[RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Scope of RDS-WHOIS2-RT

[Carlton Samuels]

I tend to agree with Alan's analysis here.  I would also suggest that we
look at the Internationalisation of WHOIS as part of this scope.

-Carlton


==============================
*Carlton A Samuels*

*Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment &
Turnaround*
=============================

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
wrote:

> In preparation for the meeting tomorrow, I would like to explain why I
> feel that we should limit our scope to an in depth review of the first
> WHOIS-RT recommendations and their implementation. This is specifically
> called for in section (iv) of the Bylaw governing this review:
>
> *The Directory Service Review Team shall assess the extent to which prior
> Directory Service Review recommendations have been implemented and the
> extent to which implementation of such recommendations has resulted in the
> intended effect. *As the first phase of this, MSSI should, with the
> support of the appropriate ICANN departments, prepare a full assessment of
> the WHOIS_RT Recommendations and their implementation, and do so prior to
> our first formal face-to-face meeting.
>
> Any future replacement for WHOIS is being discussed in the GNSO
> Next-Generation RDS PDP and is clearly our of scope. Privacy issues with
> the current WHOIS are clearly an issue, but I do not believe that this RT
> is the proper place to design any "fix" to meet GDPR issues, n ot would our
> time-frame meet requirements to act in the next several months.
>
> The GNSO has suggested nine focus areas that we should look at, and I
> would like to review them here.
>
> 1. Assess whether the RDS efforts currently underway in the ICANN
> community are on target to meet the “legitimate needs of law enforcement,
> promoting consumer trust and safeguarding registrant data.”
>
>
> The prime RDS effort is the GNSO PDP. Given that the PDP is not at a stage
> to make any recommendations, I do see how we could assess its outcomes. If
> indeed it is thought to be in trouble, it is the sole responsibility of the
> GNSO to take action. A RT recommendation to the Board cannot do that.
>
> 2. Assess the RDS efforts currently underway (or planned in the near
> term), for the purpose of making recommendations regarding how they might
> be improved and better coordinated.
>
>
> Again, I do not know what crystal ball we have to do this.
>
> 3. Ongoing work by the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues
> Implementation Review Team (see Recommendation 10 of the 2012 WHOIS Review
> Team Final Report).
>
>
> To the extent that this is an aspect of a previous WHOIS-RT
> recommendation, it falls within the purview of the review of the last RT's
> work
>
> 4. Progress of cross validation implementation (see Recommendations 6 and
> 7, 2012 WHOIS Review Team Final Report).
>
>
> Same here.
>
> 5. Review compliance enforcement actions, structure and processes (see
> Recommendation 4, 2012 WHOIS Review Team Final Report).
>
>
> Same here.
>
> 6. Availability of transparent data concerning enforcement of contractual
> obligations of WHOIS.
>
>
> I am not sure exactly what this means, but it may well fall within the
> reasonable purview of this RT.
>
> 7. Assess the value and timing of RDAP as a replacement protocol.
>
>
> Although RDAP, or an evolution of it, is a likely choice for implementing
> a future RDS, I do not see how we can assess the value of RDAP without
> having the specific requirements for that RDS. In terms of timing, if the
> current RDAP ends up being sufficient, timing is not an issue, and if it
> required enhancement, the timing is not something that we are really
> equipped to predict.
>
> 8. To the extent time and bandwidth permit, evaluate the effectiveness of
> any other steps ICANN has taken to implement Recommendations 3-11 of the
> 2012 WHOIS Review Team Final Report.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
> 9. Ensure no duplication of work that is the responsibility of the GNSO’s
> RDS Policy Development Process Working Group.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
> Alan
>
> _______________________________________________
> RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list
> 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/20170627/db9921fa/attachment.html>