From alice.jansen at icann.org Mon Dec 20 11:39:26 2010 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 03:39:26 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] ICANN Constituency Travel - London Message-ID: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7D356C9D5EE@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Dear Review Team Members, You should have received an email from ICANN Constituency Travel regarding your trip to London. If not, please contact our travel support coordinator at matt.ashtiani at icann.org. Thank you, Kind regards Alice Alice E. Jansen -------------------------- ICANN Assistant, Organizational & Affirmation Reviews alice.jansen at icann.org Direct Dial: +32.2.234.78.64 Mobile: +32.4.73.31.76.56 Office Fax: +32.2.234.78.48 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------------------- 6, Rond Point Schuman B-1040 Brussels, Belgium -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101220/4aea9012/attachment.html From liz.gasster at icann.org Tue Dec 21 22:21:57 2010 From: liz.gasster at icann.org (Liz Gasster) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:21:57 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London In-Reply-To: <83FD125C-0143-4C36-86A0-D5C3E2B40406@etlaw.co.uk> References: <83FD125C-0143-4C36-86A0-D5C3E2B40406@etlaw.co.uk> Message-ID: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7D356C9DC32@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Hello Emily and all, I'd like to comment on the topic of definitions, as I have wrestled with them a bit myself in working on WHOIS over the years. I think the idea of agreeing on a commonly understood lexicon is very useful, especially when discussing WHOIS, because what we typically may think of as generic terms can mean very different things to different people. That said, I have not found many "agreed" definitions to be readily found or documented in areas that would be useful to this team. I do have a thought about jump-starting the process -- Recently I had a similar need and found it useful to come up with "working definitions" that could be tweaked, massaged, or totally re-written by a larger group. With that in mind, I'd like to toss out the attached draft for the group's consideration, merely to start the process. I used definitions that have been used in previous ICANN work where I found helpful references, and searched elsewhere for other terms. My sources are admittedly "US-centric" as reflects my background, so other perspectives and useful sources would be very good to include. They are not intended as "approved" ICANN definitions. Please feel free to disregard this and start elsewhere, but I hope you find it useful. Best regards, Liz From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 1:44 AM To: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London Dear All Thanks, Alice, for circulating the draft agenda for London. I just want to emphasise that this is very much a draft, and I encourage you all to make comments or suggestions on the list and we can then foster a discussion about any points that arise, whether about substantive agenda items or logistics. Kind regards Emily [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/logo310.gif] 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101221/d5e61a8c/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Whois Definitions for RT.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 20593 bytes Desc: Whois Definitions for RT.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101221/d5e61a8c/WhoisDefinitionsforRT.docx From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Dec 22 02:20:50 2010 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 19:20:50 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London Message-ID: <20101221192050.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e9c139c237.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101221/d48ec209/attachment.html From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Tue Dec 21 01:45:55 2010 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:45:55 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] APEC Privacy Framework Message-ID: <20101220184555.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.b1a9c00cd6.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101220/2548168e/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: APEC+Privacy+Framework.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 198108 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101220/2548168e/APECPrivacyFramework.pdf From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Wed Dec 22 17:57:30 2010 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:57:30 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Proposed call before London meeting - your feedback please. In-Reply-To: <8CEE0BB3-91CA-4661-8782-32391356BFB1@etlaw.co.uk> References: <8CEE0BB3-91CA-4661-8782-32391356BFB1@etlaw.co.uk> Message-ID: <4D123C0A.4010505@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Dear Emily, apologies for the dealy in answering! I am availble throughout Week 1, with the only exception of Thu. 6th, after 17:00 UTC, due to the Address Council TC. I am less flexible in Week 2 already, not available on Wed. 12th beginning at 17:30 UTC, not availabe all day on Thu. 13th and not availabel on Fri. 14th after 12:00 UTC. As another item in addition to the SoI topic, we may be ready (I sincerely hope so!) to finish the CoI Policy document. Best regards, season's greetings, Wilfried. Emily Taylor wrote: > Dear all > > First of all, sorry for missing the call in Cartagena. I had to change travel plans at the last minute because of poor weather, and it just didn't work out. I have had a full debrief from Kathy and reviewed the notes. I understand that the meeting was successful. Thanks to all who contributed. > > One of the actions that arose out of the meeting was a request for a call before our London meeting. With the holiday season looming, I have a suggestion for this: > > I suggest that we try a one agenda item call, to see whether we can sign off the Scope of Work document prior to London. I am aware that those who attended Cartagena (whether in person or remotely) made good progress, and there was substantial meeting of minds on amending the working document (posted on the Wiki around mid-November). Kathy will be posting the amended document on the Wiki soon, and I encourage everyone to take a look, and amend if necessary. > > My suggestion is that we aim for a 1 hour call, either towards the end of the week beginning 3 Jan or any time during the week of 10 Jan. Please can I ask for any objections to this proposal, or alternative suggestions? > > Kind regards > > Emily > > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK > telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 > emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Wed Dec 22 18:11:43 2010 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 18:11:43 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions In-Reply-To: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7D356C9DC32@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> References: <83FD125C-0143-4C36-86A0-D5C3E2B40406@etlaw.co.uk> <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7D356C9DC32@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> Message-ID: <4D123F5F.8010005@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Dear Liz, thank you for this input, really useful! The topic I consider to be in need of further discussion, and maybe some amendment, is "[Public] Law Enforcement"; in particular regarding entities or organisations that are not fitting the (somewhat narrow) definition of "governmental agencies", but are still performing oversight and investigation duties, according to a legal mandate. (Examples: regulators, government CERTs,...) Regards, Wilfried. From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Wed Dec 22 18:21:55 2010 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 11:21:55 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Proposed call before London meeting - your feedback please. In-Reply-To: <8CEE0BB3-91CA-4661-8782-32391356BFB1@etlaw.co.uk> References: <8CEE0BB3-91CA-4661-8782-32391356BFB1@etlaw.co.uk> Message-ID: <4E3F02C0-B960-463B-81B6-21108320770B@paypal.com> I can make either week work. On Dec 16, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: Dear all First of all, sorry for missing the call in Cartagena. I had to change travel plans at the last minute because of poor weather, and it just didn't work out. I have had a full debrief from Kathy and reviewed the notes. I understand that the meeting was successful. Thanks to all who contributed. One of the actions that arose out of the meeting was a request for a call before our London meeting. With the holiday season looming, I have a suggestion for this: I suggest that we try a one agenda item call, to see whether we can sign off the Scope of Work document prior to London. I am aware that those who attended Cartagena (whether in person or remotely) made good progress, and there was substantial meeting of minds on amending the working document (posted on the Wiki around mid-November). Kathy will be posting the amended document on the Wiki soon, and I encourage everyone to take a look, and amend if necessary. My suggestion is that we aim for a 1 hour call, either towards the end of the week beginning 3 Jan or any time during the week of 10 Jan. Please can I ask for any objections to this proposal, or alternative suggestions? Kind regards Emily [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/logo310.gif] 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk From kim at vonarx.ca Wed Dec 22 18:38:32 2010 From: kim at vonarx.ca (Kim G. von Arx) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 13:38:32 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Proposed call before London meeting - your feedback please. In-Reply-To: <4E3F02C0-B960-463B-81B6-21108320770B@paypal.com> References: <8CEE0BB3-91CA-4661-8782-32391356BFB1@etlaw.co.uk> <4E3F02C0-B960-463B-81B6-21108320770B@paypal.com> Message-ID: Ditto for most of those weeks with the exception of all day Jan 3. Kim On 22 Dec 2010, at 13:21, Smith, Bill wrote: > I can make either week work. > > On Dec 16, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: > > Dear all > > First of all, sorry for missing the call in Cartagena. I had to change travel plans at the last minute because of poor weather, and it just didn't work out. I have had a full debrief from Kathy and reviewed the notes. I understand that the meeting was successful. Thanks to all who contributed. > > One of the actions that arose out of the meeting was a request for a call before our London meeting. With the holiday season looming, I have a suggestion for this: > > I suggest that we try a one agenda item call, to see whether we can sign off the Scope of Work document prior to London. I am aware that those who attended Cartagena (whether in person or remotely) made good progress, and there was substantial meeting of minds on amending the working document (posted on the Wiki around mid-November). Kathy will be posting the amended document on the Wiki soon, and I encourage everyone to take a look, and amend if necessary. > > My suggestion is that we aim for a 1 hour call, either towards the end of the week beginning 3 Jan or any time during the week of 10 Jan. Please can I ask for any objections to this proposal, or alternative suggestions? > > Kind regards > > Emily > [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/logo310.gif] > > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK > telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 > emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Dec 22 19:07:00 2010 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:07:00 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions Message-ID: <20101222120700.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.181fb6621b.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101222/ff50ca5d/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Wed Dec 22 19:11:05 2010 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:11:05 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Scope of work Message-ID: Hi Kathy et al Thanks for posting the revised Scope of work onto the Wiki. I've made a small tweak, to take in the concept of enforcement as well as policy (from the AoC). Best, Emily 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101222/5243ad87/attachment.html From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Wed Dec 22 19:33:07 2010 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:33:07 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions In-Reply-To: <20101222120700.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.181fb6621b.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20101222120700.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.181fb6621b.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <4D125273.20600@CC.UniVie.ac.at> James M. Bladel wrote: > Wilifried and Team: > > I would be very cautious about expanding the definition of "Law Enforcement" > beyond any organization that has a mandate from the government. Most of the > examples you cite (regulators, etc.) would either qualify themselves under our > existing definition, or have a close relationship with a qualifying "Law > Enforcement" organization. If we (can) take that as a common understanding I fully agree. But then it is no longer a proper "definition"? Raising the question if this is necessary, in reality, to achieve our goal... > On the other hand, there are many private or industry organizations (or even > individuals) who would assert that they qualify as "Law Enforcement" under the > expanded definition, and we should avoid this. Very valid point. > Thanks-- > > J. Thanks, Wilfried. > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working > Definitions > From: "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" > > Date: Wed, December 22, 2010 12:11 pm > To: Liz Gasster > > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org " > > > Dear Liz, > > thank you for this input, really useful! > > The topic I consider to be in need of further discussion, and maybe some > amendment, is "[Public] Law Enforcement"; in particular regarding entities > or organisations that are not fitting the (somewhat narrow) definition off > "governmental agencies", but are still performing oversight and investigation > duties, according to a legal mandate. (Examples: regulators, government > CERTs,...) > > Regards, > Wilfried. > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From liz.gasster at icann.org Wed Dec 22 19:37:13 2010 From: liz.gasster at icann.org (Liz Gasster) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 11:37:13 -0800 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Regarding statements of Interest Message-ID: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D7D358462697@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> All, Once again, in the spirit of suggesting ideas to facilitate your work, below is a draft template that the GNSO has developed on Statements Of Interest for use by Working Group participants and new Council members. It has not been officially adopted, and it will be the subject of further revision, but it is being used today. I hope you find it helpful. It can be modified or adapted as the group sees fit. Best, Liz Statements of Interest Definition: A written statement made by a Relevant Party that provides a declaration of interests that may affect the Relevant Party's judgment, on any matters to be considered by the Working Group. Content: Relevant Parties shall complete a Statement of Interest as specified below: 1. Please identify your current employer(s) and position(s). 2. Please identify your declared country of residence, which may be the country to which you pay taxes. 3. Please identify the type(s) of work performed at #1 above. 4. Please list any financial relationship beyond de minimus stock ownership you may have with any company that has a financial relationship or contract with ICANN. 5. Are you participating in this group as a representative of any individual or entity, whether paid or unpaid? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please provide the name of the represented individual or entity. 6. Please identify any other relevant arrangements, interests, or benefits as requested in the following two questions: i. Do you have any type of material interest in ICANN policy development processes and outcomes? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the material interest in ICANN policy development processes and outcomes. ii. Are there any arrangements/agreements between you and any other group, constituency or person(s) regarding your participation as a work team member? Please answer "yes" or "no." If the answer is "yes," please describe the arrangements/agreements and the name of the group, constituency, or person(s). From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Wed Dec 22 21:33:38 2010 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:33:38 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions In-Reply-To: <20101222120700.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.181fb6621b.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20101222120700.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.181fb6621b.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: I make no such assertion, but do maintain that entities other than "Law Enforcement" have a legitimate need to access and use (accurate) WHOIS information. On Dec 22, 2010, at 11:07 AM, James M. Bladel wrote: Wilifried and Team: I would be very cautious about expanding the definition of "Law Enforcement" beyond any organization that has a mandate from the government. Most of the examples you cite (regulators, etc.) would either qualify themselves under our existing definition, or have a close relationship with a qualifying "Law Enforcement" organization. On the other hand, there are many private or industry organizations (or even individuals) who would assert that they qualify as "Law Enforcement" under the expanded definition, and we should avoid this. Thanks-- J. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions From: "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" > Date: Wed, December 22, 2010 12:11 pm To: Liz Gasster > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Dear Liz, thank you for this input, really useful! The topic I consider to be in need of further discussion, and maybe some amendment, is "[Public] Law Enforcement"; in particular regarding entities or organisations that are not fitting the (somewhat narrow) definition off "governmental agencies", but are still performing oversight and investigation duties, according to a legal mandate. (Examples: regulators, government CERTs,...) Regards, Wilfried. _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Dec 22 21:38:39 2010 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:38:39 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions Message-ID: <20101222143839.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.60d371750d.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101222/706a4c63/attachment.html From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Wed Dec 22 21:49:48 2010 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:49:48 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions In-Reply-To: <20101222143839.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.60d371750d.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20101222143839.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.60d371750d.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <49EC3743-A621-45E9-AF13-110B258F4D1A@paypal.com> Agreed. On Dec 22, 2010, at 1:38 PM, James M. Bladel wrote: Absolutely agree, and these would fall under our existing "Consumer" definitions... J. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions From: "Smith, Bill" > Date: Wed, December 22, 2010 3:33 pm To: "James M. Bladel" > Cc: "Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at" >, "rt4-whois at icann.org" > I make no such assertion, but do maintain that entities other than "Law Enforcement" have a legitimate need to access and use (accurate) WHOIS information. On Dec 22, 2010, at 11:07 AM, James M. Bladel wrote: Wilifried and Team: I would be very cautious about expanding the definition of "Law Enforcement" beyond any organization that has a mandate from the government. Most of the examples you cite (regulators, etc.) would either qualify themselves under our existing definition, or have a close relationship with a qualifying "Law Enforcement" organization. On the other hand, there are many private or industry organizations (or even individuals) who would assert that they qualify as "Law Enforcement" under the expanded definition, and we should avoid this. Thanks-- J. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Draft Working Definitions From: "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" > Date: Wed, December 22, 2010 12:11 pm To: Liz Gasster > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Dear Liz, thank you for this input, really useful! The topic I consider to be in need of further discussion, and maybe some amendment, is "[Public] Law Enforcement"; in particular regarding entities or organisations that are not fitting the (somewhat narrow) definition off "governmental agencies", but are still performing oversight and investigation duties, according to a legal mandate. (Examples: regulators, government CERTs,...) Regards, Wilfried. _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Thu Dec 23 10:19:20 2010 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 10:19:20 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Scope of Work - Wiki updated for Cartagena work In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3273238D-2D34-43FE-B256-E3CF8419CFC9@etlaw.co.uk> Hi Kathy Thanks for doing this. I like the way that Scope of Work is evolving. I've made one minor tweak to reflect the fact that we will reviewing "implementation" as well as policy (it's a consequential change to map through this development in the document). I encourage everyone else to take a look at the Scope, so that we can come to our next call - or, more likely, the London meeting - with a mature document that we can sign off fairly briskly. Best wishes for the Holiday Season and New Year. Emily On 16 Dec 2010, at 20:04, Kathy Kleiman wrote: > Dear All, > Tx again to all who participated in our informal Cartagena meeting -- local and remote participation was much appreciated! > > I circulated notes from our productive brainstorming session. Today I merged those Cartagena notes into our Wiki > Scope of Work document. The Scope of Work can be found under ?Work in Progress,? ?Scope of Whois Review Team? at https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Scope+of+Whois+Review+Team). (If you would like to edit and need the Wiki password, please let me know.) > > Looking forward to our London meeting! > Happy Holidays, > > Kathy Kleiman > Director of Policy > .ORG, The Public Interest Registry > Direct: +1 703-889-5756 | Mobile:+1 703-371-6846| www.pir.org | > > Find us on Facebook | .ORG Blog | Flickr | YouTube | Twitter | > > Confidentiality Note: Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry. If received in error, please inform sender and then delete. > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101223/d77630a8/attachment.html From kKleiman at pir.org Thu Dec 23 23:26:02 2010 From: kKleiman at pir.org (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:26:02 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - adding Producers In-Reply-To: <20101221192050.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e9c139c237.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20101221192050.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e9c139c237.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: Hi James, A belated thanks for these ideas. You are right that we missing these definitions from our current outline ? and we certainly need to know who creates the Whois data and who manages it. After some thought, I suggest we add your ?Producers? outline below in two places. First, as an opening section in ?Developing the Definitions.? It also seems a good issue to ask Staff to address on Day 2 ? as part of their discussion of policy and implementation (e.g., how has ICANN defined/viewed producers of the Whois data in their policy and implementation work?) Attached is a revised agenda to include the sections. Happy Holidays and a wonderful New Year, All! Kathy From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 9:21 PM To: Liz Gasster Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London Thanks, Liz. These are excellent jumping-off points for our definitional work. In addition, I would like to add another category of stakeholder, that of WHOIS "Producers." This could be folded in to Section 3 as a new category, or added to our fact-finding efforts: 1. Producers: (a) Who are the Producers / Creators of WHOIS data? (b) Who are the Maintainers / Managers of WHOIS data? (c) What are their obligations / rights / responsibilities? (d) What are the different methods used to make data available (thick/centralized versus thin/distributed, etc.) Also, Kathy and I were discussing the idea that we should prepare some Goals or Objectives in advance of our London (and subsequent) meetings, and then issue a brief report or statement at the conclusion of the meeting on our progress towards achieving them. There are folks in the community watching our efforts very closely, and small efforts like these will go a long way towards building & preserving credibility for our final recommendations. Just a thought. Thanks-- J. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London From: Liz Gasster > Date: Tue, December 21, 2010 4:21 pm To: Emily Taylor >, "rt4-whois at icann.org " > Hello Emily and all, I?d like to comment on the topic of definitions, as I have wrestled with them a bit myself in working on WHOIS over the years. I think the idea of agreeing on a commonly understood lexicon is very useful, especially when discussing WHOIS, because what we typically may think of as generic terms can mean very different things to different people. That said, I have not found many ?agreed? definitions to be readily found or documented in areas that would be useful to this team. I do have a thought about jump-starting the process -- Recently I had a similar need and found it useful to come up with ?working definitions? that could be tweaked, massaged, or totally re-written by a larger group. With that in mind, I?d like to toss out the attached draft for the group?s consideration, merely to start the process. I used definitions that have been used in previous ICANN work where I found helpful references, and searched elsewhere for other terms. My sources are admittedly ?US-centric? as reflects my background, so other perspectives and useful sources would be very good to include. They are not intended as ?approved? ICANN definitions. Please feel free to disregard this and start elsewhere, but I hope you find it useful. Best regards, Liz From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org ] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 1:44 AM To: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London Dear All Thanks, Alice, for circulating the draft agenda for London. I just want to emphasise that this is very much a draft, and I encourage you all to make comments or suggestions on the list and we can then foster a discussion about any points that arise, whether about substantive agenda items or logistics. Kind regards Emily Emily Taylor Consultant (Internet Law and Governance) 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101223/6c502353/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Agenda London v. 2.doc Type: application/msword Size: 45056 bytes Desc: Agenda London v. 2.doc Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101223/6c502353/AgendaLondonv.2.doc From kKleiman at pir.org Thu Dec 23 23:32:08 2010 From: kKleiman at pir.org (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:32:08 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Communication goals In-Reply-To: <20101221192050.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e9c139c237.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20101221192050.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e9c139c237.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: Hi James, Tx also for your advice on the communication goals of the London meeting. I understand this is a lesson learned from the ATRT Team. Appreciate your sharing it with us. Hopefully everything we do at this meeting will be issued at or shortly after our meeting, including: Scope of Work, working definitions, our action plan which should include an outreach plan to approach members of the ICANN community, and perhaps additional communities outside of ICANN. It is very important that the community be involved in our work ? and support the direction we are heading. Best and tx, Kathy7 From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 9:21 PM To: Liz Gasster Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London Thanks, Liz. These are excellent jumping-off points for our definitional work. In addition, I would like to add another category of stakeholder, that of WHOIS "Producers." This could be folded in to Section 3 as a new category, or added to our fact-finding efforts: 1. Producers: (a) Who are the Producers / Creators of WHOIS data? (b) Who are the Maintainers / Managers of WHOIS data? (c) What are their obligations / rights / responsibilities? (d) What are the different methods used to make data available (thick/centralized versus thin/distributed, etc.) Also, Kathy and I were discussing the idea that we should prepare some Goals or Objectives in advance of our London (and subsequent) meetings, and then issue a brief report or statement at the conclusion of the meeting on our progress towards achieving them. There are folks in the community watching our efforts very closely, and small efforts like these will go a long way towards building & preserving credibility for our final recommendations. Just a thought. Thanks-- J. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London From: Liz Gasster > Date: Tue, December 21, 2010 4:21 pm To: Emily Taylor >, "rt4-whois at icann.org " > Hello Emily and all, I?d like to comment on the topic of definitions, as I have wrestled with them a bit myself in working on WHOIS over the years. I think the idea of agreeing on a commonly understood lexicon is very useful, especially when discussing WHOIS, because what we typically may think of as generic terms can mean very different things to different people. That said, I have not found many ?agreed? definitions to be readily found or documented in areas that would be useful to this team. I do have a thought about jump-starting the process -- Recently I had a similar need and found it useful to come up with ?working definitions? that could be tweaked, massaged, or totally re-written by a larger group. With that in mind, I?d like to toss out the attached draft for the group?s consideration, merely to start the process. I used definitions that have been used in previous ICANN work where I found helpful references, and searched elsewhere for other terms. My sources are admittedly ?US-centric? as reflects my background, so other perspectives and useful sources would be very good to include. They are not intended as ?approved? ICANN definitions. Please feel free to disregard this and start elsewhere, but I hope you find it useful. Best regards, Liz From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org ] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 1:44 AM To: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London Dear All Thanks, Alice, for circulating the draft agenda for London. I just want to emphasise that this is very much a draft, and I encourage you all to make comments or suggestions on the list and we can then foster a discussion about any points that arise, whether about substantive agenda items or logistics. Kind regards Emily Emily Taylor Consultant (Internet Law and Governance) 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101223/e6d2273d/attachment.html From omar at kaminski.adv.br Thu Dec 23 23:36:36 2010 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:36:36 -0200 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Communication goals In-Reply-To: References: <20101221192050.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e9c139c237.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: Dear Kathy, I totally agree, since transparency is a key issue. We should not forget the final users. Best, Omar 2010/12/23 Kathy Kleiman > > > Hopefully everything we do at this meeting will be issued at or shortly > after our meeting, including: Scope of Work, working definitions, our action > plan which should include an outreach plan to approach members of the ICANN > community, and perhaps additional communities outside of ICANN. It is very > important that the community be involved in our work ? and support the > direction we are heading. > > > > Best and tx, > > Kathy7 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101223/773c9d20/attachment.html From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Wed Dec 22 16:24:28 2010 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 09:24:28 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] travel support to attend meetings Message-ID: <20101222092428.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.1ab8c3e7fe.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101222/c8f3580d/attachment.html From kim at vonarx.ca Fri Dec 24 00:58:40 2010 From: kim at vonarx.ca (Kim G. von Arx) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 19:58:40 -0500 Subject: [Rt4-whois] travel support to attend meetings In-Reply-To: <20101222092428.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.1ab8c3e7fe.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> References: <20101222092428.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.1ab8c3e7fe.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <2A83A49A-AB2C-437F-911B-FE3FF685B581@vonarx.ca> Oh, I did not know that those travel expenses are not covered. I completely agree with you Lynn and I am in the same position. Kim __________________________________ Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year or Season's Greetings... whatever works for you. On 22 Dec 2010, at 11:24, wrote: > Dear All, > I am a little bit unhappy that my taxi or local train expense in London will not be reimbursed. > This is not consistent with the travel policies provided when we applied to work on this project. > > From the US, I will need to fly into either Heathrow or Gatwick and neither airport is close to the hotel. > So it will not be just a few dollars or pounds out of pocket for me. > > My time on this project is not billable and I feel that I should not have to incur expenses in order to participate. > What needs to happen in order to revise this position? > Regards, > Lynn > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101223/99e5127d/attachment.html From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Fri Dec 24 01:12:53 2010 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:12:53 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] travel support to attend meetings Message-ID: <20101223181253.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.695b9beefd.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101223/4d79ab92/attachment.html From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk Fri Dec 24 07:23:57 2010 From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 07:23:57 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London - Communication goals In-Reply-To: References: <20101221192050.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.e9c139c237.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <852C0EC5-E8B1-4CBD-8E14-8E1756893B61@etlaw.co.uk> Hi James and Kathy Excellent points on "producers" and communication goals and a brief report/statement after the meeting. Thanks Emily On 23 Dec 2010, at 23:32, Kathy Kleiman wrote: > Hi James, > Tx also for your advice on the communication goals of the London meeting. I understand this is a lesson learned from the ATRT Team. Appreciate your sharing it with us. > > Hopefully everything we do at this meeting will be issued at or shortly after our meeting, including: Scope of Work, working definitions, our action plan which should include an outreach plan to approach members of the ICANN community, and perhaps additional communities outside of ICANN. It is very important that the community be involved in our work ? and support the direction we are heading. > > Best and tx, > Kathy7 > > From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 9:21 PM > To: Liz Gasster > Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London > > Thanks, Liz. These are excellent jumping-off points for our definitional work. > > In addition, I would like to add another category of stakeholder, that of WHOIS "Producers." This could be folded in to Section 3 as a new category, or added to our fact-finding efforts: > > 1. Producers: > (a) Who are the Producers / Creators of WHOIS data? > (b) Who are the Maintainers / Managers of WHOIS data? > (c) What are their obligations / rights / responsibilities? > (d) What are the different methods used to make data available (thick/centralized versus thin/distributed, etc.) > > Also, Kathy and I were discussing the idea that we should prepare some Goals or Objectives in advance of our London (and subsequent) meetings, and then issue a brief report or statement at the conclusion of the meeting on our progress towards achieving them. There are folks in the community watching our efforts very closely, and small efforts like these will go a long way towards building & preserving credibility for our final recommendations. Just a thought. > > Thanks-- > > J. > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London > From: Liz Gasster > Date: Tue, December 21, 2010 4:21 pm > To: Emily Taylor , > "rt4-whois at icann.org" > > Hello Emily and all, > > I?d like to comment on the topic of definitions, as I have wrestled with them a bit myself in working on WHOIS over the years. I think the idea of agreeing on a commonly understood lexicon is very useful, especially when discussing WHOIS, because what we typically may think of as generic terms can mean very different things to different people. That said, I have not found many ?agreed? definitions to be readily found or documented in areas that would be useful to this team. > > I do have a thought about jump-starting the process -- Recently I had a similar need and found it useful to come up with ?working definitions? that could be tweaked, massaged, or totally re-written by a larger group. With that in mind, I?d like to toss out the attached draft for the group?s consideration, merely to start the process. I used definitions that have been used in previous ICANN work where I found helpful references, and searched elsewhere for other terms. My sources are admittedly ?US-centric? as reflects my background, so other perspectives and useful sources would be very good to include. They are not intended as ?approved? ICANN definitions. > > Please feel free to disregard this and start elsewhere, but I hope you find it useful. > > Best regards, Liz > > From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor > Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 1:44 AM > To: rt4-whois at icann.org > Subject: [Rt4-whois] Draft agenda for London > > Dear All > > Thanks, Alice, for circulating the draft agenda for London. > > I just want to emphasise that this is very much a draft, and I encourage you all to make comments or suggestions on the list and we can then foster a discussion about any points that arise, whether about substantive agenda items or logistics. > > Kind regards > > Emily > > 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK > telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 > emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK telephone: 01865 582 811 mobile: 07540 049 322 emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk www.etlaw.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20101224/b2002768/attachment.html