[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] List topics for this week

Wed Jun 14 21:34:06 UTC 2017

Thanks Allison.  In this response I am asking that this request be included in our Leadership Team agenda for next Monday.  In my personal opinion I think it is a very good request and one that we should honor as it fits into our work plan and I am sure it will, possibly at multiple times.

Chuck

From: allison nixon [mailto:elsakoo at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 5:09 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com>
Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] List topics for this week

Alright. I want to discuss the customer education process, because it does seem to underlie a point of misunderstanding and I want to understand better:

-Are customers notified that WHOIS data is made public when they buy domains?

-Is it clearly marked that their billing data can be different from their WHOIS data?

-Is the customer given a clear privacy option?

-Are customers frequently upset about WHOIS after the fact, to the point of complaining? Are there numbers on this?

-If customers are frequently confused or upset about WHOIS after-the-fact, does this indicate a failure of customer education at the start of the process?

and perhaps other questions as the answers are given.

I think a main point of misunderstanding between sides here is that one side considers this data to be public and intended to be public from the outset, and the other side doesn't. But I have zero visibility into what the average domain purchasing customer complains about. If it's driving some of the push to change things, I'd like to better understand that and I'd like some data, and I think it would be good for the group to understand too.

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>> wrote:

   Feel free to suggest it Allison.  We will consider it in light of our approved work plan.

   Chuck

   From: allison nixon [mailto:elsakoo at gmail.com<mailto:elsakoo at gmail.com>]
   Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 4:08 PM

   To: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>
   Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
   Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] List topics for this week

   Thanks. I'd like to submit in writing a discussion topic for next meeting. My dayjob duties regularly intersect with the scheduled calls and this isn't avoidable for me, despite being an active member on the list.

   On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>> wrote:

      The Leadership Team chooses the topics based on the results of the WG meeting.

      Note that recordings and transcripts are provided.

      Chuck

      From: allison nixon [mailto:elsakoo at gmail.com<mailto:elsakoo at gmail.com>]
      Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 1:17 PM
      To: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>
      Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
      Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] List topics for this week

      how are the discussion topics chosen? on the call? i can't make the calls due to work.

      On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Gomes, Chuck via gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>> wrote:

         One of the things we forgot to do at the end of our agenda yesterday was to identify the list discussion topics that everyone is asked to focus on this week.  Fortunately as a result of the discussion in the meeting and the questions in the poll, it appears that most everyone naturally focused on the appropriate topics which include the questions in the poll as well as the tentative conclusions that were reached in the meeting.  Here is a summary of the focus topics for this week:

         New agreements reached and accepted as tentative conclusions

         *      The WG agreed to adopt the term "minimum public data set" to refer to the set of data elements deliberated thus far - that is, the list of fields that will always be public no matter the gTLD; short form focus topic = ‘minimum public data set’.
         *      The WG agreed to add DNSSEC info to the ‘minimum public data set’; short form focus topic = ‘DNSSEC Info’.
         *      The WG agreed that the expiration date should not be removed from the "Minimum Public Data Set"; short form of focus topic = ‘Expiration Date’.

         From the poll

         *      Purposes of minimum public data set elements identified to date:

            *   Domain name
            *   Registrar name
            *   Registrar ID (Registrar IANA ID)
            *   Whois Server & Referral URL
            *   Name Servers
            *   Statuses
            *   Updated Date, Creation Date, Expiration Date

         (These topics may be discussed as a whole or as individual discussion topics.)

         According to our recently instituted procedures, please limit list discussions to the above topics this week.  As a reminder, the three rules that are particularly applicable are:

         1.     Discussion topics must be narrowly defined.
         2.     Responses must focus on the narrowly defined topics.
         3.     Ok to note dependency on another topic and state assumptions made, but keep focus on-topic.

         Thanks for your cooperation.

         Chuck

         _______________________________________________
         gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
         gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

      --

      _________________________________
      Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.

   --

   _________________________________
   Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.

   --

   _________________________________
   Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170614/6379591b/attachment-0001.html>