The APAC Space web conference that took place on 17 July 2018 saw a bigger turnout of 49 participants from the at-large community, governments, registries, and registrars in the ICANN APAC community.

The web conference functioned as a mini “readout” of discussions at ICANN62 Policy Forum focusing on the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on Temporary Specification (Temp Spec) for gTLD Registration Data. Donna Austin, GNSO Council Vice-Chair introduced the discussions within the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council on initiating the EPDP. Thereafter, APAC Space community facilitator Pam Little led the community discussion on community’s concerns and comments regarding the EPDP.

Links to the meeting recording and presentation slides can be found at the APAC Space Community Wiki webpage here: https://community.icann.org/display/GSEAPAC/APAC+Space

Key action items following the meeting are:


Debrief of ICANN62 GNSO Council Discussions on EPDP on Temp Spec for gTLD Registration Data

Donna Austin provided background that the guidelines and processes of an expedited PDP can be found in the ICANN Bylaws. An EPDP may be initiated by the GNSO Council only in specific circumstances; in the case of the EPDP on Temp Spec for gTLD Registration Data, there was a defined narrow scope to focus only on the Temp Spec with a definite deadline. Details on the formation of EPDPs according to ICANN’s Bylaws can be found in the Expedited GNSO Policy Development Process Manual.

Donna highlighted that the EPDP on Temp Spec for gTLD Registration Data is almost identical to a traditional GNSO PDP with a couple of key differences.  A typical GNSO PDP will take minimum two years to complete. Unlike a PDP, a Preliminary Issue Report and Final Issue Report (and its associated public comment period) are not required. Further, membership composition in the EPDP is limited, as defined in the charter for efficiency to adhere to the 12-month defined deadline, whereas normal GNSO Policy Development Processes (PDP) follow an open-participation approach and do not often have a defined deadline.

Particularly unique to this EPDP, the GNSO Council determined that it would be appropriate to work as a whole on drafting the Initiation Request and the Charter, where normally a drafting team will be put together. Note that this does not set a precedent for future EPDPs.

For more details, read the initiation request for the EPDP.

Following the EPDP recommendations, the GNSO Council has to decide whether to confirm the Temp Spec as a consensus policy by the 25 May 2019 deadline. The ICANN Board also has to renew the Temp Spec every 90 days until this deadline. If the Board does not confirm the Temp Spec before the deadline, contracted parties will no longer be bound by the Temp Spec. The contents of the Temp Spec may be modified due to a recent communication from the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), and these modifications will be considered by the EPDP Team. Additionally, part of the proposed scope of the EPDP requires answering a series of “gating questions” before discussions of a standardized access model can begin.

For more details of the EPDP, refer to the final Charter.

EPDP Membership

Selected EPDP Members will be representatives of their respective Stakeholder Groups. Unlike a normal PDP, where members can speak in their personal capacity, the EPDP members must represent their stakeholder group’s formal positions and not individual positions. This presents an opportunity for community members to have discussions within their Stakeholder Groups to influence positions before they are presented to the EPDP. In addition, a key criterion for EPDP members is working knowledge of GDPR and its related issues. Members must also adhere to the EPDP Statement of Participation.

EPDP members are expected to attend all meetings. If a member is unable to attend, the alternates will go in their place and are expected to be able to keep up with the EPDP discussions. Alternates will be able to listen-in to calls and join the mailing lists but will not be able to participate or post unless they are covering for a member. If members do not adhere to the standards of behavior, the Chair has the power to restrict their participation.

Membership Composition 

The proposed composition of members, alternates and liaisons for the EPDP are as follows:

GroupRySGRrSGIPCBCISPCPNCSGGACALACSSACRSSACCCNSOICANN StaffICANN BoardGNSO CouncilEPDP ChairTotals
Members33222632222



29
Alternates33111332222



23
Liaisons










2 (1 from Legal Team, 1 from Global Domains Division Team)21 (Rafik Dammak)1 (Kurt Pritz)6
Total Members + Liaisons33222632222221135


Next Steps

  • GNSO Council plans to initiate EPDP during its meeting on Thursday 19 July 2018.
  • Call for Volunteers issued, deadline for response on Friday 20 July 2018.
  • EPDP will commence discussions after its formation.
  • The EPDP first Initial Report is expected by ICANN63 Barcelona. 


Community Discussion

  • Community Facilitator Pam Little thanked Edmon Chung for facilitating past APAC Space sessions and making great community contributions. She also congratulated Maureen Hilyard for the latter’s new appointment as At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) Chair. Maureen will assume her new role at the ICANN63 Annual General Meeting.
  • Regarding how the APAC community can get involved in the EPDP despite the aforementioned requirements, Donna encouraged the APAC community to follow the deliberations of the EPDP Team by signing up as a mailing list observer, follow the meetings via real-time audio cast, as well as check the recordings and transcripts accessible to the public. Furthermore, there would be public comment opportunities for community to provide their input. Rafik Dammak added that individuals may also participate by helping to shape their internal stakeholder group positions. Pam commented that concerns can be consolidated within the sub-groups/support groups and raised to their stakeholder groups as input into the EPDP, of which Cheryl Langdon-Orr noted was a successful approach in ALAC inputs to Cross-Community Working Group activities.
  • On whether the EPDP drafting team (comprising GNSO Council members) will be part of the EPDP Team, Donna replied that it was up to the Council if they wanted to join the EPDP Team. Pam added that the Council’s decision to undertake drafting of the EPDP Charter was due to the unique circumstances, and it is unknown whether future EPDPs will follow this same procedure.
  • Pam invited Guo Feng to provide a readout of GAC discussions. Guo Feng shared that one of the discussions within the GAC during ICANN62 was on giving equal status to the GAC representatives and alternates (three respectively). Most of the GAC members were also concerned with the setting up of the unified access model (UAM) to allow legitimate users to access data. To learn more about GAC’s preoccupations and concerns, read the ICANN62 GAC Communique to the ICANN Board.
  • On whether the EPDP will cover access and accreditation, Donna mentioned that the EPDP will focus on whether the Temp Spec is a consensus policy. She was unable to comment on the extent of discussions within the EPDP to be undertaken on access and accreditation. The “gating questions” as outlined in the scope of the Charter will have to be addressed. Based on how these “gating questions” are answered, the EPDP may then tackle accreditation and access issues which may result in another Initial Report after the first one.
  • To a question on what will happen to the Registration Data Services (RDS) PDP that is on hold due to the EPDP, Donna answered that the Council will decide on what to do with the RDS PDP after having more understanding on the EPDP’s direction. The RDS PDP will then review its status and make recommendations on whether it should be terminated.
  • Finally, Pam noted that as the initiation of this EPDP entered “uncharted waters”, the GNSO Council spent a lot of time during ICANN62 ensuring that the EPDP was properly set up for success.
  • No labels