[GNSO-TPR] Proposed Agenda - TPR Meeting #103 - 12 Sept 2023

[Caitlin Tubergen]

Dear TPR Working Group Members,

Please find below the proposed agenda for the next meeting on Tuesday, 12 September at 16:00 UTC.

📣 As a reminder, homework is due in advance of tomorrow’s meeting. Thus far, no one was completed the homework. 📣

Please find the homework assignment below:

Support Staff has updated the TPR ICANN-Approved Transfers Working Document [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1gX1N8d3qoktbniRmfGE4-8Un9dPavIKQ3IZYaoe9b0E/edit?usp=sharing__;!!PtGJab4!4MQsXQvwBbDH65LVsv8zrLozIBncLsBhW8JNS5OqYExCTpNH4nQMmtGh8X09Xp24I7wbNcMzL8msOPem-fi1JsatNC5edLinRdn7SoQ$> based on your discussion last week, during which 5 questions were proposed for the WG to answer. In preparation for your next meeting on Tuesday, 12 September (1600 UTC), please provide your response to these questions in the Working Document [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1gX1N8d3qoktbniRmfGE4-8Un9dPavIKQ3IZYaoe9b0E/edit?usp=sharing__;!!PtGJab4!4MQsXQvwBbDH65LVsv8zrLozIBncLsBhW8JNS5OqYExCTpNH4nQMmtGh8X09Xp24I7wbNcMzL8msOPem-fi1JsatNC5edLinRdn7SoQ$>.

The 5 questions pertaining to (i1) Concepts are provided below:
1.       Regarding Concept 3, is $50,000 the final number to be used for the proposed price ceiling?
2.       In the current policy, there is no charge to transfer less than 50,000 domains, but transferring 50,000 or more comes with a flat fee of $50,000. Is this concept of having a minimum/“ledge” of domain names still applicable?
3.       Regarding Concept 4, if there is a sharing of the fee between registries, is there a minimum number of domain names a registry must have involved in order to qualify to share the fee? (e.g. if there are 10 registries involved and one only has 2% of the total domains involved, should they be able to partake in the sharing?)

4.       If so, what is that minimum number of domain names? (e.g. is the registry allowed to bill for one domain name?)
5.       How would this process be handled? Considering Concept 4(a), would ICANN org need to be involved further to help manage this process, and if so, why?



At the bottom of the Working Document [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1gX1N8d3qoktbniRmfGE4-8Un9dPavIKQ3IZYaoe9b0E/edit?usp=sharing__;!!PtGJab4!4MQsXQvwBbDH65LVsv8zrLozIBncLsBhW8JNS5OqYExCTpNH4nQMmtGh8X09Xp24I7wbNcMzL8msOPem-fi1JsatNC5edLinRdn7SoQ$>, you will also see a prompt to provide input relating to charter question (i2):



Should the scope of voluntary bulk transfers, including partial bulk transfers, be expanded and/or made uniform across:
1.       all registry operators (via an update to the Transfer Policy),

OR
2.       all registry operators who offer the BTAPPA (via recommended updates to the BTAPPA)

Please review these questions as well as Support Staff’s highlighted changes, and provide your comments, edits, concerns, etc. within the Working Document before 12 September at 1600 UTC.

Thank you for your attention to the homework.

Best regards,

Julie, Christian, Berry, and Caitlin
--

Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #103
Proposed Agenda
12 September 2023

1. Welcome and Chair updates

2. Continue discussion of Preliminary Agreements<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gX1N8d3qoktbniRmfGE4-8Un9dPavIKQ3IZYaoe9b0E/edit> from Charter Question i1 (Full Portfolio Transfers AKA Bulk Transfers) and Charter Question i2 (Change of Sponsorship AKA Partial Bulk Transfers)

i1) In light of these challenges described in section 3.1.7.2 of the Final Issue Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-issue-report-pdp-transfer-policy-review-12jan21-en.pdf>, should the required fee in Section I.B.2 of the Transfer Policy<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/transfer-policy-2016-06-01-en> be revisited or removed in certain circumstances?


  *   Review of homework
The 5 questions pertaining to (i1) Concepts are provided below:

  1.  Regarding Concept 3, is $50,000 the final number to be used for the proposed price ceiling?
  2.  In the current policy, there is no charge to transfer less than 50,000 domains, but transferring 50,000 or more comes with a flat fee of $50,000. Is this concept of having a minimum/“ledge” of domain names still applicable?
  3.  Regarding Concept 4, if there is a sharing of the fee between registries, is there a minimum number of domain names a registry must have involved in order to qualify to share the fee? (e.g. if there are 10 registries involved and one only has 2% of the total domains involved, should they be able to partake in the sharing?)
  4.  If so, what is that minimum number of domain names? (e.g. is the registry allowed to bill for one domain name?)
  5.  How would this process be handled? Considering Concept 4(a), would ICANN org need to be involved further to help manage this process, and if so, why?



i2) Should the scope of voluntary bulk transfers, including partial bulk transfers, be expanded and/or made uniform across all registry operators? If so, what types of rules and
considerations should govern voluntary bulk transfers and partial bulk transfers?


  *   Review of homework
1.       all registry operators (via an update to the Transfer Policy),
OR
2.       all registry operators who offer the BTAPPA (via recommended updates to the BTAPPA)



3. AOB

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-tpr/attachments/20230911/d511a1d1/attachment-0001.html>