[APRALO-Policy] Fwd: [At-Large] Announcement: Release of ICANN 78 GAC Communique

[Shreedeep Rayamajhi]

Dear At-Large Community Members,



I hope this message finds you well. Please kindly note the release of the
ICANN 78 GAC Communique:
https://gac.icann.org/contentMigrated/icann78-hamburg-communique?fbclid=IwAR23hJ2PV5-Rbyx5EmgA-IlEzdSudrp427yKQsXUkLhZthNIc4VK9M0oPYA
(and
attached).



Here is a summary of the key points discussed in the document, relevant to
the At-Large:



1. Future Rounds of New gTLDs:

   - The GAC acknowledged the Board's decision, as outlined in the
September Scorecard regarding GAC Advice, to postpone GAC Advice on
auctions in New gTLDs. This delay was due to ongoing discussions about
policy recommendations in this area. The GAC also observed that the Board
had engaged an expert to assess the matter and anticipated ongoing
collaboration with the Board and the broader community before a final Board
decision was reached.

   - The GAC emphasized the importance of GAC Consensus Advice and its
"strong presumption" language in the future Applicant Guidebook.

   - The GAC welcomed efforts to develop the Applicant Support Program and
stressed the need for support beyond fee reductions, including training and
assistance for potential applicants.



2. Registration Data Request Service (RDRS):

- The GAC welcomed the launch of the voluntary RDRS in November and
encouraged its members to inform their communities about it.

- The GAC noted that widespread use of the system would help gather
sufficient data for policy recommendations related to a future System for
Standardized Access and Disclosure (SSAD) of domain name registration data.

- The GAC supported the idea of requiring registrars to use the RDRS.

- The GAC emphasized the importance of users receiving data about the
underlying registrant rather than just information related to privacy or
proxy services.



3. Urgent Requests for Disclosure of Registration Data:

   - The GAC supported the separation of Urgent Requests from the
publication of the Registration Data Consensus Policy and the need for
discussions on this topic to achieve an outcome acceptable to all parties.

   - The GAC highlighted its concerns about the response time for Urgent
Requests, particularly the use of "business" days, and emphasizes the need
to meet public safety considerations.



4. DNS Abuse:

   - The GAC urged contracted parties to adopt DNS Abuse amendments to
establish baseline obligations for gTLD registries and registrars.

   - The GAC noted that its suggestions in the public consultation on
contract amendments were not fully reflected in the final amendments.

   - The GAC emphasized the importance of proactive monitoring and
transparency in reporting DNS Abuse, supported by dedicated capacity
building efforts.



5. Transparency and GNSO Statements of Interest:

   - The GAC “strongly supported” transparency at ICANN and expressed
concerns about proposed exceptions in SOI requirements. It is also looking
forward to continued engagement with the GNSO, Board, and community on this
issue.



Do feel free to review this communique carefully. If you have any questions
or would like to discuss the content of the communique further, please feel
free to reach out.



Best regards,



Joanna Kulesza



ALAC Liaison to the GAC


_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________
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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/apralo-policy/attachments/20231101/e6444cd1/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICANN78+Hamburg+Communique?.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 162818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/apralo-policy/attachments/20231101/e6444cd1/ICANN78HamburgCommunique-0001.pdf>