From sharon.lemon at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk Tue Sep 6 08:19:32 2011 From: sharon.lemon at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk (LEMON, Sharon) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 09:19:32 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Medical advice Dakar In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3062FB662B110E4A9F14C63284D07FF7050C6757A83C@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk> NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Hi Everyone, I am sure that most of you have Occupational Health at work, but I know there are some self employed amongst us, so thought I would share my experience with our OH rep this morning in preparation for the trip. Recommended vaccinations: Diptheria ) Tatanus ) one injection Polio ) Hepatitis A Typhoid Fever Yellow Fever I also have been given a course of Malarone as this is a high risk area for Malaria, and a very handy Travellers Diarrhoea Self-treatment kit. Just need to pack the tankini and sun block and ready to go;-) Sharon Sharon LEMON OBE Deputy Director Cyber and Forensics Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) 07768 290902 0207 855 2800 This information is supplied in confidence by SOCA, and is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It may also be subject to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, for example, under the Data Protection Act 1998. Requests for disclosure to the public must be referred to the SOCA FOI single point of contact, by email on PICUEnquiries at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk or by telephoning 0870 268 8677. All E-Mail sent and received by SOCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by SOCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring. E-Mail may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within SOCA, on authority from the Director General or his Deputy for analysis. This E-Mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible. The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110906/b98e2037/attachment.html From omar at kaminski.adv.br Tue Sep 6 13:26:17 2011 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 10:26:17 -0300 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Medical advice Dakar In-Reply-To: <3062FB662B110E4A9F14C63284D07FF7050C6757A83C@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk> References: <3062FB662B110E4A9F14C63284D07FF7050C6757A83C@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk> Message-ID: Dear friends, I won't be attending Dakar, but I'll see you in Marina del Rey. Best, Omar 2011/9/6 LEMON, Sharon > ** > > *NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED * > Hi Everyone, > > I am sure that most of you have Occupational Health at work, but I know > there are some self employed amongst us, so thought I would share my > experience with our OH rep this morning in preparation for the trip. > > Recommended vaccinations: > > Diptheria ) > Tatanus ) one injection > Polio ) > > Hepatitis A > > Typhoid Fever > > Yellow Fever > > I also have been given a course of Malarone as this is a high risk area for > Malaria, and a very handy Travellers Diarrhoea Self-treatment kit. Just > need to pack the tankini and sun block and ready to go;-) > > Sharon > > > Sharon LEMON OBE > Deputy Director > Cyber and Forensics > Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) > 07768 290902 > 0207 855 2800 > > This information is supplied in confidence by SOCA, and is exempt from > disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It may also be subject > to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, > for example, under the Data Protection Act 1998. Requests for disclosure to > the public must be referred to the SOCA FOI single point of contact, by > email on PICUEnquiries at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk or by telephoning 0870 268 8677. > > > > All E-Mail sent and received by SOCA is scanned and subject to assessment. > Messages sent or received by SOCA staff are not private and may be the > subject of lawful business monitoring. E-Mail may be passed at any time and > without notice to an appropriate branch within SOCA, on authority from the > Director General or his Deputy for analysis. This E-Mail and any files > transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom > they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please > contact the sender as soon as possible. > > > > The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure > Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in > partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On > leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. > Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or > recorded for legal purposes. > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20110906/94df0920/attachment.html From kathy at kathykleiman.com Tue Sep 6 15:01:27 2011 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 11:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely Message-ID: <4E6635C7.9040300@kathykleiman.com> Hi All, I wanted to share the good news that today, at least in Virginia, children returned to school -- so back to work for the rest of us! I also wanted to share my key thought after the last meeting -- that we should expand the group working with the survey people. While I applaud and appreciate the great work Lynn has devoted, the essence of our Team approach means that many fingers are involved in shaping our questions to the public, our interaction with the public, and our approach to others. So here too -- yet given schedules and summer, this support to Lynn has not yet materialized. Especially on an issue with as many perspectives as consumer trust -- the flipsides of privacy and accountability -- it is important for those conducting the survey, particularly the detailed in-person questions, to hear from multiple people on our Review Team. It will help them better understand the nuances and depth of the issues, and prepare better for the array of responses they may receive. Accordingly, I would like to suggest that a few additional people from the WRT, particularly those from the subteam who worked with Consumer Trust, meet with the survey companies leaders in a teleconference. I would think a meeting of no greater than an hour would be sufficient. I recommend this meeting take place as soon as possible, and probably this week. I would like to participate, and would be happy to work to help coordinate it. Best, Kathy -- From kathy at kathykleiman.com Tue Sep 6 20:26:58 2011 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 16:26:58 -0400 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely In-Reply-To: <4E6635C7.9040300@kathykleiman.com> References: <4E6635C7.9040300@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: <4E668212.3070509@kathykleiman.com> Hi All, I have heard from Kim and Omar in follow-up to the email below. Lynn, could we set up a meeting with you for Thursday or Friday? I would be happy to coordinate off the main email list. Best and tx! Kathy : > Hi All, > I wanted to share the good news that today, at least in Virginia, > children returned to school -- so back to work for the rest of us! > > I also wanted to share my key thought after the last meeting -- that we > should expand the group working with the survey people. While I applaud > and appreciate the great work Lynn has devoted, the essence of our Team > approach means that many fingers are involved in shaping our questions > to the public, our interaction with the public, and our approach to > others. So here too -- yet given schedules and summer, this support to > Lynn has not yet materialized. > > Especially on an issue with as many perspectives as consumer trust -- > the flipsides of privacy and accountability -- it is important for those > conducting the survey, particularly the detailed in-person questions, to > hear from multiple people on our Review Team. It will help them better > understand the nuances and depth of the issues, and prepare better for > the array of responses they may receive. > > Accordingly, I would like to suggest that a few additional people from > the WRT, particularly those from the subteam who worked with Consumer > Trust, meet with the survey companies leaders in a teleconference. I > would think a meeting of no greater than an hour would be sufficient. I > recommend this meeting take place as soon as possible, and probably this > week. > > I would like to participate, and would be happy to work to help > coordinate it. > > Best, > Kathy > -- From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Tue Sep 6 21:06:17 2011 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 15:06:17 -0600 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely In-Reply-To: <4E6635C7.9040300@kathykleiman.com> References: <4E6635C7.9040300@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: Please add me to the list. On Sep 6, 2011, at 8:01 AM, Kathy Kleiman wrote: > Hi All, > I wanted to share the good news that today, at least in Virginia, > children returned to school -- so back to work for the rest of us! > > I also wanted to share my key thought after the last meeting -- that we > should expand the group working with the survey people. While I applaud > and appreciate the great work Lynn has devoted, the essence of our Team > approach means that many fingers are involved in shaping our questions > to the public, our interaction with the public, and our approach to > others. So here too -- yet given schedules and summer, this support to > Lynn has not yet materialized. > > Especially on an issue with as many perspectives as consumer trust -- > the flipsides of privacy and accountability -- it is important for those > conducting the survey, particularly the detailed in-person questions, to > hear from multiple people on our Review Team. It will help them better > understand the nuances and depth of the issues, and prepare better for > the array of responses they may receive. > > Accordingly, I would like to suggest that a few additional people from > the WRT, particularly those from the subteam who worked with Consumer > Trust, meet with the survey companies leaders in a teleconference. I > would think a meeting of no greater than an hour would be sufficient. I > recommend this meeting take place as soon as possible, and probably this > week. > > I would like to participate, and would be happy to work to help > coordinate it. > > Best, > Kathy > > -- > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From kathy at kathykleiman.com Tue Sep 6 21:46:49 2011 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 17:46:49 -0400 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely In-Reply-To: References: <4E6635C7.9040300@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: <4E6694C9.6090402@kathykleiman.com> Will do, thanks Bill. Kathy Please add me to the list. On Sep 6, 2011, at 8:01 AM, Kathy Kleiman wrote: >> Hi All, >> I wanted to share the good news that today, at least in Virginia, >> children returned to school -- so back to work for the rest of us! >> >> I also wanted to share my key thought after the last meeting -- that we >> should expand the group working with the survey people. While I applaud >> and appreciate the great work Lynn has devoted, the essence of our Team >> approach means that many fingers are involved in shaping our questions >> to the public, our interaction with the public, and our approach to >> others. So here too -- yet given schedules and summer, this support to >> Lynn has not yet materialized. >> >> Especially on an issue with as many perspectives as consumer trust -- >> the flipsides of privacy and accountability -- it is important for those >> conducting the survey, particularly the detailed in-person questions, to >> hear from multiple people on our Review Team. It will help them better >> understand the nuances and depth of the issues, and prepare better for >> the array of responses they may receive. >> >> Accordingly, I would like to suggest that a few additional people from >> the WRT, particularly those from the subteam who worked with Consumer >> Trust, meet with the survey companies leaders in a teleconference. I >> would think a meeting of no greater than an hour would be sufficient. I >> recommend this meeting take place as soon as possible, and probably this >> week. >> >> I would like to participate, and would be happy to work to help >> coordinate it. >> >> Best, >> Kathy >> >> -- >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -- From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Tue Sep 6 22:38:48 2011 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 22:38:48 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely Message-ID: <643806210-1315348729-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1015113958-@b5.c9.bise6.blackberry> Very glad to have participation. I am onsite with a client engagement all week but could manage a call after business hrs eastern time zone. Lynn ------Original Message------ From: Kathy Kleiman To: rt4-whois at icann.org To: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com To: Omar Kaminski To: Kim G. von Arx Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely Sent: Sep 6, 2011 4:26 PM Hi All, I have heard from Kim and Omar in follow-up to the email below. Lynn, could we set up a meeting with you for Thursday or Friday? I would be happy to coordinate off the main email list. Best and tx! Kathy : > Hi All, > I wanted to share the good news that today, at least in Virginia, > children returned to school -- so back to work for the rest of us! > > I also wanted to share my key thought after the last meeting -- that we > should expand the group working with the survey people. While I applaud > and appreciate the great work Lynn has devoted, the essence of our Team > approach means that many fingers are involved in shaping our questions > to the public, our interaction with the public, and our approach to > others. So here too -- yet given schedules and summer, this support to > Lynn has not yet materialized. > > Especially on an issue with as many perspectives as consumer trust -- > the flipsides of privacy and accountability -- it is important for those > conducting the survey, particularly the detailed in-person questions, to > hear from multiple people on our Review Team. It will help them better > understand the nuances and depth of the issues, and prepare better for > the array of responses they may receive. > > Accordingly, I would like to suggest that a few additional people from > the WRT, particularly those from the subteam who worked with Consumer > Trust, meet with the survey companies leaders in a teleconference. I > would think a meeting of no greater than an hour would be sufficient. I > recommend this meeting take place as soon as possible, and probably this > week. > > I would like to participate, and would be happy to work to help > coordinate it. > > Best, > Kathy > -- Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T From Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au Tue Sep 6 23:31:43 2011 From: Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au (Nettlefold, Peter) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 09:31:43 +1000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Medical advice Dakar [SEC=UNOFFICIAL] In-Reply-To: <3062FB662B110E4A9F14C63284D07FF7050C6757A83C@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk> References: <3062FB662B110E4A9F14C63284D07FF7050C6757A83C@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk> Message-ID: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3060F832FC@EMB01.dept.gov.au> Hi Sharon and all, In case it's of any use to others, my advice was much the same, although I may have had an overly cautious doctor as I was also recommended to have a shot for meningococcal meningitis. Cheers, Peter From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of LEMON, Sharon Sent: Tuesday, 6 September 2011 6:20 PM To: 'Alice Jansen'; rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: [Rt4-whois] Medical advice Dakar NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Hi Everyone, I am sure that most of you have Occupational Health at work, but I know there are some self employed amongst us, so thought I would share my experience with our OH rep this morning in preparation for the trip. Recommended vaccinations: Diptheria ) Tatanus ) one injection Polio ) Hepatitis A Typhoid Fever Yellow Fever I also have been given a course of Malarone as this is a high risk area for Malaria, and a very handy Travellers Diarrhoea Self-treatment kit. Just need to pack the tankini and sun block and ready to go;-) Sharon Sharon LEMON OBE Deputy Director Cyber and Forensics Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) 07768 290902 0207 855 2800 This information is supplied in confidence by SOCA, and is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It may also be subject to exemption under other UK legislation. Onward disclosure may be unlawful, for example, under the Data Protection Act 1998. Requests for disclosure to the public must be referred to the SOCA FOI single point of contact, by email on PICUEnquiries at soca.x.gsi.gov.uk or by telephoning 0870 268 8677. All E-Mail sent and received by SOCA is scanned and subject to assessment. Messages sent or received by SOCA staff are not private and may be the subject of lawful business monitoring. E-Mail may be passed at any time and without notice to an appropriate branch within SOCA, on authority from the Director General or his Deputy for analysis. This E-Mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender as soon as possible. The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free. Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/20110907/2da3150f/attachment.html From emily at emilytaylor.eu Wed Sep 7 14:12:21 2011 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 15:12:21 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Arrival in Los Angeles Message-ID: Hi all To pick up a thread from our recent phone calls, I will be arriving in LA (to my surprise) on Sunday afternoon, so I'll be there all day Monday thinking about nothing but WHOIS. Happy to meet up and do some drafting or arguing with whoever's around. Best, Emily -- * * 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 ? m: +44 (0)7540 049 322 emily at emilytaylor.eu *www.etlaw.co.uk* Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110907/3a4f9188/attachment.html From Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au Thu Sep 8 00:00:54 2011 From: Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au (Nettlefold, Peter) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:00:54 +1000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Gap analysis - accuracy [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Message-ID: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3061428600@EMB01.dept.gov.au> Hello all, Attached is a draft gap analysis relating to WHOIS data accuracy. As with the accessibility/privacy section, I have not had time to cover all the issues, complete all the analyses, balance all the arguments, and so on in this first draft. However, I hope that it has enough structure and shape to encourage comment, debate, and input as we prepare for Marina del Rey. One issue I've struggled with is the structure. As you've seen, I've basically broken the gap analysis in two (privacy/access and accuracy) because: * these two areas seemed to attract the most comment from our stakeholders; * they are clearly drawn out as issues in the AoC provisions on WHOIS; and * many of the other 'gaps' we initially identified seem to be sub-components of these two broader issues or to be closely linked to them. Now that there is a draft in this form, I'm hoping that others will comment on whether this structure will allow us to sensibly cover all the gaps or if there is a better way to pull the pieces together. Cheers, Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/20110908/ae4a5f96/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WHOIS Gap Analysis - Accuracy.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 42150 bytes Desc: WHOIS Gap Analysis - Accuracy.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110908/ae4a5f96/WHOISGapAnalysis-Accuracy.docx From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Thu Sep 8 00:03:38 2011 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 18:03:38 -0600 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Arrival in Los Angeles In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I believe I land at noon on Monday. On Sep 7, 2011, at 7:12 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: Hi all To pick up a thread from our recent phone calls, I will be arriving in LA (to my surprise) on Sunday afternoon, so I'll be there all day Monday thinking about nothing but WHOIS. Happy to meet up and do some drafting or arguing with whoever's around. Best, Emily -- [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/etclogo250x60.gif] 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 ? m: +44 (0)7540 049 322 emily at emilytaylor.eu www.etlaw.co.uk Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713. _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From sarmad.hussain at kics.edu.pk Thu Sep 8 15:30:25 2011 From: sarmad.hussain at kics.edu.pk (Sarmad Hussain) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:30:25 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely In-Reply-To: <4E6694C9.6090402@kathykleiman.com> References: <4E6635C7.9040300@kathykleiman.com> <4E6694C9.6090402@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: <4e68366f.d319df0a.6c06.197a@mx.google.com> I would also like to join. Regards, Sarmad >>-----Original Message----- >>From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] >>On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman >>Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 2:47 PM >>To: rt4-whois at icann.org >>Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Expanding team working on survey - timely >> >>Will do, thanks Bill. >>Kathy >> >>Please add me to the list. On Sep 6, 2011, at 8:01 AM, Kathy Kleiman >>wrote: >>>> Hi All, >>>> I wanted to share the good news that today, at least in Virginia, >>>> children returned to school -- so back to work for the rest of us! >>>> >>>> I also wanted to share my key thought after the last meeting -- that >>we >>>> should expand the group working with the survey people. While I >>applaud >>>> and appreciate the great work Lynn has devoted, the essence of our >>Team >>>> approach means that many fingers are involved in shaping our >>questions >>>> to the public, our interaction with the public, and our approach to >>>> others. So here too -- yet given schedules and summer, this support >>to >>>> Lynn has not yet materialized. >>>> >>>> Especially on an issue with as many perspectives as consumer trust - >>- >>>> the flipsides of privacy and accountability -- it is important for >>those >>>> conducting the survey, particularly the detailed in-person >>questions, to >>>> hear from multiple people on our Review Team. It will help them >>better >>>> understand the nuances and depth of the issues, and prepare better >>for >>>> the array of responses they may receive. >>>> >>>> Accordingly, I would like to suggest that a few additional people >>from >>>> the WRT, particularly those from the subteam who worked with >>Consumer >>>> Trust, meet with the survey companies leaders in a teleconference. >>I >>>> would think a meeting of no greater than an hour would be >>sufficient. I >>>> recommend this meeting take place as soon as possible, and probably >>this >>>> week. >>>> >>>> I would like to participate, and would be happy to work to help >>>> coordinate it. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Kathy >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> >>-- >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Rt4-whois mailing list >>Rt4-whois at icann.org >>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From emily at emilytaylor.eu Thu Sep 8 07:54:44 2011 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:54:44 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Gap analysis - accuracy [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] In-Reply-To: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3061428600@EMB01.dept.gov.au> References: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3061428600@EMB01.dept.gov.au> Message-ID: Hi Peter Thanks for sending this new draft out to the list with plenty of time for review before our next call. All - I hope that, as before, you will contribute your thoughts and comments on the draft. One format issue - I think it's better to have the text reflect the comment and then footnote the contributor's details. That way, people focus on what is said rather than focusing on the identity of the contributor. Let me know what you think of this. Kind regards Emily On 8 September 2011 01:00, Nettlefold, Peter wrote: > Hello all,**** > > ** ** > > Attached is a draft gap analysis relating to WHOIS data accuracy.**** > > ** ** > > As with the accessibility/privacy section, I have not had time to cover all > the issues, complete all the analyses, balance all the arguments, and so on > in this first draft. However, I hope that it has enough structure and shape > to encourage comment, debate, and input as we prepare for Marina del Rey.* > *** > > ** ** > > One issue I?ve struggled with is the structure. As you?ve seen, I?ve > basically broken the gap analysis in two (privacy/access and accuracy) > because:**** > > **? **these two areas seemed to attract the most comment from our > stakeholders; **** > > **? **they are clearly drawn out as issues in the AoC provisions on > WHOIS; and**** > > **? **many of the other ?gaps? we initially identified seem to be > sub-components of these two broader issues or to be closely linked to them. > **** > > ** ** > > Now that there is a draft in this form, I?m hoping that others will comment > on whether this structure will allow us to sensibly cover all the gaps or if > there is a better way to pull the pieces together.**** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > ** ** > > Peter**** > > ** ** > > > * > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > * > > 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. > > * > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > * > > -- * * 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 ? m: +44 (0)7540 049 322 emily at emilytaylor.eu *www.etlaw.co.uk* Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110908/cc49b1b0/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Fri Sep 9 18:06:36 2011 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 11:06:36 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Please welcome Seth Reiss Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, We are pleased to inform you that Review Team Selectors, Heather Dryden and Rod Beckstrom, have appointed a new member to replace Olivier Iteanu on the WHOIS Policy Review Team. Seth Reiss is now an active Member of the WHOIS Policy Review Team as ALAC representative. For your information, his CV, letter of motivation and statement of interest may be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/composition-4-en.htm Seth has been added to the rt4 email list and may be reached at seth.reiss at lex-ip.com should you wish to contact him directly. Rest assured that past email exchanges and working documents will be forwarded to him in the meantime. Please join us in welcoming Seth to the Team and thanking him for his availability to participate in this key review process. Thank you, Best regards Olof & Alice -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110909/6ed405d6/attachment.html From omar at kaminski.adv.br Fri Sep 9 20:46:46 2011 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 17:46:46 -0300 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Please welcome Seth Reiss In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Welcome Seth! You'll find here a bunch of frendly hard workers from several countries. Just take your seat and go on :) Best wishes from .br, Omar 2011/9/9 Alice Jansen > Dear Review Team Members, > > We are pleased to inform you that Review Team Selectors, Heather Dryden and > Rod Beckstrom, have appointed a new member to replace Olivier Iteanu on the > WHOIS Policy Review Team. > > Seth Reiss is now an active Member of the WHOIS Policy Review Team as ALAC > representative. For your information, his CV, letter of motivation and > statement of interest may be found at: > http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/composition-4-en.htm > > Seth has been added to the rt4 email list and may be reached at > seth.reiss at lex-ip.com should you wish to contact him directly. Rest > assured that past email exchanges and working documents will be forwarded to > him in the meantime. > > Please join us in welcoming Seth to the Team and thanking him for his > availability to participate in this key review process. > > Thank you, > > Best regards > > Olof & 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/20110909/2fb2855c/attachment.html From seth.reiss at lex-ip.com Fri Sep 9 20:55:20 2011 From: seth.reiss at lex-ip.com (Seth M Reiss) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 10:55:20 -1000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Please welcome Seth Reiss In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <04d901cc6f32$ca379530$5ea6bf90$@reiss@lex-ip.com> Thank you Omar. I look forward to getting to know you and the rest of the team shortly. Best, Seth From: Omar Kaminski [mailto:omar at kaminski.adv.br] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 10:47 AM To: rt4-whois at icann.org Cc: seth.reiss at lex-ip.com Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Please welcome Seth Reiss Welcome Seth! You'll find here a bunch of frendly hard workers from several countries. Just take your seat and go on :) Best wishes from .br, Omar 2011/9/9 Alice Jansen Dear Review Team Members, We are pleased to inform you that Review Team Selectors, Heather Dryden and Rod Beckstrom, have appointed a new member to replace Olivier Iteanu on the WHOIS Policy Review Team. Seth Reiss is now an active Member of the WHOIS Policy Review Team as ALAC representative. For your information, his CV, letter of motivation and statement of interest may be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/composition-4-en.htm Seth has been added to the rt4 email list and may be reached at seth.reiss at lex-ip.com should you wish to contact him directly. Rest assured that past email exchanges and working documents will be forwarded to him in the meantime. Please join us in welcoming Seth to the Team and thanking him for his availability to participate in this key review process. Thank you, Best regards Olof & 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/20110909/fe27db08/attachment.html From kathy at kathykleiman.com Fri Sep 9 22:30:19 2011 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:30:19 -0400 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Please welcome Seth Reiss In-Reply-To: <04d901cc6f32$ca379530$5ea6bf90$@reiss@lex-ip.com> References: <04d901cc6f32$ca379530$5ea6bf90$@reiss@lex-ip.com> Message-ID: <4E6A937B.4010403@kathykleiman.com> Welcome Seth, Thanks for joining us! Will you be able to join us in Marina del Ray for the meeting on September 20-21? And have you found our exciting Wiki pages? Best, Kathy Thank you Omar. I look forward to getting to know you and the rest of the team shortly. > > Best, > > Seth > > *From:*Omar Kaminski [mailto:omar at kaminski.adv.br] > *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2011 10:47 AM > *To:* rt4-whois at icann.org > *Cc:* seth.reiss at lex-ip.com > *Subject:* Re: [Rt4-whois] Please welcome Seth Reiss > > Welcome Seth! You'll find here a bunch of frendly hard workers from > several countries. > > Just take your seat and go on :) > > Best wishes from .br, > > Omar > > > 2011/9/9 Alice Jansen > > > Dear Review Team Members, > > We are pleased to inform you that Review Team Selectors, Heather > Dryden and Rod Beckstrom, have appointed a new member to replace > Olivier Iteanu on the WHOIS Policy Review Team. > > Seth Reiss is now an active Member of the WHOIS Policy Review Team as > ALAC representative. For your information, his CV, letter of > motivation and statement of interest may be found at: > http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/affirmation/composition-4-en.htm > > Seth has been added to the rt4 email list and may be reached at > seth.reiss at lex-ip.com should you wish > to contact him directly. Rest assured that past email exchanges and > working documents will be forwarded to him in the meantime. > > Please join us in welcoming Seth to the Team and thanking him for his > availability to participate in this key review process. > > Thank you, > > Best regards > > Olof & Alice > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110909/05e2a9cd/attachment.html From lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com Sat Sep 10 23:30:18 2011 From: lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com (lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:30:18 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Please welcome Seth Reiss Message-ID: <20110910163018.00ef555ff13978e3e1b8d2179880f99e.fe39dbbc93.wbe@email12.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110910/22f760c2/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Sun Sep 11 08:03:40 2011 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 01:03:40 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] FW: Reviewing the Comments from ICANN Community In-Reply-To: <3226.66.44.74.157.1314735413.squirrel@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: On 8/30/11 10:16 PM, "kathy at kathykleiman.com" wrote: >Hi All, >I hope all is well. My family and I have survived the earthquake and >hurricane on the East Coast this past week -- and are hoping for easier >conditions in the future :-)! > >Like you, I am in the midst of my due diligence preparing for our meeting >on Thursday (with the disclaimer that I may not be able to attend due to >the change of date and my travel schedule). I am preparing my email >comments to share with the group. > >As promised, I did my "deep dive" on the comments we received in June/July >to our Discussion Paper. I complement the many groups that submitted >interesting and informative comments -- a lot of work was spent responding >to our queries. > >To Olof, I say Thank You! His comment summary, and especially his sorting >of the comments question by question is excellent. I urge you to review >the document at >http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/report-comments-whoisrt-discussion- >paper-05aug11-en.pdf > >However, a few commenters asked us to look at things a little differently. >They asked us to include questions we had not asked, and history we had >not included. Some have very long histories in the Whois Arena, as part of >GAC, ALAC, Registrars and NCUC. ** I created a short summary of these >comments -- and some addition, important, points and questions they raise. > >I have tried to shorten and summarize with quotes (as Olof did -- thanks >for the example, Olof!) --- below and attached. >Best, Kathy > ------------- expanding our inquiry -- comment highlights ---------- > >AN EXPANDED VIEW OF THE WRT QUESTIONS >(Responses to WRT Discussion Paper) > >Introduction: While Olof did an outstanding job of summarizing the >questions by sorting them according to their responses to our 14 >questions, certain issues fell between the cracks ? largely because groups >and communities asked us to look at questions beyond those we had chosen >to ask. This paper takes a short look at what others asked us to see ? >including overstretching the purpose of Whois, significant policy work in >the limitations of Whois, and the importance of history and historical >perspective in our work. Thanks for taking a fast look at these >summaries?and feel free to return to the full comments (found at >http://forum.icann.org/lists/whoisrt-discussion-paper/). > >1. Christopher Wilkinson, former GAC & GAC Secretariat (EU) on >purpose of >Whois: > >?I rather doubt that the initial purposes of the Whois protocol and >database extended to their current utilisation. It would appear that >rather more is expected of Whois than it is capable of delivering in view >of the legacy of past practice and the current and prospective scale of >the Internet.? (In Discussion Paper Comments) > >2. At Large Advisory Committee on the need to view the issues >differently: > >?It is our view that this Team must treat with and declare (1) whether the >WHOIS construct as originally devised and for the purpose intended is >still necessary, (2) whether the WHOIS dataset as originally determined >remains fit to its original purpose, and (3) whether the several >identifiable uses made of both the WHOIS data and processes that have >expanded the original intent are useful and in the public interest.? > >At Large Advisory Committee on the need to consider types of use in our >compliance schemes: ?Neither is it rational for the same risk in class or >kind to be ascribed to all domains; domains used primarily for support of >business transactions on the Web have a higher risk of consequential >fraudulent activities than do those used for more personal or >informational pursuits. As such, certain adjustments in approach to >compliance and our expectations of the impact from compliance might >benefit from a change in the philosophical construct of compliance and the >processes used to affect the assurance of compliance.? > >At Large Advisory Committee on the need to consider cycles of registration >in our compliance schemes: > >?We believe that the all‐round public interest may be better served >by recognizing that the risks from the fraudulent actions of bad actors >are not the same throughout the WHOIS data cycle but tend to be cyclical ? >higher following the establishment of new domains and decreasing >thereafter.? (In Discussion Paper Comments) > >3. Noncommercial Users Constituency on Why Privacy and Accuracy are >Not at >Odds: > >?Privacy and accuracy go hand-in-hand. Rather than putting sensitive >information into public records, some registrants use "inaccurate" data >as a means of protecting their privacy. If registrants have other >channels to keep this information private, they may be more willing to >share accurate data with their registrar.? > >?The problem for many registrants is indiscriminate public access to the >data. The lack of any restriction means that there is an unlimited >potential for bad actors to access and use the data, as well as >legitimate users and uses of these data.? > >Noncommercial Users Constituency on Why the Operational Point of Contact >Proceeding Marks a Critical Point of Agreement in the GNSO on a narrow >purpose to Whois: > >?ICANN stakeholders devoted a great deal of time and energy to this >question in GNSO Council-chartered WHOIS Task Forces. At the end of the >Task Force discussion in 2006, the group proposed that WHOIS be modified >to include an Operational Point of Contact (OPOC): >? > >?Under the OPOC proposal, "accredited registrars [would] publish three >types of data: >1) Registered Name Holder >2) Country and state/province of the registered nameholder >3) Contact information of the OPoC, including name, address, telephone >number, email." > >?Registrants with privacy concerns could name agents to serve as >OPoC,thereby keeping their personal address information out of the >public records.? (In Discussion Paper Comments) > >4. Why Registrars under Tucows leadership strongly sought a balance >to >simply Whois data, while improving it. > >Slides of Ross Rader, of Registrars Constituency and registrar Tucows, >discussing goals and advantages of Operational Point of Contact, endorsed >and a multi-year GNSO team. These slides and ideas were reference by >Elliot Noss, Pres of Tucows at the Registrars/WRT meeting in San Fran as >well as by the NCUC in the recent comment period. > >Goals (Operational Point of Contact- Powerpoint Slides) >?? to simply Whois data output >? reduce facilitation of domain related scams, illegal data mining, >phishing and identity theft >? maintain or increase the value of Whois for all stakeholders >? provide solid foundation for enhanced access to data by key stakeholders >? promote data accuracy? (Link to slides in NCUC Discussion Paper >Comments) > >5. Dr. Mueller: Why technical History is important ? because it >shows us >where we stopped thinking about purpose and goals. > >Dr. Milton Mueller asks us to examine his academic paper on the Whois >issues, and considers history to be a very important factor ? before and >during ICANN. Here are some highlights. > >?This article examines how the Internet?s >Whois service has evolved into a surrogate >identity system. The Whois service allows any >Internet user to type a domain name into a Web >interface and be immediately returned the name >and contact details of whoever has registered >the domain. It is used by police to bring down >Web sites committing crimes; its information is >harvested by spammers and marketers seeking >to send their solicitations; it is used by people >curious to know who is behind a Web site or >e-mail address; above all, it is used by trademark >and copyright attorneys to keep an eye on >their brands in cyberspace? > >?We recount the story of Whois because it >forces us to re-examine our understanding of >the relationship between technological systems >and global governance institutions. To understand >the importance of the Whois service, one >need only think of the license plate of an automobile >on the road, and imagine that anyone >who saw the license plate would be able to type >it into a computer and be returned the name of >the car owner and his or her street address, telephone >number, and e-mail address. > >?That is what Whois does to domain name registrants. It >links the vehicle for navigating the complex >arena of cyberspace (domains) to a responsible >individual, a location, or a jurisdiction. >Of course in the real world, access to drivers? >license databases is restricted to law enforcement >authorities and motor vehicle departments. It is >not difficult to imagine both the benefits?and >the trouble?that might be caused by free, >anonymous, unrestricted public access to drivers? >license databases. No doubt some additional >crimes would be solved and perhaps some >amazing new information services could be >developed by a Google of the future. No doubt, >also, incidents of road rage and stalking would >be taken to new heights. The same concerns >apply to Whois. In addition to facilitating >accountability on the Internet, open access to >registrant contact data raises privacy issues and >concerns about abuse of sensitive personal data >by spammers, stalkers, and identity thieves. > >?? Defaults tilt the playing >field toward one option by giving the >specified value the benefit of inertia?a Whois directory originated >as a feature of the Internet when it was a smallscale, >closed, scientific network. As the Internet >evolved into a large-scale, public, commercial >system, the Whois capability remained in place >by default. > >(Historical evolution) > >?The first RFCs make it clear that the Whois >protocol was intended to make available to >users a general directory of other ARPANET/ >Internet users. At the time, ARPANET was >what we would now call an intranet that >linked a few hundred computer scientists and >researchers at less than a hundred geographically >distributed sites. A critical fact about this >directory, then, is that it was intended to serve a >closed, relatively homogeneous, and?compared >to today?s Internet?very small group of networked >computer users.8 The early standards >documents do not specify exactly what the purpose >of this directory was. One can infer from >context that it served a variety of purposes, and >was seen as a convenience to the community of >defense contractors involved in building the >early Internet. Another critical fact is that for >most users, participation in the directory was >encouraged, but was not operationally, legally, >or contractually required.9 It may be that the >request to register in the centralized Whois >database was made to facilitate technical coordination, >but this is not documented in the >RFC, and evidence supporting this has not >been found anywhere else. The RFC states >only that the purpose is to provide ?a directory >service? (RFC 954, 1985, p. 1) to the network >users? > >?Phase 2: Internet Opened to the Public and to Commerce >While the number of host computers connected >to it grew rapidly, the Internet was still a closed >community of specialized users throughout the >1980s. From 1991 to 1995, a critical change >occurred: The Internet was opened to commercial >users and to the general public. This change was >accelerated by the creation and deployment of the >World Wide Web (WWW) and user-friendly >Web browsers, which made the Internet usable >and interesting to ordinary members of the public. >The number of computers connected to the Internet >exceeded 1.3 million before the end of 1992, >and was somewhere between 6 and 8 million by >the middle of 1995.10 This was no longer a ?community? >of computer scientists and researchers, >but a mass, heterogeneous public engaged in commerce >and in public and personal communication. >It was also an increasingly contentious and litigious >public? During this tornado of change, the Whois >service that was implemented between 1982 >and 1985 remained in place. The user base of >the Internet was no longer closed, no longer >homogeneous, no longer situated within a noncommercial >community, and no longer relatively >small and manageable. But the technical >protocol and the practices supporting a directory >of Internet users remained the same. The >only significant change was that the burden of >supplying the Whois service shifted from >defense contractor Stanford Research Institute >to civilian National Science Foundation contractor >Network Solutions, Inc. As the Internet >moved from the small, noncommercial, and >closed world of the 1980s to the open, public, >and commercial world of the mid-1990s, no >one made a conscious decision to retain the >open-access Whois service of RFC 954; Whois >was an unnoticed default value. > >(In Discussion Paper Comments) > >Final note from KK: I look forward to our discussion! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: New Issues Raised in Comments.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.documen Size: 21176 bytes Desc: New Issues Raised in Comments.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110911/a06557cc/NewIssuesRaisedinComments.docx -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt Url: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110911/a06557cc/ATT00001.txt From alice.jansen at icann.org Sun Sep 11 11:10:42 2011 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 04:10:42 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Agenda - Call Wed, 14 Sept - 19:00 UTC Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please find enclosed the agenda of your next call scheduled for this upcoming Wednesday at 19:00 UTC. 1. Roll call & apologies 2. Adopt agenda 3. Welcome Seth 4. Adopt preliminary report (1 September) 5. Consumer study: progress & updates 6. Chapters: Progress & updates. 7. Review and adopt the MdR agenda 8. Material: do we have all the material we need in anticipation of the MdR meeting? 9. A.O.B Kindly note that this agenda is also available on the wiki at:https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+20+-+14+September+2011 Thanks, Very best regards Alice -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20110911/8c1b4f7b/attachment.html