[RDS-WHOIS2-RT] GUIDANCE NEEDED - Planning

Thu Jun 22 21:17:12 UTC 2017

To my understanding that's not the idea, it just seemed difficult to entirely avoid looking at some of the same issues, therefore it was decided not to exclude it and thus give the Review Team some flexibility in this regard. The GAC is interested in a comprehensive review, given the importance of the WHOIS to GAC interests combined with the likelihood that the PDP will carry on for quite some time, meaning that we may live with the existing system for a while to come.

Cathrin

From: Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca]
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:50 PM
To: BAUER-BULST Cathrin (HOME); alice.jansen at icann.org; rds-whois2-rt at icann.org
Subject: RE: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] GUIDANCE NEEDED - Planning

Hi Cathrin,

Without going into the details of the GNSO proposal (which I will shortly), by saying the GAC does not endorse the last point in the GNSO Proposal (ensure no duplication of work between the RDS-RT and the GNSO RDS PDP), are you saying that the GAC supports us duplicating the RDS PDP work?

Alan

At 22/06/2017 04:32 PM, Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu<mailto:Cathrin.BAUER-BULST at ec.europa.eu> wrote:

Hi Alice, hi team,

Sounds like September – perhaps 2nd half? – is a possibility. I would also be available, same goes for the rest of the autumn. Having one meeting before ICANN60 and one at ICANN60 is a good idea. In general, I would have a preference for combining Review Team meetings with other meetings most or all of us attend if possible – for me that would be ICANN and the IGF this autumn/winter.

I would support Alan's proposal on the briefing which would no doubt be helpful as a baseline. I would also be interested in seeing the work plan of the previous review team or of a similar exercise, so as to have an idea of next steps, useful frequency of meetings, realistic deadlines for deliverables with a team this size etc. – this might also help us with the scope discussion. On scope, you may already be aware that the GAC has largely endorsed the GNSO proposal, with the exception of the last point on overlaps with the RDS PDP.

Looking forward to meeting you all in Johannesburg.

Best regards
Cathrin

From: rds-whois2-rt-bounces at icann.org<mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces at icann.org> [ mailto:rds-whois2-rt-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 4:24 PM
To: Alice Jansen; RDS WHOIS2-RT List
Subject: Re: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] GUIDANCE NEEDED - Planning

Hi Alice,

I think a September meeting would be fine. Exactly how much work we will do before that is less clear, for the same reason holding an earlier meeting would be problematic. Certainly, we can start talking about scope, and leadership. And as I said in my previous message, I think the decisions should be in that order.

I would definitely plan at least a 1-day and perhaps 2-day meeting prior to ICANN60. And I would schedule a consultation session or sessions. I think we will need to discuss whether we do a single session with the entire community, or meetings with each AC/SO, or both.

I again suggest that prior to our doing almost anything, I would like to have a written briefing from staff on the recommendations of the first WHIS-RT, their implementation methodology and current status, and any other comments that staff has. I am attaching a comparable document given to ATRT2. I am NOT suggesting that the new document be patterned after this one, as it had a number of critical flaws, but am including it solely to demonstrate that such a thing is possible. This one was created at the request of ATRT2 to fill a gap in its understanding of the WHOIS RT Recommendations. I also note that ATRT2 made a very specific recommendation that such reports be prepared for future review teams and this recommendation was accepted by the Board. Specifically:

11.4. Complete implementation reports
The Board should prepare a complete implementation report to be ready by review kick-off. This report should be submitted for public consultation, and relevant benchmarks and metrics must be incorporated in the report.

Regards, Alan

At 22/06/2017 06:12 AM, Alice Jansen wrote:

Dear Review Team Members,

Your first Face-to-Face Meeting

In light of your decision to not hold your first face-to-face meeting during ICANN 59 and to meet informally instead, we wish to seek your guidance on when you envision holding your first in-person session so we may plan accordingly.

As many tend to take time off in July-August, we would suggest holding your first face-to-face session in early September 2017 and scheduling calls throughout July-August to advance work, as appropriate.

Please advise whether the September timeframe is acceptable and if you have any dates to suggest for the meeting and/or conflicts we should be mindful of. This is a suggestion for your consideration – should you wish to schedule a meeting earlier, or have other suggestions, please share using this list.

In addition, we would also welcome any suggestions you may have on meeting location (subject to budget, availability etc.) so we may relay them to the meetings team to inform their venue search. For instance, we have a meeting room in Brussels, at the ICANN office, which could potentially be used for this meeting.

ICANN 60

For planning purposes –“ kindly note that as indicated in the slides presented on your call #1, we have been given the following deadlines to request a one-day session at ICANN 60 (Abu Dhabi â€“ 28 Oct-3 Nov 2017):

·         30 June – deadline for any sessiions to be held prior to the ICANN 60 program;
·         30 July - deadline for any sessions to be held during the ICANN 60 program

We would be grateful if the Review Team could let us know by the 30 June due date if you wish to hold a meeting prior to ICANN 60 and if there is interest in holding a public consultation during ICANN 60.

We look forward to reading your input.

Thanks,

Best regards

Alice

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
         1;DM5PR03MB2714;27:FDqlXOg++4Y0Fz5YMVuBWh5+YvyTsymIMYOZPIImiokqH41ogt4kQWt+Mmlq4Z2k5/sjF5fTqOk2I3VLSHy5EuZtj7Ty+gseqk1b0+DKMp302brm5TQQL8j6IwwjKTT9IgqeJXihpDaeTO2GEgKCCw==
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery:
         ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160514016)(520000050)(520002050)(750028)(400001001212)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095);

_______________________________________________
RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list
RDS-WHOIS2-RT at icann.org<mailto:RDS-WHOIS2-RT at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rds-whois2-rt/attachments/20170622/4fe96d59/attachment-0001.html>