[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Next AoC WHOIS Review

Thu Apr 28 15:54:25 UTC 2016

Dear all,
Thank you for raising awareness of this pending review. I do not have enough
knowledge of the bylaws (or of the different Policy Development Processes
underway in relation to WHOIS) to comment here on the merits of maintaining the
review cycle versus potentially adjusting it given our overlapping PDPs, but I
would like to share this email from Steve Crocker today. Dr Crocker, speaking in his personal capacity, seems to indicate that
the WHOIS-RT will be taking place.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 4:18 PM, Gomes, Chuck cgomes at verisign.com wrote:
Thanks for the quick feedback Steve. I wouldn’t see the WG spending very much
time on this, but, that said, your points are understood.

Chuck

From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met at msk.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 11:13 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Andrew Sullivan; gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Next AoC WHOIS Review

Chuck and colleagues,

I would urge caution about this, for two reasons.

First, opining on this question clearly seems outside the scope of our charter.
Some might wonder whether diverting WG bandwidth to this issue suggests we have
extra time on our hands that we don’t need to devote to the task assigned to us.

Second, it is worth remembering that the AoC review and this effort address two
distinct (though certainly overlapping) issues. The review is about whether
ICANN is effectively implementing the current system. This WG is about whether
the current system should be changed (or replaced), in light of the purposes RDS
is supposed to serve.

When the Board unanimously approved the recommendations of the first Whois
review team, they established two tracks of ongoing activity. The first involved
improving Whois accuracy and accessibility (i.e., implementing the current
system). The second track led to the WG we have now. The board, at least, pretty
clearly contemplated that both efforts would proceed in parallel.

None of this is to discourage WG members from weighing in on this question
individually or through other ICANN structures. To the contrary, the
perspectives of many of our WG members could contribute a lot to the discussion.

Steve Metalitz

From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org ] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 10:59 AM
To: Andrew Sullivan; gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Next AoC WHOIS Review

I wonder if the RDS PDP WG or possibly the leaders of the WG with support from
the full WG should prepare and submit a letter to the Board on this? Thoughts?
It is definitely an awkward situation but one that I think needs to be dealt
with in some way.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org ] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 10:52 AM
To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Next AoC WHOIS Review

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 02:43:15PM +0000, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
>
> Any WHOIS-RT should be delayed until at least 12 months after this PDP is
completed.

I don't see how that's going to be possible. The proposed bylaws won't make that
possible, and as nearly as I can tell they are an accurate reflection of what
the CCWG's report said. If the bylaws don't reflect what the CCWG-Accountability
report says, there's a much bigger process problem than the waste of resources
and energy: many people feel that a big problem historically has been
implementation of community instructions, and if we don't cleave tightly to the
community instructions in this case we shall have a serious legitimacy problem.

I agree it'd be wasteful, but I'm not sure how to avoid it.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
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/20160428/aece9df3/attachment.html>