<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Some of us, myself included, have been getting impatient because of the time we have been spending on a RDS purpose statement. In that regard, Lisa reminded me of why
it is important to do that and I want to forward her comments to the full WG. The following is a direct quote from her message.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">“We are attempting to be responsive to the board and SSAC request for this PDP to address up front this question:<br>
<br>
<b><i>"Resolved (2015.04.26.10)</i></b><i>, the Board reaffirms its request for a Board-initiated GNSO policy development process to define the purpose of collecting, maintaining and providing access to gTLD registration data, and consider safeguards for protecting
data, using the recommendations in the <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf">
<span style="color:blue">Final Report</span></a> [PDF, 5.12 MB] as an input to, and, if appropriate, as the foundation for a new gTLD policy."<br>
<br>
</i>In <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-055-en.pdf"><span style="color:blue">SAC055, WHOIS: Blind Men and an Elephant</span></a>,
<a name="_ftnref1"></a>[1] the SSAC found that further work should be undertaken prior to implementation of the WHOIS Policy Review Team?s recommendations, concluding:<br>
<br>
<i>"1. It is critical that ICANN should develop a policy defining the purpose of domain name registration data;<br>
<br>
2. ICANN should create a committee to develop a registration data policy that defines the purpose of domain name registration data; and<br>
<br>
3. ICANN should defer other activity directed at finding a ?solution? to ?the WHOIS problem? until the registration data policy identified in (1) and (2) has been developed and accepted."<br>
<br>
</i>This is why this WG must examine not just policies that pertain to access, and not just a system that provides that access, but the entire purpose of collecting, maintaining, and providing access to data. This applies whether that system is a new next-gen
system or an updated WHOIS system. If we cannot make some headway on the question of purpose, as SAC055 pointed out and the board agreed, then we are unlikely to make headway on specific policies intended to support each stakeholder's varying and sometimes
divergent views about what the purpose should be. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chuck<br>
<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>