[Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Items for PP IRT discussion on Tuesday

[Sara Bockey]

Hi Amy,

I hate to be nitpicky, I noticed in the revised LEA Spec you are stating that only Eric and Volker supported my proposal.  Theo and Chris Pelling also noted their support.  Please revise your records to accurately reflect this.

Thanks,

Sara

sara bockey
sr. policy manager | GoDaddy™
sbockey at godaddy.com<mailto:sbockey at godaddy.com>  480-366-3616
skype: sbockey

This email message and any attachments hereto is intended for use only by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy of this message and its attachments.


From: Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Amy Bivins <amy.bivins at icann.org>
Reply-To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl at icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl at icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 at 11:32 AM
To: "gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl at icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl at icann.org>
Subject: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] Items for PP IRT discussion on Tuesday

Dear Colleagues,

Attached are updated documents for discussion on Tuesday’s Privacy/Proxy IRT call, at 1400 UTC:

  1.  Updated draft de-accreditation procedure
  2.  Updated LEA Framework Specification markup

On our call Tuesday, I’ll walk you through the updates that have been made to the de-accreditation procedure based on your feedback. Please come prepared to discuss any further feedback you may have on this document, particularly the re-introduction of a proposed transition procedure that could be used to attempt to transfer impacted customers to a new provider if a provider is de-accredited. We considered whether to remove this process in the prior draft, due to practical concerns, but upon further consideration we think this process should be included, with the caveat that once it is tested adjustments may be needed to make the process work.

For the updated markup of the LEA framework specification, the goal is to determine whether we have consensus among IRT members to adopt any of the changes proposed by registrar members of the IRT. There appears to be strong support for many of these proposed changes, so unless there is opposition to changes they can be incorporated into the draft. It’s clear that the 24-hour response time proposed by the PSWG for high-priority requests does not have consensus support of the IRT, so we plan to call out this section specifically during the public comment period for community feedback.

I hope to also have an update for you on data escrow next week and, if not, soon thereafter. As Adobe Connect is still unavailable, Michelle will circulate alternative information for you to dial in for the meeting.

Best,
Amy


Amy E. Bivins
Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager
Registrar Services and Industry Relations
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551
Fax:  +1 (202) 789-0104
Email: amy.bivins at icann.org<mailto:amy.bivins at icann.org>
www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl/attachments/20180416/4eca46dd/attachment.html>