From lutz at iks-jena.de Mon Apr 23 00:14:53 2012 From: lutz at iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 02:14:53 +0200 Subject: [Rt4-whois] German data commision officier about WHOIS In-Reply-To: <15EC96EF0D23D24FA863332FE6626FF508A45E0C@BTREXMB02.myvenyu.com> References: <20120419144646.GB11762@belenus.iks-jena.de> <15EC96EF0D23D24FA863332FE6626FF508A45E0C@BTREXMB02.myvenyu.com> Message-ID: <20120423001453.GB9702@belenus.iks-jena.de> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 08:49:37PM +0000, Lynn Goodendorf wrote: > Is there any comment or guidance about domain name registrants > being natural persons or is the intention that privacy protection > would extend to organizations and businesses or anyone who may > collect personal data on a website which requires a domain name > registration? I do not see any sign, that they distinguish between natural persons and companies or possible more classes of owner-c. OTOH modelling the technical infrastructure will not distinguish either, so the thin WHOIS approach will prohibit transfering all kinds (personal) data outside of the local law area. If local law allows access to those data records - possibly grouped into access classes for natural persons, companies, etc. - it will be granted. Personally I think that most of them do not understand the full implications of thin WHOIS to it's extreme: storage of personal data only at the last point of the reseller chain (you called it "collecting personal data on a website for domain name registrarion"). But you know, that this is the model I'm favoring. From kathy at kathykleiman.com Mon Apr 23 15:54:42 2012 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:54:42 -0400 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Recommendation 17 - tweaks Message-ID: <4F957B42.7050008@kathykleiman.com> Hi Emily and All, As promised, let me circulate the tweaks I promised to Recommendation 17 on "Data Access ? Common Interface." Mostly I added a subtitle and a short description of thick and thin registries. Best, Kathy From kathy at kathykleiman.com Mon Apr 23 15:55:47 2012 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Recommendation 17 - tweaks - file attached In-Reply-To: <4F957B42.7050008@kathykleiman.com> References: <4F957B42.7050008@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: <4F957B83.2090507@kathykleiman.com> This time with the file attached :-) --- Subject: Recommendation 17 0- tweaks Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:54:42 -0400 From: Kathy Kleiman To: rt4-whois at icann.org Hi Emily and All, As promised, let me circulate the tweaks I promised to Recommendation 17 on "Data Access ? Common Interface." Mostly I added a subtitle and a short description of thick and thin registries. Best, Kathy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120423/5fca668e/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Recommendation 17 - Emily[1] kk ed.docx Type: application/x-msword Size: 12037 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120423/5fca668e/Recommendation17-Emily1kked.docx From emily at emilytaylor.eu Mon Apr 23 17:44:02 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:44:02 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Fwd: Recommendation 17 - tweaks - file attached In-Reply-To: <4F957B83.2090507@kathykleiman.com> References: <4F957B42.7050008@kathykleiman.com> <4F957B83.2090507@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: Thank you. Your edits add clarity, and do not change the substantive meaning. This is good to go now. E On 23 April 2012 16:55, Kathy Kleiman wrote: > This time with the file attached :-) > > > --- Subject: Recommendation 17 0- tweaks Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 > 11:54:42 -0400 From: Kathy Kleiman To: > rt4-whois at icann.org > > Hi Emily and All, > As promised, let me circulate the tweaks I promised to Recommendation 17 > on "Data Access ? Common Interface." Mostly I added a subtitle and a > short description of thick and thin registries. > > Best, > Kathy > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > -- * * 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120423/ac839e75/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Tue Apr 24 12:27:09 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 05:27:09 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Doodle poll - Call with ICANN Staff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Echoing the discussion below, please kindly complete the enclosed doodle poll as soon as you can to help us determine the most convenient time slot for this call: http://www.doodle.com/mfvmyzrm9iptbm9r We look forward to receiving your doodle entries and thank you in advance. Kind regards Alice From: Emily Taylor > To: Denise Michel > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Call w/ Staff Thanks Denise All: Please send in your topics that you would like to discuss. Personally, I would like to understand Compliance budgeting a little more. Kind regards Emily On 22 April 2012 00:33, Denise Michel > wrote: OK. Alice will explore availability for a "comprehensive" call. Meanwhile, what discreet topics might some Team members be interested in addressing if we go that route? Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Advisor to the President & CEO denise.michel at icann.org +1.408.429.3072 mobile +1.310.578.8632 direct On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Emily Taylor > wrote: Hi Denise Thank you for your mail. Yes, let's try to organise something for next week, and we would certainly be open to the approach you suggest, of one or two staff members who could deal with discrete topics. Kind regards Emily On 21 April 2012 05:51, Denise Michel > wrote: Dear Emily and Team members, Unfortunately, we have not been able to identify a time next week that the key Staff involved in the issues under discussion can participate in a conference call with the Team. I know you're approaching your deadline, but do you want to explore setting up a call the following week? Alternatively, are there discreet topics that can be addressed in a call by one or two Staff (and perhaps a subgroup, as we did with IDNs -- might make scheduling easier)? Please let me know how we can help. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Advisor to the President & CEO denise.michel at icann.org +1.408.429.3072 mobile +1.310.578.8632 direct _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -- 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -- [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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120424/03052954/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Wed Apr 25 07:48:35 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:48:35 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] REMINDER - Call today @ 22:00 UTC Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Your next conference call is scheduled for: **Wednesday, 25 April 2012** 22:00 UTC Please check your local time at: http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+weekly+call&iso=20120425T22&ah=1&am=30 PASSWORD: 27318 followed by # Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+29+-+25+April+2012 Adobe room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/ 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 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 -- Alice Jansen Assistant, Organizational Reviews 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/98fc6dd0/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Wed Apr 25 08:44:38 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 01:44:38 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Agenda + Preliminary report for your consideration Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Your next call is scheduled for today at 22:00 UTC (time converter: http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+weekly+call&iso=20120425T22&ah=1&am=30). Please find enclosed the agenda (also available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+28+-+18+April+2012) 1. Roll-call & apologies 2. Adopt preliminary report (18 April) https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/31176570/Prel+Report+-+18+April.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1335342856922 3. Action items list: report, update, final agreement & deliverables https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Final+Report * Data Accuracy recommendations * Privacy/Proxy recommendations * Compliance recommendations * Strategic priority recommendation * Data Access ? Common interface recommendation * IDN recommendations * Deaccreditation * Chapters 4. Scheduling: call with ICANN Staff & rotation system 5. Timeline & deliverables 6. A.O.B Please find attached the preliminary report of your call held on 18 April. Kindly note that this will be discussed during today's conference call. In the meantime, please feel free to email editing suggestions/requirements. Thanks, Very best regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Assistant, Organizational Reviews 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/0e345853/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Prel Report - 18 April.doc Type: application/msword Size: 49664 bytes Desc: Prel Report - 18 April.doc Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/0e345853/PrelReport-18April.doc From alice.jansen at icann.org Wed Apr 25 15:39:48 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 08:39:48 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] ACTION ITEMS LIST Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please find enclosed the most recent version of your action items list, also available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Action+Items+-+Spring+2012 Thanks, Kind regards Alice Action Items - Spring 2012 * Revive call schedule (calls to take place on Wednesdays once a week; first call to take place on Wed, 28 March) ? Alice [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Review and submit language of recs 5-9 (Data Accuracy) - Susan [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Susan to circulate findings (3/4 paragraphs), agreed recommendations and add wordings (+ define the substantial/full failure terms) [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Susan and James to add footnotes references * Susan to delete recommendation 7 and to move it to overarching recommendation 21 (20 with renumbering), to circulate draft to Team for comments - by 25 April[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Note: timeline discussion now component of this discussion[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Review comments submitted to the Team and Denise's recommendation tracking document [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Propose alternative language for Proxy and Privacy recommendations - James + Susan + Peter + Seth + Lynn ; [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Subteam to review comments submitted and to circulate a draft - by 25 April * Peter to submit comments in writing - by 19 April [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Kathy to circulate language to transcribe discussion held during call - by 19 April * Subteam to comment and finalize - by 24 April * Subteam to work on language of last paragraph (findings) - by 25 April * Subteam to go back to transcripts (Dakar) regarding rights/responsibilities discussions * Hold the pen on rec. 3 strategic priority -- Emily ; [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Emily to integrate comments received by next call (note: overlap with Compliance Subteam) * Susan to put forward some language on senior position - by 25 April [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Denise to circulate draft advisory 2010 and material (recording, notes etc) of Cartagena discussion on this subject matter [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Find text on accreditation-- Kathy ; + Hierarchy of enforcement - James [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * James to circulate language by 25 April (incentives> References: Message-ID: Thanks Alice All: please can you review any action items with your name on them, and give an update on progress at the call today. Kind regards Emily On 25 April 2012 16:39, Alice Jansen wrote: > Dear Review Team Members, > > Please find enclosed the most recent version of your action items list, > also available at: > https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Action+Items+-+Spring+2012 > > Thanks, > > Kind regards > > Alice > > Action Items - Spring 2012 > > - Revive call schedule (calls to take place on Wednesdays once a week; > first call to take place on Wed, 28 March) ? Alice > > > - Review and submit language of recs 5-9 (Data Accuracy) - Susan > - *Susan to circulate findings (3/4 paragraphs), agreed > recommendations and add wordings (+ define the substantial/full failure > terms)* > - *Susan and James to add footnotes references * > - *Susan to delete recommendation 7 and to move it to overarching > recommendation 21 (20 with renumbering), to circulate draft to Team for > comments - by 25 April* > - *Note: timeline discussion now component of this discussion* > > > - Review comments submitted to the Team and Denise's recommendation > tracking document > > > - Propose alternative language for Proxy and Privacy > recommendations - James + Susan + Peter + Seth + Lynn ; * * > - *Subteam to review comments submitted and to circulate a draft - > by 25 April* > - *Peter to submit comments in writing - by 19 April * > - *Kathy to circulate language to transcribe discussion held during > call - by 19 April* > - *Subteam to comment and finalize - by 24 April* > - *Subteam to work on language of last paragraph (findings) - by 25 > April * > - *Subteam to go back to transcripts (Dakar) regarding > rights/responsibilities discussions* > > > - Hold the pen on rec. 3 strategic priority -- Emily ; > - *Emily to integrate comments received by next call (note: overlap > with Compliance Subteam)* > - *Susan to put forward some language on senior position - by 25 > April * > > > - Denise to circulate draft advisory 2010 and material (recording, > notes etc) of Cartagena discussion on this subject matter > > > - Find text on accreditation-- Kathy ; +* *Hierarchy of enforcement - > James* * > - *James to circulate language by 25 April (incentives> - *Kathy to finalize and circulate* > > > - Work on language of rec. 17 Emily; AGREEMENT REACHED > - *Kathy to circulate iterations - if substantive, back on action > items list by 25 April* > > > - Review language of recs. on IDNs -- Sarmad + Kathy + Wilfried + > Michael > - IDN subteam to hold a call with Steve Sheng (Staff to schedule it > ) > - *Subteam to* *share language by 25 April* > > > - Review your chapters and send redline to Seth + Omar + Alice - *by 25 > ** **April* > > > - Review body of text in light of comments and integrate changes > suggested/required by Members-- Seth + Omar > > > - Draft some language on timeframes and implementation paths in light > of the AoC - Susan + Lynn AGREEMENT > - *Susan to add agreed language to data accuracy recommendation* > > > - Respond to Staff's comments for Community's information - All > > > - Strengthen compliance recommendations and add justification to > proposal - Peter + Emily + Bill > - *Team to take on discussion about recommendation 3 - Strategic > priority* > - *Alice to organize a subteam call* > - *All Members should submit their views and comments by next call* > > > - *Data Validation: James and Peter to draft language by next call + > to determine where this fits in the report* > > > - *Emily to make a decision on timeline of final report * > > -- > *Alice Jansen* > Assistant, Organizational Reviews > *6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5* > *B-1040 Brussels* > *Belgium* > Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 > Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 > Skype: alice_jansen_icann > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > -- * * 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/e382be0f/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Apr 25 16:59:54 2012 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:59:54 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) Message-ID: <20120425095954.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.09290e9e36.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/67e0a279/attachment.html From emily at emilytaylor.eu Wed Apr 25 17:21:16 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:21:16 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) In-Reply-To: <20120425095954.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.09290e9e36.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20120425095954.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.09290e9e36.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: Thanks for this draft, James It looks very nice. Is it appropriate also to make the point that validation deals with data on the way in, but whatever decision is made in that regard, there will also need to be substantial work on the legacy of [x ] million domains. E On 25 April 2012 17:59, James M. Bladel wrote: > Team; > > Per our discussion on the previous call, I was tasked to provide draft > langauge for a "statement" in our report regarding Data Validation. Below > is my first stab at this assignment. I recommend this become part of the > introduction / background to our Data Accuracy chapter. > > We can discuss / refine during today's call. > > Thanks-- > > J. > > > *The Review Team notes that discussions of WHOIS data often include > recommendations for WHOIS data "validation" or data "verification." The > team notes that the focus of its recommendations is that ICANN work to > improve the accuracy of WHOIS data, and that WHOIS validation or > verification would be one possible means to achieve this objective. > Currently, there are a number of ongoing efforts in this area, including a > potential Policy Development Process (PDP) and direct negotiations with > Registrars on revisions to the RAA. The Review Team therefore acknowledges > these efforts and encourages ICANN Staff to continue this work while > ensuring that all segments of the Community are involved in this process.* > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > -- * * 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/57336164/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Apr 25 18:01:18 2012 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:01:18 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) Message-ID: <20120425110118.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.cff91c7809.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/4d534283/attachment.html From denise.michel at icann.org Wed Apr 25 20:58:23 2012 From: denise.michel at icann.org (Denise Michel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:58:23 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Additional information on Compliance staffing and budget In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: *Dear Emily and Team members,* * * The budget and actual figures provided last week include 100% of the Compliance Team and small fractions of other departments, such as Legal, Registrar, Registry and Operations Teams. This reflects Compliance-related activities supported by these groups during the past three fiscal years. Other departments, such as IT, HR, etc., provide support to Compliance but fractions of these departments are not included in the Compliance budget. Each fiscal year's budget for Compliance includes broad funding categories for personnel, travel, professional services, administration, and overhead. I trust this level of detail meets the Team's need to address the overall level of resources for Compliance. Please let me know if you have questions or require anything further. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN Advisor to the President & CEO denise.michel at icann.org +1.408.429.3072 mobile +1.310.578.8632 direct On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: > Thank you Denise, and please pass on thanks to your colleagues for > producing this information at what I'm sure is a busy and difficult time > for you all. > > No doubt my colleagues may have further questions, but one think I can > immediately see we need is more information on budget. Please can you > elaborate on what is meant by "other areas of the organisation that > contribute to the compliance activities", and provide us with details about > how these contributions are calculated, and figures to support. Although > I'm familiar with the idea of contribution costing, I'm also accustomed > (when looking at budgeting for an area of business) to look at a breakdown > of costs eg staff, operational costs associated with the compliance > activities, and other costs (eg for suppliers, IT systems, events, > whatever). Could we have these please, and also the actuals. > > Thanks > > Emily > > On 21 April 2012 05:38, Denise Michel wrote: > >> Dear Emily and Team members, >> >> As requested, attached is information on Compliance staffing, including >> vacancies, and budget and spend data for the past three years. >> >> Please let me know if you have questions or need anything further. >> >> Regards, >> Denise >> >> Denise Michel >> ICANN >> Advisor to the President & CEO >> denise.michel at icann.org >> +1.408.429.3072 mobile >> +1.310.578.8632 direct >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rt4-whois mailing list >> Rt4-whois at icann.org >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois >> >> > > > -- > > > > > * > * > > 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/340c376e/attachment.html From lgoodendorf at versprite.com Wed Apr 25 21:15:10 2012 From: lgoodendorf at versprite.com (Lynn Goodendorf) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:15:10 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) In-Reply-To: <20120425095954.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.09290e9e36.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> References: <20120425095954.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.09290e9e36.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <15EC96EF0D23D24FA863332FE6626FF508A4DBB8@BTREXMB01.myvenyu.com> Thanks James! I made proposed small edits in your text below that are highlighted in yellow. Lynn ________________________________ From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] on behalf of James M. Bladel [jbladel at godaddy.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:59 AM To: RT4 WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) Team; Per our discussion on the previous call, I was tasked to provide draft langauge for a "statement" in our report regarding Data Validation. Below is my first stab at this assignment. I recommend this become part of the introduction / background to our Data Accuracy chapter. We can discuss / refine during today's call. Thanks-- J. The Review Team notes that discussions of WHOIS data often include recommendations for WHOIS data "validation" or data "verification." The team notes that the focus of its recommendations is on the desired outcome that ICANN work to improve the accuracy of WHOIS data. WHOIS validation or verification would be one possible means to achieve this objective. And our intention is to allow latitude in how the objective is achieved. Currently, there are a number of ongoing efforts in this area, including a potential Policy Development Process (PDP) and direct negotiations with Registrars on revisions to the RAA. The Review Team therefore acknowledges these efforts and encourages ICANN Staff to continue this work while ensuring that all segments of the Community are involved in this process. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/8a8afa53/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Apr 25 21:16:49 2012 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:16:49 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) Message-ID: <20120425141649.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.cc7cc42d9e.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/4171b61d/attachment.html From emily at emilytaylor.eu Wed Apr 25 21:51:30 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 22:51:30 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) In-Reply-To: <15EC96EF0D23D24FA863332FE6626FF508A4DBB8@BTREXMB01.myvenyu.com> References: <20120425095954.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.09290e9e36.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> <15EC96EF0D23D24FA863332FE6626FF508A4DBB8@BTREXMB01.myvenyu.com> Message-ID: Hi all I suggest an extra sentence at the end, which I've highlighted below: On 25 April 2012 22:15, Lynn Goodendorf wrote: > Thanks James! > > I made proposed small edits in your text below that are highlighted in > yellow. > > Lynn > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] on > behalf of James M. Bladel [jbladel at godaddy.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:59 AM > *To:* RT4 WHOIS > *Subject:* [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) > > Team; > > Per our discussion on the previous call, I was tasked to provide draft > langauge for a "statement" in our report regarding Data Validation. Below > is my first stab at this assignment. I recommend this become part of the > introduction / background to our Data Accuracy chapter. > > We can discuss / refine during today's call. > > Thanks-- > > J. > > > *The Review Team notes that discussions of WHOIS data often include > recommendations for WHOIS data "validation" or data "verification." The > team notes that the focus of its recommendations is on the desired outcomethat ICANN work to improve the accuracy of WHOIS data. WHOIS validation > or verification would be one possible means to achieve this objective. And our intention > is to allow latitude in how the objective is achieved. Currently, there > are a number of ongoing efforts in this area, including a potential Policy > Development Process (PDP) and direct negotiations with Registrars on > revisions to the RAA. The Review Team therefore acknowledges these efforts > and encourages ICANN Staff to continue this work while ensuring that all > segments of the Community are involved in this process. In any event, > whether or not validation of new registration data is implemented, there is > a significant legacy of inaccurate data in existing domain name records, > which requires attention and improvement.* > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > -- * * 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/42e89ccb/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Wed Apr 25 21:52:36 2012 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:52:36 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) Message-ID: <20120425145236.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.b0799facc6.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/db16d8ec/attachment.html From lgoodendorf at versprite.com Wed Apr 25 21:52:54 2012 From: lgoodendorf at versprite.com (Lynn Goodendorf) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:52:54 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) In-Reply-To: References: <20120425095954.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.09290e9e36.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> <15EC96EF0D23D24FA863332FE6626FF508A4DBB8@BTREXMB01.myvenyu.com>, Message-ID: <15EC96EF0D23D24FA863332FE6626FF508A4DBDC@BTREXMB01.myvenyu.com> I like it Emily - well done. ________________________________ From: Emily Taylor [emily at emilytaylor.eu] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 4:51 PM To: Lynn Goodendorf Cc: James M. Bladel; RT4 WHOIS Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) Hi all I suggest an extra sentence at the end, which I've highlighted below: On 25 April 2012 22:15, Lynn Goodendorf > wrote: Thanks James! I made proposed small edits in your text below that are highlighted in yellow. Lynn ________________________________ From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] on behalf of James M. Bladel [jbladel at godaddy.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:59 AM To: RT4 WHOIS Subject: [Rt4-whois] Data Validation Statement (Draft) Team; Per our discussion on the previous call, I was tasked to provide draft langauge for a "statement" in our report regarding Data Validation. Below is my first stab at this assignment. I recommend this become part of the introduction / background to our Data Accuracy chapter. We can discuss / refine during today's call. Thanks-- J. The Review Team notes that discussions of WHOIS data often include recommendations for WHOIS data "validation" or data "verification." The team notes that the focus of its recommendations is on the desired outcome that ICANN work to improve the accuracy of WHOIS data. WHOIS validation or verification would be one possible means to achieve this objective. And our intention is to allow latitude in how the objective is achieved. Currently, there are a number of ongoing efforts in this area, including a potential Policy Development Process (PDP) and direct negotiations with Registrars on revisions to the RAA. The Review Team therefore acknowledges these efforts and encourages ICANN Staff to continue this work while ensuring that all segments of the Community are involved in this process. In any event, whether or not validation of new registration data is implemented, there is a significant legacy of inaccurate data in existing domain name records, which requires attention and improvement. _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -- [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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/701c52a3/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Wed Apr 25 21:57:49 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:57:49 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] adobe URL Message-ID: Please join the Adobe room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/ -- Alice Jansen Assistant, Organizational Reviews 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120425/e0a47829/attachment.html From lutz at iks-jena.de Wed Apr 25 22:07:33 2012 From: lutz at iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:07:33 +0200 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Recommendation 17 Message-ID: <20120425220733.GA31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> Thank you for expanding and reformulating the recommendation 17. To my honest surprise the currenct form of this recommendation does not match the original intend anymore. So let me rephrase the main issues again: The AOC requires an "unrestriced and unlimited access to complete data for everybody". The current implementations violate this requirement in three ways: a) Most interfaces are rate limited or otherwise restriced b) Many interfaces does not offer the full set of information c) The interfaces are hard to find and often difficult to use So the recommendation 17 is simply saying: "Please build or extend an interface which is: - Web based for "easy access for everybody" (to solve c) - Multilingual for the same reason - Follows the WHOIS server references downtree starting at whois.iana.org to find any WHOIS server (not just a gTLD) and the necessary information (to solve c and overcome the thin/thick WHOIS discussion at all) - By insisting on ICANN as an operator of this service access to the WHOIS servers of the various partes can be made unrestricted (to solve a) as well as complete (to solve b) This is quite different from the current proposal to do some cosmetic changes on the Internic website ... Sorry. From omar at kaminski.adv.br Wed Apr 25 22:23:07 2012 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:23:07 -0300 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Recommendation 17 In-Reply-To: <20120425220733.GA31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> References: <20120425220733.GA31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> Message-ID: Technically speaking is there any need of a new Whois pattern? Or it's a matter of Whois database (and interface) stardardization? Omar 2012/4/25 Lutz Donnerhacke : > Thank you for expanding and reformulating the recommendation 17. > > To my honest surprise the currenct form of this recommendation does not > match the original intend anymore. So let me rephrase the main issues again: > > The AOC requires an "unrestriced and unlimited access to complete data for > everybody". The current implementations violate this requirement in three > ways: > ?a) Most interfaces are rate limited or otherwise restriced > ?b) Many interfaces does not offer the full set of information > ?c) The interfaces are hard to find and often difficult to use > > So the recommendation 17 is simply saying: "Please build or extend an > interface which is: > ?- Web based for "easy access for everybody" (to solve c) > ?- Multilingual for the same reason > ?- Follows the WHOIS server references downtree starting at whois.iana.org > ? to find any WHOIS server (not just a gTLD) and the necessary information > ? (to solve c and overcome the thin/thick WHOIS discussion at all) > ?- By insisting on ICANN as an operator of this service access to the WHOIS > ? servers of the various partes can be made unrestricted (to solve a) > ? as well as complete (to solve b) > > This is quite different from the current proposal to do some cosmetic > changes on the Internic website ... Sorry. > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois From lutz at iks-jena.de Wed Apr 25 22:34:47 2012 From: lutz at iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:34:47 +0200 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Recommendation 17 In-Reply-To: References: <20120425220733.GA31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> Message-ID: <20120425223447.GB31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 07:23:07PM -0300, Omar Kaminski wrote: > Technically speaking is there any need of a new Whois pattern? Or it's > a matter of Whois database (and interface) stardardization? Technically speaking there is a need for encoding abstraction and structure preserving transport format ... like RESTful-Whois using XML. Practically speaking the current text based implementating only needs some best current practices (i.e. a swift to UTF8 encoing and some field naming recommendations like "refer: level-deeper-whois-server"). Lawfully speaking the current storage model violates the many local and international data protection laws and the access to the data violates further local laws. So we have to face a strong move to thinner WHOIS models. Crime fighters are in the opposite situation and would prefer to have all the date stored centrally so that they have easy access to complete data while others might have limited up to no access. So we have to face a strong move to thicker WHOIS models. >From the point of usability all of those issues are irrelevant and need to be hidden behind a Web interface as requested by the original rec 17. From omar at kaminski.adv.br Wed Apr 25 23:33:45 2012 From: omar at kaminski.adv.br (Omar Kaminski) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:33:45 -0300 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Recommendation 17 In-Reply-To: <20120425223447.GB31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> References: <20120425220733.GA31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> <20120425223447.GB31263@belenus.iks-jena.de> Message-ID: Dear Lutz, Seems we're still facing different rules for (many) different situations (and patterns): thick/thin on current storage model. How deep should be the "standardization" untill reach a new layer of protection and privacy, and who should control (we could say own) this "private" data, otherwise public by default ("common")? Omar Em 25 de abril de 2012 19:34, Lutz Donnerhacke escreveu: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 07:23:07PM -0300, Omar Kaminski wrote: >> Technically speaking is there any need of a new Whois pattern? Or it's >> a matter of Whois database (and interface) stardardization? > > Technically speaking there is a need for encoding abstraction and structure > preserving transport format ... like RESTful-Whois using XML. > > Practically speaking the current text based implementating only needs some > best current practices (i.e. a swift to UTF8 encoing and some field naming > recommendations like "refer: level-deeper-whois-server"). > > Lawfully speaking the current storage model violates the many local and > international data protection laws and the access to the data violates > further local laws. So we have to face a strong move to thinner WHOIS models. > > Crime fighters are in the opposite situation and would prefer to have all > the date stored centrally so that they have easy access to complete data > while others might have limited up to no access. So we have to face a strong > move to thicker WHOIS models. > > From the point of usability all of those issues are irrelevant and need to > be hidden behind a Web interface as requested by the original rec 17. From alice.jansen at icann.org Thu Apr 26 08:47:35 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:47:35 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, In line with decisions reached during your call yesterday, your session with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2). An outlook invitation will follow shortly. Also note that per your decision, the call with ICANN Staff will take place only if the Team has a list of specific discussion points. Please kindly circulate the topics you would like to discuss by Friday, 27 April ? 17:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17) Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/bc5334e8/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Thu Apr 26 08:59:02 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:59:02 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Note Pod Content from 25 April In-Reply-To: <4438710.126104.1335397539679.JavaMail.breezesvc@pacna7app01> Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please find enclosed the note pod content of your conference call held on 25 April. Staff will draft a preliminary report for your consideration. Thanks, Kind regards Alice From: Alice Jansen > Reply-To: Alice Jansen > To: Alice Jansen > Subject: Adobe Connect - Note Pod Content from WHOIS-Review WHOIS POLICY REVIEW TEAM CONFERENCE CALL 25 April - 22:00 UTC AGENDA 1. Roll-call & apologies 2. Adopt preliminary report (18 April) https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/31176570/Prel+Report+-+18+April.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1335342856922 3. Action items list: report, update, final agreement & deliverables https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Final+Report * Data Accuracy recommendations * Privacy/Proxy recommendations * Compliance recommendations * Strategic priority recommendation * Data Access ? Common interface recommendation * IDN recommendations * Deaccreditation * Data Validation * Chapters 4. Scheduling: call with ICANN Staff & rotation system 5. Timeline & deliverables 6. A.O.B PARTICIPANTS Lutz Donnerhacke, Emily Taylor, Lynn Goodendorf, James Bladel, Susan Kawaguchi, Kathy Kleiman, Seth Reiss, Peter Nettlefold ICANN STAFF Alice Jansen, Denise Michel APOLOGIES Bill Smith, Sarmad Hussain, Michael Yakushev, Wilfried Woeber, Olof Nordling NOTES 1. Agenda adopted 2. Preliminary report adopted 3. Data Accuracy Incorported comments/concerns, renumbering, no substantial changes. Regulate term - ICANN provides rules for and oversees? Monitors? Controls? Decides to go for coordinates. (AJ) to clean this document - SIGNED-OFF Privacy/Proxy recommendations Tidy language, delete comments/colors, put bracked around last paragraph. Highlight areas in RAA which find suboptimal. Put the language out and include the whole Team in the discussion. AJ hold the pen. Peter to draft language Compliance No progress yet. Submit comments. Call on Friday morning. Emily requested to see ICANN budget and spendings on compliance. Management reports? last couple of years. Denise to follow up. Recommendation 3 Signed off to be merged with Susan's recommendation (senior position) - Emily volunteered to take this on and to share it with Susan and Kathy prior to sharing it with the group. Alice to follow up - circulate first draft. Recommendation 17 Lutz comments on the list - Costa Rica: worry about changing ownership, location. Agreement in CR. Signed off. Alice to tidy up track changes. IDN Recs Reported call with Staff. Careful that Team does not issue a policy requirement. Deaccreditation Suspension, penalties towards termination, various level of functions. Going into more detail might not help - creating heavy bureaucracy etc Data validation Separator between findings and recommendations in data accuracy chapter. Chapters leave exec. summary as is (minor editing). KK volunteered to look into it. AJ to hold pen - Seth flick through report in light of specific comments/edits --> Summary of comments ? AJ to email him key documents Finish off open issues Call with ICANN Staff Scheduled for 30 April at 22:00 UTC. If no discussion points, cancelled. Circulate your discussion points. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/bae10095/attachment.html From emily at emilytaylor.eu Thu Apr 26 09:23:02 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:23:02 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all Just to support this prompt from Alice - please can you all let us have your agenda items for anything further you want to pick up with staff in this call. Kind regards Emily On 26 April 2012 09:47, Alice Jansen wrote: > Dear Review Team Members, > > In line with decisions reached during your call yesterday, *your session > with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (* > http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2). > An outlook invitation will follow shortly. > > Also note that per your decision, the call with ICANN Staff will take > place only if the Team has a list of specific discussion points. > > Please kindly* circulate the topics you would like to discuss by Friday, > 27 April ? 17:00 UTC* ( > http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17 > ) > > Thanks, > > Kind regards > > Alice > -- > *Alice Jansen* > Organizational Reviews Manager > *6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5* > *B-1040 Brussels* > *Belgium* > Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 > Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 > Skype: alice_jansen_icann > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > -- * * 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/753976ca/attachment.html From jbladel at godaddy.com Thu Apr 26 13:40:23 2012 From: jbladel at godaddy.com (James M. Bladel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 06:40:23 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] First Experience with WHOIS Message-ID: <20120426064022.9c1b16d3983f34082b49b9baf8cec04a.cd683c05b8.wbe@email00.secureserver.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/3ea635ae/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Thu Apr 26 14:30:12 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 07:30:12 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Proxy Privacy Discussion - Clean V attached Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, For your convenience, please find attached the following: * Proxy Privacy ? CLEAN: no comments, no track-changes, no mark-up * Proxy Privacy ? Comments in boxes: track-changes deleted, comments on content available along with in-text comments * Proxy Privacy - in?text comments: no track changes, no comments in boxes, in-text comments available These versions are available on your private wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Final+Report Please be kindly reminded that the final paragraph was flagged as contentious and that Peter volunteered to draft language for the Team's consideration. Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/55cb4039/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Proxy Privacy - CLEAN.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 25534 bytes Desc: Proxy Privacy - CLEAN.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/55cb4039/ProxyPrivacy-CLEAN.docx -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Proxy Privacy - Comments in boxes.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 27502 bytes Desc: Proxy Privacy - Comments in boxes.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/55cb4039/ProxyPrivacy-Commentsinboxes.docx -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Proxy Privacy - in-text comments.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 25346 bytes Desc: Proxy Privacy - in-text comments.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/55cb4039/ProxyPrivacy-in-textcomments.docx From Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au Fri Apr 27 06:26:43 2012 From: Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au (Nettlefold, Peter) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 16:26:43 +1000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A33526761AD@EMB01.dept.gov.au> Hello all, First, I want to say that the information about compliance resourcing and budget levels that we received was very welcome. While it was troubling that this took so much effort, and that it seemed to indicate some misunderstanding about compliance staffing levels by ICANN senior staff, the provision of this information appears to be a small step in the right direction. I also note that ICANN's website now contains far more information on its compliance function than it did when we began our work, which is also welcome. Beyond the question of resourcing levels, there are separate questions about how these resources are managed and structured. This is important because if ICANN can get the structure, lines of reporting, and staff incentives right, then I would expect that the rest of its compliance efforts would flow much more easily. In terms of specifics, I understand that the compliance team sits somewhere in ICANN's legal area, and hence reports in some capacity to the General Counsel. However, it is not clear to me how this works in practice, and what this means for lines of reporting, accountabilities, and staff incentives. For example: * Does the 'Head of the Contractual Compliance Team' make final decisions about compliance actions in all instances, or do these need to be cleared with, or vetted by, someone else (e.g. the General Counsel)? * If so, is there a threshold and/or criteria for taking responsibility for a compliance decision outside of the compliance team? * Are these processes and reporting lines clear and documented? * What are the responsibilities and incentives of the ultimate decision makers (particularly if they are outside of the compliance team) - e.g. are their incentives and responsibilities clear and/or exclusively compliance focused? If not, why not? How are any conflicts of incentives/interests resolved? Given the importance of an effective compliance effort to many of our recommendations, I would be interested to explore these questions on the call (noting that John Jeffrey is scheduled to attend). I hope this helps. Cheers, Peter From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Thursday, 26 April 2012 7:23 PM To: Alice Jansen Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff Dear all Just to support this prompt from Alice - please can you all let us have your agenda items for anything further you want to pick up with staff in this call. Kind regards Emily On 26 April 2012 09:47, Alice Jansen > wrote: Dear Review Team Members, In line with decisions reached during your call yesterday, your session with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2). An outlook invitation will follow shortly. Also note that per your decision, the call with ICANN Staff will take place only if the Team has a list of specific discussion points. Please kindly circulate the topics you would like to discuss by Friday, 27 April - 17:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17) Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -- [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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway products please visit www.axway.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120427/c922412a/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Fri Apr 27 06:31:24 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:31:24 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Kind reminder: CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please be kindly reminded to circulate items you would like to discuss with ICANN Staff by today - 17:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17) See below for more information. Thanks, Kind regards Alice From: Alice Jansen > To: "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Subject: CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff Dear Review Team Members, In line with decisions reached during your call yesterday, your session with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2). An outlook invitation will follow shortly. Also note that per your decision, the call with ICANN Staff will take place only if the Team has a list of specific discussion points. Please kindly circulate the topics you would like to discuss by Friday, 27 April ? 17:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17) Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/c163d928/attachment.html From emily at emilytaylor.eu Fri Apr 27 06:44:44 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 07:44:44 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] In-Reply-To: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A33526761AD@EMB01.dept.gov.au> References: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A33526761AD@EMB01.dept.gov.au> Message-ID: Thank you Peter Alice - can you confirm whether or not John Jeffrey is scheduled to attend the call? Kind regards Emily On 27 April 2012 07:26, Nettlefold, Peter wrote: > Hello all,**** > > ** ** > > First, I want to say that the information about compliance resourcing and > budget levels that we received was very welcome. While it was troubling > that this took so much effort, and that it seemed to indicate some > misunderstanding about compliance staffing levels by ICANN senior staff, > the provision of this information appears to be a small step in the right > direction. I also note that ICANN?s website now contains far more > information on its compliance function than it did when we began our work, > which is also welcome.**** > > ** ** > > Beyond the question of resourcing levels, there are separate questions > about how these resources are managed and structured. This is important > because if ICANN can get the structure, lines of reporting, and staff > incentives right, then I would expect that the rest of its compliance > efforts would flow much more easily. In terms of specifics, I understand > that the compliance team sits somewhere in ICANN?s legal area, and hence > reports in some capacity to the General Counsel. However, it is not clear > to me how this works in practice, and what this means for lines of > reporting, accountabilities, and staff incentives. For example:**** > > ** ** > > **? **Does the ?Head of the Contractual Compliance Team? make final > decisions about compliance actions in all instances, or do these need to be > cleared with, or vetted by, someone else (e.g. the General Counsel)? **** > > **? **If so, is there a threshold and/or criteria for taking > responsibility for a compliance decision outside of the compliance team? > **** > > **? **Are these processes and reporting lines clear and documented?* > *** > > **? **What are the responsibilities and incentives of the ultimate > decision makers (particularly if they are outside of the compliance team) ? > e.g. are their incentives and responsibilities clear and/or exclusively > compliance focused? If not, why not? How are any conflicts of > incentives/interests resolved?**** > > ** ** > > Given the importance of an effective compliance effort to many of our > recommendations, I would be interested to explore these questions on the > call (noting that John Jeffrey is scheduled to attend).**** > > ** ** > > I hope this helps.**** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > ** ** > > Peter**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] *On > Behalf Of *Emily Taylor > *Sent:* Thursday, 26 April 2012 7:23 PM > *To:* Alice Jansen > *Cc:* rt4-whois at icann.org > *Subject:* Re: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN > Staff**** > > ** ** > > Dear all**** > > ** ** > > Just to support this prompt from Alice - please can you all let us have > your agenda items for anything further you want to pick up with staff in > this call. **** > > ** ** > > Kind regards**** > > > Emily**** > > On 26 April 2012 09:47, Alice Jansen wrote:**** > > Dear Review Team Members,**** > > ** ** > > In line with decisions reached during your call yesterday, *your session > with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (* > http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2). > An outlook invitation will follow shortly.**** > > ** ** > > Also note that per your decision, the call with ICANN Staff will take > place only if the Team has a list of specific discussion points. **** > > ** ** > > Please kindly* circulate the topics you would like to discuss by Friday, > 27 April ? 17:00 UTC* ( > http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17 > )**** > > ** ** > > Thanks,**** > > ** ** > > Kind regards**** > > ** ** > > Alice **** > > -- **** > > *Alice Jansen***** > > Organizational Reviews Manager**** > > *6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5***** > > *B-1040 Brussels***** > > *Belgium***** > > Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64**** > > Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56**** > > Skype: alice_jansen*_*icann**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois**** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > -- > > > **** > > * > * > > 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713.**** > > ** ** > > > * > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > * > NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s) > and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the > intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy > all > copies of the original message. > > This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. > MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, > undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway > products please visit www.axway.com. > > * > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > * > -- * * 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120427/470b835e/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Fri Apr 27 06:50:27 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:50:27 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Recommendation 3 - Strategic Priority - consolidated draft Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please find attached the clean and consolidated version of the recommendation 3 ? Strategic Priority ? draft. This is also available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Final+Report Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/b9431577/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Strategic priority.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 19461 bytes Desc: Strategic priority.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120426/b9431577/Strategicpriority.docx From emily at emilytaylor.eu Fri Apr 27 14:01:52 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:01:52 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Compliance chapter - draft Message-ID: Hi there As discussed on my call with Peter this morning, I attach a first draft of the new Chapter 4, complete with Findings and Recommendations. I'm copying to the entire list so that you all have the opportunity to comment as soon as possible. Please do read this. It's core to our report. I have no pride of authorship, please let me have your frank feedback. There are some tracked changes at the end but really the whole thing is pretty new, so just read it through. It's only 9 pages. Can I have your final edits please by the end of Monday. 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120427/d9b5e5ff/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Compliance chapter (1).docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 46180 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120427/d9b5e5ff/Compliancechapter1.docx From alice.jansen at icann.org Fri Apr 27 16:06:01 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:06:01 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Emily, Yes, John Jeffrey will be on the call. Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann From: Emily Taylor > To: "Nettlefold, Peter" > Cc: Alice Jansen >, "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Thank you Peter Alice - can you confirm whether or not John Jeffrey is scheduled to attend the call? Kind regards Emily On 27 April 2012 07:26, Nettlefold, Peter > wrote: Hello all, First, I want to say that the information about compliance resourcing and budget levels that we received was very welcome. While it was troubling that this took so much effort, and that it seemed to indicate some misunderstanding about compliance staffing levels by ICANN senior staff, the provision of this information appears to be a small step in the right direction. I also note that ICANN?s website now contains far more information on its compliance function than it did when we began our work, which is also welcome. Beyond the question of resourcing levels, there are separate questions about how these resources are managed and structured. This is important because if ICANN can get the structure, lines of reporting, and staff incentives right, then I would expect that the rest of its compliance efforts would flow much more easily. In terms of specifics, I understand that the compliance team sits somewhere in ICANN?s legal area, and hence reports in some capacity to the General Counsel. However, it is not clear to me how this works in practice, and what this means for lines of reporting, accountabilities, and staff incentives. For example: ? Does the ?Head of the Contractual Compliance Team? make final decisions about compliance actions in all instances, or do these need to be cleared with, or vetted by, someone else (e.g. the General Counsel)? ? If so, is there a threshold and/or criteria for taking responsibility for a compliance decision outside of the compliance team? ? Are these processes and reporting lines clear and documented? ? What are the responsibilities and incentives of the ultimate decision makers (particularly if they are outside of the compliance team) ? e.g. are their incentives and responsibilities clear and/or exclusively compliance focused? If not, why not? How are any conflicts of incentives/interests resolved? Given the importance of an effective compliance effort to many of our recommendations, I would be interested to explore these questions on the call (noting that John Jeffrey is scheduled to attend). I hope this helps. Cheers, Peter From:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Thursday, 26 April 2012 7:23 PM To: Alice Jansen Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff Dear all Just to support this prompt from Alice - please can you all let us have your agenda items for anything further you want to pick up with staff in this call. Kind regards Emily On 26 April 2012 09:47, Alice Jansen > wrote: Dear Review Team Members, In line with decisions reached during your call yesterday, your session with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2). An outlook invitation will follow shortly. Also note that per your decision, the call with ICANN Staff will take place only if the Team has a list of specific discussion points. Please kindly circulate the topics you would like to discuss by Friday, 27 April ? 17:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17) Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -- 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway products please visit www.axway.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- [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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120427/fc7411ea/attachment.html From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Fri Apr 27 18:10:30 2012 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:10:30 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Compliance chapter - draft In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <90088312-F512-4B3B-8CBB-D4D8035B6652@paypal.com> I have read the updated draft and support it in its entirety. Well done Emily and members of the team. On Apr 27, 2012, at 8:01 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: Hi there As discussed on my call with Peter this morning, I attach a first draft of the new Chapter 4, complete with Findings and Recommendations. I'm copying to the entire list so that you all have the opportunity to comment as soon as possible. Please do read this. It's core to our report. I have no pride of authorship, please let me have your frank feedback. There are some tracked changes at the end but really the whole thing is pretty new, so just read it through. It's only 9 pages. Can I have your final edits please by the end of Monday. Kind regards 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. From susank at fb.com Fri Apr 27 20:22:33 2012 From: susank at fb.com (Susan Kawaguchi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:22:33 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: HI Alice, Sorry I have not responded to your request for agenda items. I would specifically like to discuss 4 sections of the current RAA 3.3.1 3.7.2 3.7.7.2 3.7.8 These all pertain to the accuracy of the WHOIS information and the registrar's and registrant's responsibilities. Looking forward to the call. Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Legal Dept. Phone - 650 485-6064 From: Alice Jansen > Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:06:01 -0700 To: Emily Taylor >, "Nettlefold, Peter" > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Hi Emily, Yes, John Jeffrey will be on the call. Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann From: Emily Taylor > To: "Nettlefold, Peter" > Cc: Alice Jansen >, "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Thank you Peter Alice - can you confirm whether or not John Jeffrey is scheduled to attend the call? Kind regards Emily On 27 April 2012 07:26, Nettlefold, Peter > wrote: Hello all, First, I want to say that the information about compliance resourcing and budget levels that we received was very welcome. While it was troubling that this took so much effort, and that it seemed to indicate some misunderstanding about compliance staffing levels by ICANN senior staff, the provision of this information appears to be a small step in the right direction. I also note that ICANN?s website now contains far more information on its compliance function than it did when we began our work, which is also welcome. Beyond the question of resourcing levels, there are separate questions about how these resources are managed and structured. This is important because if ICANN can get the structure, lines of reporting, and staff incentives right, then I would expect that the rest of its compliance efforts would flow much more easily. In terms of specifics, I understand that the compliance team sits somewhere in ICANN?s legal area, and hence reports in some capacity to the General Counsel. However, it is not clear to me how this works in practice, and what this means for lines of reporting, accountabilities, and staff incentives. For example: ? Does the ?Head of the Contractual Compliance Team? make final decisions about compliance actions in all instances, or do these need to be cleared with, or vetted by, someone else (e.g. the General Counsel)? ? If so, is there a threshold and/or criteria for taking responsibility for a compliance decision outside of the compliance team? ? Are these processes and reporting lines clear and documented? ? What are the responsibilities and incentives of the ultimate decision makers (particularly if they are outside of the compliance team) ? e.g. are their incentives and responsibilities clear and/or exclusively compliance focused? If not, why not? How are any conflicts of incentives/interests resolved? Given the importance of an effective compliance effort to many of our recommendations, I would be interested to explore these questions on the call (noting that John Jeffrey is scheduled to attend). I hope this helps. Cheers, Peter From:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Thursday, 26 April 2012 7:23 PM To: Alice Jansen Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] CIRCULATE DISCUSSION POINTS - Call with ICANN Staff Dear all Just to support this prompt from Alice - please can you all let us have your agenda items for anything further you want to pick up with staff in this call. Kind regards Emily On 26 April 2012 09:47, Alice Jansen > wrote: Dear Review Team Members, In line with decisions reached during your call yesterday, your session with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2). An outlook invitation will follow shortly. Also note that per your decision, the call with ICANN Staff will take place only if the Team has a list of specific discussion points. Please kindly circulate the topics you would like to discuss by Friday, 27 April ? 17:00 UTC (http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Circulate+your+discussion+points&iso=20120427T17) Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -- [X] 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway products please visit www.axway.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- [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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. _______________________________________________ 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/20120427/cea02914/attachment.html From kathy at kathykleiman.com Fri Apr 27 21:53:33 2012 From: kathy at kathykleiman.com (Kathy Kleiman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 17:53:33 -0400 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Executive Summary - with new Findings and Recommendations Text Message-ID: <4F9B155D.5010908@kathykleiman.com> Hi All, I sat down with three screens open and tried to work my way through the Executive Summary (as promised in our meeting Wed). I referenced our original report, slides from the Public Forum, texts that Alice has finalized, and Comment Summary that Alice prepared. In addition to a few edits to the text to remove a few "rough edges," I tried to cut and paste all the new texts for Findings and Recommendations. No promises, but I did the best I could :-)! Overall, I think this reads very well. I like how the findings and recommendations flow... and I think our work shows! /*If there are some quick edits over the weekend, I may put them in, but otherwise, I pass the pen to Alice, and ask her to post this with our other new sections for review and comment. */ Have a good weekend, Kathy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120427/3110ddcd/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Executive summary kk ed.docx Type: application/x-msword Size: 50812 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120427/3110ddcd/Executivesummarykked.docx From emily at emilytaylor.eu Sat Apr 28 10:31:26 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 11:31:26 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Executive Summary - with new Findings and Recommendations Text In-Reply-To: <4F9B155D.5010908@kathykleiman.com> References: <4F9B155D.5010908@kathykleiman.com> Message-ID: Hi Kathy Thank you for bringing this work forward. Good, minimalist work on the Exec summary, and I like what you've done on the studies, although personally I liked the previous language. I would be in favour of reverting to the bold statement about the system being broken and needing fixing. It was picked up in many of the articles about the draft report, and it now reads as if we've changed our mind about this, and it's a bit too watered down. Re-reading the situation on IDNs makes me believe strongly that we need to convey in simple terms a sense of *urgency.* * * It would be great- and easier to see what's happening, if the agreed findings and recommendations could be accepted (ie no longer in tracked changes) so that we can see clearly what is new. Alice - could you do that please? Also, Alice, for completeness we need to include the findings and recommendations from the new Compliance Chapter that I sent around yesterday - please have that marked up as people have not yet considered it. Finally, Kathy you mentioned that the WDRP recommendation has now been replaced by the new compliance recommendations. Actually, we decided in Costa Rica to keep the WDRP recommendation but to move it into data accuracy, where it fits more logically. Alice - could you do that please. Keep the text as it is, not marked up, but just put a comment in to highlight that it's been moved. Thanks again, Kathy, good work. Emily On 27 April 2012 22:53, Kathy Kleiman wrote: > Hi All, > I sat down with three screens open and tried to work my way through the > Executive Summary (as promised in our meeting Wed). I referenced our > original report, slides from the Public Forum, texts that Alice has > finalized, and Comment Summary that Alice prepared. In addition to a few > edits to the text to remove a few "rough edges," I tried to cut and paste > all the new texts for Findings and Recommendations. No promises, but I did > the best I could :-)! > > Overall, I think this reads very well. I like how the findings and > recommendations flow... and I think our work shows! > *If there are some quick edits over the weekend, I may put them in, but > otherwise, I pass the pen to Alice, and ask her to post this with our other > new sections for review and comment. * > > Have a good weekend, > Kathy > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > -- * * 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120428/90e0de93/attachment.html From emily at emilytaylor.eu Sat Apr 28 11:59:26 2012 From: emily at emilytaylor.eu (Emily Taylor) Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 12:59:26 +0100 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Executive summary, findings and recommendations - revised Message-ID: Dear all Thank you Kathy for your work on combining our discussions, findings and recommendations into a single document along with the Executive Summary. I have gone through it all now, and attach a marked up draft, which I hope does the following: 1. I have marked as accepted all the text which I believe has been agreed by the team on our previous calls - that is the wording of findings and recommendations on strategic priority, data accuracy, most of the wording on privacy proxy (apart from last para), the common interface, and the new ones at the end on progress reporting. I may have got this wrong, and hope that others will review carefully. 2. I have marked up new text: - there were some sections of the old exec summary which I thought we could reintroduce since they make important points on (1) consensus building and (2) consumer trust. - The text on strategic priority which is new, recalls our agreement on the last call. This is basically Susan's text. Having reviewed the whole recommendation, it makes sense (I think) to pull out some duplicate ideas (on incentives), and also to put the reporting bit at the end. - I added a few words into Kathy's new text introducing Outreach (rec 3). I like Kathy's text and recommend that it is accepted. - Whole new section on Compliance. As reported on our last call, we've had an outline in circulation for some time, but only had the opportunity to discuss in our small team yesterday. This is our proposal, which is lifted from the larger chapter that was circulated yesterday. - I added the WDRP text (which was quite a popular draft recommendation!) into data accuracy recommendations. I recall from our discussions in Costa Rica that we agreed it was a bit out of place as the second recommendation, and that it fitted better as a sub-section on accuracy. Having put in that recommendation, I saw that we had no text in the findings to anchor it. Taking Kathy's approach, I found the paragraph in our original draft report (Compliance chapter - findings), which described the problem we perceive. - The paragraph on data validation (drafted by James, Lynn and me) is now at the end of the findings on data accuracy, as agreed on our last call. Otherwise, I recommend Kathy's changes are accepted (I've left them marked up so all can see and comment). Lastly, Kathy - you asked about "de-accreditation", and my recollection is that we noted James' draft and helpful explanations on this, and agreed that we didn't need to go further or add new text into the recommendations. Again, if I've misunderstood, please shout. All: Would be grateful for your input on this as soon as possible. Even if it's a short e-mail saying "I read it; I agree" ;-) 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120428/7e6d2346/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Executive summary et kk ed.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 63049 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120428/7e6d2346/Executivesummaryetkked.docx From alice.jansen at icann.org Sat Apr 28 19:34:00 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 12:34:00 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] action items list - updated Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please find enclosed the most recent version of your action items list (also available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Action+Items+-+Spring+2012) Subcategories have been added for your convenience. Thanks, Kind regards Alice Action Items - Spring 2012 Data Accuracy SIGNED OFF [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/smile.gif] * Review and submit language of recs 5-9 (Data Accuracy) - Susan [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Susan to circulate findings (3/4 paragraphs), agreed recommendations and add wordings (+ define the substantial/full failure terms) * Susan and James to add footnotes references * Susan to delete recommendation 7 and to move it to overarching recommendation 21 (20 with renumbering), to circulate draft to Team for comments - by 25 April[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Note: timeline discussion now component of this discussion[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Alice to clean the document[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] Proxy/Privacy Recommendations * Propose alternative language for Proxy and Privacy recommendations - James + Susan + Peter + Seth + Lynn ; [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Subteam to review comments submitted and to circulate a draft - by 25 April[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Peter to submit comments in writing - by 19 April [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Kathy to circulate language to transcribe discussion held during call - by 19 April[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Subteam to comment and finalize - by 24 April[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Subteam to go back to transcripts (Dakar) regarding rights/responsibilities discussions * Alice to circulate clean version[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Peter to propose new language for contentious paragraph * Review Team Members to submit comments on clean version Recommendation 3 - Strategic Priority * Hold the pen on rec. 3 strategic priority -- Emily ; [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Emily to integrate comments received by next call (note: overlap with Compliance Subteam)[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Susan to put forward some language on senior position - by 25 April [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Alice to merge the two assignments, to circulate to Emily and Kathy for final approval and then submit to list for comments[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Review Team Members to provide comments on consolidated draft Deaccreditation CLOSED - NO ACTION NEEDED * Find text on accreditation-- Kathy ; + Hierarchy of enforcement - James [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * James to circulate language (incentives> Emily in V2[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Review Team to submit comments Comments * Review comments submitted to the Team and Denise's recommendation tracking document [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Review Team Members to respond to Staff's comments for Community's information Call with ICANN Staff * Circulate discussion points by Friday, 7 April - 17:00 UTC[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] Timeline NO ACTION REQUIRED * Draft some language on timeframes and implementation paths in light of the AoC - Susan + Lynn [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] AGREEMENT * Susan to add agreed language to data accuracy recommendation[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Emily to make a decision on timeline of final report[https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] Administrative * Revive call schedule (calls to take place on Wednesdays once a week; first call to take place on Wed, 28 March) ? Alice [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] * Denise to circulate draft advisory 2010 and material (recording, notes etc) of Cartagena discussion on this subject matter [https://community.icann.org/images/icons/emoticons/check.gif] -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120428/0c2a0a75/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Sun Apr 29 12:28:11 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 05:28:11 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Agenda - call with ICANN Staff Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, As you know, your call with ICANN Staff is scheduled for Monday, 30 April at 22:00 UTC (time converter at: http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+Policy+RT%3E%3CICANN+STAFF&iso=20120430T22&ah=2) Please find enclosed the draft agenda (also available at https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Call+with+ICANN+Staff+-+30+April+2012) Thanks, Kind regards Alice 1. Roll-call & apologies 2. Adopt agenda 3. Discuss the RAA sections that pertain to the accuracy of WHOIS information and the registrar's and registrant's responsibilities i.e.: * 3.3.1 * 3.7.2 * 3.7.7.2 * 3.7.8 4. Discuss Compliance Team & decision-making * Does the "Head of the Contractual Compliance Team" make final decisions about compliance actions in all instances or do these need to be cleared with, or vetted by, someone else (e.g. the General Counsel)? * If so, is there a threshold and/or criteria for taking responsibility for a compliance decision outside of the compliance team? * Are these processes and reporting lines clear and documented? * What are the responsibilities and incentives of the ultimate decision makers (particularly if they are outside of the compliance team) ? e.g. are their incentives and responsibilities clear and/or exclusively compliance focused? If not, why not? How are any conflicts of incentives/interests resolved? 5. A.O.B -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120429/eea10d37/attachment.html From alice.jansen at icann.org Sun Apr 29 14:22:49 2012 From: alice.jansen at icann.org (Alice Jansen) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 07:22:49 -0700 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Submit feedback: Compliance chapter - draft In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Review Team Members, Please be kindly reminded to submit your comments and final edits on the Compliance chapter circulated by Emily (attached and also available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Final+Report) by tomorrow ? Monday, 30 April - end of your business day. Thanks, Kind regards Alice From: Emily Taylor > To: "Nettlefold, Peter" >, "Smith, Bill" >, Mikhail Yakushev > Cc: "rt4-whois at icann.org" > Subject: [Rt4-whois] Compliance chapter - draft Hi there As discussed on my call with Peter this morning, I attach a first draft of the new Chapter 4, complete with Findings and Recommendations. I'm copying to the entire list so that you all have the opportunity to comment as soon as possible. Please do read this. It's core to our report. I have no pride of authorship, please let me have your frank feedback. There are some tracked changes at the end but really the whole thing is pretty new, so just read it through. It's only 9 pages. Can I have your final edits please by the end of Monday. Kind regards 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120429/0353920a/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Compliance chapter (1).docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 46180 bytes Desc: Compliance chapter (1).docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120429/0353920a/Compliancechapter1.docx From bill.smith at paypal-inc.com Sun Apr 29 17:10:34 2012 From: bill.smith at paypal-inc.com (Smith, Bill) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 17:10:34 +0000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] Executive summary, findings and recommendations - revised In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <28EAF73D-B4FA-4BDB-A1CC-1586CFA65FA5@paypal.com> Read it, agree. One suggested change and a comment for a change. 1) Request changing number in the IP address section to number. 2) RFC for WHOIS is not plicy See attached for specifics. On Apr 28, 2012, at 4:59 AM, Emily Taylor wrote: Dear all Thank you Kathy for your work on combining our discussions, findings and recommendations into a single document along with the Executive Summary. I have gone through it all now, and attach a marked up draft, which I hope does the following: 1. I have marked as accepted all the text which I believe has been agreed by the team on our previous calls - that is the wording of findings and recommendations on strategic priority, data accuracy, most of the wording on privacy proxy (apart from last para), the common interface, and the new ones at the end on progress reporting. I may have got this wrong, and hope that others will review carefully. 2. I have marked up new text: - there were some sections of the old exec summary which I thought we could reintroduce since they make important points on (1) consensus building and (2) consumer trust. - The text on strategic priority which is new, recalls our agreement on the last call. This is basically Susan's text. Having reviewed the whole recommendation, it makes sense (I think) to pull out some duplicate ideas (on incentives), and also to put the reporting bit at the end. - I added a few words into Kathy's new text introducing Outreach (rec 3). I like Kathy's text and recommend that it is accepted. - Whole new section on Compliance. As reported on our last call, we've had an outline in circulation for some time, but only had the opportunity to discuss in our small team yesterday. This is our proposal, which is lifted from the larger chapter that was circulated yesterday. - I added the WDRP text (which was quite a popular draft recommendation!) into data accuracy recommendations. I recall from our discussions in Costa Rica that we agreed it was a bit out of place as the second recommendation, and that it fitted better as a sub-section on accuracy. Having put in that recommendation, I saw that we had no text in the findings to anchor it. Taking Kathy's approach, I found the paragraph in our original draft report (Compliance chapter - findings), which described the problem we perceive. - The paragraph on data validation (drafted by James, Lynn and me) is now at the end of the findings on data accuracy, as agreed on our last call. Otherwise, I recommend Kathy's changes are accepted (I've left them marked up so all can see and comment). Lastly, Kathy - you asked about "de-accreditation", and my recollection is that we noted James' draft and helpful explanations on this, and agreed that we didn't need to go further or add new text into the recommendations. Again, if I've misunderstood, please shout. All: Would be grateful for your input on this as soon as possible. Even if it's a short e-mail saying "I read it; I agree" ;-) Kind regards 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. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713. _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Executive summary et kk ed1.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 62116 bytes Desc: Executive summary et kk ed1.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120429/efc62e01/Executivesummaryetkked1.docx From Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au Sun Apr 29 23:58:43 2012 From: Peter.Nettlefold at dbcde.gov.au (Nettlefold, Peter) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 09:58:43 +1000 Subject: [Rt4-whois] FW: Recommendation 3 - Strategic Priority - consolidated draft [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Message-ID: <636771A7F4383E408C57A0240B5F8D4A3352676482@EMB01.dept.gov.au> Hello all, Thanks again to Susan and everyone else who contributed to these findings and recommendations, which I fully support. I spotted a couple of minor typos, and have made a couple of minor edits to coordinate/cross-reference with the compliance findings and recommendations that have also been circulated for comment. I hope this helps. Cheers, Peter From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alice Jansen Sent: Friday, 27 April 2012 4:50 PM To: rt4-whois at icann.org Subject: [Rt4-whois] Recommendation 3 - Strategic Priority - consolidated draft Dear Review Team Members, Please find attached the clean and consolidated version of the recommendation 3 - Strategic Priority - draft. This is also available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Final+Report Thanks, Kind regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway products please visit www.axway.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120430/a38dc870/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Strategic priority.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 19894 bytes Desc: Strategic priority.docx Url : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120430/a38dc870/Strategicpriority.docx -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt Url: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120430/a38dc870/ATT00001.txt