Sorry that I am late, had problems finding the link

NP Annabeth... Welcome

hi! @annebeth!

Hi all!

Can you live with it test is important to exercise as we try to move towards consensus

Let us work together to avoid that the SubPro will be the Never Ending Story. @Jeff, I think this is a very productive way to work

ok - thanks

Document here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kUlmZH8nxWTgfcRluA5FxLheMm4XhhOwkRt7om52aQU/edit#

We have a phone number ending in 305. Is anyone familiar with that number?

That's me - Marc Trachtenberg

Thank you, Marc!

We are on page 43 of the Google doc

Registry Services evaluation is a mix'n'match of technical and non-technical features.

Jeff said the evaluation of the application is NOT the same as the pre-evaluation (technical) rest right?

All 2 point questions were ones offering extra points for doing extra things, not that they worth more.

(compared to other criteria)

Abuse handling was 1-point if I recall correctly.

ICANN's own PIRR also recommend dropping 2 point questions.

ok - makes sense

is Jothan Frakes a member of this group? He was an evaluator and may be able to shed some light on this issue of clarifying questions and why there were so many.

All evaluators are bound to confidentiality terms, so he couldn't answer those questions.

The interpretation of what meet is up to the IRT.

So AGB gets something implementable.

ICANN has some data breaches in the application system, if I remember, making them extra scary to turn over your security plans. Classic example of the regulatory being less sophisticated than the regulatees.

had

Jeff, there was one IG that you skipped.

Priority is process-wide, so when it comes to technical evaluation, it ends up being publish priority, in order to gain from cost-savings at evaluation.

so the apps wouldn’t be “batched” rather, the next TLD in the queue with that RSP would get a “quick pass”

Elaine, no. The results would be hold until higher priority apps are evaluated.

yes, just shortening the amount of time the repeat RSP app spends from start to finish

ok, thank you Jeff and Steve

And also saving on person-hours to do the evaluations.

It truly showed how stuck ICANN was in its second-level-sales mentality.

lessons learned and hopefully with these recommendations remediation applied

currentRegistry needs a space

noted @rubens

fixed

It intended all options:

RO, Affiliate of an RO, parent company etc.

We just need to highlight that the italics was in addition to the 2007 policy.

still better than "spirit"...

Current list of services available in Fast Track RSEP:

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/fast-track-rsep-process-authorization-language-2019-06-14-en

Jim, it should be available to the IRT.

when should the examination be completed by?

It should be earlier than that IMHO.

So the IRT can use the analysis to tune AGB.

But this looks more like an envelope note than something to be in the policy.

Sounds good @Jeff

probing questions that 'stress test' any decent security policy

I believe we could read Steve's comment on COI x Registrant Protections, because depending on the COI decision, it might come into play.

Financial Evaluation

It's.

Haha, yes

Great progress Team... Thanks for this... and Bye for now...

@Jeff only 4 miles

Bye @ll!

lol