[Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Tue Jul 17 13:29:20 UTC 2018

Thanks to all of the small team for your dedication above and beyond the call of duty, not least to Heather and Keith.

In our own words, we’re asking the EPDP Team to be “willing to work, in good faith, toward consensus solutions during the life of the EPDP...” so Council itself can’t do any less! Keeping our collective good faith and good will in mind,  let’s set this ball rolling so that we can begin the substantive work.

Best

Marie

From: Epdp-dt <epdp-dt-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 2:31 PM
To: philippe.fouquart at orange.com; Erika Mann <erika at erikamann.com>; Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin at team.neustar>
Cc: Epdp-dt at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Also agree

The charter and its scope have been the subject of intense discussion for weeks. While the concept of “perfection” is nice it’s impossible. What we seem to have reached at this stage is about as close to it as we can expect to get.
If the WG has issues they can come back to Council with queries or seek guidance.

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

From: Epdp-dt <epdp-dt-bounces at icann.org<mailto:epdp-dt-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of "philippe.fouquart at orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart at orange.com>" <philippe.fouquart at orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart at orange.com>>
Date: Tuesday 17 July 2018 at 13:27
To: Erika Mann <erika at erikamann.com<mailto:erika at erikamann.com>>, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin at team.neustar<mailto:Donna.Austin at team.neustar>>
Cc: "Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>" <Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Couldn’t have phrased in better.

I appreciate the different views expressed here especially for section J but would rely on the EPDP team to figure the least “unsatisfactory one” out as they move forward. Or come back for guidance if needed.

Regards,

Philippe

From: Epdp-dt [mailto:epdp-dt-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Erika Mann
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 2:12 PM
To: Austin, Donna
Cc: Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

This group is tasked with (a) difficult goal(s). I share Pam's concern concerning a 'harmonized access' model but this shouldn't prevent this group from starting the work.

As long as we keep in mind that we're searching for a WHOIS (access) model that is workable - and legally acceptable - in different jurisdictions, and as long we don't become orthodox in our approaches, we should be able to see a solid outcome emerging.

Heather, framed it well in her last email:

"We need to resist the temptation of usurping the work of the EPDP Team. If language is redundant, they will work around it. If it is not perfect, we will empower them to refine, and come back to Council with questions where necessary. Let's get this team started, and see if these last minute issues are truly obstacles to their work."

Kind regards,
Erika

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 16, 2018, at 9:11 PM, Austin, Donna via Epdp-dt <epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:epdp-dt at icann.org>> wrote:
Very well said Heather.

From: Epdp-dt [mailto:epdp-dt-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Heather Forrest
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 5:43 PM
To: Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Colleagues,

We have travelled a long distance together, and the small group has worked almost non-stop on the scope for nearly 2 weeks now, up against work and family pressures and the tantalising photos of others' summer family holidays. The weight of the task is pushing us to our limits, and it kills me to see the significant efforts at compromise from Panama and the two weeks since come undone in the final 3 days.

We've said many times - but I'll repeat it here as now it's urgent and very real - that the community's perception of the Council's ability to deliver on its Bylaws mandate by running this EPDP is at stake on Thursday. If we are unable to agree on the charter, there is a live risk that Pandora's box opens.

We had a text that was fairly stable as of Sunday, based on the timeline that we agreed in the DT call last Wednesday. We need to resist the temptation of usurping the work of the EPDP Team. If language is redundant, they will work around it. If it is not perfect, we will empower them to refine, and come back to Council with questions where necessary. Let's get this team started, and see if these last minute issues are truly obstacles to their work. If we do not get them started, we may never find out. If you are willing to work with the text we have as per Keith's Sunday email and let the Team push forward, now is the time to speak up.

Best wishes,

Heather

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Pam Little <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>> wrote:
Hi Paul,

Thank you for the feedback.

To me, the goal of the Temp Spec and this EPDP effort is very simple: to comply with the law. "Avoid the fragmentation of WHOIS" or the idea of harmonization as a premise or goal is fundamentally flawed. As you know, there is already fragmentation of WHOIS in the cc world. As far as I know, .JP does not even have a WHOIS service.

More importantly, I would like to point out the latest guidance regarding Codes of Conduct and Accreditation in the EDPB letter (see page 6 https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/jelinek-to<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_correspondence_jelinek-2Dto&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=wQW2DCZFumEvcBcjrLYjWHhNX_WnA3nWfj5ZdnjZDak&s=rZ0OyCS9JwuSdabv4b6EZcmL-H0wrXCUaiB5LqM6zRI&e=>-marby-05jul18-en.pdf). Specifically:

1.  Certification and/or accreditation are voluntary measures, not mandatory.
2.  The responsibility for designing a model that will provide the assurance [of compliance with the GDPR] is, in the first instance, up to the data controllers.

The previous langauge and your latest suggested language pre-suppose there should be a "community-wide model for access or similar framework", which in my view, is inconsistent with the above guidance.

I hope this explains my thinking for my proposed edits.

Kind regards,

Pam
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sender:Drazek, Keith <kdrazek at verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek at verisign.com>>
Sent at:2018 Jul 17 (Tue) 01:58
To:PMcGrady at winston.com<mailto:To%3APMcGrady at winston.com> <PMcGrady at winston.com<mailto:PMcGrady at winston.com>>; PAMELA LITTLE <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>>; Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org> <Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>>; marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org> <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Subject:RE: [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Hi Pam and Paul,

Attached is an updated version incorporating Pam’s edits and responding to her questions. I incorporated Paul’s suggested language below for Section J.

Regards,
Keith

From: McGrady, Paul D. <PMcGrady at winston.com<mailto:PMcGrady at winston.com>>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 7:37 AM
To: Pam Little <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com<mailto:pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>>; Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>; marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>; Drazek, Keith <kdrazek at verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek at verisign.com>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Hi Pam,

Thank you for your proposed edits.  However, I do think that they eliminate an important concept that we were trying to get at and would prefer the question revert to its previous formulation.

If the DT decides to eliminate the concept of reconciliation/avoiding an unharmonized approach, I still think your proposed changes need some work.

If we change to “Can the obligation to provide “reasonable access” be clarified or defined…” I think that leads us down the wrong path.  J1 already focuses on clarifying and defining reasonable access.  I think we could ask “Can the obligation to provide “reasonable access” be further clarified and/or better defined through the implementation of a community-wide model…”  We lose the idea of harmonization, which was the purpose of the question in the first place, but ultimately those working on the answer will hopefully take into account issues that would tend to bring a discordant result and try to avoid those outcomes.

So, Keith, we would prefer that the question revert.  If we can’t get that, we would be OK with:

“Can the obligation to provide “reasonable access” be further clarified and/or better defined through the implementation of a community-wide model for access or similar framework which takes into account at least the following elements:”

Best to all,
Paul

From: Epdp-dt [mailto:epdp-dt-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Pam Little
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 1:50 AM
To: Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>; marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>; Drazek, Keith <kdrazek at verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek at verisign.com>>
Subject: Re: [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Hi Keith

Many thanks to you and the small drafting team for the "final" draft.

Because of time zone differences, I have not had an opportunity to discuss this with my RrSG councillors or RrSG members but, in the interest fo time, I have made some suggested edits and queries to the final draft. Most of them are intended to correct minor errors or add more clarity and consistency so I hope they are not controversial, except perhaps my proposed change to J2 below:

"J2) Can the obligation to provide “reasonable access” be clarified or defined reconciled with the objective of avoiding, to the extent possible, an unharmonized approach to third-party access to registration data, , without the implementation of a community-wide model for access or similar framework which takes into account at least the following elements:"

It seems to me neither the langauge in the previous draft (re fragmentation of WHOIS) nor the final draft was helpful hence my proposed change to try to make it more neutral.

I also have a question regarding the last paragraph in the final draft:

"The EPDP Team shall respect the timelines and deliverables as outlined in Annex A and A-1 of the ICANN Bylaws and the EPDP Manual. As per the GNSO EPDP Working Group Guidelines, the EPDP Team shall develop a work plan that outlines the necessary steps and expected timing in order to achieve the milestones of the EPDP as set out in Annex A and A-1 of the ICANN Bylaws and the EPDP Manual and submit this to the GNSO Council. Any significant updates to the work plan are expected to be communicated in a timely manner to the GNSO Council with an explanation as to why the work plan needed adjustment."

The final draft Charter has set timelines for Deliverable 2. Is the EPDP Team expected to develop a work plan for all three deliverables?

Kind regards,

Pam
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sender:Drazek, Keith via Epdp-dt <epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:epdp-dt at icann.org>>
Sent at:2018 Jul 16 (Mon) 13:08
To:Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:To%3AEpdp-dt at icann.org> <Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>>; marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org> <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Subject:[Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Hello again everyone….

Now attached is the final draft of the EPDP WG Charter scope section for your review and our vote on the 19th.

I have attached the redline version (against the version circulate to the DT last Wednesday) and the clean version.

Thanks for your patience and for the constructive input of all parties.

Regards,
Keith

From: Drazek, Keith
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2018 10:28 AM
To: Drazek, Keith <kdrazek at verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek at verisign.com>>
Cc: Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>; marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] [Epdp-dt] EPDP Scope

Hi all. Please wait before reviewing. I may have jumped the gun and we may have more suggested edits incoming from NCSG.

Thanks,
Keith

On Jul 15, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Drazek, Keith via Epdp-dt <epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:epdp-dt at icann.org>> wrote:
Hi all,

As discussed on Wednesday’s EPDP Drafting Team call, attached is the final draft of the EPDP charter scope section.

I received a few suggested edits from Stephanie and Darcy and did my best to incorporate/address them. The small group has reviewed and agreed this is ready for approval at the 19 July Council meeting.

Thanks to everyone for your contributions to this effort.

Regards,
Keith
<Updated Scope Section 15 July 2018 -- Consolidated Edits.docx>
<Updated Scope Section 15 July 2018 -- Consolidated Edits CLEAN.docx>
_______________________________________________
Epdp-dt mailing list
Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/epdp-dt<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fmm.icann.org-252Fmailman-252Flistinfo-252Fepdp-2Ddt-26data-3D02-257C01-257Cpmcgrady-2540winston.com-257C21dc7986efdb472f2d1608d5eae86f9d-257C12a8aae45e2f4ad8adab9375a84aa3e5-257C0-257C0-257C636673207197019797-26sdata-3D42E7jzrAu6xBuZTUb5-252BNLhVHYI20lrWnf-252Fgrl3WOpgg-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=wQW2DCZFumEvcBcjrLYjWHhNX_WnA3nWfj5ZdnjZDak&s=gTHh8bCtTFVh7WkJ4_Jy7uh2Do3dCGDwaO3qBFfgoE0&e=>

________________________________
The contents of this message may be privileged and confidential. If this message has been received in error, please delete it without reading it. Your receipt of this message is not intended to waive any applicable privilege. Please do not disseminate this message without the permission of the author. Any tax advice contained in this email was not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by you (or any other taxpayer) to avoid penalties under applicable tax laws and regulations.

_______________________________________________
Epdp-dt mailing list
Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/epdp-dt<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_epdp-2Ddt&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=wQW2DCZFumEvcBcjrLYjWHhNX_WnA3nWfj5ZdnjZDak&s=ZDhwh5kCbJSY5_bt6G5mc1_sdxYwITI5u_TH6ShZjIY&e=>

_______________________________________________
Epdp-dt mailing list
Epdp-dt at icann.org<mailto:Epdp-dt at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/epdp-dt

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/epdp-dt/attachments/20180717/fe67db7a/attachment-0001.html>