[Rt4-whois] WHERE ARE WE NOW? UPDATE

[Emily Taylor]

Hi all

Thanks for your amazing productivity and dedication today.  I have heard
from more than 1 member of the Team at 5am their local time today.  Very,
very much appreciated.

OK - this is what we needed to do today:

(1) Definitions of law enf. and applicable laws.  Minor changes requested
by Peter  - are we comfortable, or not? DONE
(2) Where are we on proxies?  - is there some agreed text to go into the
recommendations now (thanks for your work on this Susan, James and others)  IN
PROGRESS
(3) How much of the consumer chapter stays in the full report, and how much
goes into an appendix. DONE
(4) Background on WHOIS chapter - does it stay where it is, or does it go
into an appendix? DONE
(5) any final comments on the compliance letter, please?  Alice, please can
you produce a clean copy of this. IN PROGRESS _ ALICE HAS BEEN WRESTLING
WITH THE FULL REPORT TODAY.

Well done, all.  Thank you Alice for producing the consolidated version.

*Outstanding open issues on recommendations:

(1) The recommendation on "interface" (Lutz's one).  James has suggested
that we frame this as an issues report, and this has found support from me,
Kathy, Omar, Mikhail and Bill.  Can we do this please?
(2) Proxy recommendations.  Bill has raised a problem with the proposed
best practices; Susan has acknowledged that she and James would be happy
with less detail - waiting for proposed language here.  Susan has just
circulated an additional proposed recommendation on reviewing existing
practices.
(3) The Person - Bill raised a query whether this should be a member of the
Compliance team, or someone else.


*I see (1) and (3) are easy and (2) is difficult.

On a more general level, James has repeatedly and rightly raised that our
recommendations need to have time frames, and be correctly targeted.  I
agree, and I'm sure we all do, but we're struggling to know how to do
this.  I have one suggestion, which would be to task the Board to consider
our recommendations within 3 months, and present an action plan for
implementation within another 3 months, together with budgetary impact and
the identity of who has been tasked.  James -would this work?


*Rest of the document

*This is mainly in good shape, but it needs a proof-read now, and the
elimination of the remaining highlighted text - I do not see these as
contentious.
Bill is working to pull together the language of the findings/conclusions
just before the recommendations.


*What's the plan now?

*I want us to sign off definitively on the recommendations, and stabilise
the text in the next hour, please.  To do this, folks, we're going to sort
out the proxies.  Please note that there is already one team member (Bill)
expressing concern on these; as I read Peter's mails on the subject he was
also expressing concerns that we are introducing very detailed text very
late in the day.  We have a strong statement on proxy liability from
Dakar.  Can we have proposals to close this down, please?

Over the next two days, I would like Alice and Kathy to carefully
proof-read, and tidy up the text in the main body of the report.  If there
are any volunteers to assist them (Bill - you mentioned that you may have
some time? Others?? ). Then we can get it published, but we need to sign
off on the substantive recommendations in the *next hour!*

Kind regards

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/20111130/cb4970f0/attachment.html