2021-06-10 EPDP Team Phase 2A - Meeting #29

Notes/ Action Items

EPDP Phase 2A - Meeting #29

Proposed Agenda

Tuesday 10 June 2021 at 14.00 UTC

1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes)
2. Welcome & Chair updates (Chair) (5 minutes)
3. Publication of Initial Report & Chair’s statement

 - Keith sent an email on behalf of the EPDP Leadership Team – notes the Initial Report was published and some of the outstanding issues

EPDP Feedback:

- Report to Council in response to Recommendation 1 was apt. Consensus does not exist, which makes it clear to the Council, but does not make it clear to people who are not on Council.

- The email regarding consensus was an email to the EPDP list, not the email that was sent to the GNSO Council

- Concern that this report does not accurately reflect the input from the team. It’s important to go back and fix this. It is misleading because it seems to imply that there is consensus that there be no change. The Team should have been given more time update the report. We feel that we have not been heard.

- Agree with previous concern. The way that the report went out and the way it was characterized made many feel that they were systematically ignored and discounted. Maybe there should be an explanatory note to the Initial Report.

- The report makes clear that there is no consensus for new consensus policy recommendation that would require change. Understand concerns that are being raised – this was the state, and it is important for the Team to get the report out on time. If we were to have missed the date, we would have had to submit a project change request, which may not have been granted. The report makes clear that there is no consensus at this stage, but we are soliciting input on the report.

- A recommendation from multiple groups are recommendations of themselves

- This is not a recommendation of the EPDP Team in full

- There is no consensus. Some also have a problem with the overall timing. If the report had said – there is no consensus to make a recommendation on change, it would have gotten out in the same time period. It’s not a matter of when you had to get the report out.

- This does not qualify as an initial report in terms of the operating procedures. Not sure how the team gets to an initial report to a final report. Ask staff to report if we can even get to a final report after this initial report.

- No changes are recommended is not true changes are recommended by the certain groups.

- One issue has been the lack of timely input and timely homework completion from the team. There was very little interaction between the groups on an intersessional basis.

- Could the team instead of saying no changes are recommended it would just say no consensus could be found on recommending any changes.

. Calls for new reports and redrafting will not change anything.

- The deadlines created a very challenging scenario – the amount of significant changes to the report created significant challenges to the group. If there is a way to bake in cushion at the end to restrict entirely new material review at the end

- A 24-hr delay of publishing a report would have been helpful and could have prevented the issue

- Recognize the issue of timing. This is not the only policy being discussed and cannot think about timelines in the abstract. There are topics that the Council is trying to find the bandwidth to address things. For example, the scoping team on accuracy, DNS abuse, implementation of reviews, PPSAI, T&T, RPMs Phase 2 – there has to be constraints around the timeline and the amount of time any one particular topic can be deliberated on or can never get to other topics. This is why the Council gave limited time. The work kicked off in October and the Council requested proposals in advance of the work. No proposals were provided until the end of February.

1. ICANN71 Session Proposal (30 minutes)
2. Brief overview of proposed session (see attached)

- Instead of Chair’s update, we would like the update to included EPDP Team members as well

1. EPDP Team feedback & identification of volunteers

- Laureen volunteer for questions 4 or 5

- RySG to get back to the group with a volunteer

1. Confirm next steps

1. Intermediary work through the Public Comment (30 minutes)
2. General discussion of what can be accomplished working off-line until the public comment closes 19 July 2021

- A break for the group could be more beneficial than continued conversation.

- There is an opportunity here for the group to continue its discussions. We may not receive anything brand new during the public comment period. It could be a reintroduction of comments already made.

- If anyone would like to recommend specific items the team could work on

1. Consider possible mediated discussions

- We’ve observed that one thing that has been missing from Phase 1 and Phase 2 are the coffee conversations. Leadership thought it may be worth taking advantage of Melissa Allgood, who is a qualified mediator to see if one-on-one conversations with groups. It would not be the same intensity as the regular meeting schedule but may help as the group goes into public comment review.

1. Confirm next steps

1. Wrap and confirm next EPDP Team meeting (5 minutes):
2. EPDP Team Meeting #30 Thursday 15 July at 14.00 UTC (tentative)
3. Meeting #31 Thursday 22 July (confirmed)
4. Confirm action items

- Keith to circle back with Staff re: Milton’s proposal and circle back to the group following the discussion.

- EPDP Team members to volunteer for the ICANN71 session

1. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any