The call for the Transfer Policy Review PDP Working Group will take place on Tuesday, 19 March 2024 at 16:00 UTC for 90 minutes.
For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/axdbpsdb
PROPOSED AGENDA
- Welcome and Chair Updates
- ICANN79 TPR Sessions Debrief
2a. Discuss updates to CORD Draft Recs
2b. Poll questions
2c. Established Relationships (time permitting)
3. AOB
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS
PARTICIPATION
Apologies: Osvaldo Novoa (GNSO Council Liaison), Rick Wilhelm (RySG), Catherine Paletta (RrSG), Jody Kolker (RrSG)
Alternates: Essie Musailov (RrSG), Christopher Patterson (RrSG)
RECORDINGS
Notes/ Action Items
Main discussion and action items
1. Welcome and Chair Updates
- The meeting commenced with welcoming all attendees. There were no specific updates from the chair.
2. ICANN79 TPR Sessions Debrief
- Staff provided updates to the draft recommendation language, accessible provided here.[docs.google.com]
- Wiki page to ICANN79 session 1, which took place on 2 March 2024:https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP/2024-03-02+ICANN79+Transfer+Policy+Review+PDP+WG+Call+Session+1
- Discussion revolved around the updates to the CORD Draft Recommendations:
- Clarification was made regarding the use of two colors of highlights in the presentation, where yellow indicated changes to the draft language, and blue highlighted points for discussion.
- Preliminary recommendation 1.1 was updated to clarify changes to registrant data, particularly concerning email addresses.
- Examples were sought to understand non-material changes to email addresses.
- Recommendation 3.4 sparked considerable discussion during the session, particularly regarding opt-out options and notification methods.
- Concerns were raised about potential contradictions between recommendations 3.3 and 3.4 regarding notification methods.
- Group consensus leaned towards including SMS and other secure communication methods as an option for notifications alongside email.
- There was uncertainty regarding the inclusion of an opt-out option and its implications.
- Discussion ensued on whether to make the opt-out option mandatory or optional for registrars, with consideration for guardrails.
- Questions arose regarding notifications to new email addresses following an update, prompting further deliberation.
- The current consensus favored retaining the opt-out option as optional for registrars.
- Recommendation 3.7 was discussed regarding the consolidation of notifications and verification requests.
- There was a proposal to change recommendation 4 from "must" to "may" regarding opt-out provisions.
2b. Poll Questions
- Poll questions [icann.zoom.us] were proposed to clarify outstanding issues related to opt-out.
- Consideration was given to whether opt-out should apply to changes in email addresses and the scope of opt-out concerning different types of data changes.
- Scenarios were presented to illustrate different opt-out cases.
- Discussion continued on whether the opt-out option should be mandatory or optional for registrars.
- The group expressed interest in making the opt-out option optional, with specified parameters.
2c. Established Relationships (time permitting)
- Red-lined Recommendation 17 from Group One was discussed, particularly focusing on established relationships.
- Proposed revisions to Recommendation 17 aimed to provide flexibility for registrars while addressing security concerns.
- Concerns were raised regarding the lack of a clear definition for established relationships and the potential risks associated with them.
- Staff emphasized the need for strong rationale to justify lessening the 30-day transfer restriction.
3. Any Other Business (AOB)
- No additional topics were raised.