From omar at kaminski.adv.br  Mon May  9 00:23:30 2011
From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski)
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 21:23:30 -0300
Subject: [Rt4-whois] China - IT Outsourcing And Data Privacy Guidelines
In-Reply-To: <20110506134559.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.0dd6b5f0ff.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
References: <20110506134559.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.0dd6b5f0ff.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikXi9MpH79xTfBeVrUX_eFd8NTyoQ@mail.gmail.com>

Indeed, Lynn. We (Brazil) are discussing right now a to be proposed
bill about personal data.

The intimacy and personal honor is protected by our federal
Constitution (1988), but we don't have a privacy law yet.

So perhaps another way is to classify some possibilities of data
breach across Whois to better address the applicable laws topic (?).

I'll study this week the consultation results, now I'm less busy now
(and at last...).

Regards from .br,

Omar


2011/5/6  <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>:
> Since we have discussed privacy laws as a priority in "applicable laws",
> sharing the article below about new data privacy guidelines in China.
> There are also new legal privacy requirements in India. ?News on that topic
> will be forwarded next.
> Just want to re-state that privacy law on a global scope is still emerging
> and we can expect it
> to continue.
> Lynn
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This From: Computerworld, May 4, 2011
> http://www.computerworld.com
>
> IT Outsourcing in China And Data Privacy Guidelines
> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9216417/IT_Outsourcing_in_China_And_Data_Privacy_Guidelines?taxonomyId=145
>
> Stephanie Overby
> May 4, 2011 (CIO)
>
> China's data privacy protection has long been considered one of the world's
> weakest. But the government's proposed data security guidelines may go too
> far in the opposite direction.
>
> The People's Republic of China took a step toward addressing its lack of
> comprehensive data privacy laws earlier this year: It issued a series of
> proposed data security guidelines intended to better protect the privacy of
> Chinese citizens and provide guidance for international businesses operating
> in the country. The document, developed in consult with China's Ministry of
> Industry and Information Technology, contains a set of broadly applicable
> rules and principles for storing, handling and transferring personal
> information.
> http://advice.cio.com/beth_bacheldor/what_google_vs_china_says_about_security_and_offshore_outsourcing
>
> Some business leaders worry the regulations, as they are currently
> written-with requirements stricter than those that exist in the U.S. or
> Europe-are too expansive and could cause serious damage to China's growing
> IT and business process outsourcing industry and to its customers.
> Specifically, the proposed rules indicate that information sent to China
> would face restrictions in getting back out again.
> http://www.cio.com/article/11865/Outsourcing_Is_Cheaper_In_China
>
> To shed light on China's proposed data privacy regulations, CIO.com
> interviewed Paul McKenzie, managing partner of the Beijing office of law
> firm Morrison & Foerster. He explains what the draft guidelines say, how
> likely they are to pass as written, and what offshore outsourcing customers
> can do to prepare for them.
>
> CIO.com: Data security and intellectual property protection are always a
> concern when offshoring, but China has a particularly bad reputation in this
> area. Is that perception of lax information security in China warranted?
>
> Paul McKenzie, managing partner, Morrison & Foerster: High levels of
> employee churn amongst outsourced service providers-particularly in the
> application development and maintenance field-coupled with limited cultural
> awareness of the importance of proprietary information tend to exacerbate
> the problem in China. Proper compartmentalization and practical data
> security controls can be worth far more than a contractual right, which may
> be difficult to enforce. An ounce of prevention is often worth a pound of
> cure.
> http://www.cio.com/article/642105/Why_I_Outsourced_Application_Development_to_China
>
> What are the most noteworthy new personal data protection guidelines the
> Chinese government has proposed?
>
> The most significant concepts in the guidelines involve:
>
> An overarching principle that the holders of personal information keep such
> information confidential, and a specific requirement that express consent be
> obtained for all third-party disclosures of personal information;
>
> A set of more specific principles to be observed during the collection,
> processing, use, transfer and maintenance of personal information;
>
> Application of such principles specifically to personal data on computer
> networks (as opposed to other data storage media in hard copy form);
>
> Restrictions on outsourcing the handling of personal information;
>
> Prohibition on the export of personal information unless expressly permitted
> by law or otherwise approved by government authorities.
>
> How do these restrictions compare to data privacy regulations in the U.S.
> and Europe? <| Powered by www.ISPIClips.com |>
>
> The most significant way in which the guidelines are different from the U.S.
> and the European Union relates to the transfer of data. The U.S. has no
> general prohibition against transferring data across borders. Rather, U.S.
> companies that are regulated are expected to protect personal information
> wherever it is located-in the U.S. or outside of the U.S.
>
> If these data security guidelines are enacted in China, express consent from
> an individual must be obtained in connection with the transfer of personal
> information to any other organization. Yet no exceptions are provided,
> unlike rules in other jurisdictions, such as the E.U., where sharing
> customer information is permitted without consent if it is necessary to
> complete a contract between the customer and the company. Without a clear
> definition of "other organizations," the guidelines could even prevent
> transfers of data to company affiliates and could be a significant
> impediment to outsourcing.
>
> Export of personal data from China would also be prohibited under the draft
> guidelines unless an exception was found under Chinese law. But without a
> clear Chinese law currently in effect, the guidelines, if made mandatory,
> would prohibit the export of such data even when a customer had consented.
>
> That sounds like bad news for Western companies sending IT work to China-and
> for China's outsourcing industry.
>
> This would likely have a crippling effect on the growing Chinese outsourcing
> industry. Companies would be reluctant to outsource customer data processing
> to China-based providers for fear of a prohibition on having such data
> returned to them. However, there are reasons to expect that export
> carve-outs will eventually be forthcoming, as other sections on outsourcing
> in the draft guidelines are very much in line with requirements in other
> countries.
>
> How likely is it that these rules will be tweaked to allow exceptions for IT
> outsourcing?
>
> The guidelines are still very much in draft form, and regulators have
> received a heavy volume of comments from the public. While on the surface,
> some of the restrictions on export of data would appear draconian, we expect
> that more explicit exceptions will be put in place-for example, allowing
> transfer of data to affiliates and transfer of data back to the companies
> which outsourced their data processing to a firm in China.
>
> What is the process by which such proposed regulations become law in China?
>
> The drafts have been circulated as a potential "national standard" under
> China's national standardization system. They would first be issued as a
> voluntary guideline lacking the force of law. Examples of other
> non-mandatory standards include standards for book numbering, codes for
> representing the names of countries, and use of punctuation marks.
>
> We do believe that the regulators are testing the waters with these
> guidelines to see what form and substance national regulations on data
> privacy would ultimately take. Based on our conversations with relevant
> regulators, it is expected that these initial draft guidelines may still be
> changed significantly before being issued due to the extent of comments they
> have received from the business community.
>
> In the absence of national guidance, have there been regional or city data
> privacy regulations in effect?
>
> Several provinces and cities have introduced laws to try to regulate data
> privacy, particularly the online disclosure of personal information. By
> definition local legislation is limited in territorial scope, and it is
> therefore difficult to see how it might be sensibly applied to the Internet.
> The existing patchwork of local laws is actually one of the factors
> motivating the central government to accelerate progress towards the
> adoption of a unified national law based on the draft guidelines.
>
> What should companies currently outsourcing IT to China or sending IT work
> to their own captive centers there do to prepare for increased data security
> scrutiny?
>
> China recently enacted new criminal and tort laws that could be used to
> impose liability on companies if information is not properly protected.
> Companies should be thinking of how to develop internal control procedures
> to prevent rogue employees from misusing customer data. Incorporating some
> of these new guidelines may prove to be a useful defense in case of
> individual lawsuits.
>
>
> Copyright ? 1994 - 2011 Computerworld Inc. All rights reserved.
>
>
> ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois
>
>



From michel.denise at gmail.com  Mon May  9 17:52:09 2011
From: michel.denise at gmail.com (Denise Michel)
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:52:09 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Registry Agreements for Whois Review Team.
Message-ID: <BANLkTimLXWRJGNPskCYm5O8a5KkmqdV7Fw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Mikhail,

I was asked to ensure you had ICANN's agreements with registries.  I assume
this meant gTLD registries.  These are posted on ICANN's website and linked
on the Team's wiki, but for ease of access I've attached a list noting the
registry, type of agreement and URL.  I've also included a link for the
proposed template agreement included in the applicant guidebook for new
gTLDs.

Please see my April 26 email to the Team for specific references to "Whois"
in the registry agreements.

Regards,
Denise

Denise Michel
michel.denise at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110509/4baa3d21/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICANN-Agreements-with-gTLD registries-May 2011.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 80726 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110509/4baa3d21/ICANN-Agreements-with-gTLDregistries-May2011.docx 

From denise.michel at icann.org  Mon May  9 17:56:54 2011
From: denise.michel at icann.org (Denise Michel)
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:56:54 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Registry Agreements for Whois Review Team.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimLXWRJGNPskCYm5O8a5KkmqdV7Fw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimLXWRJGNPskCYm5O8a5KkmqdV7Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=a7DR9pRgFx03CggAZTjqKXLRgyQ@mail.gmail.com>

Re-sending

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Denise Michel <michel.denise at gmail.com>
Date: Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:52 AM
Subject: Registry Agreements for Whois Review Team.
To: Yakushev Mikhail <yakushev at dstadvisors.ru>
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org


Dear Mikhail,

I was asked to ensure you had ICANN's agreements with registries.  I assume
this meant gTLD registries.  These are posted on ICANN's website and linked
on the Team's wiki, but for ease of access I've attached a list noting the
registry, type of agreement and URL.  I've also included a link for the
proposed template agreement included in the applicant guidebook for new
gTLDs.

Please see my April 26 email to the Team for specific references to "Whois"
in the registry agreements.

Regards,
Denise

Denise Michel
michel.denise at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110509/070ab674/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICANN-Agreements-with-gTLD registries-May 2011.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 80726 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110509/070ab674/ICANN-Agreements-with-gTLDregistries-May2011.docx 

From Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au  Tue May 10 00:42:20 2011
From: Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au (Nettlefold, Peter)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 10:42:20 +1000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] FOLLOW-UP v2: Please REVIEW - SGP Mtg - Draft
	schedule [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
In-Reply-To: <3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B75276058C7C558E@pir-mail-01>
References: <C9DB3288.7315%alice.jansen@icann.org>
	<C9DB36CF.7337%alice.jansen@icann.org>
	<636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3028848801@EMB01.dept.gov.au>
	<3371CBBD15D9714482943AD5D5B75276058C7C558E@pir-mail-01>
Message-ID: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3028AEB929@EMB01.dept.gov.au>

Hi Kathy,
Sorry for the delay in responding to this.
The GAC communiqu? drafting usually goes till around 6pm on the Wednesday, and sometimes later.
I'd be happy to join you all as soon as I'm done with that and before the gala.  Alternately, we could meet Tuesday afternoon/evening or early Wednesday morning over a coffee?
I'm sorry I can't be more precise, but the GAC schedule hasn't been finalised yet, so I don't have a lot to go on.
I hope this helps.
Cheers,
Peter

From: Kathy Kleiman [mailto:kKleiman at pir.org]
Sent: Thursday, 28 April 2011 4:02 AM
To: Nettlefold, Peter; Alice Jansen; 'RT4 WHOIS'
Cc: SHEAN, Belinda
Subject: RE: [Rt4-whois] FOLLOW-UP v2: Please REVIEW - SGP Mtg - Draft schedule [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Peter,
We definitely don't want to conflict with the drafting of the GAC communiqu?.  We were trying to find a time in late afternoon and before the Gala (which will be that night) for a debrief/next steps session. Is there anything in that window that might be possible?

Best regards,


Kathy Kleiman
Director of Policy
.ORG, The Public Interest Registry
Direct: +1 703-889-5756 | Mobile:+1 703-371-6846|  www.pir.org<http://www.pir.org> |

Find us on Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/pir.org>  |  .ORG Blog<http://www.pir.org/orgbuzz> | Flickr<http://flickr.com/orgbuzz> | YouTube<http://youtube.com/orgbuzz> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/ORGBuzz> |

Confidentiality Note:  Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry.  If received in error, please inform sender and then delete.


From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Nettlefold, Peter
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 11:10 PM
To: Alice Jansen; 'RT4 WHOIS'
Cc: SHEAN, Belinda
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] FOLLOW-UP v2: Please REVIEW - SGP Mtg - Draft schedule [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hello all,

Thanks very much to all involved in preparing this.

I have one question, and a request:


?       Do the references to a DNS abuse session and possible meeting with law enforcement representatives on the Monday relate to our discussions on how best to interact with law enforcement, or is this something new/different?



?       The internal debriefing/wrap-up that has been scheduled for Wednesday afternoon will clash with the time usually set aside for drafting of the GAC communiqu?, so I would ask if this could perhaps be moved to an alternate time?

Cheers,

Peter

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org]<mailto:[mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org]> On Behalf Of Alice Jansen
Sent: Monday, 25 April 2011 10:37 PM
To: 'RT4 WHOIS'
Cc: SHEAN, Belinda
Subject: [Rt4-whois] FOLLOW-UP v2: Please REVIEW - SGP Mtg - Draft schedule
Importance: High

Dear all,

Please review the attached version (v2). We realized something was missing in the previous document...
Apologies for the inconvenience and thanks for your understanding,

Kindest regards

Alice
From: Alice Jansen <alice.jansen at icann.org<mailto:alice.jansen at icann.org>>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 05:15:36 -0700
To: 'RT4 WHOIS' <rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>>
Cc: "SHEAN, Belinda" <belinda.shean at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk<mailto:belinda.shean at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk>>
Subject: Please REVIEW - SGP Mtg - Draft schedule

Dear Review Team Members,

Please find attached a draft schedule for Singapore.
Kindly note that this is the outcome of a coordination session Emily and Kathy had with Olof and I.

This will be discussed during the next conference call scheduled for this Wednesday  at 20:00 UTC. In the meantime please make sure to review the document and to circulate any feedback you may have.

Thank you,

Very best regards and Happy Easter to all!

Alice

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.


If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Security Advisor of the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, 38 Sydney Ave, Forrest ACT 2603, telephone (02) 6271-1376 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.


Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.


If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Security Advisor of the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, 38 Sydney Ave, Forrest ACT 2603, telephone (02) 6271-1376 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.


Please consider the environment before printing this email.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110510/113dce0b/attachment.html 

From Yakushev at dstadvisors.ru  Tue May 10 11:56:20 2011
From: Yakushev at dstadvisors.ru (Yakushev Mikhail)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:56:20 +0000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Registry Agreements for Whois Review Team.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=a7DR9pRgFx03CggAZTjqKXLRgyQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimLXWRJGNPskCYm5O8a5KkmqdV7Fw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=a7DR9pRgFx03CggAZTjqKXLRgyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7C0268D000FB534D8BEDFAD61C5E72A8139983@OWA.mazal.ru>

Dear Denise,
Thank you very much - your message is received. However, unfortunately, I cannot find your message of April 26, can you please kindly resend it.
Best regards,
Michael

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Denise Michel
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 9:57 PM
To: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Registry Agreements for Whois Review Team.

Re-sending

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Denise Michel <michel.denise at gmail.com<mailto:michel.denise at gmail.com>>
Date: Mon, May 9, 2011 at 10:52 AM
Subject: Registry Agreements for Whois Review Team.
To: Yakushev Mikhail <yakushev at dstadvisors.ru<mailto:yakushev at dstadvisors.ru>>
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>


Dear Mikhail,

I was asked to ensure you had ICANN's agreements with registries.  I assume this meant gTLD registries.  These are posted on ICANN's website and linked on the Team's wiki, but for ease of access I've attached a list noting the registry, type of agreement and URL.  I've also included a link for the proposed template agreement included in the applicant guidebook for new gTLDs.

Please see my April 26 email to the Team for specific references to "Whois" in the registry agreements.

Regards,
Denise

Denise Michel
michel.denise at gmail.com<mailto:michel.denise at gmail.com>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110510/695f34ef/attachment.html 

From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com  Mon May  9 00:46:56 2011
From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com)
Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 17:46:56 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] consumer classifications - earlier work contributed by
	Dr. Sarmad
Message-ID: <20110508174656.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.600cf6dd2a.wbe@email12.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110508/ae3e2994/attachment.html 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Tue May 10 13:52:51 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 06:52:51 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Prel Rep - material for TOMORROW
Message-ID: <C9EF0FD3.800B%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

Please find attached the preliminary report of your last teleconference.

Kindly note that this will be discussed during our next conference call with a view to adopting a final version.

Thanks,

Very best regards

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110510/f2937247/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Prel Rep - 27 April - for your consideration.doc
Type: application/x-msword
Size: 46080 bytes
Desc: Prel Rep - 27 April - for your consideration.doc
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110510/f2937247/PrelRep-27April-foryourconsideration.doc 

From Kathy at KathyKleiman.com  Tue May 10 20:52:08 2011
From: Kathy at KathyKleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 16:52:08 -0400
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Discussion paper - some additions
In-Reply-To: <C9EF0FD3.800B%alice.jansen@icann.org>
References: <C9EF0FD3.800B%alice.jansen@icann.org>
Message-ID: <4DC9A578.3070005@KathyKleiman.com>

Hi All,
Attached for your review, please find an edited copy of the excellent 
discussion paper that Peter circulated.  As you know, this is the 
document we are preparing for public comment prior to Singapore, and as 
part of our outreach and meetings there.

As promised, I reviewed the history of the GNSO policy work over the 
last 10 years, and fortunately found that we had a wonderful aid -- the 
*/Whois Background Information /*that ICANN Staff member Liz Gasster 
prepared for us (located on our Wiki site, under Whois Background 
Information).

It is an excellent overview of the history of the GNSO Whois policy - 
its successes and not-so-successes -- and concise overview of the hard 
work in the GNSO. We see a theme of the very same tensions that the AoC 
focuses on, including access v. privacy.  I summarized the paper even 
further, and added some questions based on this past policy work.

Attached please find a revised version of the discussion paper (with 
changes tracked) for discussion tomorrow.

All the best,
Kathy


> Dear Review Team Members,
>
> Please find attached the preliminary report of your last teleconference.
>
> Kindly note that this will be discussed during our next conference 
> call with a view to adopting a final version.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Very best regards
>
> Alice
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110510/bef4a9cc/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WHOIS Review - draft discussion paper REVISED.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 30066 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110510/bef4a9cc/WHOISReview-draftdiscussionpaperREVISED.docx 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Wed May 11 08:25:26 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 01:25:26 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] REMINDER - CONFCALL today at 17:00 UTC
Message-ID: <C9F01496.809E%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

The next WHOIS conference call is scheduled for:

**Wednesday, 11 May 2011**

17:00 UTC

Please check your local time at: http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+CALL&iso=20110511T17

Password: 27318 followed by #

Adobe room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/

Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+10+-+11+May+2011

Audio-cast (silent observers): http://stream.icann.org:8000/whois.m3u

Dial-in numbers:
Please find below a table which encapsulates dial-in numbers for your countries of residence.
Should you be traveling, please refer to the full list which is available at:  http://www.adigo.com/icann/

Australia       1 800 009 820
1 800 036 775
Sydney  T       +61 290372962
Melbourne       T       +61 399996500
Brisbane        T       +61 731777546

Austria L - 0 800 295 858
M - 0 800 295 138
T - +43 720 882 638

Belgium L - 0800 79210
M ? 0800 79218
T - +32 78 480 286

Brazil  L - 0800 891 1597
M - 0800 891 1598
T - +55 613 717 2040

Canada  1 800 550 6865
T - +1 213 233 3193

France  0800 90 25 56
T - +33 170618347

Germany L -  0800 1016 120
G - M 0800 1016 124

Russia  8 10 8002 535 3011
T - +7 499 650 7835
United Kingdom  0800 032 6646
T  - +44 207 099 0867

United States   1 800 550 6865
T  - +1 213 233 3193


T ? local toll number ; M ? mobile preferred number ; L ? landline preferred number

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require a dial-out for this call.

Thank you,

Very best regards

Alice
Alice E. Jansen
--------------------------
ICANN
Assistant, Organizational & Affirmation Reviews
alice.jansen at icann.org<mailto: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/20110511/c1ea269b/attachment.html 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Wed May 11 09:52:11 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 02:52:11 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Budget Request v2.2 - SIGN OFF - ConfCall today
Message-ID: <C9F028EB.8143%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

In anticipation of your call scheduled for today at 17:00 UTC, please find attached an updated version of the budget request which reflects the decisions reached on 27 April.

Kindly note that this is submitted for your final approval.

Thank you,

Very best regards

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110511/91ca11a7/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Budget proposal v2.2.doc
Type: application/x-msword
Size: 32768 bytes
Desc: Budget proposal v2.2.doc
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110511/91ca11a7/Budgetproposalv2.2.doc 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Wed May 11 10:25:45 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 03:25:45 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Agenda - ConfCall today
Message-ID: <C9F030C9.8182%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

Please find below the agenda for today's call:

 1.  Adopt agenda
 2.  Adopt preliminary notes of the last conference call (27 April)
 3.  Report from (SL) and (PN) on outreach to law enforcement representatives
 4.  Review the Draft Discussion Paper circulated by (KK) based on (PN)'s document
 5.  Sign off the Budget Request circulated by Staff on behalf of (ET) and exchange of views on potential consumer profiles
 6.  Analysis of public comments submitted by the community: report of subteams on respective comments
 7.  Update on the Implementation subteam's progress and upcoming work
 8.  Singapore meeting: discussion of scheduled outreach session; overview of draft agenda for F2F meeting on Sunday; finalizing the "debrief meeting" of Wednesday
 9.  A.O.B

Also available on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+10+-+11+May+2011

Thank you,

Very best regards

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110511/a3f0d1f6/attachment.html 

From omar at kaminski.adv.br  Wed May 11 17:34:06 2011
From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 14:34:06 -0300
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Law enforcement: ICCYBER 2011 in Brazil
Message-ID: <BANLkTinR+w=3wpaD+4t56ptt3MNtxZMYug@mail.gmail.com>

http://www.iccyber.org/en/
VIII International Conference on Cyber Crime Investigation
October 05-07, Florianopolis/SC, Brazil

The topics and subjects of the conference are, among others:

Topic I ? Crimes in the Cyber Space

    Sexual exploitation of children through the Internet
    Frauds against financial institutions
    Cyber terrorism
    Publishing of criminal information through the internet
    Other cyber crimes

Topic II ? Computer Law

    Brazilian law for cyber crimes
    International and comparative law for cyber crimes

Topic III ? International Police Cooperation

    Performance of the nets of international police cooperation
    Alternatives to improve the international police cooperation

Topic IV - Computer Forensic

    Digital investigation
    Live analysis
    Data hiding, recovery and data analysis
    Evidence handling, preservation, storage and analysis
    Prevention, detection and monitoring of botnets
    Anti-forensics techniques
    Wireless and peer-to-peer (P2P) forensics
    Computer forensic tools ? development, testing and evaluation
    Computer forensic in education
    Analysis of malicious code
    Secure software development

Topic V ? Related Technologies

    Cryptology
    Biometrics
    Network and Information security
    Artificial intelligence
    Artificial neural networks
    Pattern recognition
    Signal processing
    Prevention and detection of Intrusion
    Image processing
    Computer vision



From michel.denise at gmail.com  Wed May 11 18:37:25 2011
From: michel.denise at gmail.com (Denise Michel)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 11:37:25 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Disconnected
Message-ID: <BANLkTinF_MocCV0gRNb96FSukTcaXZpPng@mail.gmail.com>

i was unable to get back into the call.  My aplogies. Please email
specific issues to Olof and he'll make sure they're addressed.

Again, my apologies for the problems.

Regards
Denise

-- 
Denise Michel
michel.denise at gmail.com


From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk  Wed May 11 19:02:41 2011
From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 20:02:41 +0100
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Disconnected
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinF_MocCV0gRNb96FSukTcaXZpPng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinF_MocCV0gRNb96FSukTcaXZpPng@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1BAE27E2-5517-4BE7-9636-1DBDF25B4804@etlaw.co.uk>

Thanks Denise, much appreciated

On 11 May 2011, at 19:37, Denise Michel wrote:

> i was unable to get back into the call.  My aplogies. Please email
> specific issues to Olof and he'll make sure they're addressed.
> 
> Again, my apologies for the problems.
> 
> Regards
> Denise
> 
> -- 
> Denise Michel
> michel.denise at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110511/fb7a8199/attachment.html 

From Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au  Wed May 11 22:43:53 2011
From: Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au (Nettlefold, Peter)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:43:53 +1000
Subject: [Rt4-whois] REMINDER - CONFCALL today at 17:00 UTC
	[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
In-Reply-To: <C9F01496.809E%alice.jansen@icann.org>
References: <C9F01496.809E%alice.jansen@icann.org>
Message-ID: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3028B3C219@EMB01.dept.gov.au>

Hi all,
Unfortunately I'll be unable to make this call due to the time.
Again, I look forward to listening to the recording.
Cheers,
Peter

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alice Jansen
Sent: Wednesday, 11 May 2011 6:25 PM
To: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: [Rt4-whois] REMINDER - CONFCALL today at 17:00 UTC

Dear Review Team Members,

The next WHOIS conference call is scheduled for:

**Wednesday, 11 May 2011**

17:00 UTC

Please check your local time at: http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+CALL&iso=20110511T17


Password: 27318 followed by #

Adobe room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/

Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+10+-+11+May+2011

Audio-cast (silent observers): http://stream.icann.org:8000/whois.m3u

Dial-in numbers:
Please find below a table which encapsulates dial-in numbers for your countries of residence.
Should you be traveling, please refer to the full list which is available at:  http://www.adigo.com/icann/

Australia

1 800 009 820
1 800 036 775
Sydney  T       +61 290372962
Melbourne       T       +61 399996500
Brisbane        T       +61 731777546

Austria

L - 0 800 295 858
M - 0 800 295 138
T - +43 720 882 638

Belgium

L - 0800 79210
M - 0800 79218
T - +32 78 480 286

Brazil

L - 0800 891 1597
M - 0800 891 1598
T - +55 613 717 2040

Canada

1 800 550 6865
T - +1 213 233 3193

France

0800 90 25 56
T - +33 170618347

Germany

L -  0800 1016 120
G - M 0800 1016 124

Russia

8 10 8002 535 3011
T - +7 499 650 7835

United Kingdom

0800 032 6646
T  - +44 207 099 0867

United States

1 800 550 6865
T  - +1 213 233 3193


T - local toll number ; M - mobile preferred number ; L - landline preferred number

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require a dial-out for this call.

Thank you,

Very best regards

Alice
Alice E. Jansen
--------------------------
ICANN
Assistant, Organizational & Affirmation Reviews
alice.jansen at icann.org<mailto: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



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties.


If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Security Advisor of the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, 38 Sydney Ave, Forrest ACT 2603, telephone (02) 6271-1376 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments.


Please consider the environment before printing this email.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110512/56802581/attachment.html 

From kim at vonarx.ca  Wed May 11 22:47:50 2011
From: kim at vonarx.ca (Kim G. von Arx)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 18:47:50 -0400
Subject: [Rt4-whois] WHOIS Tel conferences
In-Reply-To: <1BAE27E2-5517-4BE7-9636-1DBDF25B4804@etlaw.co.uk>
References: <BANLkTinF_MocCV0gRNb96FSukTcaXZpPng@mail.gmail.com>
	<1BAE27E2-5517-4BE7-9636-1DBDF25B4804@etlaw.co.uk>
Message-ID: <DE207AFC-3B2E-4DEF-8959-1A5A16EC1E91@vonarx.ca>

All: 

My apologies, for having missed the call today, but I put in the correct time in to my calendar but the incorrect timezone.  My apologies.  

Kim 

__________________________________

kim at vonarx.ca
+1 (613) 286-4445

"Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars..."



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110511/a1ff3986/attachment.html 

From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk  Thu May 12 08:52:26 2011
From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:52:26 +0100
Subject: [Rt4-whois] WHOIS Review Team - Budget request
Message-ID: <1E5C56B1-4F4A-4392-BE5D-9E1A22A13115@etlaw.co.uk>

Dear Peter

I hope you are well.

On behalf of the WHOIS Review Team, appointed under the Affirmation of Commitments, I submit for Board consideration and approval a request for funds.

The Scope of the WHOIS Review Team, which closely reflects the text of the AoC, is to assess the extent to which existing WHOIS policy and its implementation:
is effective,
meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement; and
promotes consumer trust.
The concept of "consumer trust" is a key part of our task, and one which we have found both hard to define, and hard to test within the ICANN community. The Review Team unanimously believes that in order to achieve the task entrusted in us by the signatories of the AoC, we are required to look further afield than those who engage in ICANN.

The attached proposal gives a high level overview of why we believe it is necessary to commission professional research, to enable us to evaluate the effectiveness of WHOIS policy and its implementation as it relates to promoting consumer trust.  We hope that this will give the Board the information you require to make a decision. If, however, you have any queries at all, please let me know and I shall be more than happy to assist.

Kind regards,


Emily Taylor
Chair,
WHOIS Review Team


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/20110512/dbeae1d1/attachment.html 

From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk  Thu May 12 08:53:24 2011
From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:53:24 +0100
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: WHOIS Review Team - Budget request
References: <1E5C56B1-4F4A-4392-BE5D-9E1A22A13115@etlaw.co.uk>
Message-ID: <AEAAC83A-4162-4D36-B646-872B69FACBA2@etlaw.co.uk>

With attachment


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Emily Taylor <emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk>
> Date: 12 May 2011 09:52:26 GMT+01:00
> To: peter.dengatethrush at icann.org
> Cc: Denise Michel <denise.michel at icann.org>, "rt4-whois at icann.org WHOIS" <rt4-whois at icann.org>
> Subject: WHOIS Review Team - Budget request
> 
> Dear Peter
> 
> I hope you are well.
> 
> On behalf of the WHOIS Review Team, appointed under the Affirmation of Commitments, I submit for Board consideration and approval a request for funds.
> 
> The Scope of the WHOIS Review Team, which closely reflects the text of the AoC, is to assess the extent to which existing WHOIS policy and its implementation:
> is effective,
> meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement; and
> promotes consumer trust.
> The concept of "consumer trust" is a key part of our task, and one which we have found both hard to define, and hard to test within the ICANN community. The Review Team unanimously believes that in order to achieve the task entrusted in us by the signatories of the AoC, we are required to look further afield than those who engage in ICANN.
> 
> The attached proposal gives a high level overview of why we believe it is necessary to commission professional research, to enable us to evaluate the effectiveness of WHOIS policy and its implementation as it relates to promoting consumer trust.  We hope that this will give the Board the information you require to make a decision. If, however, you have any queries at all, please let me know and I shall be more than happy to assist.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> 
> Emily Taylor
> Chair,
> WHOIS Review Team
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 


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/20110512/8151d832/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 110512 Budget proposal.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 157740 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110512/8151d832/110512Budgetproposal.pdf 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110512/8151d832/attachment-0001.html 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Thu May 12 15:19:41 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:19:41 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Your SGP schedule on the Wiki
Message-ID: <C9F1C72D.8575%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear Review Team Members,

Please note that your Singapore schedule is available on your public wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Singapore+Meeting

Kindly note that slots posted on this page are "carved in stone" and that there is more to come. Please make sure to check this webpage on a regular basis.

Rest assured that I will send you a recap of your final schedule via email and that outlook invitations will be circulated.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to improve this system. Kindly note that rooms will be assigned later this month and that the public ICANN schedule will be issued on May 30.

Many thanks,

Very best

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110512/5b3fa857/attachment.html 

From peter.dengatethrush at icann.org  Fri May 13 05:19:46 2011
From: peter.dengatethrush at icann.org (Peter Dengate Thrush)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 17:19:46 +1200
Subject: [Rt4-whois] WHOIS Review Team - Budget request
In-Reply-To: <1E5C56B1-4F4A-4392-BE5D-9E1A22A13115@etlaw.co.uk>
References: <1E5C56B1-4F4A-4392-BE5D-9E1A22A13115@etlaw.co.uk>
Message-ID: <A8B3BAA4-AC9C-4737-B987-A2EBF60683F8@icann.org>

Dear Emily,
I acknowledge receipt of this budget request.

A substantive response will follow in due course.

regards


Peter Dengate Thrush
Chairman of the Board of Directors, 
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 

+64 4 4998959 (DDI)
+64 21499888  (mobile)
+64 4 4710672 (fax)



On 12/05/2011, at 8:52 PM, Emily Taylor wrote:

> Dear Peter
> 
> I hope you are well.
> 
> On behalf of the WHOIS Review Team, appointed under the Affirmation of Commitments, I submit for Board consideration and approval a request for funds.
> 
> The Scope of the WHOIS Review Team, which closely reflects the text of the AoC, is to assess the extent to which existing WHOIS policy and its implementation:
> is effective,
> meets the legitimate needs of law enforcement; and
> promotes consumer trust.
> The concept of "consumer trust" is a key part of our task, and one which we have found both hard to define, and hard to test within the ICANN community. The Review Team unanimously believes that in order to achieve the task entrusted in us by the signatories of the AoC, we are required to look further afield than those who engage in ICANN.
> 
> The attached proposal gives a high level overview of why we believe it is necessary to commission professional research, to enable us to evaluate the effectiveness of WHOIS policy and its implementation as it relates to promoting consumer trust.  We hope that this will give the Board the information you require to make a decision. If, however, you have any queries at all, please let me know and I shall be more than happy to assist.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> 
> Emily Taylor
> Chair,
> WHOIS Review Team
> 
> 
> 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/20110513/b0756521/attachment.html 

From alice.jansen at icann.org  Fri May 13 13:06:13 2011
From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 06:06:13 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] 1to1s with Emily
Message-ID: <C9F2F5FE.8671%alice.jansen@icann.org>

Dear all,

Please note that 30-minute 1to1 sessions with Emily will be scheduled for the upcoming weeks in line with the decision reached during your last conference call.

Please expect to receive individual emails from me very soon.

Thanks,

Kindest regards

Alice
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110513/01fe63b7/attachment.html 

From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com  Fri May 13 16:36:56 2011
From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 10:36:56 -0600
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Discussion paper comments
Message-ID: <39BF0C2785E4044E81A4D55B333D510661FAD01CB3@DEN-MEXMS-001.corp.ebay.com>

All,

Please find attached a copy of the draft discussion paper with my comments attached. I am concerned that the recent proposed changes take us outside our scope<https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Scope+and+Roadmap+of+the+WHOIS+RT>, and could lead us to rehash approximately 10 years of difficult, exhausting, frustrating, but largely fruitless work.

I believe we've made good progress on the items in our Roadmap and if we continue to work on those items, we'll be able to complete our review in timely fashion.

Bill Smith

[cid:image001.jpg at 01CC114E.907D3DF0]
The safer, easier way to pay online

2211 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95131
Direct  408 967 2380  | Cell  925 577 0606
Skype  wc.smith

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110513/e7f9b4c7/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 20447 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110513/e7f9b4c7/image001.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WHOIS Review - draft discussion paper REVISED wcs	comments.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 34527 bytes
Desc: WHOIS Review - draft discussion paper REVISED wcs
	comments.docx
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110513/e7f9b4c7/WHOISReview-draftdiscussionpaperREVISEDwcscomments.docx 

From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk  Fri May 13 17:53:41 2011
From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:53:41 +0100
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Discussion paper comments
In-Reply-To: <39BF0C2785E4044E81A4D55B333D510661FAD01CB3@DEN-MEXMS-001.corp.ebay.com>
References: <39BF0C2785E4044E81A4D55B333D510661FAD01CB3@DEN-MEXMS-001.corp.ebay.com>
Message-ID: <C6938DA5-F852-4317-A1C4-0D642E54B22B@etlaw.co.uk>

Thanks Bill and Kathy for your providing your comments

People - please can we take up these issues on the list, and see whether we can determine a way forward which respects the diverse views here?

Look forward to the discussion unfolding.

Kind regards

Emily



On 13 May 2011, at 17:36, Smith, Bill wrote:

> All,
>  
> Please find attached a copy of the draft discussion paper with my comments attached. I am concerned that the recent proposed changes take us outside our scope, and could lead us to rehash approximately 10 years of difficult, exhausting, frustrating, but largely fruitless work.
>  
> I believe we?ve made good progress on the items in our Roadmap and if we continue to work on those items, we?ll be able to complete our review in timely fashion.
>  
> Bill Smith
>  
> <image001.jpg>
> The safer, easier way to pay online
>  
> 2211 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95131
> Direct  408 967 2380  | Cell  925 577 0606
> Skype  wc.smith
>  
> <WHOIS Review - draft discussion paper REVISED wcs comments.docx>


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/20110513/0502f369/attachment.html 

From emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk  Sun May 15 14:13:40 2011
From: emily.taylor at etlaw.co.uk (Emily Taylor)
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 15:13:40 +0100
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Comments on the Issues paper
Message-ID: <860562BB-9E3C-4501-A8D5-F66C5C07388F@etlaw.co.uk>

Hi all

A gentle reminder that we agreed to review the draft issues paper, and circulate comments by close of business on Monday. The Team has asked Alice to edit the comments, and we're hoping to set up a call on Wednesday with this as the only agenda item.

So far, Kathy and Bill have circulated comments - thank you.  

Please let's have your comments by end of Monday.  If you're happy with the paper, or have views on the comments already made, please say so.

Thanks

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/20110515/4f4b3626/attachment.html 

From jbladel at godaddy.com  Sun May 15 23:36:06 2011
From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel)
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 16:36:06 -0700
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Comments on the Issues paper
Message-ID: <20110515163606.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.dc6440b172.wbe@email00.secureserver.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110515/15aaadc1/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WHOIS Review - draft discussion paper REVISED wcs + JMB	comm" filename*1="ents.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 34543 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110515/15aaadc1/WHOISReview-draftdiscussionpaperREVISEDwcsJMBcommfilename1ents.docx