04:01:03	 From Kimberly Carlson : Hello and welcome to today’s ccPDP on Retirement Working Group teleconference on 9 January at 11:00 UTC.  In the interest of time, attendance will be taken based on those in Zoom.  Apologies received from:  Stephen Deerhake and Brent Carey.  As a reminder the calls are recorded and transcribed; recording/transcript will be posted on the public wiki:  https://community.icann.org/x/8ZczBw. Please also remember to mute your phones and microphones while others are speaking to avoid background noise.   Thank you.
04:02:34	 From ppoblete : Hello everyone
04:04:25	 From jaap : Bart topped off
04:06:06	 From jaap : Bart popped up again
04:06:09	 From Bart Boswinkel : b=ack
04:08:25	 From Danko Jevtovic : Hi *.*
04:09:38	 From Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet : Hi and Happy New Year everyone! Sorry to join late my last meeting ran over.
04:18:35	 From Nenad Orlić : My subject, so i have few things to say :)
04:23:27	 From Nenad Orlić : I dont think there is text about that in current policy
04:23:33	 From Nenad Orlić : maybe i missed it but...
04:23:43	 From Danko Jevtovic : If I remember correctly similar issue was discussed in ccNSO with Kim
04:24:17	 From Eberhard Lisse : 4.1 Expectations
04:24:20	 From Eberhard Lisse : Note: Given the importance and exceptional nature of the ccTLD retirement process the IFO, prior to sending a Notice of Retirement, should contact the ccTLD Manager and confirm who the IFO should be dealing with regarding the retirement process. The person or role identified by the ccTLD Manager to deal with the retirement process is referred to as the Retirement Contact and in the remainder of this document the use of the term ccTLD Manager should be understood to mean ccTLD Manager or Retirement Contact if one has been formally identified to the IFO by the ccTLD Manager.
04:25:03	 From Nenad Orlić : working through policy text right now
04:25:24	 From Nenad Orlić : 49-52 lines as i see
04:25:27	 From Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet : I think that covers it
04:25:57	 From Barrack Otieno : i am in Agreement Nick
04:26:47	 From Nenad Orlić : i really cant find that in policy
04:26:56	 From Nenad Orlić : 49-52 lines do not cover it
04:30:06	 From Nenad Orlić : 65-68 deals with lines of communication
04:31:23	 From Nenad Orlić : it is ok, maybe addition that it is cctld mangers responsibility to notify IFO if change retirement contact happens
04:31:30	 From Nenad Orlić : that covers all situations in total
04:31:50	 From Bart Boswinkel : We need too discuss it anyway again in 2 weeks
04:32:03	 From Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet : I think I agree Bernie re court interventions.
04:32:04	 From Nenad Orlić : so if anything happens, its cctld managers fault
04:32:06	 From Bart Boswinkel : with draft notes included
04:32:56	 From Nenad Orlić : in terms of stress test,only situation not coverd is change og retirement contact
04:33:23	 From Nenad Orlić : im still on my subject, been reading policy word-by-word :)
04:33:34	 From Bart Boswinkel : we will add that one to the list
04:36:04	 From Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet : I think that's right Eberhard
04:36:24	 From Nenad Orlić : depends on nature of breach
04:37:05	 From Nenad Orlić : iff cctld starts registering a lot of new domains on multi-year registrations, it should be cut short to minimize damage
04:39:33	 From Nenad Orlić : i can think of only two 'breach scenarios' that require 'action'
04:39:48	 From Nenad Orlić : - registration of domains beyond shutdown date
04:40:01	 From Nenad Orlić : - massive dns abuse / technical outage
04:40:49	 From Sean Copeland : I think Nenad defines a material breach which we should have something for, technical would be minor ( in relative terms ).
04:41:15	 From Sean Copeland : Not sure on the second point from Nenad
04:43:24	 From Nenad Orlić : a) If domains stop resolving for long time
04:43:45	 From Nenad Orlić : b) registrant information for domain dissapears
04:43:47	 From Nenad Orlić : for example
04:46:59	 From Bart Boswinkel : And again we will revisit on next call with text of policy added for context
04:50:59	 From Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet : Absolutely correct Eberhard, otherwise it nulfies the whole point of the retirement policyh
04:54:42	 From Peter Koch : this is a) not about executimng the stress test now and b) not about the reason why the state disapperas
04:56:59	 From Eberhard Lisse : We are reaching the top of the hour…
04:57:29	 From jaap : so drop “commercial” ?
04:58:19	 From Bart Boswinkel : and does it matter given the result?
04:58:27	 From ppoblete : substitute “commercial” by “registrant community”
04:59:59	 From Peter Koch : @ppoblete, yes, for example, or drop ‘commercial’ to allow wider range of scenarios
05:00:01	 From ppoblete : Saturday, I understand
05:00:06	 From Kimberly Carlson : Saturday,
05:00:12	 From Kimberly Carlson : Blocks 4, 5
05:00:22	 From Peter Koch : apologies, need to leave; bye!
05:00:50	 From Barrack Otieno : No AOB from me
05:00:51	 From Bernard Turcotte : bye all
05:00:59	 From Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet : bye
05:01:00	 From ppoblete : God bye!
05:01:00	 From Sean Copeland : bye
05:01:01	 From Kristina Hakobyan : by all)
05:01:01	 From Nenad Orlić : bye
05:01:03	 From jaap : bye all
0