[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Next week's meeting

Thu Apr 21 23:22:24 UTC 2016

Hi
I’ll be an apology for this meeting 

Holly
On 22 Apr 2016, at 3:57 am, Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
> Not having heard any objections, we’ll go ahead and re-organise next week’s meeting as follows:
> 15.30 – 16.15 UTC Data Sub-Team 
> 16.15 – 17.00 UTC Privacy Sub-Team 
> 17.00 – 17.45 UTC Purpose Sub-Team 
> 
> Note that this will be scheduled as one call (same dial in number and AC room) to facilitate participation for those that are involved in multiple sub-teams, but there is no obligation for WG members to attend all three sub-team meetings, unless you would like to. However, if you are not a member of a sub-team but would like to join, you are encouraged to participate as an observer to allow ample opportunity for the sub-team to progress in its work. 
> 
> Call details will be sent out in a separate email. Please ignore the notice that went out earlier today for the ‘normal’ WG meeting.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Marika
> 
> From: <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
> Date: Wednesday 20 April 2016 at 13:16
> To: "Metalitz, Steven" <met at msk.com>, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & Action items from today's meeting
> 
> Dear Steve,
> 
> The proposal is indeed to have 45-minute calls for each of the sub-teams that are to be scheduled consecutively around the time of the normal WG meeting as the assumption is that people have kept that time free in their diaries. Of course, for some that are involved in multiple sub-teams as well as staff, it may mean up to a 135-minute meeting.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Marika
> 
> From: "Metalitz, Steven" <met at msk.com>
> Date: Wednesday 20 April 2016 at 13:00
> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: RE: Notes & Action items from today's meeting
> 
> I am not sure I understand the proposal but would not be in favor of having a 135-minute WG call next week.  However, it may make sense to schedule 45-minute calls for each of the subteams as they all have a lot of work to complete.  These could be scheduled consecutively, or in another pattern, so long as not overlapping (for those who are on more than one subteam). 
>  
> <image001.gif>
> Steven J. Metalitz |Partner, through his professional corporation
> T: 202.355.7902 |met at msk.com
> Mitchell Silberberg & KnuppLLP|www.msk.com
> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
>  
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
>  
> From:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 2:04 AM
> To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & Action items from today's meeting
>  
> Dear All,
>  
> Please find below the notes and action items from today’s RDS PDP Working Group meeting. Please take particular note of action item #8 which requires your input within the next 48 hours.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Marika
>  
> Notes & Action items - 20 April 2016
>  
> 1. Roll call / SOIs
> Roll call will be taken from Adobe Connect
> Update to SOIs: Susan Kawaguchi - Facebook has acquired a registrar. Will update SOI shortly to reflect this.
> 2. Report from each small team: Privacy, Data, Purpose
>  
> Purpose team: See checklist circulated. A couple more documents are in the process of being reviewed, many have already been submitted. Aim to have everything completed in next 48 hours. Initial discussions have started on what are the most important documents and rationale for why these are the most important. These include so far:
> EWG Recommendations - identified very clearly purposes behind data use (see relevant sections)
> 2012 WHOIS Policy Review Team Report
> SAC055
> 2007 GAC Communique regarding WHOIS
> 2013 RAA - includes specific uses by registrars
> Article 29 WP opinion (03/2003) on purpose limitation
> Article 29 WP on ICANN Procedure for Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law (2007)
> Article 29 WP on legitimate interests of data controller (2014)
> Many of the other documents were interesting and somewhat related, but didn't specificly identify potential purposes. 
>  
> Action item #1: Sub-team to try and reach rough consensus in the next week on a list of the most important documents related to purpose
> Action item #2: pull out some very short bullet points of the main value and points made in these most important document from the summaries
>  
> Data team: The lines between data and privacy and data and purpose aren't always clear in the documents reviewed. Issue of European Data Protection legislation has been flagged - moving target at the moment with new legislation under consideration. Most if not all documents have now been summarised. Initial discussions have started on what are the most important documents and rationale for why these are the most important. These include so far:
> Whois Task Force Final Report
> SAC 054
> EWG Recommendations, including tutorials and FAQs
> RA Spec 4
> What are next steps? Fact that some things are still evolving, such as laws and regulation, it is something to be conscious of, but no need to worry about too much at this stage as some items only come back in later phases of the PDP.. 
>  
> Action item #3: Sub-team to try and reach rough consensus in the next week on a list of the most important documents related to purpose
> Action item #4: pull out some very short bullet points of the main value and points made in these most important document from the summaries
>  
> Privacy team: Number of summaries have already come in. Initial discussions have started on what are the most important documents and rationale for why these are the most important. These include so far:
> SAC 054
> EWG Recommendations
> Action item #5: Sub-team to try and reach rough consensus in the next week on a list of the most important documents related to purpose
> Action item #6: pull out some very short bullet points of the main value and points made in these most important document from the summaries
>  
> 3. Confirm next steps and target date to complete small team outputs
> Small team outputs are more than most important documents. List of questions have been circulated (see 'plan to consolidate summaries and complete & present team outputs')
> Each team encouraged to provide their feedback to these questions in the next week.
> Sub-teams will need to verify summaries submitted to ensure nothing was missed. In the case of some documents, it may be difficult to only have a few bullet points. However, bullet points may help guide full WG in a concise way but recognising that the WG may need to dig into the full details at some point. 
> Staff will consolidate summaries into one document for each sub-team. Some summaries are uneven depending on the expertise of the members of the team - those with specific expertise or where involved in the development of these documents, are encouraged to review the summaries. 
> Focus on relevance of the work for the PDP, not necessarily overall importance / relevance in a broader context.
> Be careful to not jump ahead in relation to conclusions and blending issues. Maybe first two teams could look at purpose and data without looking at privacy concerns and not mix things? Leave privacy considerations to privacy sub-team and not blend at this stage.
> Action item #7: Those with specific expertise and/or those who where involved in the development of some of these documents, are encouraged to review the summaries to ensure that the key points have been included and correctly covered.
>  
> 4. Confirm next meeting date (Tuesday, 26 April  - may be used for small team calls)
> Suggestion for next week's meeting to add a little bit of time before and after (135 minutes total) to allow for each of the three teams to have 45 minutes to finalise responses to questions. This will require each of the sub-teams to have done work on the mailing list prior to the call. 
> Put this suggestion forward to the mailing list to request input.
> What needs to happen prior to the next meeting: few summaries missing from each team - these will need to be submitted (staff will send out reminders), consolidated summary documents will be produced in the next few days for sub-team reviews, sub-teams to agree on most relevant documents as well as other questions identified, review summaries and pull out key points from these most relevant documents. Next step would be to finalise work plan. Ideally the WG will be able to complete this part of the work shortly so it can move into the actual deliberations and development of requirements.
> Action item #8: WG members to provide feedback on this proposed approach within next 48 hours so that ample notification can be provided in relation to next week's meeting.
> <image001.gif>_______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160422/326bde24/attachment.html>