AC Chat SPEC11 27 August 2015 Fabien Betremieux: (8/27/2015 14:33) Hello Artthawit, our call will start in about 30 minutes Artthawit Hung: (14:33) Hi Artthawit Hung: (14:33) ok! Fabien Betremieux: (14:34) Please don't mind the audio until then, we may be conducting some tests. Fabien Betremieux: (14:34) Thank you for joining our meeting today. Artthawit Hung: (14:34) I see Artthawit Hung: (14:35) It's my pleasure to join this meeting :) Di Ma: (14:45) hello, everybody Fabien Betremieux: (14:45) Hello Di Ma, thank you for joining our call today Fabien Betremieux: (14:45) We should be starting in about 15 minutes Di Ma: (14:47) okay, I am standing by Fabien Betremieux: (14:54) Hello everyone, welcome to our Framework Drafting Team meeting. For audio participation, please either dial-in to the coneference with details provided in the meeting invite, or use the audio feature of Adobe Connect Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (14:55) Hello Everyone Theo Geurts: (14:56) Good Afternoon Wanawit Ahkuputra GAC TH: (14:56) Good evening from Thailand Mouhamet Diop: (15:01) Hello From Senegal Gisella Gruber 2: (15:03) Elaine Pruis and Crystal Ondo have joined the call (and are not yet on Adobe Connect) Gisella Gruber 2: (15:04) Richard Roberto has joined the call Gisella Gruber 2: (15:05) Crystal Ondo has joined the call Yasmin Omer: (15:07) yes please Jon Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:07) Has anyone mapped out the overall timeline and what milestones we are trying to hit? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:09) 9th Sep is not a good idea Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:09) Stated another way, are there some deliverables that have been promised to any group that we should be aware of? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:09) due to LA Summit Gisella Gruber 2: (15:12) Robert Flaim has joined the call Richard Roberto: (15:13) +1 Jeff Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:13) +1 Jef Yasmin Omer: (15:13) Correct Jeff Jon Flaherty: (15:15) correct Richard Roberto: (15:15) So are we each supposed to provide our own draft proposal? Richard Roberto: (15:17) Are each of the constituencies meant to meet independently outside of this group as a whole? Peter Green (CONAC): (15:18) Hi, execuse me, what's being discussed now? Alan Woods (Rightside): (15:18) completely agree re timeline. Peter Green (CONAC): (15:18) Sorry for being late Richard Roberto: (15:19) agreed Cathrin Bauer-Bulst: (15:19) Fully agree on the timeline Elaine Pruis-Donuts: (15:19) ICANN did some of the leg work already with the community by collecting responses to questions and comments, which resulted in the "charter". Hopefully we don't have to start over and we can review the charrter with our relevant groups and come back with some modifcations Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:21) missed calles shound not be an excuse for not doing work Artthawit Hung: (15:21) Should the time in the chater "4.4 Meeting" be updated to 14:00 UTC ? Cathrin Bauer-Bulst: (15:22) Elaine, could you clarify on the charter? The charter that I am aware of outlines how the drafting team should proceed but does not yet contain content. And the draft framework currently in the workspace lists many of the issues that should be covered in the framework but does not yet provide the actual content. Cathrin Bauer-Bulst: (15:22) Maybe I am missing a key document here. I'd be grateful if you could enlighten me! Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:23) Yes, can we please get all documents posted to a wiki space for us Elaine Pruis-Donuts: (15:23) you've got it Cathrin-the draft framework which was distributed along with the charter for our first meeting Cathrin Bauer-Bulst: (15:23) Jeff, the docs are posted here: https://community.icann.org/display/S1SF/Current+Documents Cathrin Bauer-Bulst: (15:24) OK, thanks, Elaine. Yasmin Omer: (15:25) I'm happy with the format you suggest re: calls and happy to focus on colloborating via email Jon Flaherty: (15:25) great cheers Theo Geurts: (15:26) +1 , yas Yasmin Omer: (15:26) It'd be great to see those Bobby Yasmin Omer: (15:26) thank you Wanawit Ahkuputra GAC TH: (15:26) thank Bobby Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:27) What has been going on for 2.5 years? Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:28) I am trying to look up a bunch of the linked documents and some of them go to "File not found" (the links in the staff paper) Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:28) Everyone should have access to the list Elaine Pruis-Donuts: (15:28) full transparency please Yasmin Omer: (15:28) I think it should be everyone Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:29) Like the IETF - everyone gets to comment Jon Flaherty: (15:29) sounds good Richard Roberto: (15:29) +1 everyone Theo Geurts: (15:30) agreed Richard Roberto: (15:30) at the very first meeting of this working group I questioned the emphasis on expediency and got quite a bit of support so why are we still in a rush? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:31) as I undersand we already have RySG/RrSG co-chairs Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:31) who are able to relay information Rubens Kuhl: (15:31) Since GDD Summit doesn't include GAC, PSWG, MAAWAG or CERTs, I don't see it as a key moment to this process. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:32) +1 Rubens Fabien Betremieux: (15:33) Beijing GAC Advice: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/gac-to-board-18apr13-en.pdf Richard Roberto: (15:33) Agreed, Jeff Fabien Betremieux: (15:33) NGPC Proposal: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-i-agenda-2b-25jun13-en.pdf Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:34) reference to history ... SPEC 11 was added to RA without any counsultations with Registries Krista Papac: (15:35) @Rubens: It would be an opportunity for registries and registrars to discuss among themselves. It's up to the GDD Summit attendees to decide whether they want to do that or not. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:36) heavy echo Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:39) @Krista - I aAgree. This would be a good topic to make sure we include at the GDD Summit. Yasmin Omer: (15:42) Yes, thanks Fabien Elaine Pruis-Donuts: (15:42) did I misunderstand, did you say ICANN staff is working on a parallel clarificaiton?? Yasmin Omer: (15:43) That will presumably go out for public comment, yes? Yasmin Omer: (15:44) sure Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:47) Are we talking about this document or something else: https://community.icann.org/display/S1SF/Current+Documents?preview=/54693403/54888169/security-framework-draft-outline-v1.1-12aug15.pdf#CurrentDocuments-Framework Fabien Betremieux: (15:48) This was compile by staff as a conversation starter Fabien Betremieux: (15:48) This is not what Jon is refering to. Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:48) Is Jon reading from something? Fabien Betremieux: (15:48) his own notes I would believe Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:48) what is the jurisdiction of the company in question? Rubens Kuhl: (15:50) Jon might be referring to UK, but it's a guess. Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:50) That product by Architelos is under a little controversy these days (See Afilias law suit) Al Bolivar & Chris Klein (Verisign): (15:51) http://domainincite.com/19140-afilias-wins-10m-judgment-in-architelos-trade-secrets-case Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:51) than it is quite limited to US and UK Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:52) Have we compiled stats on abuse in the new gtlds? Al Bolivar & Chris Klein (Verisign): (15:52) Yes read the supplied link regarding Architeos Al Bolivar & Chris Klein (Verisign): (15:52) Architelos sorry. Elaine Pruis-Donuts: (15:53) Jeff there are stats on new gTLDs --showing the abuse in new TLD is 10x less than legacy TLDs Elaine Pruis-Donuts: (15:53) and significantly tied to price Jon Flaherty: (15:54) no problem ! Rubens Kuhl: (15:56) Spam is not a security risk per se. Mass e-mail can be a threat delivery mechanism, but not all mass mailing come with security threats. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:57) as a second effect - making higher prices for domans due to extended security measures might decrease number of abuses ... but at expence of lower income ... Nick Shorey - UK Government: (15:57) Sorry to cover old ground - I was slightly late in - is there general consensus that the timeframe is workable? Elaine Pruis-Donuts: (15:57) Corroborating this is a recent Anti-Phishing Working Group (apwg.org) survey that concludes: “Phishing occurred in 227 top-level domains (TLDs), but 90% of the malicious domain registrations (20,565) were in just five TLDs: .COM, .TK, .PW, .CF and .NET. A small number of phishing attacks were seen in the new generic top-level domains that began launching in early 2014.” Yasmin Omer: (15:57) we will get back to you on a proposed timeline and scope Mouhamet Diop: (15:57) i have a very instable connection. Jon Flaherty: (15:57) thanks ill revise all these reports Nick Shorey - UK Government: (15:58) Thanks Yasmin Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:59) We look forward to seeing the PSWG's proposal Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): (15:59) bye all Jon Flaherty: (15:59) thanks Wanawit Ahkuputra GAC TH: (15:59) thank you everyone Richard Roberto: (15:59) Thanks everybody Yasmin Omer: (15:59) thanks all Jeff Neuman (Valideus): (15:59) thanks Al Bolivar & Chris Klein (Verisign): (15:59) Goodbye all Alan Woods (Rightside): (15:59) thanks Luis Muñoz: (15:59) Thank you all Theo Geurts: (15:59) thanks all Artthawit Hung: (16:00) Thank you all Mouhamet Diop: (16:00) Bye