<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Emily and colleagues <div><br></div><div>Good morning and thank you for this, I might have misunderstood (quite likely) but do we also not use the opportunity (in writing to SO/ACs etc) to give an update on the progress made in the WG and note appointment of vice chair etc?</div><div><br></div><div>best</div><div><br></div><div>Nigel </div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 2 Sept 2021 at 15:52, Emily Barabas <<a href="mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org">emily.barabas@icann.org</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 lang="en-BE" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Dear </span>
<span lang="EN-US">all</span><span style="color:black">,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Please find below the notes and action items from today’s meeting on
</span><span lang="EN-US">Thursday 2 September</span><span style="color:black"> 2021 at
</span><span lang="EN-US">13:00</span><span style="color:black"> UTC.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">As noted on the call, as a standard step in the GNSO EPDP/PDP staff will draft a letter to SO/AC/SG/Cs asking for early input on the charter questions. The WG will have an opportunity
to review the draft and provide feedback before this is sent to SO/AC/SG/Cs. Based on conversations to date, it appears that the charter questions are fit for purpose to include as written with the outreach letter. If there are any concerns with this approach,
please response on list.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">As a reminder, there are two action items for members and participants:
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">ACTION ITEM 1: Members to read background documents included in Edmon’s welcome email and confirm when they have done so
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/172720403/IDN%20EPDP%20-%20Proposed%20Approach%20-%20Initial%20Review%20of%20Charter%20Questions%20-%2017%20August%202021.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1629739156000&api=v2" target="_blank">
here</a>. The welcome email is available at: <a href="https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/2021-July/000002.html" target="_blank">
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/2021-July/000002.html</a><u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">ACTION ITEM 2: </span></b><b><span lang="EN-US">Members and participants to review the
</span></b><b><span lang="EN-US">data and metrics part of the charter on page 19 and think about whether other data and metrics would be useful for the group to consider in deliberating on charter questions. <u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Best regards,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">Steve, Marika, and Emily<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-left:none;border-bottom:1pt solid windowtext;padding:0cm 0cm 1pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">IDNs EPDP – Notes and Action Items<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Meeting #4 on 2 September 2021<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Action Items:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">ACTION ITEM 1: Members to read background documents included in Edmon’s welcome email and confirm when they have done so
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/172720403/IDN%20EPDP%20-%20Proposed%20Approach%20-%20Initial%20Review%20of%20Charter%20Questions%20-%2017%20August%202021.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1629739156000&api=v2" target="_blank">
here</a>. The welcome email is available at: <a href="https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/2021-July/000002.html" target="_blank">
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/2021-July/000002.html</a><u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">ACTION ITEM 2: </span></b><b><span lang="EN-US">Members and participants to review the
</span></b><b><span lang="EN-US">data and metrics part of the charter on page 19 and think about whether other data and metrics would be useful for the group to consider in deliberating on charter questions. <u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Notes:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal">Roll Call & SOI Updates<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="2" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal">Welcome & Chair Update<span lang="EN-US">s</span><u></u><u></u></li></ol>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">EOI reminder – Edmon will begin serving on the ICANN Board at the AGM. The EOI process is now open to identify a replacement EPDP Chair:
<a href="https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/call-for-expressions-of-interest-chair-of-epdp-internationalized-domain-names-1-9-2021-en" target="_blank">
https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/call-for-expressions-of-interest-chair-of-epdp-internationalized-domain-names-1-9-2021-en</a>.
<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Edmon will be talking with the ICANN executive team and legal counsel about his transition and will keep the group updated on these discussions. For now, the goal is to keep the work going without interruption.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
Data & metrics<span lang="EN-US"> – Everyone is encouraged to review the data and metrics part of the charter on page 19 and think about whether other data and metrics would be useful for the group to consider in deliberating on charter questions. This will
be discussed further as the group gets into the substantive deliberations on the specific topics.
<u></u><u></u></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="3" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal">Begin initial review of charter questions<span lang="EN-US"> (continued) – Topics C-G</span><u></u><u></u></li></ol>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Question regarding the exercise: Both Topics A & B came back with a estimation of a “medium” level or effort. Is this accurate?<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">This exercise is just to get an initial sense of the expected workload for the purposes of building an initial draft work plan for the group. The work plan will be delivered to the GNSO Council so that the Council can monitor the progress
of the group, manage the process, and troubleshoot if there are issues that need to be resolved. The estimates do not need to be exact.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Comment: The working group should aim to create a work plan that is as accurate as possible with the available information.
<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">If the working group needs to change more time than originally expected in the work plan, it will deliver a “project change request” to the GNSO Council.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Topic C: “Same entity” and the second-level: estimated level of effort: High = 10+ call hours: (4/20): 20%; Medium = 5 to 10 call hours (12/20): 60%; Low = < 5 call hours: (4/20): 20%<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Comment: There may be cases where two different legal entities have rights to variants but suddenly only one survives, and two strings should belong to one of the entities. There may be legal implications that have not yet been investigated
and will require some time from this group.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Comment: There are two tracks: One where you are changing the definition of an existing IDN implementation in a TLD and the names already exist and you make changes to the variant mapping based on the sources you choose. That is problematic
when you have to decide one or the other based on rights. The second is you introduce IDNs to an existing namespace and no names are registered in that IDN, so that is determined before all of that happens.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">We might want data points on what existing registrations look like – how many would have a conflict if RGZ-LGRs are applied over them.
<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Topic D: </span>Adjustments in registry agreement, registry service, registry transition process, and other processes/procedures related to the domain name lifecycle<span lang="EN-US">: estimated level of effort: High = 10+ call hours: (12/19):
63%; Medium = 5 to 10 call hours (4/19): 21%; Low = < 5 call hours: (3/19): 16%<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Topics D & E are the administrative processes that are required. For D there are 8 questions covering a wide range of issues. Looking at the mapping document, a lot of it has been covered to some extent.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">For this topic, we are not talking about writing the legal language in the Registry Agreement. This subject is just about the policies for what needs to change in these things.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">We are only focused on the elements that need to change with respect to specific subjects that this EPDP covers.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Registry Transition Process is a potential for IDN conflicts if the RST phase does not accept the incumbent RSP's implementation of a language/script and requires the use of a new LGR (better defined but can contain conflicts such as new
variant mapping, more or less code points and new or different context rules).<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">We are going to change some basic elements and need to consider all the dependencies on a procedural level. This may take time.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Clarification: The focus on this exercise is to estimate the time required for the Working Group to consider topics for policy recommendations, not necessarily timelines for each TLD process and specific Registry Agreements.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Topic E: </span>Adjustments to objection process, string similarity review, string contention resolution, reserved strings, and other policies and procedures<span lang="EN-US">: High = 10+ call hours: (5/17): 29%; Medium = 5 to 10 call hours
(9/17): 53%; Low = < 5 call hours: (3/17): 18%</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Many of these topics were covered in SubPro. This group will be focused on considering what the SubPro WG has already looked into. We are not looking to second guess the results of that process.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">There will be an IRT for SubPro. This group should coordinate with the IRT and review what it comes up with to make sure there are no holes. It is primarily an oversight function, and therefore may require less effort than some of the other
topics.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">On the other hand, this topic covers all procedures related to new gTLDs and will change the process for reviewing applications, so it may take a lot of time.<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Topic F: </span>Adjustments in registration dispute resolution procedures and trademark protection mechanisms<span lang="EN-US">: High = 10+ call hours: (2/17): 12%; Medium = 5 to 10 call hours (10/17): 59%; Low = < 5 call hours: (5/17):
29%<u></u><u></u></span></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Comment: This is a complicated issue. It is possible for an intellectual property owner to have rights in the registered name but not variants or vice versa. Finding out legal implications and whether transfers can be ordered is difficult.
This might take time even though there are only two questions.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">This group might need to ask for help on this topic from other groups to inform final discussion. This is also a topic where additional data and metrics may be needed.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Putting this task of developing the work plan in perspective, we have likely overestimated or underestimated on some of these topics. It will likely even out. In a worst-case scenario, we have the option to go to the Council and adjust the
timeline.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">If we want to take a conservative approach, we can estimate on the high end of the ranges specified in the polls.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Topic G: </span>Process to update the IDN Implementation Guidelines<span lang="EN-US">: High = 10+ call hours: (6/20): 30%; Medium = 5 to 10 call hours (10/20): 50%; Low = < 5 call hours: (4/20): 20%</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Some uncertainty on this topic. </span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">More might be brought our way under this topic. IDN Implementation Guidelines 4.0 have not been adopted. The Working Group may need to consider the path forward.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li style="margin-left:18pt">
<span lang="EN-US">Comment: It is surprising that this topic came back as medium and so did Topic F. The representation of different expertise is not balanced on the call. The leadership team should take this into account as it builds the work plan.</span><u></u><u></u></li></ul>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="4" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal">Early outreach to SO/AC/SG/Cs<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
<p><u></u> <u></u></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li><span lang="EN-US">This is a standard step in the EPDP/PDP. The working group will ask SO/AC/SG/Cs for early input on the topics included in the charter.
</span><u></u><u></u></li><li><span lang="EN-US">This step is somewhat of a duplication of effort, since the groups have an opportunity to provide input through their representatives in the EPDP.</span><u></u><u></u></li><li><span lang="EN-US">Based on conversations to date, it appears that the charter questions are fit for purpose for early outreach and staff can go ahead and draft a cover letter asking for
early input on the charter questions (with charter questions appended). The WG will have an opportunity to review the draft document before it is sent.
</span><u></u><u></u></li><li><span lang="EN-US">If anyone has concerns with this approach, they should reply on list.</span><u></u><u></u></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="5" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal">Begin deliberations on Topic A: Consistent definition and technical utilization of RZ-LGR<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li><span lang="EN-US">This item will be started on the next call.</span><u></u><u></u></li></ul>
<p style="margin-left:72pt">
<u></u> <u></u></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="6" type="1">
<li class="MsoNormal">AOB<u></u><u></u></li></ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">ACTION ITEM 1: Members and participants to read background documents included in Edmon’s welcome email and confirm when they have done so
<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/172720403/IDN%20EPDP%20-%20Proposed%20Approach%20-%20Initial%20Review%20of%20Charter%20Questions%20-%2017%20August%202021.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1629739156000&api=v2" target="_blank">
here</a>. The welcome email is available at: <a href="https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/2021-July/000002.html" target="_blank">
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/2021-July/000002.html</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">ACTION ITEM 2: Members and participants to review the
</span><span lang="EN-US">data and metrics part of the charter on page 19 and think about whether other data and metrics would be useful for the group to consider in deliberating on charter questions. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0cm" start="1" type="1">
<ul style="margin-top:0cm" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal">Next call: 9 September at 13:00 UTC<u></u><u></u></li></ul>
</ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:54pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-epdp-idn-team mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-epdp-idn-team@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-idn-team" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-idn-team</a></blockquote></div></div>