[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Last call for Issue-Spotting on Part 2 plus New Comments to Review (Parts 3 & 4)

Fri Aug 21 16:27:19 UTC 2015

I'm more allergic to missing/ignoring comments submitted during the
public comment period ;-) And if we worked on changing the deadline we
wouldn't be missing it.

/FM

On 2015-08-21 12:16 PM, McGrady, Paul D. wrote:
>
> I’m allergic to missing our deadline.
>
>  
>
> *From:*gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *James M.
> Bladel
> *Sent:* Friday, August 21, 2015 7:55 AM
> *To:* James Gannon; Michele Neylon - Blacknight
> *Cc:* gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Last call for Issue-Spotting on
> Part 2 plus New Comments to Review (Parts 3 & 4)
>
>  
>
> Maybe I can help with this.
>
>  
>
> (Yet another) RAA Confession:  I was the one behind the 1 JAN 2017
> “sunset” date for the Temporary Spec on Privacy/Proxy Registrations.
>  The thinking at the time was that we needed an expiry date to “light
> a fire” under ICANN to start/launch the PPSAI effort.  Otherwise,
> there was a legitimate concern that the Temporary Spec would, by
> default, become “permanent.”
>
>  
>
> The sunset date can be extended by mutual agreement between ICANN and
> Registrars.  Given that many of the largest / most active registrars
> are participating on this working group, I don’t anticipate a lot of
> resistance to this idea, especially if we feel that meeting arbitrary
> milestone deadlines will impact the quality of our work.
>
>  
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>  
>
> Thanks—
>
>  
>
> J.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From: *<gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of James
> Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james at cyberinvasion.net>>
> *Date: *Friday, August 21, 2015 at 7:42
> *To: *Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com
> <mailto:michele at blacknight.com>>
> *Cc: *PPSAI WG <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
> *Subject: *Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Last call for Issue-Spotting on
> Part 2 plus New Comments to Review (Parts 3 & 4)
>
>  
>
> Yes unfortunately the timing on this I don’t see working out, given
> that this is vacation season for the northern hemisphere, the volume
> of comments, and the complexity associated with moving forward I think
> we need to take heed of these issues and look t what timeline will
> give the best outcome and not necessarily meet specific dates that we
> have framed out deliberations around to date. We don’t have a drop
> dead date where we must be finished by, as there are backstops built
> into the RAA, and we need to take that into account.
>
>  
>
> -James
>
>  
>
>  
>
>     On 21 Aug 2015, at 13:03, Michele Neylon - Blacknight
>     <michele at blacknight.com <mailto:michele at blacknight.com>> wrote:
>
>      
>
>     Agreed
>
>     For a lot of us this is holiday season and we are either on
>     holiday (hello from Croatia!) or we are covering for people who are
>
>     Regards
>
>     Michele 
>
>     Mr Michele Neylon
>
>     Blacknight Hosting & Domains
>
>     http://www.blacknight.host/
>
>     http://www.mneylon.social <http://www.mneylon.social/>
>
>     Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal 
>
>
>     On 21 Aug 2015, at 11:19, Volker Greimann
>     <vgreimann at key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>> wrote:
>
>         I object to the cutoff. We should allow more time for review
>         and raising of issues due to the holiday season in Europe. We
>         have no objective need to rush and should take the time we
>         need to get this right, rather than getting this over with.
>
>         Best,
>
>         Volker
>
>         Am 20.08.2015 um 18:50 schrieb Mary Wong:
>
>             Dear WG members,
>
>              
>
>             This is a _last call_ for any issues that you would like
>             to bring to the WG’s attention concerning Part 2 of the WG
>             Public Comment Review Tool (first circulated on 10
>             August), similar to the approach we adopted for
>             issue-spotting in Part 1. Please send these to the email
>             list for consideration at the next WG call as soon as you
>             can, but *no later than Monday* (a day before the call) if
>             at all possible.  
>
>              
>
>             Please also find attached two documents - 
>
>              
>
>             (1) Part 3 of the WG Public Comment Review Tool,
>             containing excerpts from public comments sent directly to
>             the public comment forum and responses to the online
>             questions template that cover all the WG's remaining
>             preliminary recommendations aside from those being
>             analyzed by the Sub Teams (i.e. Preliminary
>             Recommendations #16-20); and
>
>              
>
>             (2) Part 4 of the WG Public Comment Review Tool,
>             containing those comments and suggestions made by
>             commenters and template responders that were not
>             specifically framed as responses to particular WG
>             recommendations. Part 4 also contains two additional
>             elements, viz. a list of the types of concerns raised by
>             signatories to the Save Domain Privacy petition (much of
>             which is also reflected in many of the general comments
>             received in the public comment forum), and a list of
>             commenters who supported or endorsed other commenters’
>             submissions. While this Part 4 may be of particular
>             usefulness to Sub Team 4, we attach it here to facilitate
>             the WG's review of all the remaining comments not
>             otherwise summarized in other parts of the Tool.
>
>              
>
>             These two documents are the last in the series of
>             documents that comprise the WG’s Public Comment Review
>             Tool for our Initial Report, not including the additional
>             documents that were prepared for the various Sub Teams
>             that will also form part of the record for the Final
>             Report. I should point out that some of the comments in
>             these two documents include some strong language, but we
>             have chosen to leave them in as they were sent in the same
>             way as comments that used less robust language; I hope
>             that is all right. 
>
>              
>
>             Cheers
>
>             Mary
>
>              
>
>             Mary Wong
>
>             Senior Policy Director
>
>             Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
>
>             Telephone: +1 603 574 4889
>
>             Email: mary.wong at icann.org <mailto:mary.wong at icann.org>
>
>              
>
>              
>
>              
>
>              
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20150821/a0d9bbaf/attachment-0001.html>