You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 23 Next »

At-Large Representatives (ALAC Team)

ALAC Members: Satish Babu, Lianna Galstyan and Abdulkarim Oloyede

ALAC Participants: Justine Chew and Hadia Elminiawi


REPORTS/UPDATES TO & CONSULTATIONS WITH THE AT-LARGE CONSOLIDATED POLICY WORKING GROUP (CPWG)

11 Aug 2021 - ongoing

See GNSO Workspace: Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs)

Preliminaries

At its meeting on 20 May 2021, the GNSO Council resolved to initiate an Expedited Policy Development Process (EDPD) on Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and adopted a charter for the EPDP Team to deliberate identified Policy Track issues and to provide policy recommendations on:

i) the definition of all TLD and the management of variant labels to facilitate delegation of variant gTLDs in the root zone while achieving the security and usability goal of variant labels in a stable manner; and

ii) how the IDN Implementation Guidelines, which Contracted Parties are required to comply with, should be updated in the future.

The charter questions in the charter were developed based on the following principles and framework:

  • Not to revisit Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) recommendations in context of future new gTLDs, but to consider whether such recommendations should be extended to existing gTLDs (where IDNs are concerned);
  • To consider the impact of recommendations out of the IDN Variant TLD Implementation Staff Paper ("Staff Paper") and Recommendations for the Technical Utilization of the Root Zone Label Generation Rules ("TSG recommendations") on both future and existing gTLDs where there is a lack of SubPro recommendation; and
  • To coordinate with the SubPro Implementation Review Team (SubPro IRT) on addressing implementation issues to achieve, to the extent possible, consistent solutions for new and existing gTLDs – to note that the SubPro IRT has not yet been convened at this point.


Policy Track Issues & Charter Questions (CQ)

Policy Track Issues

Charter Questions

Charter Questions Discussed with CPWG #EPDP Draft Recs / IG Status #

A. Consistent definition and technical utilization of RZ-LGR

  • a1: RZ-LGR as  sole authoritative source
  • a2: Any standing of self-identified variants
  • a3: Any challenge process to RZ-LGR variant dispositions
  • a4: Where script of application not supported by RZ-LGR
  • a5: Any ceiling value for variant allocation 
  • a6: Impact of possible non-full backward compatibility of future version of RZ-LGR on existing delegations
  • a7: Allowing single character IDNs
  • a8: Catch-all
  • a9: TLD label statuses (taxonomy)
  • a10: TLD label statuses (changes)
  • a1, a2, a3 on 24 Nov 2021, 1 & 8 Dec 2021
  • a4, a5, a6, a7 on 2 Feb 2022
  • Revisited a5, a6 on 2 Mar 2022
  • a8 has been parked since it's a catch-all question
  • a9, a10 are pending
  • a1: Stable
  • a2: Stable
  • a3 Stable except for an Open Item 
  • a4: Stable
  • a5: Stable after 2nd reading
  • a6: Stable after 2nd reading 
  • a7: Pending, awaiting input from CJK GPs)
  • a8: Parked since is catch-all question
  • a9: Not yet out for comment
  • a10: Not yet out for comment

B. IDN Variant TLD Management: "Same entity" at the top-level

  • b1: Same entity top level
  • b2: Same entity back end
  • b3: Any additional requirements beyond b1 and b2
  • b4: Process to obtain variant labels
  • b4a: Role of "withheld for the same entity"
  • b5: Extension of restrictions on community, brand to variant labels
  • b1, b2, b3, b4 + prefaced db1 on 16 Mar 2022 
  • b4a, b5 are pending
  • b1: Not yet out for comment
  • b2: Not yet out for comment
  • b3: No recommendation needed
  • b4: Parked pending strawman proposal
  • b4a: Parked, pending e1 deliberation
  • b5: Not yet out for comment

C. IDN Variant TLD Management: "Same entity" at the second-level

  • c1: Same entity second level
  • c2: Reconcile SubPro rec with existing RA
  • c3: Mechanism to identify registrant - ROID
  • c3a: If use ROID, anything else?
  • c4: Harmonization of IDN tables; consider existing SLD
  • c4a: Disposition of variant labels across TLD can differ
  • c5: Methods to harmonize IDN tables
  • c6: Use of RFC7940


D. Adjustments in registry agreement, registry service, registry transition process, and other processes/procedures related to the domain name lifecycle

  • d1: Legal framework
  • d1a: Registry Agreement
  • d1b: 'Application' for future variant TLDs
  • d2: Lifecycle management of variant TLDs
  • d3: Same entity data escrow impact
  • d4: Same entity lifecycle second level
  • d5: Registration fees second level
  • d6: Transfer second level, voluntary and involuntary
  • d6a: UDRP impact on same entity principle
  • d7: Suspension of 1 domain impact to variant set
  • d7a: URS impact on same entity
  • d8: Catch-all
  • d1: No recommendation needed
  • d1a: Not yet out for comment
  • d1b: Not yet out for comment with Part 1 parked pending outreach to Arabic/Chinese TLD ROs & strawman proposal

E. Adjustments to objection process, string similarity review, string contention resolution, reserved strings, and other policies and procedures:

  • e1: Role of "withheld for the same entity"
  • e2: Criteria for objection
  • e3: String similarity (scope)
  • e3a: String similarity (consequences)
  • e4: String contention resolution
  • e5: Reserved strings & strings ineligible for delegation
  • e6: 2-character Latin IDN TLDs
  • e7: Catch-all (same entity - top level)

  • e1: In deliberation
  • e2: Deferred
  • e3: In deliberation
  • e3a: In deliberation
  • e4: Deferred
  • e5: In deliberation
  • e6: Deferred
  • e7: 
F. Adjustments to registration dispute resolution procedures and trademark protection mechanisms
  • f1: Same entity impact to TMCH top level
  • f2: Same entity impact to RPMs, URS, UDRP, etc top level


G. Process to update the IDN Implementation Guidelines
  • g1: Process to update IDN Guidelines
  • g1a: Differentiation for ccTLDs and gTLDs?


2021 Deliberations

  • This EPDP Team has its first meeting on 11 Aug 2021 and have been meeting nearly every week, on Thursdays at 13:30 UTC.
  • The ALAC Team provided regular verbal updates to CPWG especially whenever there were some developments in the deliberations of this EPDP. 
  • In particular, the ALAC Team, presented:

1. An update to CPWG on 1 Sep 2011 on the EPDP's third meeting of 25 Aug 2021, as an example
2. Some background to CPWG on 24 Nov 2021 and on EPDP Team deliberations for CQ a1-a3 as at 18 Nov 2021 (presentation
3. A follow-up to CPWG on 1 Dec 2021 on recap to CQ a1-a3 (presentation)
4. An opportunity for discussion of questions at CPWG on 8 Dec 2021 out of the ALAC Team's presentations of 24 Nov 2021 and 1 Dec 2021 

2022 Deliberations

  • The EPDP Team recommenced its meeting on 6 Jan 2022.
  • # At its 3 Feb 2022 call, it was determined that the EPDP Team would move forward with an updated sequence of charter questions. 
  • The ALAC Team continued to provide regular verbal updates to CPWG especially whenever there were some developments in the deliberations of this EPDP. 
  • In particular, the ALAC Team, presented:

5. And discussed with CPWG on 2 Feb 2022 positions and rationales for CQ a4 - a7 (presentation)
6. Some background to CPWG on 2 Mar 2022 and on EPDP Team deliberations for CQ a5 and a6 (presentation)
7. Some background to CPWG on 16 Mar 2022 and on EPDP Team deliberations for CQ b1 - b4, d1b (presentation)
8. And discussed with CPWG on 23 Mar 2022 to seek indicative positions for CQ d1b (presentation) by way of 5 straw poll questions:




Update for 01 September CPWG:

Discussions at the third meeting of the EPDP on IDNs (25 Aug 2021)

  1. The meeting started with Roll Call & SoI Updates (Edmon reported an update of his SoI on account of his induction into the ICANN Board). All members were asked to read the background documents that Edmon had shared in his welcome mail and confirm through the form.
  2. The background presentation by Sarmad, which started in the previous meeting, was completed.
  3. The next item was an initial review of the charter questions, and the basic strategy was presented in a document. The steps involved:
    • Consider whether the order of topics A-G as presented in the Charter is the appropriate order to work (Agreed by the group).
    • For each topic, there will be discussions in order to gain a deeper understanding of the issues and positions involved, and also consider if AC/SOs needed to be consulted. As an initial step, a poll was conducted (involving all members + participants) for two items A and B to rate the complexity of the topic ("High"-10+ hours, "Medium"-5-10 hours, and "Low"-Less than 10 hours). The poll reported both items to be 'Medium complexity'. It was decided to discuss this methodology further in the next meeting.
  4. Given the clash of the EPDP Meeting Time with ALAC CPWG, the group decided to run a Doodle poll to choose between Tuesday and Thursday at the same time (13:00 UTC).

Action Items
AI #1: Members to read background documents included in Edmon’s welcome email and confirm when they have done so here. The welcome email is available at: https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-idn-team/2021-July/000002.html


AI #2: Staff to circulate and members/participants to fill out Doodle poll to schedule next week’s meeting and future meetings.

Full minutes available at: https://community.icann.org/display/epdpidn/2021-08-25+IDNs+EPDP

  • No labels