Chat Transcript (see Zoom recording, chat tab)
GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar
Notes/ Action Items
1. ACTION ITEM: Jothan Frakes, Jim Galvin, Jody Kolker, and Rick Wilhelm have volunteered to compile a list of attack vectors and how the recommendations solve for them, or where they are out of scope.
1. Roll Call & SOI updates
2. Welcome and Chair Updates
- No call next week (01 November) due to the CPH Summit, starting up twice-a-week meetings the following week (with 10 November).
Timeline see: https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP/2022-10-25+Transfer+Policy+Review+PDP+WG+Call
3. Continue Discussion of Comments on Elimination of the Losing FOA – Recommendation 2 (see Public Comment Review Tool and Working Document [docs.google.com])
- Proposal based on Public Comment adds complexity to the process.
4. Continue Discussion of Notification of TAC Provision – Recommendation 3 (see Public Comment Review Tool and Working Document [docs.google.com])
- One of the considerations for Recommendations #3 and #4 is whether we will keep these notifications. If we assume that – regardless of Recommendation #2 – then we can dive into the specifics.
Recommendation 3: The working group recommends that the Registrar of Record MUST send a “Notification of TAC Provision” to the RNH, as listed in the registration data at the time of the TAC request, without undue delay but no later than 10 minutes after the Registrar of Record provides the TAC.
Implementation Note: For the purposes of sending the notification, the Registrar of Record should use contact information as it was in the registration data at the time of the TAC request. In cases where a customer uses a Privacy/Proxy service, the Registrar of Record should send the notification directly to contact information associated with the underlying customer where it is possible to do so
o Question: Should this only refer to Proxy service? Proxy service is RNH, whereas for Privacy service, the underlying customer is RNH.
ACTION ITEM: For Recommendation #3 -- WG members to review the language in the Implementation note and suggest improvements. See page 4 in the Working Document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SaEV9vjiSZONjHvnXj3zbPVTTflDTo4WphZrbqDTmxU/edit?usp=sharing.
For next meeting – review comment from ICANN org: “Include additional elements required to be included in the “Notification of TAC Provision” such as:
6. AOB -- Work Plan for Reviewing Public Comments – see attached and below:
- Suggestion is to go through the recommendations sequentially.