[Rt4-whois] Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC

Wed May 2 20:39:15 UTC 2012

The proposed change sounds very sensible to me. Thanks Susan.

Seth

From: Susan Kawaguchi [mailto:susank at fb.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 9:26 AM
To: Seth M Reiss; 'Alice Jansen'; rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC

Hello All, 

I have quickly reviewed the chapter edits and insertion of Steve Crocker's
comments.   The only comments I have relate to page 26 

Data accuracy - In 2009-10, ICANN commissioned a study on data accuracy,
which was undertaken by the National Opinion Research Council of the
University of Chicago (NORC) (the "NORC WHOIS Data Accuracy Study 2009/10").
The study found that only 23% of WHOIS records were fully accurate [SMR1] <>
[SMR1]and over 20% were completely inaccurate.  The[Sk2] <>  [Sk2] low level
of accurate WHOIS data is unacceptable, and decreases consumer trust in the
WHOIS, in the industry of which ICANN is a quasi-regulator, and therefore in
ICANN itself.  The organisation's priority in relation to WHOIS should be to
improve WHOIS data accuracy and sustain improvement over time.  It should
develop a methodology to measure overall accuracy, publish performance
targets, and actively collaborate with registrars and registrants to improve
data accuracy.

In the corresponding recommendation we changed the terms to those defined in
the NORC study.  Do we want to use that vocabulary here along with the
definitions from the NORC study or leave this paragraph as it is.  

No Failure Met all three criteria fully - deliverable address, name linked
to address, and registrant confrimed ownership and correctness of all
details during interview

Full failure - Failed on all criteria - undeliverable address and
unlinkable, missing, or patently false name, unable to locate to interview

I have suggested a revision below in yellow. 

 Data accuracy - In 2009-10, ICANN commissioned a study on data accuracy,
which was undertaken by the National Opinion Research Council of the
University of Chicago (NORC) (the "NORC WHOIS Data Accuracy Study 2009/10").
The study found that only 23% of WHOIS records met the study's criteria for
No Failure and over 20% were categorized as Full Failure.  The[low level of
accurate WHOIS data is unacceptable, and decreases consumer trust in the
WHOIS, in the industry of which ICANN is a quasi-regulator, and therefore in
ICANN itself.  The organisation's priority in relation to WHOIS should be to
improve WHOIS data accuracy and sustain improvement over time.  It should
develop a methodology to measure overall accuracy, publish performance
targets, and actively collaborate with registrars and registrants to improve
data accuracy.

I am open to changing it to something similar to what I have suggested or
leaving it as it since the community knew, for the most part,  what we were
talking about. 

Susan Kawaguchi

Domain Name Manager

Facebook Legal Dept.

Phone - 650 485-6064

From: Seth M Reiss <seth.reiss at lex-ip.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 19:46:12 -1000
To: 'Alice Jansen' <alice.jansen at icann.org>, <rt4-whois at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC

Chapter edits (minimalist approach employed).

Seth

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On
Behalf Of Alice Jansen
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 11:53 PM
To: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: [Rt4-whois] Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC
Importance: High

Dear Review Team Members,

As you know, your next call is scheduled for Wednesday, 2 May at 06:00 UTC
(time
converter:http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+RT+-+2+
May+-+06%3A00+UTC
<http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+RT+-+2+May+-+06%
3A00+UTC&iso=20120502T06&ah=1&am=30> &iso=20120502T06&ah=1&am=30)

Please find enclosed the agenda, also available at:
https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+30+-+2+May+2012 

Thanks,

Kind regards

Alice

-----------

Tomorrow's call will be our last as a review team, and our task is to sign
off the final report. If you are unable to make the call, please indicate
your agreement or any comments on the executive summary and compliance
chapter if you have not already done so.*

1. Executive summary

- Sign off general text

- Discuss outstanding proposals for amendments and reach conclusions

- IDN recommendations - final text for approval.

2. Compliance chapter

- Sign off general text

3. Full report (other chapters)

- Report from Seth on edits (minimalist approach)

- Sign off by RT

4. Steps to publication

- Clean up tracked changes and combine into single document (Alice)

- Final check for sense (Alice, Emily, Kathy)

- Review Appendices and add new material as referenced (table showing public
comments, additional Compliance documents referenced in the new chapter),
and agree publication date for appendices (proposal - 11 May)

5. AOB and vote of thanks for ICANN staff support.

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

* To date, received from Bill, Kathy, Peter and Susan.

-- 

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 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2169 / Virus Database: 2411/4973 - Release Date: 05/02/12

  _____  

 [SMR1] <> Crocker asks for a definition here.

 [Sk2] <> In the corresponding recommendation we changed the terms to those
defined in the NORC study.  Do we want to use that vocabulary here along
with the definitions from the NORC study or leave this paragraph as it is.  

No Failure Met all three criteria fully - deliverable address, name linked
to address, and registrant confrimed ownership and correctness of all
details during interview

Full failure - Failed on all criteria - undeliverable address and
unlinkable, missing, or patently false name, unable to locate to interview

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120502/efc87d18/attachment.html 