[Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] [for iRT review] Draft Thick Whois Transition Policy for .COM, .NET, and .JOBS
theo geurts
gtheo at xs4all.nl
Sat Sep 3 19:14:34 UTC 2016
Hi Dennis,
Yes, agreed on the implementation project, we are almost there anyways.
You are correct that there is no change in the procedure at this very
moment. But this can change.
My read is, the WHOIS IAG is in limbo due to the withdrawal. But it can
be rewritten/reintroduced at the GNSO next meeting, or thereafter.
Regardless what they are going to do, I guess we need some clarity here
and the IRT should signal them?
Thanks,
Theo
On 2-9-2016 23:11, Dennis Chang wrote:
> Hi Theo,
>
> Thanks for your attention to this CP. Much appreciated of course.
>
> My understanding is that the GNSO Council considered a possible modification to the existing procedure as recommended by the IAG,
> but this decision has been deferred. Therefore, no change to the procedure that is currently in place.
>
> In another word, we continue with our implementation project. Agreed?
>
> Thanks
> Dennis Chang
>
>
> On 9/2/16, 1:13 PM, "theo geurts" <gtheo at xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> Hi Dennis,
>
> It just dawned on me that this thing was rather familiar for two
> reasons. I was an observer on that group and it was discussed yesterday
> at the GNSO council meeting.
>
> https://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-council-01sep16-en.pdf
>
> The motion is currently withdrawn. Where does that leave us draft wise?
>
> Side note for those who are interested. The trigger mentioned in the
> WHOIS IAG was already tried by the Dutch Registry SIDN (backend operator
> for .Amsterdam) in 2015. The Dutch Privacy Data Regulator simply replied
> back :"You know the law, stick to it, we are not going to issue a
> statement". And that was the end of that. Yes, fun people for sure, they
> just don't how to party.
>
> Anyhow, all fun talk aside, the WHOIS IAG report is not an option for
> now since it is in limbo at the GNSO, how do we proceed?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Theo
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2-9-2016 20:00, theo geurts wrote:
> > Thank you Dennis,
> >
> > I'll give it a read as soon I have the time.
> >
> > Theo
> >
> > On 2-9-2016 15:47, Dennis Chang wrote:
> >> Hello Theo,
> >>
> >> ICANN Procedure For Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law
> >> mentioned in the implementation note can be found here:
> >> https://whois.icann.org/en/icann-procedure-handling-whois-conflicts-privacy-law
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Dennis Chang
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/2/16, 2:19 AM, "gtheo" <gtheo at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks Dennis,
> >> One question after a quick read, what procedure is that on the
> >> implementation notes on the last page? Do you have a link?
> >> For the rest I think we got it covered and should be able
> >> to wrap it up
> >> rather quickly.
> >> Best regards,
> >> Theo
> >> Dennis Chang schreef op 2016-09-02 02:05 AM:
> >> > Dear Thick Whois Policy Implementation Review Team,
> >> >
> >> > Attached for your review is our initial draft of the Thick Whois
> >> > Transition Policy for .COM, .NET and .JOBS. The draft Policy
> >> includes
> >> > the various elements discussed in our recent meeting on this
> >> topic.
> >> >
> >> > As you review the draft, you will find bracketed text in four
> >> > sections: sections 2.9, 2.10, 3.4 and 3.5. These sections are
> >> > bracketed because they reference the Registry Registration Data
> >> > Directory Services Consistent Labeling and Display Policy and the
> >> > Registration Data Access Protocol gTLD Profile. As you may be
> >> aware, a
> >> > Request for Reconsideration (RfR) was submitted by the Registries
> >> > Stakeholder Group in August regarding the Registry
> >> Registration Data
> >> > Directory Services Consistent Labeling and Display Policy [1]
> >> that was
> >> > published on 26 July 2016. The RfR objects to the inclusion of
> >> RDAP in
> >> > the Consensus Policy. While the RfR goes through its own
> >> process, we
> >> > thought it was important to continue progressing the
> >> implementation
> >> > project with the goal of opening Public Comment in September and
> >> > announcing the Transition Policy by 1 February 2017 per our
> >> schedule.
> >> > Therefore, the text is bracketed as it may need to be revisited
> >> > pending the resolution of the RfR and we wanted to directly
> >> call the
> >> > IRT’s attention to it.
> >> >
> >> > We will review all contents of the document at our next IRT
> >> meeting as
> >> > a team but please provide your comments in advance via email if
> >> > possible.
> >> >
> >> > Thank you for your support!
> >> >
> >> > —
> >> >
> >> > Kind Regards,
> >> >
> >> > Dennis S. Chang
> >> >
> >> > GDD Services & Engagement Program Director
> >> >
> >> > +1 213 293 7889
> >> >
> >> > Skype: dennisSchang
> >> >
> >> > www.icann.org "One World, One Internet"
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Links:
> >> > ------
> >> > [1]
> >> >
> >> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-labeling-policy-2016-07-26-en
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list
> >> > Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> >> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list
> > Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
>
>
>
>
More information about the Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
mailing list