[IRT.RegDataPolicy] [Ext] RE: IRT Task 136 Review Drafting Error in Section 5of the Public Comment form 20210323

[Dennis Chang]

Thanks Sarah!

This is exactly the type of feedback we were looking for.
I think your suggestion of a, b, and c. is good and we should implement.
We should provide sufficient explanation to make it easier for the community to comment.
I invite all IRT members to help with this effort by providing comment that could contribute to clarification.

This has been added to the IRT working session agenda at ICANN70 on the 25th.
Please don’t forget to register for the session.
https://70.schedule.icann.org/meetings/kb3DP7xJNZZSPkQZw#/?limit=10&sortByFields[0]=isPinned&sortByFields[1]=lastActivityAt&sortByOrders[0]=-1&sortByOrders[1]=-1&uid=E6umHFHPvcfTAnSNE


Thanks
Dennis Chang

From: Sarah Wyld <swyld at tucows.com>
Date: Monday, March 15, 2021 at 08:05
To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang at icann.org>, "Dennis Chang via IRT.RegDataPolicy" <irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] RE: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] IRT Task 136 Review Drafting Error in Section 5of the Public Comment form 20210323

Hi Dennis,

I have attempted to review these drafting errors both on my own and with the help of the CPH members of the IRT team, but in some cases I am having a hard time understanding exactly what the change is.

Would it be possible for the IPT to update the Drafting Errors section of the doc to clearly include (a) text from the Final Report, (b) text from the OneDoc, and (c) rationale for the change/difference?

Specifically for the one labelled “Section 12.1.1: Registrant and Tech emails. Final report only includes log files.” I am not clear what change is being described here, and I don’t see how the rationale matches the subject. In the rationale, there are some bits that seem to be inapplicable (e.g. Policy language assumes a legal basis exists and data processing agreement is in place; Board Resolution states Thick WHOIS Policy is not repealed or overturned) and other parts that seem more relevant but don’t seem to match the subject (“in order to create a technical contact over EPP, Tech Name and Tech email fields are required. Therefore, the draft policy language clarifies that BOTH tech fields MUST be collected if offered and provided.”)

Thanks.


--

Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E



Policy & Privacy Manager

Tucows

swyld at tucows.com<mailto:swyld at tucows.com>

+1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392

[cid:image001.png at 01D71990.46FED5D0]

From: Dennis Chang via IRT.RegDataPolicy<mailto:irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>
Sent: March 9, 2021 4:24 PM
To: Dennis Chang via IRT.RegDataPolicy<mailto:irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>
Subject: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] IRT Task 136 Review Drafting Error in Section 5of the Public Comment form 20210323

Dear IRT,

The subject of what we call “Drafting Error” is an important one as we draft our policy language to be deliberately inconsistent with the recommendation.  We’ll discuss this briefly tomorrow and leave you to review and comment.
136

Review Drafting Error in Section 5 of the Public Comment form [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1exDiwr7NOeCQQZuCHQy2IcHZ4wCcOa_jCswY7X8B5ek/edit__;!!PtGJab4!r9mZhm5VkfuDxkpelu3kY0Nk8DgQNsR9WrzlyDOWFRlx9IN0jTxaJ9d-yjx2no76tb-KAQOE$>

20210323


--
Kind Regards,
Dennis S. Chang
GDD Programs Director
Phone: +1 213 293 7889
Sykpe: dennisSchang
www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> One World – One Internet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20210315/d6dd89fe/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3032 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20210315/d6dd89fe/image001-0001.png>