Claudia Ruiz:Welcome to the At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call on Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 19:00 UTC
Claudia Ruiz:https://community.icann.org/x/-ACrBQ
Holly Raiche:Hello - I'm waiting for a dial out
Claudia Ruiz:We are dialing out to you Holly, thank you
Evin Erdogdu:Hello all, welcome! Agenda: https://community.icann.org/x/-ACrBQ
John Laprise:Hi all...at work so I'll be mostly listening and writing in the chat
Evin Erdogdu:Welcome John!
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:Apologies -- currently finishing an ICANN62 prep meeting
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:I mean ICANN63 sorry
Jonathan Zuck:Hoping you mean ICANN63!
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:yup :-)
Evin Erdogdu:Welcome Olivier!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I am in the AC
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):will join Audio shortly
Ejikeme Egbuogu:hello everybody
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:I am awaiting a dial out & as soon as on the call, we'll be starting
Nadira AL-Araj:hi all,just wanted to let yku know that I will be leaving at the top of the hour
Evin Erdogdu:Thank you @Nadira, noted
Claudia Ruiz:Welcome Cheryl Langdon-Orr
Claudia Ruiz:Welcome Dev Anand Teelucksingh
Claudia Ruiz:Welcome Alan Greenberg
Alan Greenberg:URL?
Maureen Hilyard:Hi Claudia.. we've all come from another call. :)
Claudia Ruiz:Welcome Hadia Elminiawi
Evin Erdogdu:Grabbing link now
Evin Erdogdu:View-only (public) link: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1bbQttBnzbQ1Z73YttYb8nzDQyG9jlCjEeZ-2DhfTVF-2Db8_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=CXERzIws_vaPY8WrLB9yz2PICpecEh3yA9MaabnyyBk&m=3L_clmtAlFqYtvOA7tv8ABbf8V6f6RBYxfu066qk9fQ&s=UicHukMHf10BvVqxPt4kqBNtMQg_xWT5bwD3FTTFAZg&e=
Jonathan Zuck:Folks can comment though?
Claudia Ruiz:Welcome Sebastien Bachollet
John Laprise:Strongly support Alan/Milton
John Laprise:If we don't establish legitimate GDPR rationales we're sunk.
John Laprise:FYI here's the GDPR compliant privacy I worked on at my employer: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.rsna.org_Privacy-2DPolicy_&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=CXERzIws_vaPY8WrLB9yz2PICpecEh3yA9MaabnyyBk&m=3L_clmtAlFqYtvOA7tv8ABbf8V6f6RBYxfu066qk9fQ&s=d7DUFYT9NQdVjKesDwgtZ4I0Roeul3IU1bL-PjWpB2I&e=
John Laprise:There's also GDPR requirements for data minimization and data accuracy
John Laprise:We can't keep more data than we need and we have to insure that the data we have *cough* WHOIS *cough* has to be accurate
Claudia Ruiz:@Alan- Seun is on the call
Jonathan Zuck:and there IS a high correlation between piracy and malware
Claudia Ruiz:Welcome Tanya Tropina
Holly Raiche:Heaven knows I hope EPDP goes beyond the usual self interest - I hope Alan is right and that there is reason for hope
Hadia Elminiawi:+ 1 Alan BC, GAC, SSAC and sometimes IPC
Tanya Tropina:Hi all :-) sorry for being late.
Claudia Ruiz:Welcome Eduardo Diaz
Holly Raiche:(And when Milton is being helpful, there is reason for hope)
Tanya Tropina:Holly, Milton is not only helpful, he is one of the people who is trying to bring this EPDP discussion back on track from discussing access ad nauseam
Tanya Tropina:(I feel like I join just in time :-))
Holly Raiche:(and I agree with Alan's analysis - prupose is,and always has been, the key)
Holly Raiche:And Tanya - Milton is very smart, and very capable - he just hasn't always been helpful, so I'm delighted he is being so now
John Laprise:piracy and malware correlation acknowledged nonetheless it's not clear that's an ICANN responsibility or LEO responsibility (personally I think it's the latter)
Tanya Tropina:Holly :-)
Holly Raiche:@ John - I think that's the nub of the issue
Alan Greenberg:@John, you are wrong, and I look forward to convinving you of that.
Holly Raiche:@ john - so very true
Alan Greenberg:It is, or should be very clear. It all comes down to our responsibility for ensuring a stable, reliable DNS.
Alan Greenberg:WE cannot make that happen along, but we have an obligation to facilitate it.
Holly Raiche:@ Alan - I would have thought that our starting point is the GdpR - and what purposes com under it
Greg Shatan:@John, LEO can’t dodge their part of the responsibility, and ICANN can’t dodge their responsibility. It’s not a binary.
Tanya Tropina:Do you call LEA "LEO" on the other side of the pond? I am sorry, just want to ensure I get it well
Alan Greenberg:@Holly, and our job is to build that rationale
CW:@ Greg- no capito?
Holly Raiche:@ Alan - so we really on the same page - as I thought. I think John is there too - we are all trying to fit stuff under that umbrella
Greg Shatan:Holly, GDPR is not granular on purpose, though it is specific on the categories of lawful bases of processing.
Jonathan Zuck:contacted by each other and visitors to their sites
Holly Raiche:Goog example Alan - (and the GDRp generally makes LEA an exeption)
CW:@Alan's example is valid.
Greg Shatan:@CW, my Italian isvery limited, outside of restaurants. What are you asking?
Holly Raiche:(Sorry - good example)
John Laprise:On Law Enforcement: that's fine but that's a governmental requirement not and a separate rationale for data collection
John Laprise:Agreed Greg
John Laprise:not a foregone conclusion
Holly Raiche:In fact, the issue has been discussed for endless hours - over endless years. @ John - that's the issue
Greg Shatan:I will say that ICANN has not covered itself in glory with their interactions with the EDPB, Art. 29, etc. So the “wrong way” is unfortunately still a possibility.
Tanya Tropina:interests or purposes?
Tanya Tropina:well anyway I guess we will discuss this on EPDP anyway :-)
Alan Greenberg:@TT, it is ICANN's PURPOSE that is driven by the interests of other supporting that putpose.
John Laprise:yes, it is legitimate interest HOWEVER legitimate interest includes a delicate balancing test between the individual privacy interests of the data subject and the data controller: legitimate interest is not a magic wand
Evin Erdogdu:Word Doc is attached to agenda
Hadia Elminiawi:those are legitimate interests that happen to be ICANN purposes
Tanya Tropina:Alan, fine, but am afraid that some of the examples are rather the examples of conflated purposes and that's what EDPB asked ICANN not to do.
Tanya Tropina:when it's ICANN's legitimate interest, fine.
John Laprise:I'm just particularly wary having spent so much time on GDPR with my day job
Hadia Elminiawi:I lost the sound
Greg Shatan:The legitimate interests of third parties is not limited to ICANN.
Eduardo Diaz NARALO:Are we obligated to answer using all the boxes?
Claudia Ruiz:@Hadia - would you like a dial out?
Nadira AL-Araj:Good suggestion JZ is to pick the most contraversy points and state ALAC position.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):And remember this is th INITIAL Report not the soon to publish Suplimentary and then FINAL one
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):all still subject to PC as well
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):26 Sept
Greg Shatan:After comments close in a WG, the staff tends to cut up the responses and chart them by topic. So it’s worthwhile to answer the way we have.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):NO further extensions !!!!!
Greg Shatan:As good as staff is, they don’t do as well going on a “scavenger hunt” for position statements in comments.
Holly Raiche:@ Greg - useful for the WG, but for ALAC - it would be much more helpful to identify what our main issues are and what we think
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:We can ask Alan if this could be ratified post deadline?
Greg Shatan:Understood, @Holly, and I agree that a “Guide for the Perplexed” is necessary to get decent responses from ALAC.
Greg Shatan:Our submission, though, needs to work for the WG.
Maureen Hilyard:+1 Greg
Greg Shatan:I like Alan’s overarching positions!
Greg Shatan:“gTLD minimization” :-)
Evin Erdogdu:Ok will change to comment mode
Holly Raiche:The reason I want something overarching is both for us (not everyone will have read every question) and for the WG
Hadia Elminiawi:+ 1 alan
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Sorry you missed me
Greg Shatan:If we don’t answer each question, it will be seen as “no view” by ALAC.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):NO
Jonathan Zuck:so you took your own hand down?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):not now I am in two other calls I was only in 1 other when I asked to jum the que quiuckly before the dial out
Jonathan Zuck:I didn't realize. sorry.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):NP
Eduardo Diaz NARALO:@Greg: we should add to each blank box the following: "Intentionally left blank" or " No comment"
Alan Greenberg:Olivier, I said that we cannot say we have strong views about something and then have indiv answers that straddle the wall.
Evin Erdogdu:Board decision related to .Amazon: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources_board-2Dmaterial_resolutions-2D2018-2D09-2D16-2Den-232.d&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=CXERzIws_vaPY8WrLB9yz2PICpecEh3yA9MaabnyyBk&m=3L_clmtAlFqYtvOA7tv8ABbf8V6f6RBYxfu066qk9fQ&s=_WbZ78R889ImLiSDzEb6ztdW-cqRl8-DZYk3iFLC2KY&e=
Greg Shatan:This could be used to resolve contention sets generally.
Nadira AL-Araj:sharing a string could be win-win situation
Greg Shatan:I don’t think ICANN should be running games of chance.
Greg Shatan:Those aren’t the only 2 choices...
Greg Shatan:Of course, a meritocratic method could end up looking like Community Priority Evaluations.... :-(
Greg Shatan:That said, I would want to explore merit-based methods for resolving contention sets.
CW:@JZ I think we need to see the precise texts which determine the agreement beween Amazon (the company not the 'registry') and the regional entities in the Amazon basis. Wht are the long-term guarantees?
Jonathan Zuck:NOT operational funding!
Hadia Elminiawi:+1 Olivier
Greg Shatan:On the merits, I remain firmly in favor of rounds.
Jonathan Zuck:Greg, for evaluations?
Greg Shatan:Though rounds can be implemented in a number of different ways (e.g., batching).
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:it is also likely to be more expensive for ICANN to have ongoing open applications without rounds
Greg Shatan:For submission of applications, and for evaluations.
Holly Raiche:On 'rounds', I think our cncern can be expressed more as a way of enabling community applications - giving them some kind of preference. And since having 'rounds' is how that is done, I think we back into supporting rounds - BECAUSE of the community applications
Sebastien:I am in favor of rounds for applications submission and for evaluation but it can be split into various categories
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:another thing without rounds is that it's first come first served which might lead a race to purchase all common words, who knows, purchase the words, and then resell them a few months later. Speculation! Yippee!
Greg Shatan:One change I would like to consider is having a transparent application basket. No more “reveal day.”
Greg Shatan:Olivier — Shall we encourage Top Level Domain Speculation?
Greg Shatan:Even more than we already have?
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:@Greg: no
Greg Shatan:<relieved>
Dev Anand Teelucksingh:@Greg what do you mean transparent application basket - everyone sees the application when its filed and received by ICANN ?
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:because as with every uncontrolled speculation, it's a bubble that bursts and the one organisation that will burst then is ICANN
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:+1 Sébastien I agree.
Greg Shatan:@Dev, yes.
Hadia Elminiawi:makes sense
Dev Anand Teelucksingh:Agree with Sebastien, that's precisely what I think will happen
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:@greg: but good words are likely to be snatched from small participants
Greg Shatan:Communities get to win the contention sets though.
CW:@JZ +1 on translparency
Greg Shatan:So they would benefit if they saw that a faux community application was already filed.
Jonathan Zuck:right
Greg Shatan:Otherwise, they are left to object.
Greg Shatan:Our position is opaque.
Evin Erdogdu:Workspace for ICANN Seeking Community Feedback on Proposed Unified Access Model: https://community.icann.org/x/wwA5BQ
Tanya Tropina:Greg I wonder if you are morally conflicted on this issue or not :-)
Jonathan Zuck:@Tanya, he has a viewpoint as does everyone else. I think calling it a "moral" conflict seems a bit inconsistant. Let's just air everyone's view
Tanya Tropina:Jonathan, that was rather a joke, Greg knows me for quite a long time not to take this personally. But sorry if I offended anyone here
John Laprise:I'm good.
Greg Shatan:Tanya, you did not offend me. Quite the opposite.
Tanya Tropina:Greg :-) thank you.
Greg Shatan:Dispassion from all sides would be good. A rational discussion is always welcome!
Greg Shatan:Not hearing.
Greg Shatan:OCL???
Greg Shatan:We may have a broken bridge.
Claudia Ruiz:Greg, we are speaking, would you likea a dial out?
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:can you hear Alan now?
Greg Shatan:No.
Tanya Tropina:yes we can
Tanya Tropina:(me can)
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:the bridge works
Hadia Elminiawi:yeswe can
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:I just tested it
Tanya Tropina:I hear everything on AC with no problem
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:we might have lost Greg on AC
Greg Shatan:I’n hearing JZ
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:JZ is on AC
Hadia Elminiawi:I am hearing him on both too
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:Alan is on phone
Claudia Ruiz:we are dialing out to you Greg
Claudia Ruiz:Greg is now on the bridge
John Laprise:I'm not a supporter on IP interests, per se. Trademarks and copyright/patents are very different.
Greg Shatan:I can hear! I can hear!
Greg Shatan:John — good point. IP is a grouping of convenience.
John Laprise:...and trade secrets are a horse of another colour entirely
Alan Greenberg:Ultimately regardless of who "designs" the model, it will have to be GDPR compliant. Why waste time talking about that?
Jonathan Zuck:Indeed
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:@Alan: do we have an idea when this is going to be discussed in the EPDP?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh:Unfortunately, have to leave the call - take care all
Hadia Elminiawi:@Olivier not soon
CW:Good night. Today began here at 04.00 UTC. Enough. Thakyou Jonathan, colleagues and staff. CW
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Night CW
Hadia Elminiawi:Good night CW
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond:Thanks @Hadia. Isn't this the key for GDPR topic? The access model? Isn't this the most challenging thing?
Alan Greenberg:over time....
John Laprise:Agreed Alan
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I hear you Alan ;-)
Hadia Elminiawi:Good luck with that alan
Hadia Elminiawi:and Cheryl
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):my 0400 seems log ago and now I am still in 3 calls at once
Holly Raiche:@ JONATHAN - FINE BY ME
John Laprise:KSK: This is a hard thing the members need to use the KSK tool to check to see their ISPs are compliant
John Laprise:and then contact their ISPs
John Laprise:But support
Jonathan Zuck:we don't need to diagnose but help announce
John Laprise:SSAC spoke with GAC and was a dead end
Holly Raiche:what about the ccTLDs as wll
John Laprise:we need to disseminate the KSK rollover check tool SSAC was sending out
Holly Raiche:Maybe something to the list - not sure there is time now
Hadia Elminiawi:+ 1Eduardo
Jonathan Zuck:I don't think we need to "check" any more but inform that it's happening
John Laprise:We do need to check: it will help identify which ISPs will fail
Jonathan Zuck:John, can you organize a call on this?
Eduardo Diaz NARALO:A prmomo flyer will do. But it has to be simple to understand (challenge!) and to the point
John Laprise:It's on the SoMe WG agenda
Holly Raiche:Good idea Ed
Eduardo Diaz NARALO:JZ +1
Hadia Elminiawi:Great idea
John Laprise:Check with ICANN communication?
John Laprise:Evin?
Holly Raiche:@ John - goood idea
Evin Erdogdu:@John sure will check, they have deadlines in advance of ICANN63 but we can certainly make the request.
John Laprise:TY :)!
Evin Erdogdu:It would be a tight deadline for 11 October but will check
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Thanks everyone again great to see this WG progress things so well... even when you only have a fraction of my attention/brain...
Evin Erdogdu:You're welcome!
Hadia Elminiawi:Thank you all
Jonathan Zuck:not sure we need to hit that deadline. this is just about spreading information that will be needed regardless of when it happens
Jonathan Zuck:that's fine
Avri Doria:bye
Hadia Elminiawi:bye
Tanya Tropina:thanks all - bye
Evin Erdogdu:Thank you all!
Claudia Ruiz:bye all!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Bye for now then ... Onto my next call...
Maureen Hilyard:Bye all
