[Gnso-epdp-team] Notes, Action Items - EPDP Team Phase 2 Meeting #3

[Caitlin Tubergen]

Dear EPDP Team,

 

Below, please find notes and action items from today’s EPDP Team Meeting.

 

As a reminder, our next meeting will be Thursday, 30 May at 1400 UTC.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika, Berry, and Caitlin

--

EPDP Phase 2 Meeting #3

23 May 2019 

14:00 UTC

 

Action Items

 
Janis to reach out to Chair of the GNSO and convey the EPDP Team’s desire to  engage with the GNSO Council regarding the Board resolution. Following discussion, Janis to refer back to the EPDP Team with GNSO Council feedback and proposed next steps.
Rafik, as GNSO Council liaison, to seek clarification from the GNSO Council regarding the Bylaw-triggered consultation process following non-adoption of parts of GNSO Council adopted recommendations. 
GAC Members to provide legal clarifying questions for incorporation in the legal questions table by end of tomorrow, Friday, May 24. Support Staff to distribute updated table to the Team following receipt of GAC questions.
EPDP Team Members to provide comments on legal questions table, i.e., question relevance and prioritization, by Wednesday, 29 May. 
Support Staff to convert the working definitions list into a Google Doc and distribute to the Team as soon as possible. 
EPDP Team Members to propose comments on the working definitions list by Tuesday, 28 May.
Following posting of the worksheet for SSAD by Support Staff, EPDP Team members to review the System for Standardized Access/Disclosure worksheet and provide any input on the document by Wednesday, 29 May so that the Team can discuss the worksheet during the next call.
Support Staff to schedule additional calls to review and discuss priority 2 worksheets for those interested.
EPDP Team Members to continue reviewing the provided worksheets (see https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/b.+Worksheets) and provide input as soon as possible. 
EPDP Team Members to review and provide input on the early input template by Wednesday, 29 May so that the Team can finalize this call for input during the next EPDP Team call.
Janis to share message with the EPDP Team concerning possible external expert presentation by Steve Crocker. 
 

Notes & Action items

 

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: https://community.icann.org/x/ZwPVBQ.

 

1.               Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes)
Attendance will be taken from Zoom
Remember to mute your microphones upon entry to Zoom, which is typically the first icon on the left on the bottom toolbar.
Please state your name before speaking for transcription purposes.
Please remember to review your SOIs on a regular basis and update as needed. Updates are required to be shared with the EPDP Team
 

2.               Confirmation of agenda (Chair)

 

3.               Welcome and housekeeping issues (Chair) (10 minutes)

 

a.                                 Bilateral meetings of the Chair to date

 

·         Janis had a bilateral meeting with SSAC last week. 

·         Other groups who wish to have a bilateral meeting may reach out to Janis at any time.

 

b.                                 Proposed next steps in relation to Board action on Phase 1 recommendations (seehttps://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-05-15-en#1.b [icann.org])

 

·         There was a request from the Team to discuss this issue during the last EPDP Team meeting

·         There are two bits of the Phase 1 Final Report that were not adopted by the Board - specifically, Purpose 2 and part of Recommendation 12

·         With respect to Purpose 2 - the reason the Board did not adopt it is because of the recent letter from the European Commission. The Board was concerned that Purpose 2 was deemed inconsistent with the law. The Board believes this purpose needs to be revisited, noting that the EPDP Team also deemed Purpose 2 as a placeholder. 

·         The Board also did not adopt part of Recommendation 12. The concern was that by suggesting that registrars could delete the contents of the organization field, there could be loss of identifying data as to who the registered name holder is.

·         Per the Bylaws, the Board and GNSO will now enter into consultations 

·         EPDP Members are welcome to contact the GNSO Council directly if there are any questions, and the Council can consider adding the questions to the consultation

·         GNSO Council liaison update: the Council did not have adequate time during its last meeting to discuss the board resolution. An extraordinary meeting has been scheduled for next week, so the Council can share more details from that discussion during the next EPDP Team Meeting.

 

                                Feedback from EPDP Team:

·         The background information was helpful. The conduit for the EPDP to communicate is through the GNSO Council. It may be helpful to open a dialogue with respect to these two items. To the extent the EPDP Team could provide its thoughts or opinions to the GNSO Council, it could be useful.

·         Question: is there any action or follow-up that ICANN org or the Board is taking with the EC regarding the conflation issue? The GNSO Council is not as close to the issue as the EPDP Team is, and there may be different understandings of what the EC letter meant.

·         Please refer to the Board rationale, where the Board asked ICANN org to request additional input from DPAs. The Board does want Org to continue to seek clarification from the DPAs.

·         Action: Janis to speak to Chair of the GNSO and ask if the EPDP Team can engage with the GNSO Council with respect to the Board resolution and refer back to the EPDP Team with a proposal. 

·         The GNSO may refer the issues back to the EPDP Team since the EPDP Team has not been dissolved.

 

c.                    Response from ICANN Org to EPDP Team letter (see https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/2019-May/001951.html) 

 

·         Proposal to constitute a smaller group was rejected by the EPDP Team

·         The letter from ICANN CEO confirms readiness to engage with the entire EPDP Team when the EPDP Team is ready

                                

Feedback from the EPDP Team:
Question: what are the next steps? Is the ball in the EPDP Team’s court or ICANN org’s court?
Answer: The ball is in the EPDP Team’s court. If there are policy questions the EPDP Team would like to formalize, it is best to begin drafting and formulating sooner rather than later.
 

4.               Finalize approach for phase 2 (15 minutes) (Chair)

 
Review input received on draft approach that has not been addressed yet
·         Everyone should make an attempt to follow the proposed schedule and adhere to deadlines for input.

·         Please refer to the possible order of steps for the SSAD

·         This proposal is not static, but rather dynamic. The Team, for example, could consider adding additional meetings.

 

                Feedback from EPDP Team: 

·         The draft approach looks good. With respect to working on one track at a time rather than working on them in parallel, part of the Team believes we should work in parallel and others do not. Could the Team agree to start off working in parallel and then changing course if it is believed to be untenable?

·         Support the dual path, but understand the reluctance of the Team to do so. May be better to revisit after Marrakech.

·         If the GNSO Council boots issues back to the EPDP Team, where will these issues fall in the work plan? Will that take precedence over the normal workstream?

·         Rather than opine on hypotheticals, we will consider how to address this when the issue presents itself. Until then, the Team can focus on the issues identified in Slide 4 and give feedback accordingly.

·         Approach: later in this call, we will discuss the worksheet for work stream 2 items. Perhaps Team Members who are willing to work on these items in parallel could do so in separate calls, and then we could share the work done by the small group during a plenary session. 

·         Confirm updates, if any that need to be made. Seeing no objection, we will begin this approach next week and revisit in Marrakech. 

 

5.               Legal memos clarifying questions (15 minutes) (Caitlin)

 

a.               Review questions submitted

 

·         The table seeks to categorize the clarifying questions received to date by aligning them with the Phase 1 legal memos from Bird & Bird and identifying their relevance for the EPDP Team’s work in Phase 2. 

·         Please note some of the questions have been rephrased to ensure consistency in style; however, the submitting group is noted and the original questions have been included and referenced at the end of the document. The submitting group is, of course, welcome to review the questions and note where the intent or essence of the question was not captured correctly.

 

b.         Discuss how to prioritize and confirm questions for submission to Bird & Bird

 

·         When reviewing the below questions, the Team should consider if additional information would assist in moving its work forward by either (1) addressing the charter questions identified for Phase 2 or (2) addressing specifically-identified questions or areas noted in the Phase 1 Final Report that were to be further considered in Phase 2. 

 

                Feedback:

·         Is there a reason we would not just forward these questions now?

·         We would like to confirm these questions have not been answered yet, and that these questions are relevant to the Team’s work due to the limited budget of Legal Counsel.

·         The GAC would like to submit the questions by Friday.

·         The Support Staff seems to have categorized the work in Phase 2, and perhaps it would be helpful to focus on the questions for items next in our work.

·         Questions should also be reviewed to ensure they are not leading questions.

 

c.                                  Confirm next steps

 

·         GAC to provide updated questions by end of tomorrow.

·         We will put the final version by next Tuesday for review.

·         Would like to conclude the table during the next meeting.

·         As part of the worksheets, Support Staff has asked EPDP Team members to pay attention to the worksheets and flag any legal questions that may inform the Team’s work on a specific topic in Phase 2.

 

6.               Working definitions for the purpose of the EPDP (15 min) (Chair):

 
Introduction of the draft (see initial list attached)
 

·         The Team discussed producing a list of working definitions that could be used to aid in the Team’s common understanding of definitions.

·         As previously explained, these definitions are not precise legal definitions; instead, they will be used to aid the Team’s common understanding of terminology as we go through our work.

 
Input by the Team
 

·         Definitions should be very neutral going forward as not to presume any outcomes.

·         This document is a really good start, but it may be worth highlighting where these are working definitions or where they have been agreed to by the group.

·         These are working definitions - the only purpose is to have a common understanding of what we are referring to when we discuss these items as a group.

·         Under SSAD, we should remove the term third party. One of the major entities requesting data will be ICANN itself. Removing third party allows whatever mechanism we are building to be used ICANN as well.

·         The Charter of the group requires us to come up with a system for lawful access to third parties with legitimate interest.

·         This exercise is not about shaping the outcome of our discussion - it is an attempt to provide a list of terms so that we understand the terms in a similar manner. This is not about an outcome, just terminology.

·         Introduce an additional term - authorization - the process of delivering the privileges assigned during authentication. Will add to the Google Doc.

·         It would be helpful to put these definitions in a Google Doc so that we can review and comment efficiently.

·         Adding ICANN to the SSAD definition is not necessary since ICANN is the controller.

 
Confirmation next steps for finalization of the understanding by May 30
 

·         Support Staff will convert this list into a Google Doc and distribute to the Team. The Team can then propose edits by Tuesday, 28 May.

 

7.               Workstream 1 worksheet (15 minutes) (Marika)

 
Outline concept approach
 

·         Assuming this slide is the order of the expectations from the Team, the proposal is to capture this order in the worksheet. 

·         The worksheet includes related Charter questions, Phase 1 recommendations, policy questions flagged in the TSG report, expected deliverable, et. al.

·         There is a long list of required reading materials - please begin this reading as soon as possible so everyone comes to the discussions with the same background understanding. If you believe anything is missing there, please do let Support Staff know.

·         EPDP Team to provide feedback on the proposed timing of topics. 

·         This worksheet is a starting point for the Team to weigh in on how the Team should review the topic.

·         Are there any efforts in EPDP Phase 1 implementation that are relevant? (rec. 18, for example)

·         The worksheet also seeks to map next steps

·         This intends to help allow groups to prepare for conversations and communicate expected deadlines for each topic.

 
Input from EPDP Team
·         Please provide this in Google Doc format as this makes review more efficient.

 
Confirm next steps for finalization of workstream 1 worksheet
 

·         This worksheet would serve as a map to address topics for the building blocks of the system. This is the main document we would be working on as we go through this topic. We should attempt to finalize the outline of the worksheet in the next few weeks so that we can dwell on the topics by the Marrakech meeting.

·         Support Staff could proceed to fill this worksheet out and then post it as a Google doc.

·         EPDP Team members to familiarize themselves with this worksheet and provide any input on the document and we will review the document again during the next call.

 

8.               Workstream 2 Worksheets (15 minutes) (Marika) – see https://community.icann.org/x/5oaGBg

 
Review input received
 

·         Some members have already begun providing input, but please continue to provide input. 

·         Need to confirm what the expected next steps are, so please pay attention to this field. 

·         The worksheets will be the topic of conversation that will be attempted in parallel.

 

                EPDP Team input:

·         For the worksheets to be truly useful, they need to be living documents. Accordingly, the due date for review should be before the meeting where the topic will be discussed.

·         The worksheets will be updated to reflect the outcome of any related conversations. Once recommendations are finalized, the worksheets will become static.

·         Team Members should review the worksheets - we will attempt to review the worksheet regarding Priority 2 - Friday - 14:00 UTC and anyone wishing to participate is welcome to participate.

 
Confirm next steps
9.               Call for early input on Phase 2 Topics from SO/AC/Gs

 

·         Support Staff has drafted an input document for the Team’s review

·         Proposal to review by Tuesday, 28 May

·         This may not be feasible to review this document by Tuesday. 

 

10.          Any other business

·         CPH asked if there would be any briefing of experts prior to the Team’s substantive work.

·         Would the group be amenable to receive a briefing by Steve Crocker regarding SSAD?

 

11.           Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday, 30 May at 14.00 UTC (5 minutes)
Confirm action items
Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any
 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/attachments/20190523/7c8c70a0/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4620 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/attachments/20190523/7c8c70a0/smime-0001.p7s>