<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=utf-8"><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;}
@font-face
{font-family:"GD Boing";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* 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;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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>Is there anyone in this WG who disagrees with Sara’s statement that ‘RDS must change’, understanding that we still have large differences of opinion regarding how to change it?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Chuck<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> gnso-rds-pdp-wg [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Sara Bockey<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 14, 2018 9:22 AM<br><b>To:</b> Steve Crocker <steve@shinkuro.com>; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Using the GDPR as a basis for RDS Policy is backwards<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I agree with Steve and look forward to additional feedback from him. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>RDS must change. Discussions to the contrary are a waste of time.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Sara<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:1.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"GD Boing",serif;color:#02C54C'>sara bockey</span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:1.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"GD Boing",serif;color:#111111'>sr. policy manager | </span></b><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"GD Boing",serif;color:#02C54C'>Go</span></b><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"GD Boing",serif;color:black'>Daddy<sup>™</sup></span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:1.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"GD Boing",serif;color:#111111'><a href="mailto:sbockey@godaddy.com"><span style='color:#954F72'>sbockey@godaddy.com</span></a> 480-366-3616</span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"GD Boing",serif;color:#111111'>skype: sbockey</span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:black;background:white'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:black;background:white'>This email message and any attachments hereto is intended for use only by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy of this message and its attachments.</span></i><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>gnso-rds-pdp-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Steve Crocker <<a href="mailto:steve@shinkuro.com">steve@shinkuro.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 9:27 AM<br><b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Using the GDPR as a basis for RDS Policy is backwards<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><a name="_MailOriginalBody">I am only partially up to speed on the state of discussion within this WG, but I have been following the RDS situation for several years. In my view, the current focus on GDPR, while understandable because of the looming deadline, is logically backwards. The challenge, which we tried to address forcefully in 2012, is to rethink the RDS from the ground up. In my view, this is: <o:p></o:p></a></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'>o necessary<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'>o feasible<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'>o will lead to a much cleaner model<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'>o will make it relatively straightforward to satisfy the GDPR and all similar regulations around the world.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'>There are also some issues such as the relationship of name server operators that also need to be addressed.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'>There is obviously much more that needs to be said. I will contribute as much and as quickly as I can.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'>Steve<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-bookmark:_MailOriginalBody'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>