AT-LARGE GATEWAY

At-Large Website

ALAC

RALOs

At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)

At-Large Governance

ALAC Liaisons and Representatives 

Policy Comments & Advice

Working Groups

ICANN Meetings

At-Large Summit (ATLAS III)

At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development

ALAC and RALO Elections, Selections, and Appointments

At-Large FY25 Strategic Priority Activities

Date: Wednesday,14 August 2024

Time: 19:00 - 20:30 UTC  (for the time in various time zones click here) 

How can I participate in this meeting?

English, French & Spanish Conference ID = 3535 (subject to availability)

Zoom Room: https://icann.zoom.us/j/765717566?pwd=UTJCdWRSZVdJNEhOYW02OVBqQVQ1Zz09

Passcode: #CPWG2345*

Real time transcription (RTT) available at: https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN (subject to availability)

Action Items: EN

Recording: EN, ES, FR

Zoom Recording: EN

Zoom Chat: EN

Transcript: EN, ES, FR

Participants:

EN : Olivier Crépin-Leblond,  Maureen Hilyard, Gordon Chillcott, Adrian Carballo, Lilian Ivette De Luque, Marcelo Rodriguez, Aziz Hiliali, Bill Jouris, Bukola Oronti, Claire Craig, Eduardo Diaz, Justine Chew,  Pari Esfandiari, Raihanath Gbadamassi, Shah Rahman, Tommi Karttaavi, Alan Greenberg, Ashirwad Tripathy, Avri Doria, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Christopher Wilkinson, Denise Hochbaum, Ejikeme Egbuogu, Eunice Perez, Frank Anati, Godway Kubi, Gopal Tadepalli, Greg Shatan, Hadia Elminiawi, Herve Setondji Hounzandji, Jim Prendergast, John McCormac, Judith Hellerstein, Kondwani Mbale, Lavish Mawuena Mensah, Letitia Masaea, Patrick Kiiza, Roberto Gaetano, Sandra Rodriguez, Sebastien Bachollet, Vanda Scartezini, Vernatius Ezeama, Yaa Kumi Asare-Bediako

ES: Harold Arcos, Sergio Salinas Porto

FR: Anne-Marie Joly-Bachollet

Apologies:  Priyatosh Jana, Steinar Grøtterød, Laura Margolis, Satish Babu, Alfredo Calderon, Jonathan Zuck

Observer: none

Staff: Heidi Ullrich, Andrew Chen, Berry Cobb, Michelle DeSmyter

ES Interpreters: David & Claudia

FR Interpreters: Claire & Dominique

Call Management: Michelle DeSmyter


AGENDA. *****Final Draft*****

Click tabs for languages - Haga clic en pestañas para idiomas - Cliquez sur les onglets pour les langues

    English (EN)

    1. Welcome and Introduction to the Meeting - Staff (2 minutes)

    2. Adoption of Agenda, Review of Action Items -Olivier Crépin-Leblond (3 minutes)

    3. Policy Workgroup and Small Team Updates (20 minutes)

    Transfer Policy Review Policy Development Process (TPR-PDP) - (N/A) 

    At-Large Workspace

    At-Large Representatives

      • ALAC Appointed Representatives: Steinar Grøtterød, Daniel Nanghaka
      • ALAC Alternates: Raymond Mamattah, Lutz Donnerhacke
      • ALAC Observers: Chokri Ben Romdhane, Hans Bathija, K Mohan Raidu, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy

    Additional Resources

    Registration Data Request Service (RDRS) - (10 minutes) - Alan Greenberg

    (formerly System for Standardized Access/Disclosure Operational Design Assessment)

    At-Large Representative

      • ALAC Appointed Representative: Alan Greenberg 

    Additional Resources

    Standing Predictability Implementation Review Team (SPIRT) Charter Drafting Team - (10 minutes) - Alan Greenberg

    At-Large Representative

      • ALAC Appointed Representative: Alan Greenberg 

    Additional Resources

    GNSO SubPro Small Team / Small Team Plus - (N/A) 

    At-Large Representative(s)

      • ALAC Liaison to the GNSO: Justine Chew
      • ALAC Subject Matter Expert (SME): Currently, Greg Shatan
      • ALAC SME Alternate: Currently, Avri Doria

    Additional Resources

    IANA Naming Function Review (IFR2) - (N/A) 

    At-Large Representative

      • ALAC Appointed Representative: Carlton Samuels 

    Additional Resources

    Registration Data Accuracy (RDA) Scoping Team - (N/A)

    At-Large Workspace

    At-Large Representatives

      • ALAC Appointed Representatives: Alan Greenberg, Michael Palage

    Additional Resources

    4. Implementation Review Team (IRT) Updates (5 Minutes)

    Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues (PPSAI) IRT - (5 minutes) - Alan Greenberg

    At-Large Representative

      • At-Large Representative: Alan Greenberg
      • At-Large Alternate: Greg Shatan
      • At-Large Participants: Carlton Samuels and Shah Zahidur Rahman

    Additional Resources

    Subsequent Procedures IRT - (N/A)

    At-Large Workspace on SubPro

    At-Large Representative(s)

      • ALAC Appointed Representative: Justine Chew 
      • ALAC Appointed Alternate: Cheryl Langdon-Orr

    Additional Resources

    5. Policy Statement Updates - Avri Doria, Andrew Chen and drafting team member(s) and all (40 minutes)

    a. Recently Ratified by the ALAC / Currently going through Ratification Process

    b. Current Statements (ALAC Advice, Public Comment Statement, or Correspondence)

    Statement/Correspondence/Advice Name

    Internal Deadlines

    Public Comment Close

    Status

    		 Assigned Working Group

    Reviewer(s)/Penholder(s)

    At-Large Workspace: Han Script Single Character IDN Generic Top-Level Domains

    • In preparation for the New gTLD Program: Next Round, ICANN org worked with the Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Script Generation Panels (CJK GPs) to seek their guidance on string similarity concerns for single character IDN gTLD applications in the Han script. The CJK GPs agreed that the work already done in the Root Zone Label Generation Rules (RZ-LGRs) sufficiently addresses the technical and linguistic concerns around string similarity for single character IDN TLDs. Feedback is requested on the Proposed Considerations for the Application of Single Character IDN Generic Top-Level Domains based on the analysis and conclusions shared by the CJK GPs.
      • The CPWG has decided not to provide a public comment statement for this proceeding. 


    		  NO STATEMENT CPWG

    At-Large Workspace: Proposed Language for the Next Round Applicant Support Program and Registry Service Provider Evaluation Program Terms and Conditions (20 minutes - Justine Chew)

    • In this Public Comment proceeding, ICANN org is looking for input from the community on whether the proposed language for the Terms and Conditions for the New gTLD Program: Next Round Applicant Support Program and Registry Service Provider Evaluation Program is consistent with recommendations 18.4 and 18.6 as well as recommendations from Topics 6 and 17 from the Final Report on the new gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Process.

      • The CPWG has agreed to draft a statement for this public comment proceeding.

    Draft Statement:  

    Final Statement:  

    ALAC Vote:  to  

    		   DRAFT CPWG

    Justine Chew 

    At-Large Workspace: Registries Stakeholder Group Charter Amendments

    • The Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) recently amended its charter and notified the ICANN organization of its request for approval by the ICANN Board. This Public Comment proceeding seeks input on proposed amendments of the RySG charter to inform ICANN Board consideration. The RySG amended its charter to reflect its current practices, align with its operating procedures, and accommodate its evolving needs. It also accounts for best practices for the GNSO such as the GNSO Operating Procedures and the ICANN Bylaws.

      • The OFB-WG has decided not to provide a public comment statement for this proceeding.


    		  NO STATEMENT OFB-WG


    At-Large Workspace: Preliminary Issue Report on Latin Script Diacritics (15 Minutes - Bill Jouris and Patrick Kiiza)

    • Initial Draft Statement

    • This Preliminary Issue Report on Latin Script Diacritics examines a single issue: the circumstance where a base ASCII generic top-level domain (gTLD) and the Latin script diacritic version of the gTLD are not variants of each other, and where currently no mechanism exists that allows a single registry operator to simultaneously operate both gTLDs. The report provides additional background about this issue, including factors that might be appropriate for considering the scope of the issue or that might aid in a policy development process (PDP), and an assessment as to whether this issue is within scope of the ICANN policy process and the GNSO. The report also includes a draft PDP charter. Your input will be reviewed in preparing the final Issue Report that the GNSO Council will consider in determining next steps.

      • The CPWG has agreed to draft a statement for this public comment proceeding. 

    Draft Statement:  

    Final Statement:  

    ALAC Vote:  to  

    		   DRAFT CPWG

    Bill Jouris Satish Babu @Patrick.Kiiza

    At-Large Workspace: Data Processing Specification for ICANN-Accredited Registries and Registrars

    • ICANN org seeks community input on draft Data Processing Specifications (DPS) applicable to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement and Registry Agreement. Pursuant to the Phase 1 Recommendations 19 and 20 of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data, ICANN org and a team convened by the Contracted Party House negotiated the terms of the DPS for which we now seek public comment. ICANN org is preparing to implement the DPS so contracted parties can begin utilizing it during the Registration Data Policy transition period (21 August 2024 - 20 August 2025). 
      • Does the CPWG and At-Large community wish to comment on this proceeding?


    		  PENDING DECISION CPWG


    At-Large Workspace: gTLD IDN Tables Review Process When Reference LGR is not available

    • Currently there are 26 script-based Ref. LGRs published and ICANN org is able to review IDN Tables in hundreds of languages written in these scripts. However, there are 161 scripts encoded in Unicode standard and many scripts do not have Ref. LGRs available. Feedback is requested on the Proposed Process to Review gTLD IDN Tables Without Reference Label Generation Rules.

      • The CPWG and At-Large community has agreed to review this public comment proceeding.


    		  UNDER REVIEW CPWG

    Hadia Elminiawi Satish Babu Abdulkarim Ayopo Oloyede Harold Arcos 

    At-Large Workspace: IRP-IOT – Proposed updates to the IRP Supplementary Procedures

    • The Independent Review Process (IRP) provides for third-party review of Board or Staff actions (or inactions) alleged to be inconsistent with ICANN's Articles or Bylaws. The IRP Implementation Oversight Team (IRP-IOT) seeks input on its proposed updates to IRP Supplementary Procedures.
      • The OFB-WG has agreed to draft a statement for this public comment proceeding. 


    		 
    		OFB-WG


    At-Large Workspace: Proposed Fundamental Bylaws Amendments Related to Grant Program

    • The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers is seeking input on a proposed amendment to Article 4, Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the ICANN Bylaws. The proposed Bylaws amendment is designed to specifically exclude the use of the ICANN’s Reconsideration and Independent Review Processes (collectively, “Accountability Mechanisms”) to challenge decisions on individual applications in the ICANN Grant Program. This proposal replaces the earlier proposed amendments to Article 4, Section 4.1 to set out a general process for how the ICANN community can limit access to ICANN’s Accountability Mechanisms.

      • To be reviewed by the OFB-WG.


    		 
    		OFB-WG


    At-Large Workspace: Draft ICANN Strategic Plan and Operating Plan Framework for FY26-30

    • As the ICANN Board finalizes the draft Strategic Plan for FY26–30, your insights are crucial to ensuring its success and alignment with community needs. The Board and org need your feedback on the clarity and relevance of our vision, the appropriateness of the strategic objectives, and the detailed goals and strategies designed to achieve them. Additionally, we seek your input on the proposed progress indicators and identified strategic risks. Furthermore, your input on the key activities identified in the five-year Operating Plan Framework to achieve each draft strategy is also appreciated. Your comments will help the Board and org to refine and enhance the plan to better serve our community through our strategic objectives. 
      • To be reviewed by the OFB-WG.


    		 
    		OFB-WG

    Claire Craig Cheryl Langdon-Orr Judith Hellerstein Bukola Oronti Hadia Elminiawi Vanda Scartezini 

    At-Large Workspace: Transfer Policy Review Working Group Initial Report 

    • Initial Draft Statement
    • The Initial Report on the Transfer Policy Review Policy Development Process (PDP) documents the Working Group’s efforts and preliminary recommendations for how to evolve and improve ICANN’s Transfer Policy. The PDP Working Group requests your input on this Initial Report, which covers a wide range of generic top-level domain (gTLD) transfer-related topics and proposes a variety of changes to the current Transfer Policy.
      • The CPWG has agreed to draft a statement for this public comment proceeding. 

    Draft Statement:  

    Final Statement:  

    ALAC vote: to  

    		   DRAFT CPWG

    Steinar Grøtterød 

    c. Upcoming Public Comment Proceedings

    Improved GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency Charter Amendment Process OFB-WG

    The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) charter revision process has been updated to reflect the continuous evolution of the ICANN community, ongoing implementation of Specific Review recommendations, and the review role of ICANN Board. These improvements will streamline charter revisions and allow GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies to continue their focus on policy development.

    Draft PTI FY26-30 Strategic Plan OFB-WG

    The Five-Year Strategic Plan establishes a vision and a set of strategic objectives in service of PTI's mission.

    Proposed Language for Draft Sections of the Next Round Applicant Guidebook (September)CPWG

    This Public Comment proceeding is the second in a series of proceedings that will seek input from the ICANN community on proposed language for selected sections of the Applicant Guidebook for the New gTLD Program: Next Round.

    Revised Operating Standards for Specific Reviews Draft OFB-WG

    Over the course of multiple Specific Reviews, challenges emerged with the process that impacted their effectiveness. To address these challenges, ICANN org developed process improvements that it socialized with the community. Based on community input, org revised the Operating Standards for Specific Reviews. This proceeding seeks community input on the Revised Operating Standards, in time for the next Accountability and Transparency Review.


    6. Any other business (AOB) - Avri Doria and all (11 minutes)   

    7. Next Meeting - Olivier Crépin-Leblond and staff (2 minutes)

    • CPWG meetings are held weekly on Wednesdays, at rotating times of 14:00 & 19:00 UTC
    • Proposed Next Meeting: Wednesday, 21 August 2024, 14:00 UTC 

    CPWG Resources

    • No labels

    1 Comment

    1. Steinar Grøtterød

      Update to the At-Large input to Comment on Initial Report on the Transfer Policy Review

      My recommendations to the charter questions for Part A: TPR PDP Initial Report - Group 1(a) and Part B:TPR PDP Initial Report - Group 1(b)Recommendations are added to the Google doc. The "End-User Impact" status is added to each question in the heading, making it more easy to select charter questions to investigate.

      I kindly ask CPWG members to read - and comment if needed, my recommendations.

      My input to set the "End-User Impact"

      The idea is to indicate the End-User Impact for each of the proposed recommendations. The levels are:

      • LOW
      • MEDIUM
      • HIGH

      I will work within the following understanding:

      • The status LOW indicate that the recommendation will have a minimal impact for the end-users. Example Recommendation #4: Change the wording from "AuthInfo Code” to “Transfer Authorization Code (TAC)”.
      • The status MEDIUM indicate a a minor change in the present policy, requiring the end-users attention. Example Recommendation #6:Service Level Agreement (SLA) for TAC provision.
      • The status HIGH indicate a major change that may impact end-users.

      A key question is "what is the understanding of an end-user"?

      A requirement is that any end-users MUST be the registrant of a generic domain name. Defining more criteria to an "end-user" can be difficult. I have added my proposed recommendations to the charter questions under the assumptions that the end-user is not a professional domain name holder, but have his/her domain names in a low number and for normal usage (blog, email etc.).