[CPWG] [GNSO-TPR] Input Due 16 January: Draft Revisions to Recommendations 10-22

Thu Dec 22 09:49:42 UTC 2022

Dear Dr. Steinar Grøtterød,

Many thanks for the mail. I hope the following trace will give us a good start.

*****************************************************
494 3.1.4 Charter Question a4
..........................
..........................
509 3.1.5 Charter Question a5
510
511 If the working group determines the Gaining FOA is no longer needed, does the
512 transmission of the AuthInfo Code provide a sufficient “paper trail” for auditing and
513 compliance purposes?
514
515 Working Group Response:
516
517 It is the working group’s view that a sufficient “paper trail” will be provided by records
518 associated with provision of the TAC and notifications to the RNH outlined in Preliminary
519 Recommendations 3-4.
...........................

799 Preliminary Recommendation 3:
........
801 but no later than 10 minutes after the Registrar of Record issues the TAC.

3.1: This notification MUST be provided in English and in the language of the
registration agreement and MAY also be provided in other languages.

825 Preliminary Recommendation 4:

853 4.2:...........

********************************************************

Hence my request for clarifications on who determines "Sufficient Paper Trial" for audit and by what process to decide.

Sincerely,

Gopal T V
0 9840121302
https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545
https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli

PS: I will come back to this mail thread in the Indian evening tomorrow [23 Dec]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. T V Gopal
Professor
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
College of Engineering
Anna University
Chennai - 600 025, INDIA
Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340
       (Res) 24454753
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

________________________________
From: Steinar Grøtterød <steinar at recito.no>
Sent: 22 December 2022 14:36
To: gopal <gopal at annauniv.edu>
Cc: CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [GNSO-TPR] Input Due 16 January: Draft Revisions to Recommendations 10-22

Dear Gobal,

I am somehow confused about your question and kindly ask you to point me to where in the report you request a clarification.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Steinar Grøtterød

From: gopal <gopal at annauniv.edu>
Date: Thursday, 22 December 2022 at 09:41
To: CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>, Steinar Grøtterød <steinar at recito.no>
Subject: Re: [GNSO-TPR] Input Due 16 January: Draft Revisions to Recommendations 10-22

Dear Dr. Steinar Grøtterød,

Many thanks for the nice report. It was not ojnly 5 minutes of the budgeted time but the entire 90 minutes of the CPWG meeting on 21 December 2022 happened in jiffy to my mind.

I am sorry for the belated comment.

The report prepared by  your Working group is very nice to read through.

I seek one clarification:

Eventually, the Working Group will not be funtional / operational. In that case what will be the "Sufficient Paper Trial" by the gaining registrar for the audit purpose? Who will determine "sufficient" and execute?

Sincerely,

Gopal T V

0 9840121302
https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545
https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. T V Gopal
Professor
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
College of Engineering
Anna University
Chennai - 600 025, INDIA
Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340
       (Res) 24454753
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

________________________________

From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Steinar Grøtterød via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
Sent: 21 December 2022 16:50
To: CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
Subject: [CPWG] FW: [GNSO-TPR] Input Due 16 January: Draft Revisions to Recommendations 10-22

Dear CPWG members,

Attached to this email is the updated recommendations based on the input from the Public Comment Period for the TPR PDP Initial Report Phase 1a.

I will distribute to the CPWG mailing list a space where we can make our comments in addition to the At-Large WG members recommendations.

We should allocate some time for the discussions at the CPWG meetings in January 2023, making it possible to give our feedback within the set deadline (Jan 16, 2023)

Regards,

Steinar Grøtterød

From: GNSO-TPR <gnso-tpr-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 11:58
To: gnso-tpr at icann.org <gnso-tpr at icann.org>
Subject: [GNSO-TPR] Input Due 16 January: Draft Revisions to Recommendations 10-22

Dear working group members,

As discussed on yesterday’s call, staff had an action item to provide an updated redline revision of the Initial Report reflecting agreed updates to Recommendations 10-22 (see pages 26-39), as well as revisions resulting from the last round of input on the previous redline and strawman (see highlighted text on pages 17-19, 21, and 24). The document is attached.

The deadline for submitting input is 16 January 2023. After the deadline, the working group will discuss the items submitted in the input document. Following review of those items, the text will be considered stable.

Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions about the review process.

Kind regards,

 Caitlin, Julie, Berry, and Emily

Emily Barabas

Policy Development Support Senior Manager

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976

www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20221222/c49e1bac/attachment-0001.html>