<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Thanks Lisa and thanks to Ayden for his advanced search skills which
yielded results! I hesitate to ask, but I want to see all the
comments to the earlier WHOIS studies and task forces as well....and
I cannot find them in the Archives. Can we please have these things
pulled up? I understand that at least in theory the questions we
have been handed are supposed to be a distillation of earlier work,
but I would certainly like to read all the earlier work. As long as
we are going to go at this for five years, we might as well get
informed....<br>
Kind regards, <br>
Stephanie<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2016-03-20 14:08, Lisa Phifer wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6.2.3.4.2.20160320112915.0913be68@mail.corecom.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
Thanks Stephanie.<br>
<br>
As you found, the HTML version of the 2007 WHOIS TF's final report
is
indeed the official version
(<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois-privacy/whois-services-final-tf-report-12mar07.htm"
eudora="autourl">
http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois-privacy/whois-services-final-tf-report-12mar07.htm</a>
). I will add the English PDF printed at the time of the report's
submission (thanks Ayden!) to this WG's wiki background materials
page
for ease of printing.<br>
<br>
Please also note the RDS PDP Issue Report's Section
<a moz-do-not-send="true" name="_Ref420727775"></a>3.2.2, WHOIS
Task Force Final Report (2007),
which concludes:<br>
<br>
<b>The final report of this [2007 WHOIS] Task Force provides an
excellent
source of information for learning the types of data collected
and the
purposes of data collection. However, the GNSO did <i>not </i>adopt
the
Task Force proposals. Instead, the GNSO recommended pursuing
formal,
targeted studies to generate empirical data to inform future
policy
discussions.<br>
<br>
</b>As you highlighted below, it is this RDS PDP WG which is now
tasked
with redefining purpose.<br>
<br>
This was done because the 2007 task force - along with prior and
subsequent GNSO efforts - could not reach consensus on policy
reforms
that hinge upon this question of purpose. Following further
analysis by
the 2012 WHOIS RT and SSAC in SAC055, the board requested this RDS
PDP to
take a different, more structured approach to help this WG achieve
consensus, decomposing this complex issue into component questions
that
all reflect this WG's answer to that fundamental question of
purpose.<br>
<br>
Best, Lisa<br>
<br>
<br>
At 08:09 PM 3/19/2016, Stephanie Perrin wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="">Thanks very much for
these
materials Lisa. Please let me reiterate a point that I guess
has
not registered yet. The first question we have to ask is "what
is the purpose of collecting, using, storing, and disclosing
registration
data? If we agree on the narrow definition that was defined in
the
2007 WHOIS task force report, then many of the current uses, as
has been
pointed out by the global data commissioners repeatedly, are not
legitimate. So lets agree on the purpose of data collection
first.
I am deeply concerned about the discussion of
"requirements". Here is the 2007 definition:<br>
<i>The GNSO Council recommends that the WHOIS task force use the
following definition: "The purpose of the gTLD WHOIS service
is to
provide information sufficient to contact a responsible party
for a
particular gTLD domain name who can resolve, or reliably pass
on data to
a party who can resolve, issues related to the configuration
of the
records associated with the domain name within a DNS name
server."
as a working definition to allow the task force to proceed on
terms of
reference (2), (3), and (4)<br>
<br>
</i>Note: the ICANN wiki says this is what we are doing:<br>
" The <b>Next-Generation gTLD Registration Directory Services
to
Replace Whois Policy Development Process Working Group</b>
(RDS-PDP-WG)
has been established to redefine the purpose of gTLD
registration data
and to consider how to safeguard this data. It is also tasked
with
proposing a model for gTLD registration directory services that
will
address accuracy, privacy, and access issues. "<br>
If we are redefining the purpose of gTLD registration data, we
should
address that question first.<br>
cheers Stephanie<br>
<br>
On 2016-03-19 11:18, Lisa Phifer wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="">Greetings all,<br>
<br>
Attached please find materials developed by the leadership
team to
facilitate discussion during the next WG call. These materials
include:<br>
<br>
(1) <u>A summary table of all work plan changes proposed thus
far.</u>
This serves as a consolidated record of all suggestions made
to date
during WG calls, meetings, and on the email list. Staff will
continue to
add any new suggestions made between now and the next WG call
as new rows
to the end of this table. This table is a tool to help all WG
members
easily recall and consider all of the suggestions made by
everyone,
before attempting to agree upon resolutions. In creating this
table, we
tried to extract and accurately paraphrase changes and
rationale from
lengthier email exchanges, but the WG's email archive (
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg"
eudora="autourl">
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a>) can be
consulted for
all email message text in full. Italicized "Notes" have also
been included to provide linkage between suggestions and
related charter
questions.<br>
<br>
(2) <u>A mind map of fundamental questions and sub-questions.</u>
This
serves as a concise illustration of the fundamental questions
and
sub-questions detailed in the Issue Report and Charter. This
map can be
adjusted as the WG agrees upon refinements to questions
(including but
not limited to sequencing) and adds new subquestions,
inter-dependencies,
further inputs, and detailed policies that should be "parked"
for consideration during phases 2/3. This map is a tool to
help the WG
better understand and reach agreement on fundamental questions
to be
addressed in phase 1 by providing an overall picture as well
as an
opportunity to start thinking about additional sub-questions
and whether
there are certain questions that need to be considered before
being able
to address other questions, etc.<br>
<br>
(3) <u>A simple text listing of the questions and
sub-questions in the
mind map</u> - for those who may find a simple bullet list
of questions
in text format more useful than a mind map.<br>
<br>
We hope that the WG will find these materials to be a helpful
starting
point to facilitate further WG discussion on the phase 1 work
plan.
<br>
<br>
In addition, the leadership team is working on an annotated
draft of the
work plan itself, to be distributed on Monday for use during
Tuesday's
RDS PDP WG call.<br>
<br>
Best Regards,<br>
Lisa<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg"
eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>