[Gnso-epdp-team] Question to ICANN Org re. status of the implementation of Phase 1 recommendations 6 and 13.1
brian.gutterman at icann.org
Mon Mar 1 19:30:53 UTC 2021
Dear WG members,
Hope this message finds you all well.
The Implementation Project Team was notified of a question from the EPDP Phase 2A Team relating to the status of the implementation of Phase 1 recommendations, particularly recommendations 6 and 13.1.
As Keith noted during the recent EPDP Team meeting, the Phase 1 Implementation Review Team is still working on implementing the Phase 1 recommendations.
The Implementation Review Team has reviewed draft language for both of the aforementioned recommendations, and we are sharing it below for ease of reference. Please note, however, that this language is not yet final as the Implementation Review Team has not performed its final review of the draft policy language. Additionally, this draft policy language (in its entirety) will be posted for public comment when complete, and we invite the EPDP Team to contribute to the public comment proceeding when it opens.
EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation #6.
The EPDP Team recommends that, as soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar must
provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to
publish redacted contact information, as well as the email address, in the RDS for the
Draft policy language: Where a Registrar redacts the values of the data elements listed in Sections 10.3.1.1 through 10.3.1.8, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to Publish the data element values. Registrar MUST Publish the value of the data element(s) for which the Registered Name Holder provided its Consent.
EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation #13.1.
The EPDP Team recommends that the Registrar MUST provide an email address or a
web form to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact, but MUST NOT
identify the contact email address or the contact itself, unless as per Recommendation
#6, the Registered Name Holder has provided consent for the publication of its email
Draft policy language: Where a Registrar redacts the data element values listed in Section 10.3.1.8 or 10.3.1.12, in lieu of “REDACTED”, Registrar MUST Publish an email address or a link to a web form for the Email value to facilitate email communication with the relevant contact, but MUST NOT identify the contact email address or the contact itself.
We note that the EPDP Team has raised concerns with web forms; however, to date, the IRT has not discussed the issue of possible minimum web form requirements, as no IRT members have raised this as a topic requiring discussion.
We also note that some EPDP Team members have asked how many registrars (if any) have already implemented a similar requirement, despite the fact that Phase 1 recommendations have not yet been implemented. The Implementation Project Team is not in a position to answer this question, as this question is more appropriately directed to registrars.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gnso-epdp-team