<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><div><div><div><div>Dear Review Team Members,</div><div><br></div><div>Please find enclosed the note pod content of your conference call held on 18 April.</div><div>Staff will draft a preliminary report for your consideration.</div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards</div><div><br></div><div>Alice</div></div></div></div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span> Alice Jansen <<a href="mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org">alice.jansen@icann.org</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span> Alice Jansen <<a href="mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org">alice.jansen@icann.org</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span> Alice Jansen <<a href="mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org">alice.jansen@icann.org</a>><br><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span> Adobe Connect - Note Pod Content from WHOIS-Review<br></div><div><br></div><top><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:14pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial"><b>WHOIS Policy Review Team - I8 April - 23:00 UTC</b></pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#990099;font-family: Arial"><b>AGENDA</b></pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">1. Roll call & apologies</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">2. Agenda & Preliminary report (11 April)</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">3. Data validation: should this topic be added to our findings/preamble</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">4. Review proposed language & action items penholders report</pre><p></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial"><li>Compliance</li></pre><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial"><li>Proxy/Privacy</li></pre><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial"><li>Data Accuracy</li></pre><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial"><li>Recommendation 3</li></pre><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial"><li>Deaccreditation</li></pre><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial"><li>IDNs</li></pre><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">5. Discuss general revisions to chapters and final report timeline</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">6. A.O.B (scheduling issues)</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#CC9933;font-family: Arial"><b>PARTICIPANTS </b></pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Lutz Donnerhacke, Lynn Goodendorf, Kathy Kleiman, James Bladel, Peter Nettlefold, Omar Kaminski, Susan Kawaguchi, Seth Reiss</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#0000FF;font-family: Arial"><b>ICANN STAFF </b></pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Alice Jansen, Denise Michel</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#FF0000;font-family: Arial"><b>APOLOGIES</b></pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Sarmad Hussain, Emily Taylor, Wilfried Woeber, Michael Yakushev, Bill Smith, Olof Nordling</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#00CC00;font-family: Arial"><b>NOTES</b></pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">1. Prel report adopted</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">2. Data validation - </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) this subject was discussed in London. Would have to rebuild amount of work ongoing in Community (PDP, RAA) need to be cautious</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(LG) appropriate to consider having a couple of lines to encourage data validation techniques as a way to achieve accuracy goals.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) as ongoing, think we had agreed to leave a roadmap to next RT.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) Not sure where this would fit in Data accuracy. Would be useful to acknowledge that things going on in the Community. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(KK) state that numerous mechanisms but went for low-hanging fruit? </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) might confuse community. Be consistent, restate definitions.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(LG) How would validation/authentication techniques be used rather than getting involved in implementation details.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) emphasize accuracy goal not mention the path taken to get there.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">PENHOLDERS - (JB) - (PN) </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Would should this additional piece go? Exec. summary? Body of text? Recs? </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(KK) make sure it can be found in different parts of the report. Up to subteam to put proposal forward</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">3) Compliance recommendations (PN) Mostly prepared by (ET). Public discussion about compliance in Costa Rica + enquired about Compliance figures. Compliance clearly related to WHOIS landscape. Strategic priority also included in the compliance recommendations. How much do we pull them apart to make them clear? Each issue to be given an identity.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(KK) Liaison with IETF? </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) still need to discuss points. Please send in your views.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Team should review Compliance recommendations and submit comments to subteam.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">4) Strategic priority - Compliance subteam to take this on.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">SK position: CEO or Board committee - </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Team went back to Costa Rica discussion.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) Board-level Committee tasked with implementing whatever comes out of this group. Starting-point ATRT. This group would overseen WHOIS.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) Should be for all WHOIS issue not only compliance recommendations. If the Board issues the mandate, there would be more movement within ICANN Staff. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) - Idea of CEO and Board Committee good situation - to keep issues disentangled, call for independent report to advise Board on benchmarking, best practivces etc. More of an organizational question. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) volunteered to draft some language.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">5) Proxy/Privacy Recommendations</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) Reference to 3.7.7.3 - important component not contained in paragraph. Wrongful use. Collision with something that is currently in the RAA.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) this was not caught on in the comments</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) The way written in our report - it preserves liability.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) Done to deal with uncertainty created by RAA. Comments in response to discussion paper brought our attention to this question of who is responsible. Discussion in Dakar responsibility with Registry Name Holder. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Go back to Dakar transcripts.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(KK) to send out a version on Thurs, 19 April to reflect that. discussion. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Subteam o work on the language of last paragraph.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) comments on findings - dot points are repetitive. Positive and negative should be together followed by a conclusion. (PN) to submit comments in writing</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Privacy discussion:. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) Is there a right to privacy</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(LG) In Europe, privacy is a human right. Word right has connotations which could mean different things and cause unecessary disagreement with recommendations. Would prefer if could avoid using that word.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) ICANN not governement - cannot support, establish, disminish right that people don't have under jurisdiction they live in. E.G. domain name transfer. Number of contexts where word right starts to confuse proces rather clarify it. Reference to Registrants' rights and responsibilities document published by ICANN. Need to find a way to establish expectations for privacy. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(LG) Data protection aspects of people who believe they have been harmed by fraudulent Domain names. Rights of people using the internet. In violent agreement James - just need to find wording to present the problem. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) to draft on Tursday, 19 April for subteam comments to get ball moving.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">5) Data Accuracy Recommendations</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) not created language per say but shortened things. Findings are for revision. On rec 7, initially recommended that add language on timeline, should we lose rec 7 as is under accuracy and add to recommendation 21? </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) thanks for work. Middle paragraph of findings bits where go directly to scope. In terms of readability, might be worth drawing points out. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Regulator term - not sure if better wording? Might want to focus on that.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) in the report</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) discussed this with GAC. Something we might want to be mindful of.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) Oversight?</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) which ICANN regulates and oversees?</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) alternatives: administer/manage/coordinate...</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) findings: heard in public sessions. make it clear that widely communicated to the RT. Rec 6 - language of unreachable WHOIS - update? Annual status on all goals.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Rec 7?</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) Rec 7 - WHOIS overall. If renumber recommendation - moving it to a different section. No pointing toward data accuracy or whois in general.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(KK) merge 6+7 into one rec?</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) getting rid of rec 7 and create an overarching 21 rec. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(SK) Separate rec about plan at the end. All related recs. at the end </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">to work on this and to send it to the group.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">6) Deaccreditation</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(JB) and (KK) to reiterate that.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">7) IDNs</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Meeting tomorrow with Steve Sheng and Francisco Arias. </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Michael has circulated revisions to subteam and this has been emailed to Staff to see if that fixes issues.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">8) Chapters & Timeline</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(PN) No revision to chapters </pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">(KK) Add agenda item to next call.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">Do you think can get all language ready by next week? No objection. Emily to decide. Looks like might be going into May. Amendments to chapters and recs by next call.</pre><p></p><p align="LEFT"></p><pre style="font-size:11pt;color:#000000;font-family: Arial">9) A.O.B</pre><p></p></top></span></body></html>