1 of 15

At-Large ICANN 78 Talking Points

1

At-Large Welcome Session at ICANN78

21-26 October 2023

2 of 15

Sequence

Ongoing PDPs Talking Points
TPR-PDP
EPDP-IDNs
RDA Scoping Team
RDRS (SSAD)
Closed Generics
Applicant Support
New gTLD Round
OFB Talking Points
Topics of Interest to At-Large
At-Large ICANN 78 Talking Points
Resources

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At-large

Talking Points

Resources

BACKGROUND

Overview

On 26 January 2020, the ICANN Board passed a resolution to defer contractual compliance enforcement of the gaining registrar's requirement to obtain express authorization of an inter-registrar transfer from the Transfer Contact via a Standardized Form of Authorization (FOA). ICANN Contractual Compliance will defer enforcement of Section I(A)(2.1) of the Transfer Policy until the matter is settled in the GNSO Council's Transfer Policy Review.

On 18 February 2021, the GNSO Council initiated the two-phase Transfer Policy Review PDP. The purpose of the PDP is to determine if changes to the policy are needed to improve the ease, security, and efficacy of Inter-Registrar and Inter-Registrant Transfers. As recommended in the Final Issue Report, the PDP will address the following topics in sequence:

The Gaining and Losing Forms of Authorization, AuthInfo Codes [also known as the Transfer Authorization Code (TAC)], and NACKing transfers (Phase 1A).
The change of registrant (Phase 1B).
The transfer emergency action contact and reversing inter-registrar transfers, Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, and ICANN-approved transfers (Phase 2).

The GNSO Council adopted the PDP working group charter on 24 March 2021. According to PDP 3.0, the working group adopted a representative model with set criteria and expectations for their members and chairs. The working group met for the first time on 14 May 2021.

Why is Transfer Policy important to At-Large and End Users?

Emphasis on the Registrant perspective. The processes and requirements for transferring a domain name between one registrar to another affect registrants and End Users.
Registrars have obligations to registrants. Processes and requirements provided by Registrars to Registrants (End Users) to access the Transfer Authorization Code (TAC) must be simple, consistent, and secure.

Registrants should easily be able to transfer their domain to a new registrar or a different registrant.
Processes should be secure and protect against unauthorized activity related to the registrant’s account.

3 of 15

Transfer Policy Review Policy Development Process

Leads: Steinar Grøtterød and Daniel Nanghaka

Talking Points (Phase 1b and 2)

At-Large representatives have advocated the option for a Registrant to initiate a Transfer Dispute.
At-Large representatives will monitor closely the discussion connected to an updated policy for Change of Registrant.
The ICANN Approved bulk transfer and the BTAPPA are both of less importance to the end-user as long as the rights for the Registrant is not decreased.

Session on ICANN78: Saturday Oct 21, 2023 10:30-12:00 CET

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At-large

Talking Points

Resources

BACKGROUND

Overview

On 26 January 2020, the ICANN Board passed a resolution to defer contractual compliance enforcement of the gaining registrar's requirement to obtain express authorization of an inter-registrar transfer from the Transfer Contact via a Standardized Form of Authorization (FOA). ICANN Contractual Compliance will defer enforcement of Section I(A)(2.1) of the Transfer Policy until the matter is settled in the GNSO Council's Transfer Policy Review.

On 18 February 2021, the GNSO Council initiated the two-phase Transfer Policy Review PDP. The purpose of the PDP is to determine if changes to the policy are needed to improve the ease, security, and efficacy of Inter-Registrar and Inter-Registrant Transfers. As recommended in the Final Issue Report, the PDP will address the following topics in sequence:

The Gaining and Losing Forms of Authorization, AuthInfo Codes [also known as the Transfer Authorization Code (TAC)], and NACKing transfers (Phase 1A).
The change of registrant (Phase 1B).
The transfer emergency action contact and reversing inter-registrar transfers, Transfer Dispute Resolution Policy, and ICANN-approved transfers (Phase 2).

The GNSO Council adopted the PDP working group charter on 24 March 2021. According to PDP 3.0, the working group adopted a representative model with set criteria and expectations for their members and chairs. The working group met for the first time on 14 May 2021.

Why is Transfer Policy important to At-Large and End Users?

Emphasis on the Registrant perspective. The processes and requirements for transferring a domain name between one registrar to another affect registrants and End Users.
Registrars have obligations to registrants. Processes and requirements provided by Registrars to Registrants (End Users) to access the Transfer Authorization Code (TAC) must be simple, consistent, and secure.

Registrants should easily be able to transfer their domain to a new registrar or a different registrant.
Processes should be secure and protect against unauthorized activity related to the registrant’s account.

4 of 15

Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) & Universal Acceptance (UA)

Leads: Satish Babu, Hadia El Miniawi, Abdulkarim Oloyede, Justine Chew

Talking Points

IDNs and UA are critical to individual Internet end-user equity online.
IDN variants support better end-users experiences provided they do not lead to user confusability
IDN variants can support better individual Internet end-user experiences but not at the expense of security and stability of the root zone.
IDN variant management requires careful adjustments to relevant domain name life cycle processes and policies.

Sessions

Sat 21 Oct, 9:00-10:00 CEST, GNSO: IDN EPDP Working Session (1 of 3)
Sat 21 Oct, 10:30-12:00 CEST, GNSO: IDN EPDP Working Session (2 of 3)
Mon 23 Oct, 16:30-17:30 CEST, GNSO: IDN EPDP Working Session (3 of 3)

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At-large

Talking Points

Resources

BACKGROUND

Overview

ICANN instituted the IDN Program to assist in the development and promotion of a multilingual Internet using IDNs. The program is primarily focused on the planning and implementation of IDN TLDs, including IDN country code TLDs and generic TLDs. The IDN Program also supports projects geared towards effective use of IDNs at the second-level of the Domain Name System (DNS), as guided by the community.

The GNSO Council initiated the Expedited PDP on Internationalized Domain Names (EPDP-IDNs) to provide policy recommendations on:

The definition of all TLDs and the management of variant labels to facilitate the delegation of variant gTLDs in the root zone.
How the IDN Implementation Guidelines should be updated in the future.

Why is this topic/issue important to At-Large and End Users?

The introduction of new gTLDs and IDNs into the Internet ecosystem has led to the expansion of the DNS.
The DNS expansion of IDNs has led to greater innovation and consumer choice in the domain name industry, while also reducing linguistic barriers to the Internet for users and communities around the world.
"Supporting IDNs and UA is a priority for ICANN and an important step toward an inclusive and multingual Internet…Cooperation with global organizations like EURid is critical to making the Internet more accessible and viable not only for users across Europe but around the world." Former ICANN President and CEO, Göran Marby.

5 of 15

Registration Data Accuracy (RDA) Scoping Team

Leads: Michael Palage and Alan Greenberg

Talking Points

Work on hold. Group has not met since September 2022. Unclear when it will restart.
Accuracy is STILL important!!
There are NIS2 accuracy requirements

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At-large

Talking Points

Resources

BACKGROUND

Overview

A Closed Generic refers to a common word used for a gTLD (i.e., .books) that is restricted by the registry or by the business interests of a single company.

In the course of the New gTLD Program, the ICANN Board (via its New gTLD Program Committee) identified several topics that would benefit from policy development for future rounds. One such topic was the question of how to handle “Closed Generic” gTLD applications.

Existing provisions in the 2012 New gTLD Program such as GNSO policy recommendations and gTLD Applicant Guidebook intended for them to be implicitly allowed (as stated by the Council in its 2013 correspondence with the ICANN Board). After the New gTLD Program launched, the GAC issued advice on the matter, advising that for strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access “should serve a public interest goal.”

The GNSO Operating Procedures specifically refer to ICANN Board letters as the "trigger" for invoking GNSO Council consideration of one of the procedures in the Annexes that are formally incorporated in the ICANN ByLaws - GNSO Input, GNSO Guidance, or EPDP.

6 of 15

Registration Data Request Service (RDRS)

Leads: Alan Greenberg

Talking Points

Implementation proceeding
Group to monitor implementation and operation being formed. ALAC will participate.

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At-large

Talking Points

Resources

BACKGROUND

Overview

A Closed Generic refers to a common word used for a gTLD (i.e., .books) that is restricted by the registry or by the business interests of a single company.

In the course of the New gTLD Program, the ICANN Board (via its New gTLD Program Committee) identified several topics that would benefit from policy development for future rounds. One such topic was the question of how to handle “Closed Generic” gTLD applications.

Existing provisions in the 2012 New gTLD Program such as GNSO policy recommendations and gTLD Applicant Guidebook intended for them to be implicitly allowed (as stated by the Council in its 2013 correspondence with the ICANN Board). After the New gTLD Program launched, the GAC issued advice on the matter, advising that for strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access “should serve a public interest goal.”

The GNSO Operating Procedures specifically refer to ICANN Board letters as the "trigger" for invoking GNSO Council consideration of one of the procedures in the Annexes that are formally incorporated in the ICANN ByLaws - GNSO Input, GNSO Guidance, or EPDP.

7 of 15

Facilitated Dialogue on Closed Generics

Leads: Greg Shatan and Alan Greenberg

Talking Points

fundamental issues remain unresolved
No Longer “Critical Path”
ALAC and GAC: No Closed Generics without more work
GNSO wants the Board to decide

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At-large

Talking Points

Resources

BACKGROUND

Overview

A Closed Generic refers to a common word used for a gTLD (i.e., .books) that is restricted by the registry or by the business interests of a single company.

In the course of the New gTLD Program, the ICANN Board (via its New gTLD Program Committee) identified several topics that would benefit from policy development for future rounds. One such topic was the question of how to handle “Closed Generic” gTLD applications.

Existing provisions in the 2012 New gTLD Program such as GNSO policy recommendations and gTLD Applicant Guidebook intended for them to be implicitly allowed (as stated by the Council in its 2013 correspondence with the ICANN Board). After the New gTLD Program launched, the GAC issued advice on the matter, advising that for strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access “should serve a public interest goal.”

The GNSO Operating Procedures specifically refer to ICANN Board letters as the "trigger" for invoking GNSO Council consideration of one of the procedures in the Annexes that are formally incorporated in the ICANN ByLaws - GNSO Input, GNSO Guidance, or EPDP.

The Facilitated Dialogue defined and advanced a number of issues with Closed Generics, but also left numerous critical and fundamental issues unresolved and incompletely explored
The At Large view is that the work product of the group is limited utility, since there were no final consensus outcomes
The group was shut down by mutual agreement of the chairs of GAC, GNSO and ALAC on the basis that Closed Generics were not on the “critical path” for the next round of gTLDs
The “three chairs” sent an initial letter to the group in August, recommending that the current status continue during the next round; i.e., that no Closed Generics could be applied for.
At Large supported these positions and the “three chair letter” in general.
Subsequently, the GNSO Chair pulled back from the position regarding the status quo following internal pressure from some in the GNSO. The GNSO Chair justified the change by saying that the position constituted policy advice, and that the GNSO Council could only give policy advice after a Policy Development Process. The GNSO Chair wanted to dilute the “three chair letter” before forwarding it to the ICANN Board.
ALAC and GAC Chairs did not support diluting the letter. As a result, the ALAC and GAC Chairs will send a joint letter to the Board reiterating the message of the original “three chairs letter”, while the GNSO Chair will communicate separately.

8 of 15

Applicant Support GNSO Guidance Process (GGP)

Leads: Maureen Hilyard, Satish Babu

Talking Points

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At-large

Talking Points

9 of 15

New gTLD Next Round (SubPro)

Talking Points

The At-Large’s participation in the SubPro Implementation Review Team (SubPro IRT) helps to ensure correct implementation of Board-approved SubPro policy recommendations for the Next Round.
Our priority areas are Program communication, Applicant Support, Community Applications, Public Interest Commitments & Registry Voluntary Commitments, Internationalized Domain Names, Application Comment, Objections

Sessions

Prep Week: Tue Oct 10, 14:30 UTC, Applicant Support Program: Exploring Research Findings From Other Global Programs
Sat Oct 21, 10:30-12:00 CEST, GDS: SubPro IRT #16 (1 of 3)
Wed Oct 25, 10:30 - 12:00 CEST, GNSO: NCUC Issue Forum (2nd half will be on Applicant Support)
Thu Oct 26, 16:00 - 17:30 CEST, GDS: SubPro IRT #16a (2 of 3)
Thu Oct 26, 9:00 - 10:00 CEST, GDS: SubPro IRT #16b (3 of 3) - Applicant Support

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At_large

Talking Points

Resources

BACKGROUND

New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP - Overview

The new generic top-level domains (gTLD) Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) program refers to policies related to the expansion of the Domain Name System (DNS) through the addition of new gTLDs. Examples of current gTLDs include .com, .biz, and .gallery. New gTLDs would be considered alternatives to current gTLDs. As the voice of individual end users, the At-Large community is focused on a few distinct areas of gTLD expansion associated with the previous round.

The New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group began its work in February 2016. Over the course of several years, it convened several subgroups and undertook extensive deliberations on the list of topics in its charter. In September 2021, the ICANN Board directed ICANN org to initiate an ODP for the Final Report outputs. The ODP began in January 2022.

As the ODP progresses, the GNSO Council is considering whether it may be appropriate to conduct additional policy work, possibly in the form of a GNSO Guidance Process, to conduct supplemental work on specific Subsequent Procedures (SubPro) topics. The topics would fall broadly into two areas where: 1) the SubPro Final Report recommendations envisioned substantive work during implementation; and 2) the ODP team has determined additional guidance will be needed if and when implementation is commenced.

10 of 15

ICANN Governance and Operations (OFB)

Leads: Ricardo Holmquist

Talking Points

Operating Plan and Budget:

A needed focus on operating initiatives, not just on the numbers.
Special focus on the new funding sources for activities, SFICR and previous gTLD funds
At Large's OFB-WG has a identified a set of priorities, with the Multistakeholder Model being the top priority.

Planning:

ICANN is looking to develop the FY26-30 Strategic Plan. At-Large needs to contribute to this Plan.
Very few people attended the first planning session. The voice of At-Large is needed in future planning sessions.

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At_large

Talking Points

Resources

11 of 15

ICANN Governance and Operations (OFB)

Leads: Sebastien Bachollet and Cheryl Langdon-Orr

Pilot Holistic Review - Revised Draft ToR

Talking Point - we remain supportive of the Holistic Review and keen for the PHR to complete ASAP.

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At_large

Talking Points

Resources

The Pilot Holistic Review Revised Draft ToR Public Comment proceeding opened on 28 September, and will run through 27 November.
The Staff Report is expected to be published on 11 December.

see https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/pilot-holistic-review-revised-terms-of-reference-tor-28-09-2023

The OFB-WG was briefed on Oct 5th at 1800 UTC see Presentation- Larisa Gurnick, Jason Kean and Evin Erdogdu - ICANN org Review Support & Accountability/members of the PHR ToR Team (Avri Doria and Pat Kane) and Katrina Sataki OEC Chair

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

At-Large Workspace: Pilot Holistic Review Revised Draft Terms of Reference

https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/pilot-holistic-review-revised-terms-of-reference-tor-28-09-2023

Pilot Holistic Review Webinar 21 August 2023.

Pilot Holistic Review wiki.

No formal sessions are currently planned at ICANN 78 (TBC)

12 of 15

Topics of Interest for At-Large

Policy

DNS Abuse
Applicant Support Program
Public Interest Commitments & Registry Voluntary Commitments
Internationalized Domain Names
ICANN Strategic PLan fiscal years 2026 to 2030
ICANN Operating Plan and Budget

Governance

Holistic Review

Resources

At-Large Resources

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At_large

Talking Points

Resources

13 of 15

At-Large - ICANN 78 Talking Points

TPR-PDP

Our goal is to define a policy that makes inter-registrar transfers of domain names and Change of Registrant SIMPLE, SAFE AND SECURE. At-Large will also fight for Registrars being able to initiate a Transfer Dispute Process.

IDN EPDP

IDNs and UA are important for Internet users equity, diversity and inclusion.

How do we bring new local languages and user communities online?

Minimizing user confusability and and maximizing end user online safety

Closed Generics

No to monopolization of the Information Space.

Open markets and public good come first.

Applicant Support

Ensure worldwide accessibility to the new gTLD program

How can we get more successful applications from underserved communities?

Communicating the Applicant support program

DNS Abuse

End user education and awareness for prevention and reporting of DNS abuse.

Compliance tools

Resources

At-Large Resources

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At_large

Talking Points

Resources

14 of 15

At-Large - ICANN 78 Talking Points

Holistic Review

The Pilot Holistic Review Revised Draft ToR Public Comment proceeding opened on 28 September, and will run through 27 November.
The first-post IANA transition ICANN wide review for end users is important

Resources

At-Large Resources

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At_large

Talking Points

Resources

15 of 15

At-Large Resources

Web Pages

Workspaces

ICANN77 Session Reports
ICANN77 Workspace
ALAC Workspace
ALAC Policy Advice Development
Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG)
Operations, Budget, and Finance Working Group (OFB-WG)

Social Media

Ongoing PDPs

OFB

Topics of Interest to At_large

Talking Points

Resources