| 1
Agenda ¤ GDD Summit 2019 ¤ CZDS 2.0 Update ¤ Data Escrow Data Processing Agreements ¤ RDAP Update ¤ IDN Implementation Guidelines 4.0 ¤ PICDRP Improvements ¤ RSEP Improvements ¤ Compliance Audits ¤ RySG Priorities / What can we work on together? | 2
2019 GDD Summit – Bangkok Thailand ¤ https://www.icann.org/gddsummit ¤ Fun Filled week: GDD Summit + ROW +DNS Symposium + DNS OARC ¤ We need your help, join the planning committee! | 3
CZDS 2.0 Coming January 2019 ¤ New platform will enable future enhancements ¤ Refreshed user experience for community users ¤ Migrating Registry functionality into NSp ¡ Not migrating registry CZDS users ¡ RPC’s will be given initial access within NSP ¡ Option to delegate or add additional CZDS only users ¤ Existing access to zone files will be migrated ¤ More info and training materials will be published before year end | 4
Update: Data Escrow Data Processing Agreement ¤ Per the Temp Spec – Registries & Registrars were expected to ensure their data escrow agreements included data processing requirements consistent with GDPR ¤ Similar to RRAs we had agreed to work together (ICANN +CPH) to develop a consistent approach – progress has been slow ¤ There are differing views on controller / processor relationship for each of the parties (CP, ICANN, DEA) and what agreements are needed ¤ Suggested Approach ¡ ICANN work with Data Escrow Agents to develop approved template data processing agreement that can be added as addendums to the existing data escrow agreements when a RO or RR believes it is necessary | 5
RDAP Implementation Status ¤ The Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data calls for gTLD registries and registrars to implement RDAP following a common profile, SLA, and registry reporting requirements ¤ A proposal for a gTLD RDAP Profile ended its public comment period on 13 October 2018 ¤ ICANN org and the contracted parties continue to negotiate an RDAP SLA and registry reporting requirements | 6
Expected RDAP Implementation Timeline 13 Oct Oct Dec 1H Nov-Dec 2018 2018 2019 2018 2018 Public Comment Period 135-day Implementation Publish Publish draft Publish RDAP Draft gTLD Final gTLD gTLD RDAP Final gTLD service RDAP RDAP profile SLA, and RDAP SLA, becomes profile registry and registry generally ended reporting reporting available Public requirements requirements Comment for Public Comment | 7
IDN Implementation Guidelines ¤ gTLD – registries and registrars offering IDNs contractually bound Background Required by most Registry Agreements ¡ ¡ For second-level IDN registration • For example, new gTLD Registry policies and Agreement: Specification 6 Section 1.4 practices Required by many Registrar Agreements ¡ ¡ To minimize the risk • For example, 2013 Registrar of cybersquatting Accreditation Agreement: Additional and consumer Registrar Operation Specification confusion Clause 3 ¤ IDN ccTLDs – “expected” by the Fast Track Process and the proposed IDN ccTLD Policy | 8
History and Status of Update ¤ Last updated in 2011 Jul Oct May 2015 2015 2018 Working Final Call for Initial Interim Final Draft First draft Final draft Group Proposed Community issues list draft Presented for Second for Public Ver. 4.0 Experts formed presented presented to ICANN Public Comment published Board Comment presented + presented Second Public Comment response presented | 9
Topics Covered and Next Steps ¤ https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-05-10-en ¤ Total of 7 topics and 19 guidelines with additional notes: Transition Format of IDN Consistency of IDN IDN Variant Labels (4) Tables Tables and Practices (3) (2) (4) Similarity and Publishing IDN Terminology Additional Confusability Registration (1) Notes I - VII of Labels Policy and Rules (4) (1) ¤ ICANN org currently analysing the requirements posed by IDN Guidelines 4.0 ¤ Targeting for ICANN Board consideration in Jan. 2019; Implementation Required as early as August 2019 ¤ Contracted Parties should be reviewing and preparing now | 10
PICDRP Improvements ¤ Public Interest Commitments Dispute Resolution Procedure (PICDRP) developed and implemented in 2014 ¤ So far only 2 cases utilized a PICDRP Panel ¤ Based on recent experience & the Complaints Office identified some opportunities for operational improvements ¡ Sharing communications with both parties similar to other DRPs ¡ Disclosing identities of selected panelists with the parties ¡ Setting timing expectations as to when the Panel will be appointed ¡ Publishing all PICDRP Panel reports on a dedicated page ¤ Intention is to publish updates for public comment in 1Q 2019 with goal to finalize by end of 2Q 2019 | 11
Recommend
More recommend
