Line 36: |
Line 36: |
| ===Transfer Policy Review PDP=== | | ===Transfer Policy Review PDP=== |
| * The Transfer Policy Review PDP Working Group discussed the Public Comment report concerning the Phase 1A Initial Report | | * The Transfer Policy Review PDP Working Group discussed the Public Comment report concerning the Phase 1A Initial Report |
− | ===EPDP-IDNs=== | + | |
| + | ==IDNs=== |
| * The working group for the [[EPDP-IDNs|Expedited Policy Development Process for Internationalized Domain Names]] discussed its progress, namely that it will break the process into "chunks." The WG will publish the Initial Report in two parts. Part 1 will cover charter questions and recommendations about TLD variant management and part 2 will concern charter questions and recommendations about second-level variant management.<ref>[https://75.schedule.icann.org/meetings/LNAKr9E4yGB5kw6mZ EPDP-IDN Working Group Session 1, ICANN75]</ref> | | * The working group for the [[EPDP-IDNs|Expedited Policy Development Process for Internationalized Domain Names]] discussed its progress, namely that it will break the process into "chunks." The WG will publish the Initial Report in two parts. Part 1 will cover charter questions and recommendations about TLD variant management and part 2 will concern charter questions and recommendations about second-level variant management.<ref>[https://75.schedule.icann.org/meetings/LNAKr9E4yGB5kw6mZ EPDP-IDN Working Group Session 1, ICANN75]</ref> |
| + | * [[James Caulfield]] of ICANN Org's [[Risk Management]] discussed issues around introducing TLD variant labels and the need for a common understanding and an agreed mechanism to quantify the risks, in terms of likelihood (occurrence) and severity (seriousness of the consequences). He recommended considering the String Similarity Review as a way to understand the proportionality of the proposed Hybrid Model in addressing the risks associated with failure modes. Issues could include denial of service if a user attempts to visit http://example.X, reading it as being the same as http://example.Y, and after typing the address (http://example.X), the connection does not work as http://example.X is not registered. There could be a misconnection if a user attempts to visit http://example.X, reading it as being the same as http://example.Y. After clicking on http://example.Y, the user arrives at a site controlled by a registrant different from http://example.X, or a misconnection due to variants blocked to avoid string similarity.<ref>[https://75.schedule.icann.org/meetings/LNAKr9E4yGB5kw6mZ EPDP-IDN Working Group Session 1, ICANN75]</ref> |
| | | |
| ===Registration Data Accuracy=== | | ===Registration Data Accuracy=== |
Line 43: |
Line 45: |
| ===DNS Abuse=== | | ===DNS Abuse=== |
| * The DNS Abuse Small Team discussed its outputs with the GNSO Council | | * The DNS Abuse Small Team discussed its outputs with the GNSO Council |
− | * The [[CPH]] gave a presentation DNS Abuse Outreach | + | * The [[CPH]] gave a presentation on DNS Abuse Outreach |
| * The ccNSO's standing committee on DNS Abuse met | | * The ccNSO's standing committee on DNS Abuse met |
| * The IPC held a closed working session on DNS Abuse | | * The IPC held a closed working session on DNS Abuse |