / purposes that occur in a number of
                cyber crime cases. Some are done by investigators in
                private realm. Some steps are done by law enforcement
                due to the same goal. Purpose here is to explain how
                things work practically and see what issues would
                surface. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Start
                with practical instances (i.e., recital 49) about the
                processing of data. Then compromised/malicious
                registrations. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                A, law enforcement may also rely on these parties and
                techniques. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                B, Tasks 1-2: reasons why the data are requested and
                used. Maliciously registered means somebody uses the
                domain name to commit a crime. If a domain name is
                maliciously registered, suspending the domain name is an
                option. If a domain name is compromised, you don’t want
                to suspend the domain. Reputational providers do not
                generally block domains. Some just list domain names and
                say don’t have anything to do with them. You need to
                determine what additional domains may be related. The
                issue is dealing with ongoing harm. You can determine
                what other domain names are on the same IP address,
                which may not be operated by the same bad actor. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                B, Task 3: If the contact data is bogus, it is a sign of
                bad faith. Sometimes criminals do a poor job of faking
                the data. Accessing accuracy is important. Comment from
                EPDP Team members: Bogus data is not automatically a
                sign of bad faith. And your accuracy check has to be
                done by compliance. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                B, Task 4: Need to document the case and preserve the
                reason why you made the decision of suspending the
                domain name and substantiate why the domain name is
                problematic.  Be responsible and give decision makers
                the information they need. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                B, Task 5: law enforcement and private parties do this.
                Private parties may want to avoid associated assets. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                B, Task 6: many aspects involve automation. Some block
                lists use algorism. The system that protects people
                involve a high degree of automation. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">So
                how does 49 relate to domain names?  When domains are as
                the mechanism for the cybercrime attack, the “ability of
                a network to resist…” will largely be based on the
                ability to continue to allow traffic from said domain,
                or (as Greg is explaining) to block / reject any further
                traffic from or access to said domain.</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">How
                can you describe things generally and then go to nitty
                gritty issues like automation. you need to be very
                specific in other fields as well. Don’t see a Use Case
                here. Need clear explanation on how all those recitals
                and all the clauses apply to these issues. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">It
                is an issue with the law but not what ICANN/EPDP Team
                can fix. We still have to apply the law as best as
                possible, but EPDP Team cannot make any effort to change
                the law. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The
                EPDP Team needs to work on how to deal with the balance
                of the law. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The
                internet will die far faster if people are advocating
                breaking it because people did not involve themselves in
                the crafting of such law. For example the e-privacy
                regulations were stalled because an affected party
                advocated on how the law would have an unintended
                consequence. Again ICANN cannot fix the way it is, we
                can only figure out a way of making the "new" post GDPR
                world better .... including shaping future legislative
                endeavors - not by ICANN policy supporting a bending of
                that law.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">They
                should be reported to law enforcement. Not like Brian
                Krebs just putting out info of the attackers wife on a
                public blog. <a href="https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/07/who-is-the-govrat-author-and-mirai-botmaster-bestbuy/" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(17,85,204)">https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/07/who-is-the-govrat-author-and-mirai-botmaster-bestbuy/</span></a></span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">
                security researchers need to do their research
                diligently without harming those who are not involved.</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Suggest
                that people do their research on how investigations by
                private actors are managed under DP law in the meantime,
                and talk about the case the following week. While
                cybercrime is a good example of rampant regulatory
                avoidance, it is not the only one.  However, it does not
                work well under data protection law (competition law
                also being relevant but not in our remit).</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The
                need is to stop the harmful activity, it is not to
                identify the guilty party. You don’t need redacted data
                to substantiate the domain. There will be a lot of
                information that won’t be redacted. Support efforts by
                private actors to sweep through the information to stop
                attacks, but we don’t need to open up the data. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The
                practical issue is that the vast majority of the cases
                do not involve law enforcement or are being reported.
                Law enforcement does not have the resources. A lot is
                done by relying on contract. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Phone
                number is relevant when its relevant. This use case
                doesn't cover those instances where passive DNS (for
                example) was sufficient. They do exist, but not relevant
                to this use case</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">ACTION
                ITEM: In the meeting on Thursday, 1 August, the EPDP
                Team to devote part of the meeting to discuss initial
                reaction from members on the SSAC Crime-Abuse
                Investigation Use Case. EPDP Team to provide input by
                writing no later than 14:00 UTC on Monday, 29 July. More
                detailed discussion about this use case will take place
                in the meeting on 8 August.  <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background:rgb(252,252,252)"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">6. Use case – final reading: </span><a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/111386876/Use%20Case%20-%20GAC%20LEA1-13719.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1563377116000&api=v2" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(0,82,204)">Investigation
                of criminal activity against a victim in the
                jurisdiction of the investigating EU LEA requesting data
                from a non-local data controller</span></a><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)"> (30 minutes)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:16pt;vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chair’s
                Proposal: deal with this item before the first reading
                of item #5<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Starting
                from g) Safeguards (requirements) applicable to the
                Entity Disclosing the Nonpublic Registration Data <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">See
                responses from Chris Lewis-Evans to comments submitted
                by RrSG on this use case. Chris agrees with Registrar
                group’s suggestion re Section C, as it gives an
                increasing level of accuracy. Agree with the suggested
                change in Section D by the registry group. Section F,
                agree with the suggested change.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chris
                Lewis-Evans will also consider additional registrars’
                comments/questions. Registrar reps indicated that they
                will need a couple of days to review the responses Chris
                provided and may respond further on the list once they
                have had a chance to do that. Don’t take silence as
                complete agreement.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Re
                6(1)F, the legal authority needs to be identified. EPDP
                Team is not expert to verify that. Ensure that LEA
                establishes the legal authority itself. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                H:  <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Clarify
                  the comments from registrars, add safeguards under
                  automated system which may be different. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Need
                  to have a discussion about how the automated system
                  works. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Probably
                  useful to drop a footnote in the template to provide
                  the explanation Chris just gave so it’s clear on its
                  face and avoids later confusion and uncertainty. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                I, no further comments/requests. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                J:  <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">First
                  time discussing accreditation. It is a chicken-egg
                  situation, as it depends on the standardized system.
                  Jurisdiction and legal basis would be necessary for an
                  accreditation body to look at. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">There
                  are differences between accreditation and validation.
                  Some suggested to first discuss validation first, as
                  it has different forms which can or cannot be
                  automated. Accreditation might then be fully
                  automated. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">“Validation”
                  probably means “authentication” that is covered in
                  Section K. We need to deal with accreditation first
                  before authentication. There may be one exceptional
                  case that one can be authenticated before
                  accreditation, but it does not justify changing the
                  default order.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">This
                  depends on the implementation of the standard system.
                  Even we don’t end up with having a centralized system,
                  we can still do it. A decentralized system can still
                  have value. The same standards can be centralized and
                  also applied in decentralized way.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The
                  “code of conduct” may not be part of the
                  accreditation. Disclosure / nondisclosure related
                  issues belong more in the safeguard section. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">EPDP
                  Team can create a special accreditation entity that
                  consists of one group or many groups. There are a
                  number of options. But first need to see whether there
                  is a broad agreement that accreditation as a principle
                  should be introduced in the standard. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">EPDP
                  Team needs a set of definitions because people are
                  using the terms in different ways, and for
                  accreditation, there are two aspects. Accredditing of
                  a group to be eligible to use a system (or make a
                  manual request) and accrediting an individual
                  requester to be part of that group.</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">
                  This is what we currently have in the chair’s working
                  definitions document: “Accreditation – refers to the
                  process or action of recognizing a person as having a
                  particular identity, possibly with an associated
                  affiliation or status.”<u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">See
                  Chair’s working definitions here: <a href="https://community.icann.org/x/-5WjBg%5C" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(17,85,204)">https://community.icann.org/x/-5WjBg</span></a>.
                  Strongly suggest to flesh out the details when people
                  are using different meanings for the same terms. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">There
                  is no accreditation body that the EPDP Team needs to
                  define or create. The EPDP Team does not need to
                  determine what the accreditation elements/criteria
                  are. Specifically about the LEA, it is up to the law
                  enforcement and the coalition of law enforcement
                  bodies to do it. Part of this comment will represent
                  part of the policy statement. As a policy matter,
                  there should be accreditation, the accreditation
                  should ensure certain aspects/points, etc. We can
                  develop general policies on accreditation and it is in
                  our work plan. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">There
                  would be some “approved” list of accredited based on
                  some the set of criteria.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Another
                  consideration, albeit not an immediate problem, is
                  about authoritarian government, human rights
                  protection, cloud act, etc. We can accredit a law
                  enforcement agency as a legitimate one, but if there
                  is a national law that allows the agency to
                  investigate or harass people that criticize the
                  government, how do we want to handle that? Do we want
                  to have additional human rights protection attached to
                  the accreditation criteria? <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">A
                  lot of those human rights concerns can be addressed by
                  the terms of use, ensuring there is strong enforcement
                  of the terms of use. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">General
                  policies to keep authoritarian countries away from
                  disclosure and accreditation? Don’t think this group
                  can do that. Also some of these countries are
                  allegedly undertaking cyber attacks. Whatever this LEA
                  accreditation body would be, civil society would
                  definitely have to be involved in the definitions, but
                  this is outside of our remit. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Somebody
                  accredited does not mean he/she has a valid request.
                  You have to review each request to ensure it is valid.
                  There is a responsibility for the entity that releases
                  the data to validate the request.  We all agree at
                  this point that accreditation doesn't assume
                  guaranteed access.  A valid form of accreditation is
                  merely a factor in the 6(1)f balance - or in the case
                  of jurisdiction - a confirmation that there is a legal
                  obligation on that controller in that jurisdiction.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Does
                  every single contracted party need to act as its
                  accreditation body? This may not be implementable. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The
                  correct safeguards for both the accreditation and the
                  authentication levels need to be developed. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If
                  we are talking about a fully automated accreditation
                  process, law enforcement organizations can be done
                  easily, but not so easy to accredit other kinds of
                  organizations. Need some human intervention. Also need
                  a decision making process, which can be automated
                  possibly. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Staff
                  have grouped the input on accreditation together,
                  aligning with the relevant charter questions (but no
                  definition):  <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="square">
                <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span>b) What are the unanswered policy
                    questions that will guide implementation? </span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span><u></u><u></u></span></li>
                <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span>b1) How will credentials be
                    granted and managed? </span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span><u></u><u></u></span></li>
                <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span>b2) Who is responsible for
                    providing credentials? </span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span><u></u><u></u></span></li>
                <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span>b3) How will these credentials be
                    integrated into registrars’/registries’ technical
                    systems?</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span><u></u><u></u></span></li>
              </ul>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chair’s
                  proposal: When accreditation is discussed next time,
                  Staff to pull out their compilation of everything that
                  has been submitted on accreditation and identification
                  related processes to help inform EPDP Team’s further
                  deliberation on this fundamental building block. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                L:  <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Come
                  back to “credentialing” in a more structured way when
                  reviewing the next case. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">We
                  add a footnote to note it.</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><u></u><u></u></span></li>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                M:   <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">it
                  is up to the LEA whether there is any urgency. In
                  certain cases, a specific quick turn around may be
                  necessary, but 2 days across the board may be too
                  restrictive. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">There
                  is concept of acknowledging the requests, whether the
                  data will be delivered. Some requests have higher
                  priority and some requests demand different levels of
                  confidentiality. Need to accommodate these concepts. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If
                  you have a lot of requests, you have to staff up too.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Maybe
                  Section M and Section O should be different. The level
                  of requests is just for the LEA’s consideration, and
                  that level is generally lower than other kinds of
                  requests. Maybe 4 business days would be more than
                  reasonable? Some exceptions can be made and listened
                  to. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">We
                  cannot apply go daddy standards to all Registrars. It
                  is a long tail data set, and many registrars may have
                  one request/day, aligning with their size of business.
                  There is a natural balancing. Also need to factor in
                  that not all registrars will receive the same volume
                  of requests - this may be aligned with the # of domain
                  names under management. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                N: <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Is
                  it possible to have an automated decision? How
                  determinations are made when there is disagreement? We
                  can automate processes, but not all processes can be
                  automated. Need to evaluate all the information
                  received before moving forward. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If
                  an LEA makes a request for 10,000 records all based on
                  the same legal basis and investigation, could the
                  request be manually reviewed but once approved the
                  delivery of the data automatic? <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">There
                  may be instances that some data fields can be released
                  safely for bona fide parties. Automated does not mean
                  all the way to finish, it can be 80% of the process.
                  This is important to know by the practitioner. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">All
                  the details regarding use cases are relevant to what
                  can be automated or not. Focus on the use cases first
                  and then circle back to this question. Automation is
                  one of the charter questions and building blocks. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                N:  <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
              <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Suggest
                  removing the word “possible” and leaving “desirable”.
                  A “possible" question should remain in the template,
                  though we may want to separate it from "desirable"</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">
                  Data retention would be subject to legal requirements
                  in the jurisdiction of the LEA would it not? Might be
                  better to ask whether automation is consistent with
                  legal requirements/legal basis</span><span lang="ZH-CN">
</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            </ul>
          </ul>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Section
                P: not so clear, suggest the same language used in the
                previous section for retention. There is no blanket
                answer. <u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">ACTION
                ITEM: Staff to compile the input submitted on
                automation/accreditation to assist the EPDP Team in its
                substantive discussions during next week’s call and
                future calls. Leadership team to develop initial
                thoughts paper on accreditation to kick start
                discussions.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">ACTION
                ITEM: Chris Lewis-Evans to incorporate input received
                from the EPDP Team and continue fine tuning the use case
                (GAC LEA1-13719-1), which is expected to be attached in
                the annex to the Initial Report. Updated version to be
                posted on the Wiki and the leadership to make a further
                recommendation for how to finalize the use case.<u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt;background:rgb(252,252,252)"> <u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background:rgb(252,252,252)"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">7. Any other business (5 minutes)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">a) Priority 2 small team meetings
              update</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">(1) Accuracy and WHOIS ARS (see </span><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1pS9Pibanj-2DHp6LztZpeERtxdoLsnp4y-5F-2Ddo0vU5VJuw_edit&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=5YD7bD56hEe4pQH_dqUWfn942ryJsY558QEJfweSvL4&s=F6hmCB4N05tXAmHo8nuMH6_4YK5hSWXaa5p8T0SNwXw&e=" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(0,82,204)">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pS9Pibanj-Hp6LztZpeERtxdoLsnp4y_-do0vU5VJuw/edit[docs.google.com]</span></a><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">(2) Input received on other priority
              2 items from RrSG (see</span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2019-June/002174.html" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(0,82,204)">https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2019-June/002174.html</span></a><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">(3) Leadership to recommend next
              steps via mailing list</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">b) Council request for input on org
              letter requesting clarification on Data Accuracy and
              Phase-2 (see </span><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_marby-2Dto-2Ddrazek-2D21jun19-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=QiF-05YzARosRvTYd84AB_UYInlydmFcjNmBM5XgySw&m=5YD7bD56hEe4pQH_dqUWfn942ryJsY558QEJfweSvL4&s=YeVJr1ZFqKyDvbIDvXURXaal3PB4fqg3oghAsQwtfSA&e=" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(0,82,204)">https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/marby-to-drazek-21jun19-en.pdf[gnso.icann.org]</span></a><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">). EPDP Team to provide input on the
              mailing list. Confirm deadline for input.   </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
            <li class="MsoNormal" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);margin-top:8pt;background:rgb(252,252,252);vertical-align:baseline"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The
                EPDP Team did not address these agenda items <u></u><u></u></span></li>
          </ul>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt;background:rgb(252,252,252)"> <u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background:rgb(252,252,252)"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">8. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team
              meeting on Thursday 1 August 2019 at 14.00 UTC (5 minutes)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">a) Confirm action items</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">b) Confirm questions for ICANN Org,
              if any</span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span><br>
              <br>
              <u></u><u></u></span></p>
          <pre>_______________________________________________<u></u><u></u></pre>
          <pre>Gnso-epdp-team mailing list<u></u><u></u></pre>
          <pre><a href="mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
          <pre><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
          <pre>_______________________________________________<u></u><u></u></pre>
          <pre>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<u></u><u></u></pre>
        </blockquote>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span>-- <br>
              Volker A. Greimann<br>
              General Counsel and Policy Manager<br>
              <strong>KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH</strong><br>
              <br>
              T: +49 6894 9396901<br>
              M: +49 6894 9396851<br>
              F: +49 6894 9396851<br>
              W: <a href="http://www.key-systems.net" target="_blank">www.key-systems.net</a><br>
              <br>
              Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local
              court of Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no.
              HR B 18835<br>
              CEO: Alexander Siffrin<br>
              <br>
              Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company
              registered in England and Wales with company number
              8576358.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <div class="gmail-m_-599757340101471059moz-signature">-- <br>
      Volker A. Greimann<br>
      General Counsel and Policy Manager<br>
      <strong style="border-bottom:3px solid rgb(92,70,181)">KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH</strong><br>
      <br>
      T: +49 6894 9396901<br>
      M: +49 6894 9396851<br>
      F: +49 6894 9396851<br>
      W: <a class="gmail-m_-599757340101471059moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.key-systems.net" target="_blank">www.key-systems.net</a><br>
      <br>
      Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local court of
      Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no. HR B 18835<br>
      CEO: Alexander Siffrin<br>
      <br>
      Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company registered
      in England and Wales with company number 8576358.</div>
  </div>

_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-epdp-team mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</blockquote></div>