[ALAC] ccNSO meeting 202 - February 15th., 2024

[Justine Chew]

Thank you for this report, Laura.

I'm sure Satish, Hadia and AK will also bring us up to speed with GNSO EPDP
on IDNs Phase 2 preliminary recommendations and the proposed approach for
the updating the IDN Implementation Guidelines from the gTLD perspective to
complement your update.

Kind regards,
Justine



On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 at 12:03, Laura Margolis via ALAC <
alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:

> Dear All:
>
> ccNSO Council meeting #202 was held on February 15th.
>
> Here is the full agenda
> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Liaison+to+the+ccNSO+Reports?preview=/2262570/305299478/Agenda%20meeting%20202%2015%20February%202024%20v1.pdf>
> and notes
> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Liaison+to+the+ccNSO+Reports?preview=/2262570/305299478/Agenda%20meeting%20202%2015%20February%202024%20v1.pdf>
> .
>
> I would like to highlight some important updates regarding ccPDP4:
>
> *Updates on ccPDP4
> <https://ccnso.icann.org/en/workinggroups/idn-cctld-strings.htm>*
>
> *a.*  *Progress and expected timeline ccNSO Decision making*
>
>
> The ccPDP4 WG expects to complete its work by 20 February 2024, and the
> Issue manager will submit the report prior to ICANN79 for consideration and
> decision making by the Council. *The Final report does include both
> policy recommendations* *and advice to ccTLDs*. The advice is on topics
> that were considered out of scope of the PDP by the WG, and the
> decision-making process is not defined through Annex B of the Bylaws, but
> through the Internal rules of the ccNSO.
>
>
>
> *Two different tracks*:
>
> 1)      *Set of policy recommendations*.
>
> That was the task of the WG, to develop this policy and propose it.
>
> 2)     *Advice to ccTLD managers*.
>
> Submitting IDN tables for second level domains.
>
> Secondly, about *registering IDN domain names and variants to the same
> entity*.
>
>
> It will have 2 sides: one is for *policy making*. As per the ccPDP
> process. First council will be asked to support the recommendations, and
> then the membership, before being sent to board.
>
>
>
> The advice is governed by the internal rules of the ccNSO. That will be a
> council decision, with the option to have a veto by the members. There is
> also a proposed timeline for the member's vote. After the June’s meeting,
> the recommendations can be submitted to the board.
>
>
>
> *Note: *
>
> 2 types of decisions
>
> · One within the context of the PDP itself
>
> · Second one out of scope of the PDP, and will be a regular resolution.
>
>
>
> *b.*    *Discussion and views Draft Recommendation 14 on participation of
> ccNSO in developing IDN Guidelines.*
>
>
>
> The *IDNccPDP4 WG* was requested to provide feedback on a draft
> recommendation by the Phase 2 GNSO IDN EPDP WG on proposal to create a
> formal process for convening a group that would *propose amendments to
> IDN Guidelines*. These Guidelines may affect (IDN & ASCII)) ccTLDs, with
> IDN second level domains under management and were developed by a group of
> experts, including members of the ccTLD community.  According to the
> proposal, the ccNSO and GNSO Councils will have a role in developing the
> charter for the community group that will develop future versions of the
> IDN Implementation Guidelines.
>
>
>
> *EPDP GNSO* *has a phase 2,* currently in drafting mode. One of the
> recommendations (draft rec. 14 in the report) is about *suggesting a more
> predictable process on changing the IDN* *implementation guidelines*.
> Board development guideline on the format how to submit tables to IANA.
> Board initiated process. CcNSO appointed some members. Suggestion is to
> make the process more rigorous. Reason for raising it now: they foresee a
> role for ccNSO council
>
> *Firstly, to approve the process to be designed*, every time the board is
> initiating the process
>
> *Secondly, to appoint members to this WG and monitor the outcome for the
> community*
>
>
>
> This is relevant for ccTLDS, *IDN tables need to have a format*.
> Determined by the implementation guideline. Therefore ccNSO will be
> involved in the evolution of the IDN implementation guideline.
>
>
> Also, please take a look at the February newsletter
> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Liaison+to+the+ccNSO+Reports?preview=/2262570/305299473/ccNSO%20Newsletter%20%20February%202024.pdf#ccNSO--1198923559>
> .
>
> Thank you and have a nice week!
>
>
> *Laura Margolis*
> ALAC Liaison to ccNSO
>
> margolisl at gmail.com
> +59899690992
> skype: lauri.margolis
>
> ccNSO Liaison Workspace
> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Liaison+to+the+ccNSO+Reports#ccNSO-696341623>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20240219/a7e20d44/attachment-0001.html>