<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [tech-whois] A follow up session in San Francisco?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12pt'>Thank you Jim and Jay for your suggestion. <BR>
<BR>
Warm regards, <BR>
Steve<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 2/16/11 4:37 PM, "James M Galvin" <<a href="jgalvin@afilias.info">jgalvin@afilias.info</a>> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12pt'>I agree with Jay's suggestion.<BR>
<BR>
Jim<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-- On February 17, 2011 11:49:40 AM +1300 Jay Daley <<a href="jay@nzrs.net.nz">jay@nzrs.net.nz</a>><BR>
wrote regarding Re: [tech-whois] A follow up session in San Francisco?<BR>
--<BR>
<BR>
> Hi Steve<BR>
><BR>
> On 2/02/2011, at 2:04 PM, Steve Sheng wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > What do others on the mailing list think? Since Whois is used not<BR>
> > only by GNSO constituencies, but by ccTLDs, RIRs as well. Should<BR>
> > this be a joint working group with other SOs and ACs, for example<BR>
> > with SSAC? Another question is should the discussion happen inside<BR>
> > IETF instead of ICANN?<BR>
><BR>
> I would recommend that we have a joint WG across all constituencies<BR>
> that discusses "A new directory service" and that does what Michael<BR>
> suggested, which is consider the various requirements and get<BR>
> agreement on those. The registrar and user communities may have just<BR>
> as much input as the registries.<BR>
><BR>
> Once that is done then we can take two further steps:<BR>
><BR>
> 1. Have a joint WG on whether to scrap the current WHOIS service.<BR>
> 2. Ask the IETF to look at the protocol needed to support this new<BR>
> service including revisiting CRISP.<BR>
><BR>
> cheers<BR>
> Jay<BR>
><BR>
> ><BR>
> > Warm regards,<BR>
> > Steve<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> > On 1/31/11 10:35 AM, "Michael Young" <<a href="myoung@ca.afilias.info">myoung@ca.afilias.info</a>> wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I tend to agree with James on this one, if we are going to do<BR>
> > something meaningful here, let's put a plan together on how to do<BR>
> > so.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I think the last meeting found that we all agree that the current<BR>
> > Whois is at least lacking a solution for IDNs (I think we all<BR>
> > agreed on other shortcomings as well, but that was the most urgent<BR>
> > one I noted).<BR>
> ><BR>
> > There are many other controversial potential Whois requirements<BR>
> > that are related to the Whois policy(and related studies) work<BR>
> > going on. I suggest we try and focus on building a requirements<BR>
> > list of items that we believe a) don't constrain or affect current<BR>
> > or anticipated policy issues and have the GNSO/IRD review and agree<BR>
> > on that list b) if they do have policy implications but are<BR>
> > urgent (such as IDN enablement), let's work with the IRD and GNSO<BR>
> > to create some prioritized attention to the issues.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Once you have an agreed upon set of requirements, with the relevant<BR>
> > stakeholders bought in, the rest becomes an examination of<BR>
> > inventory and then execution. We can then examine the most<BR>
> > efficient proposals to solve the requirements - including looking<BR>
> > at past work to see if there's anything worth reusing.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Michael Young<BR>
> ><BR>
> > M:+1-647-289-1220<BR>
> ><BR>
> > -----Original Message-----<BR>
> > From: James M Galvin [<a href="mailto:jgalvin@afilias.info">mailto:jgalvin@afilias.info</a>]<BR>
> > Sent: January-31-11 1:23 PM<BR>
> > To: Steve Sheng; <a href="tech-whois@icann.org">tech-whois@icann.org</a><BR>
> > Subject: Re: [tech-whois] A follow up session in San Francisco?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I'm not opposed to a follow up session in San Francisco but I'd<BR>
> > like to have a more actionable goal for the meeting than "engage a<BR>
> > discussion on the technical evolution of WHOIS".<BR>
> ><BR>
> > One thing that was clear from our last meeting is somebody needs to<BR>
> > "own" this work. A generic meeting with a generic agenda is not<BR>
> > making progress. If this work is going to progress then from whom<BR>
> > is there a formal mandate and what is it?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Without an actionable goal we're just using up meeting slots.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > For one thing, let's be clear about whether we're talking about the<BR>
> > Whois protocol, the Whois data model, or the Whois data<BR>
> > representation.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Depending on the actionable goal, if we are going to have<BR>
> > presentations by RWS and IRIS, perhaps a presentation by the IRD<BR>
> > would be helpful since it will have something to say about future<BR>
> > requirements for a replacement Whois data model.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Jim<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> > -- On January 26, 2011 9:52:17 AM -0800 Steve Sheng<BR>
> > <<a href="steve.sheng@icann.org">steve.sheng@icann.org</a>> wrote regarding [tech-whois] A follow up<BR>
> > session in San Francisco? --<BR>
> ><BR>
> > > Dear all,<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > We had a successful workshop in Cartagena last year. Thinking<BR>
> > > ahead for the San Francisco meeting, we would like to ask if<BR>
> > > there would be any interest in scheduling a follow up session in<BR>
> > > San Francisco. Particularly we thought about inviting IRIS and<BR>
> > > RWS authors and implementers to come and give presentations about<BR>
> > > their experience, and then engage a discussion on the technical<BR>
> > > evolution of WHOIS.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > If there is sufficient interest, we can request a slot in the<BR>
> > > San Francisco meeting and invite speakers to come.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Warm regards,<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> > _______________________________________________<BR>
> > tech-whois mailing list<BR>
> > <a href="tech-whois@icann.org">tech-whois@icann.org</a><BR>
> > <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/tech-whois">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/tech-whois</a><BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
> > _______________________________________________<BR>
> > tech-whois mailing list<BR>
> > <a href="tech-whois@icann.org">tech-whois@icann.org</a><BR>
> > <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/tech-whois">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/tech-whois</a><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>