<div>Hi Greg,<br></div><div><br>Thank you for taking the time to suggest these revisions. I would like to respectfully submit that we maintain, in the first paragraph, the reference to the "ever-evolving global Internet."</div><div><br></div><div>With regards to the second paragraph, you suggested: “Consumers, the domain name industry, governments, intellectual property owners, registrants, and a variety of other stakeholders all have a vested interest in an RDS system…” <br></div><div><br></div><div>A fairer framing would be: “Consumers, the domain name industry, governments, intellectual property owners, registrants, <b><u>end-users</u>,</b> and a variety of other stakeholders <b><u>claim to</u></b> have a vested interest in an RDS system…”<br></div><div><br></div><div>Text is underlined and in bold solely for legibility purposes. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns regarding this alteration.</div><div><br></div><div>Best wishes,</div><div><br></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block"><div>Ayden Férdeline<br></div><div><a title="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline">linkedin.com/in/ferdeline</a><br></div><div><br></div></div><blockquote class="protonmail_quote" type="cite"><div>-------- Original Message --------<br></div><div>Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For WG Review - Redlined Problem Statement<br></div><div>Local Time: August 17, 2016 3:45 PM<br></div><div>UTC Time: August 17, 2016 2:45 PM<br></div><div>From: gca@icginc.com<br></div><div>To: lisa@corecom.com,gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<br></div><div><br></div><div>
<br></div><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Thanks to the drafting team. My comments are as follows.</span></span></a><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">First paragraph: the addition of “</span></span></span><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">(domain
name)” does not help, and makes the sentence more confusing.</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">First paragraph: as per the meeting notes, “ever-evolving global Internet” is probably not necessary. (And divining the future is
difficult.)</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Top of second paragraph: Add the words “a variety of other stakeholders’” so as to read: “</span></span></span><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Consumers,
the domain name industry, governments, intellectual property owners, registrants, and a variety of other stakeholders all have a vested interest in an RDS system…” The current list in the draft is not comprehensive, and other stakeholders have been identified
by our WG, the EWG, etc. We cannot imply that the current list is authoritative or complete.</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Second paragraph: “performant” is not a defined word in the English language; it’s more software developer slang. In a document
like this, I suggest we use words that are well-defined and our global audience can rely upon. I think we are trying to say: “performs well”.</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Third paragraph: rather than “constituency” I think we mean and should use “set of stakeholders.” “Stakeholders” ties back to the
text above. And at ICANN, “constituency” has a specific meaning and we want to avoid confusion with that.
</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Third paragraph: Regarding this section: “This understanding will enable the Working Group to ensure the policies which enable an
effective RDS also define a secure and safe environment for commerce and communication.” This formulation seems overly broad. While security, abuse, and privacy are considerations, a “safe environment for commerce and communication” on the Internet is much
broader than those, and involves far more than registration data. </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">So, what are drafters aiming at here, and can a reasonable scope and intent be expressed? I wonder if that sentence is needed at
all.</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">Third paragraph: “within the RDS”. Do you mean “that uses the RDS”? “Within the RDS” implies being embedded somehow. As always,
use of the term “system” can be confusing if not defined on context, since sometimes in this WG “system” refers to a technical system (like an ARDS) and sometimes “system” refers to the wider ecosystem of interlocking policies and technical implementations.</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">With best wishes,</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">--Greg</span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:10pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:10pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:10pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> </span></span></span><br></p><div><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"></span><br></div><div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size">From:</span></span></b><span style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif" class="font"><span style="font-size:11pt" class="size"> gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Lisa Phifer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, August 17, 2016 2:35 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For WG Review - Redlined Problem Statement</span></span></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <br></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div>Dear all,<br></div><div>
<br></div><div>
Attached please find a redlined version of the problem statement produced by the drafting team for WG review. This redline includes edits discussed during today's WG call.<br></div><div>
<br></div><div>
<b><i>Action item</i></b><i>: WG to review redline version of the problem statement and share any further comments/edits with the mailing list ahead of next week's meeting.
<br>
<br>
</i>Thank you to the drafting team for their work, and to all WG members for reviewing the attached redline with the goal of finalizing this statement on the next WG call.</div><div>
<br></div><div>
Best,<br></div><div>
Lisa<br></div><div>
<br></div><p></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div>