<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Title" content="">
<meta name="Keywords" content="">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Arial;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Courier New";
panose-1:2 7 3 9 2 2 5 2 4 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.msoIns
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-style-name:"";
text-decoration:underline;
color:teal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:616957639;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1031013002 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:700590520;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1962924442 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:49.5pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:1021396526;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1008733710 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:39.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l2:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:111.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l2:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:147.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:183.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l2:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:219.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l2:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:255.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l2:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:291.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l2:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:327.0pt;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:1802650291;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:846216138 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l3:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l3:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l3:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l4
{mso-list-id:2110156177;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:381608132 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l4:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:.75in;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l4:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l4:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l4:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l4:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l4:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New",serif;}
@list l4:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style>
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear Working Group Members,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Below are the action items and notes from today’s WG call. The action items, notes, meeting materials and recordings are all posted on the meeting’s wiki page here:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/x/XmfwAw">https://community.icann.org/x/XmfwAw</a>. The transcripts will be posted on the same wiki page, when they are available.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Amr</p>
<div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="border:none;padding:0in"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Action Items:</u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5">Volunteer team to engage in email discussion over the next 2-3 weeks to assist with proposing an alternative WG agreement to balance points of views expressed regarding the Original
Registration Date. Volunteers identified: Benjamin Akinmoyeje, Andrew Sullivan, Volker Greimann, Tim OBrien and Jonathan Matkowsky (coordinator)</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5">Staff to incorporate WG agreements accepted during this call into the working draft, and to draft a poll on proposed WG agreements and additional questions to help prepare the WG for
deliberation in our next call. </li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5">All WG members to review the
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RDSPDP-Handout-For29AugCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504017543000&api=v2">
29 Aug Handout</a><u> to prepare for deliberation on additional proposed data elements in next week’s WG call.</u></li></ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Notes:</u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members 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 here: <a href="https://community.icann.org/x/XmfwAw">https://community.icann.org/x/XmfwAw</a></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">1) Roll Call/SOI Updates</p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:3.0pt;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo1">No updates to SOIs</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">2) Continue deliberation on Data Elements beyond MPDS</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> a) Charter Question: "What data should be collected, stored and disclosed?" focusing first on set of data required in RDS</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:3.0pt;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo1">Slide 1
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level2 lfo1">Ten data elements at the bottom of slide 1 of the
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RDSPDP-Handout-For29AugCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504017543000&api=v2">
29 Aug Handout</a> to be discussed if time allowed were deferred to 5 September call</li></ul>
</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:3.0pt;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo1">Discussion took place on the WG mailing list over the past week regarding the difference between RDS and Registrar data</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:3.0pt;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo1">Another discussion that took place on the mailing list was regarding improving contactability of registrants</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:3.0pt;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo1">All inputs (including possible inconsistencies between agreements) to be further considered during iterative second pass deliberation on all WG agreements</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> b) Review poll results: <a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/AnnotatedResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1503943692000&api=v2">
AnnotatedResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall-v2.pdf</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2">Question 2: Reseller
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Question 2: Reseller must be supported by the RDS, and must be provided for inclusion in the RDS by Registrars</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">72% Support the agreement, 8% did not support the agreement and 20% suggested alternatives</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">5 WG members who suggested alternatives did not disagree with the statement, but rather suggested improvements</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Proposed alternative agreement developed by leadership following examining all the comments submitted:
<i>Reseller must be supported by the RDS, and must be provided for inclusion in the RDS by Registrars (if applicable)</i></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">"If applicable" included in proposed text, as might not always be practically feasible to include a reseller (such as if no resellers are involved in the domain name registration)</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Should resellers be involved, the proposed WG agreement isn't specific on which reseller in the chain of resellers is to be included in the RDS (registrar-facing reseller vs registrant-facing
reseller) - discussion deferred until deliberation on policy and/or implementation</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Current RAA does not require the registrars to include resellers in the data submitted by them (”MAY” in 2013 RAA)</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Suggestion to replace the second "must" with "may" in the proposed WG agreement, so that it reads:
<i>Reseller must be supported by the RDS, and MAY be provided for inclusion in the RDS by Registrars</i></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Rough consensus was achieved on the first part of this agreement, but that we are now re-polling on the second part of the agreement only - that is, whether the agreement should
be "MUST" or "MAY" be provided for inclusion in the RDS.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Resellers may act similarly to P/P providers or lawyers who register domain names on behalf of customers/clients - may be required to assume responsibility of domain name registration,
so need to be contactable</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">In chains of resellers, some resellers do not disclose who the resellers in their chain are to avoid poaching of both resellers and registrants - makes it difficult for registrars
to identify and provide this information, and may increase customer confusion</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">WG agreement should be considered a high-level concept without having to deal with underlying specifics at this time, especially regarding implementation details - this may be deferred</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Resellers, which are known to the registrars must be included</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">AC Room show of hands of whether registrars MUST provide the reseller information: 11/39 WG member agree, 8/39 WG members disagree</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Tentative conclusion to accept the first part of the statement "<i>Reseller must be supported by the RDS" - second part of the statement</i> "and must be provided for inclusion
in the RDS by Registrars (if applicable)" deferred</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Suggestion for WG members who belong to the RrSG to request formal opinion on inclusion of resellers in the RDS from the RrSG, as most registrars do not have relationships with
resellers</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Registrars who do have a relationship with resellers may wish to reach out to them, and relay their concerns to the WG</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Agreement to re-poll on two variants - Must and May - with qualifier (if applicable) and noting that there may be a chain of Resellers</li></ul>
</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Proposed WG Agreement (to be confirmed through repolling):</b> "Reseller Name must be supported by the RDS, and MAY be provided for inclusion in the RDS by Registrars. Note: There may be a chain of Resellers."</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2">Question 3: URL of Internic Complaint Site
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">71% support for the agreement “The URL of the Internic Complaint Site must be supported for inclusion in the RDS.” with little opposition</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Majority of discussion on this question focused on whether the URL to the Internic site should be included in the RDS, or whether it should be on a generally published web page
instead of being conveyed through the RDS</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Accept this result as initial rough consensus</li></ul>
</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>WG Agreement (to be recorded in working draft as point of rough consensus):
</b>"The URL of the Internic Complaint Site must be supported for inclusion in the RDS."</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2">Question 4: Original Registration Date
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">77% support for the agreement:
<i>The Original Registration Date must be supported for inclusion in the RDS.</i></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">However, 19% explicitly did not support this proposed agreement.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Several WG members were unsure on what "Original Registration Date" was referring to</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Collecting/identifying original registration date will be complicated for already registered domain names - may be easier for new domain names being registered moving forward -
not clear that this would cost-effectively implementable</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Proposed WG Agreement (developed by leadership, based on poll results, including comments)
<i>The Original Registration Date (see footnote below) must be supported for inclusion in the RDS. Footnote: This agreement received both strong support and noteworthy opposition in 22 August poll. Further deliberation to address concerns raised, including
this data element's definition, starting from the working definition given on page 57 of the EWG Report: This is different than the creation date since the creation date picks up the latest time that the domain name was registered; it is possible that the
domain name was previously registered and subsequently deleted multiple times. The Original Registration Date denotes the first date that the domain name was ever registered.</i></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Security community regards the date of the most recent re-registration date of a domain name as important when investigating bad actors</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Created_on is part of the EPP specification - (maybe it's spelled createDate or something like that)</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">The WG previously agreed upon a Minimum Public Data Set which includes Create Date. However, Original Creation Date proposed by the EWG is intended to reflect something different
– see definition above.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Another possibility is to add a data element that captures the create date of the last time this domain name was registered (prior to deletion and re-registration)</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Alternative proposal:
<i>The most recent prior registration date (if the domain has been re-registered by anyone, not necessarily the current registrant) must be supported for inclusion in the RDS.</i></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Should this field be mandatory to populate, it will be impossible for some registries to fill it in - may end up being false in some cases - despite this data being desirable, should
not be mandatory</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Even if the original registration date can be definitively identified, what is its utility? Acquiring this data from a third-party may not make it reliably accurate</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Suggested interpretation is that a string for a domain name that has been discontinued then re-registered should be considered a new domain name despite the string having been previously
registered</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Purpose of collection of this data should be identified and agreed upon prior to mandating its provision/collection. (Note: The WG already has an agreement that policy must include
definitions for all data elements)</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Original registration date is helpful in tracking bad actors/malicious web sites</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">A valuable use case on use of the original registration date, is when it pre-dates the registration of a trademark, which may indicate the benign intent of its registration should
a dispute over the domain name arise</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Working definition given on page 57 of the EWG Report:
<i>This is different than the creation date since the creation date picks up the latest time that the domain name was registered; it is possible that the domain name was previously registered and subsequently deleted multiple times. The Original Registration
Date denotes the first date that the domain name was ever registered.</i></li></ul>
</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>ACTION ITEM:</b> Volunteer team to engage in email discussion over the next 2-3 weeks to assist with proposing an alternative WG agreement to balance points of views expressed regarding the Original Registration Date. Volunteers identified:
Benjamin Akinmoyeje, Andrew Sullivan, Volker Greimann, Tim OBrien and Jonathan Matkowsky (coordinator)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2">Questions 5 and 6: Registrar Abuse Contacts
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">80% supported Registrar Abuse Contact Email with no opposition</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">68% supported Registrar Abuse Contact Phone with 28% opposition</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Some comments suggested that Registrars should have a choice of contact method</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Potential alternative proposed by WG leadership:
<i>A Registrar Abuse Contact must be supported for inclusion in the RDS, and must be provided by Registrars. Registrars should have a choice of abuse contact method(s) they support.</i></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Registrars individually choosing/creating their own abuse contact methods might make it complicated for enterprises to contact them - registrars may choose alternative abuse contact
methods, but must provide email and telephone contact methods</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Reason for opposing phone as an abuse contact method: Information tends to get lost during phone calls during reporting of abuse</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">There is a need to clarify what the purpose of the abuse contact is - should be limited to complaints regarding a domain name, not the web content or hosting associated with it</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Purpose of the abuse contact is a good example of why all data elements need to be defined</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">If the WG deviates from the requirement of provision of email and phone contacts for abuse, other forms of contact should include non-proprietary methods of contact as requirements</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Note existing WG Agreement #31: At least one element enabling contact must be based on an open standard and not a proprietary communication method.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Most Internet users who face a problem online do not know what the technical nature of the problem is - may not be certain which abuse contact to use</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">1) A very recent Consensus Policy (effective 1 August 2017) just stated that Registrar Abuse Contact Email and Registrar Abuse Contact Phone MUST be PUBLISHED (and must therefore
be provided by registrars). See <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-labeling-policy-2017-02-01-en">
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-labeling-policy-2017-02-01-en</a> #1 2) I therefore suggest this wording: "The Registrar Abuse Contact Email and Registrar Abuse Contact Phone must be supported for inclusion in the RDS, must be provided by Registrars,
and must be published."</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Possible alternative proposed WG agreement:
<i>Per recently approved consensus policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-labeling-policy-2017-02-01-en">https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-labeling-policy-2017-02-01-en</a>), The Registrar Abuse Contact Email and Registrar Abuse
Contact Phone must be supported for inclusion in the RDS, must be provided by Registrars</i></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">During a show of hands, 13/38 WG members on the call agreed with proposed possible alternative WG agreement above</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Cited CL&D Consensus Policy is based on the result of bilateral negotiations between registrars and ICANN while drafting the 2013 RAA</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Suggestion to include a "privacy abuse contact" – this suggestion captured for later discussion when the WG deliberates on additional proposed data elements</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Given strong support and no opposition to Email as an abuse contact method, and noteworthy opposition to Phone as a contact method, the following agreement only is accepted from
the 22 August poll results.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-.25in;mso-list:l4 level2 lfo2">Might make sense to have one common method of contact regarding abuse across all registrars</li></ul>
</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>WG Agreement (to be recorded in working draft as point of rough consensus):
</b>"The Registrar Abuse Contact Email Address must be supported for inclusion in the RDS, and must be provided by Registrars."</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>ACTION ITEM:</b> Staff to incorporate WG agreements accepted during this call into the working draft, and to draft a poll on proposed WG agreements and additional questions to help prepare the WG for deliberation in our next call.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> c) Deliberate and consider next steps in relation to remaining data elements that more agreed upon or were unsure should be in RDS:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RDSPDP-Handout-For29AugCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504017543000&api=v2">
29AugustCall-Handout</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2">WG members should be prepared to discuss remaining data elements in this week's poll question 7: Fax, SMS, IM, Social Media</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2">Slides in this call's handout compiled the comments submitted in this week's poll, broken down for each data element</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"MS Mincho",serif">
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>ACTION ITEM:</b> All WG members to review the <a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RDSPDP-Handout-For29AugCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504017543000&api=v2">
29 Aug Handout</a><u> to prepare for deliberation on additional proposed data elements in next week’s WG call.</u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">3) Confirm action items and proposed decision points</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><b>ACTION ITEM:</b> Volunteer team to engage in email discussion over the next 2-3 weeks to assist with proposing an alternative WG agreement to balance points of views expressed regarding
the Original Registration Date. Volunteers identified: Benjamin Akinmoyeje, Andrew Sullivan, Volker Greimann, Tim OBrien and Jonathan Matkowsky (coordinator)</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><b>ACTION ITEM:</b> Staff to incorporate WG agreements accepted during this call into the working draft, and to draft a poll on proposed WG agreements and additional questions to help
prepare the WG for deliberation in our next call.</li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><b>ACTION ITEM:</b> All WG members to review the
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RDSPDP-Handout-For29AugCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504017543000&api=v2">
29 Aug Handout</a><u> to prepare for deliberation on additional proposed data elements in next week’s WG call.</u></li></ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Proposed WG Agreement (to be confirmed through repolling):</b> "Reseller Name must be supported by the RDS, and MAY be provided for inclusion in the RDS by Registrars. Note: There may be a chain of Resellers."</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>WG Agreement (to be recorded in working draft as point of rough consensus):
</b>"The URL of the Internic Complaint Site must be supported for inclusion in the RDS."</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>WG Agreement (to be recorded in working draft as point of rough consensus):
</b>"The Registrar Abuse Contact Email Address must be supported for inclusion in the RDS, and must be provided by Registrars."</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">4) Confirm next WG meeting (Tuesday 5 September at 16.00 UTC)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Meeting Materials:<o:p></o:p></u></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RDSPDP-Handout-For29AugCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1504017543000&api=v2"><b>29AugustCall-Handout</b></a></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:0in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><b>22 August Call poll</b>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="circle">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-22.5pt;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3">
<b>Link to participate: <a href="https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/22August17"><span style="font-weight:normal">https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/22August17</span></a></b></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-22.5pt;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3">
<b>PDF of Poll Questions: <a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/SurveyMonkey_poll%20questions%2022%20August%202017.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1503494133908&api=v2"><span style="font-weight:normal">Poll-from-22AugustCall.pdf</span></a></b></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-22.5pt;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3">
<b>SurveyMonkey Summary Poll Results: <a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/SummaryResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1503854062000&api=v2"><span style="font-weight:normal">SummaryResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall.pdf</span></a></b></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-22.5pt;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3">
<b>SurveyMonkey Raw Data Poll Results: <a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RawDataResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall.zip?version=1&modificationDate=1503854077000&api=v2"><span style="font-weight:normal">RawDataResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall.zip</span></a></b> and <a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/RawDataResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall.xlsx?version=1&modificationDate=1503854087000&api=v2">XLS</a></li><li class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left:-22.5pt;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3">
<b>Annotated Survey Results</b>: <a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086750/AnnotatedResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall-v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1503943692000&api=v2">AnnotatedResults-Poll-from-22AugustCall-v2.pdf</a></li></ul>
</li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>