ICANN 76
 | |
| Dates: | 11-16 March 2023
Community Forum |
| Location: | Cancun, Mexico |
| Venue: | Cancun Center |
| Website: | https://76.schedule.icann.org/ |
ICANN 76 is a Community Forum that will happen in Cancun, Mexico from March 11 through 16 and will have a hybrid format. Registration is available here.
Prep Week edit
From 27 February to 1 March, there will be sessions[1] on the
- Implementation of Work Stream 2 Recommendations, phase 2 of the CCWG-Accountability process. Work Stream 2 focused on mechanisms following the completion of the IANA Functions Stewardship Transition
- Coalition for Digital Africa
- updates on or from Universal Acceptance, Planning and Finance, GNSO policy work[2], Contractual Compliance, SUBPRO, NCAP study 2, and IDNs
Topics edit
At ICANN 76,
- the ICANN Board:
- adopted the Sub Pro Final Report Scorecard in full; Section A identifies the adopted outputs. Section B identifies the pending outputs. Section C identifies dependencies;
- accepted the Second NomCom Organizational Review; and
- thanked Manal Ismail for her service to the ICANN Board and Jonathan Spring for his service to the SSAC.[3]
UA edit
- ICANN Organization and the UASG outlined progress on UA-readiness and IDNs
- EPDP on Internationalized Domain Names Team held two working sessions toward publishing the Phase 1 Initial Report focusing on top-level IDN gTLD definition and variant management.
Transfer Policy Review edit
The Transfer Policy Review PDP Working Group focused on Phase 2 (aka Group 2) Topics and discussed:[4]
- reducing the cost to reduce barriers to entry; introducing formality, such as accreditation; whether registrants are getting what they need – what current channels are available – settlement, courts (costly), through registrar (TDRP);
- whether to adjust the TDRP to accommodate registrants, which would require substantial changes or a new separate system.
- gaming or potential gaming of TDRP if available to registrants – could be adjusted for that.
- This WG focuses on transfers between contracted parties, so disputes among registrants could be out of scope.
- if out of scope the WG could make a recommendation to GNSO Council that a process for registrants could be considered separately.
- Issues raised by George Kirikos (limitation period of 12 months; with Temp Spec, the Losing Registrar can win 100 percent of the TDRP disputes because the Gaining Registrar doesn’t have access to the Whois info for the FOA because of GDPR; long registration period creating confusion with ownership of the domain name in case of an invalid transfer)
- Gap Analysis - Reversal of Inter-Registrar Transfers[5]