[Gnso-epdp-team] Consensus Call - Bundle #3

[farzaneh badii]

I am truly sorry and apologize to all for confusing the columns.I was
referring to recommendation 18, page 9/10/11 of this report, reasonable
access. the column says that language been revised on 11 Feb and is giving
time for the group to review it.

It is in the final report that Rafik shared with a caveat that "agreement
in principle awaiting sign off of latest language -[page 20]". I hope I got
the numbers correct this time.



Farzaneh


On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:46 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Kurt,
>
> As to recommendation 15, I am surprised that the IPC suggested changes are
> simply copy pasted in at least two instances in the report :
>
> - Logs of Requests, Acknowledgements and Responses should be maintained in
> accordance with standard business recordation practices so that they are
> available to be produced as needed including, but not limited to, for audit
> purposes by ICANN Compliance;
>
> -A separate timeline of [less than X business days] will considered for
> the response to ‘Urgent’ Reasonable Disclosure Requests, those Requests for
> which evidence is supplied to show an immediate need for disclosure [time
> frame to be finalized and criteria set for Urgent requests during
> implementation].
>
> As far as I remember CPs on that thread (Alan Woods and Marc) and us
> (NCSG) objected to adding audit. Did anything change?   I also  see a
> change to "urgent" requests done by IPC which is totally unacceptable and I
> cannot remember we ever came to a consensus about that. This also applies
> to additions to logs of requests.
>
> Sarah on that thread had suggested some acceptable changes that I believe
> addresses the issues and is middle ground. I have attached those
> suggestions.
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 1:24 PM Kurt Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Everyone:
>>
>> I have attached Bundle 3 of the consensus designations. As some items are
>> still in discussion or newly minted, I have held off assigning a
>> designation to those. To make it clear, I have created two separate tables
>> (3A and 3B).
>>
>> I have taken a conservative approach in holding back a final designation
>> where we have not received feedback on final wording. However, I do think
>> we have agreement on nearly all of these and look forward to closing them
>> out by the end of this week.
>>
>> Please comment on Table 3A by the end of this week if you disagree or
>> wish to discuss the level of consensus indicated. Please use Table 3B  to
>> consider your response so that we can request a rapid turnaround on that
>> table when it is issued.
>>
>> Please read the introduction to the document for a more complete
>> explanation.
>>
>> Please let me know if you have questions or need for further explanation.
>>
>> As always, thank you and best regards,
>>
>> Kurt
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
>> Gnso-epdp-team at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-epdp-team/attachments/20190213/36304d52/attachment-0001.html>