[ALAC] Fwd: Re: RDS Review

[Holly Raiche]

My first response - OMG (to be polite)

So Tijani, Leon and everyone else who thinks widening the Terms of Reference is a good idea - I trust you are also putting your hands up - and trust me- these issues have been discussed for YEARS (my life with WHOIS goes back to 2009) so you’ll be involve for YEARS.  Just ask Carlton.

Alan - if you were at the WG in Hyderabad where expanded terms of reference were discussed, you know what I think.  I said so at the time to everyone at the meeting.    And I could go on - but won’t.  I frankly don’t have time for the existing RDS AND the review, so I think one of us should stay on the RDS and the other, tackle this insanity (while keeping an eye on the P/P services implementation team and the  implementation of the RDAP).

My suggested response (in case you haven’t guessed) is that anything more than a TINY review is a HUGE ask - and not just on ALAC.  At least, with the others, attending all the meetings is part of what they do.  But if they want anything representing the interests of end users, they can pay for the hours it takes (and, for those of us on this side of the globe, weekly calls beginning at 0400 hrs - for 90 minutes.  Once Sydney if off daylight savings and the US is on daylight savings, its 0200 - 0330 every week.)

SHEER BLOODY MADNESS

Holly


On 9 Jan 2017, at 1:07 pm, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:

> I am attaching a document from the GNSO on the proposed RDS (formerly WHOIS) Review to be started very soon.
> 
> You will recall that we previously had approved a narrowing of the scope of the RDS Review to focus just on the extent to which the previous WHOIS Review Recommendations had been implemented. This GNSO proposal widens the scope considerably. Although there is no question that the wider scope is interesting and ptentially useful, it will also require far more community involvement that the earlier proposal.
> 
> The call for volunteers was to close on 13 January and a decision needs to be made quickly on exactly what the Review should be.
> 
> Comments please, with some urgency.
> 
> Alan
> 
> 
>> From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com>
>> Subject: Re: RDS Review
>> Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 17:42:53 +0000
>> 
>> 
>> Dear Karen and Community Leaders –
>> 
>> The GNSO Council, working with its component Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, has produced this document (attached), which outlines our feedback and concerns with the proposed “limited scope” for the upcoming RDS review.  The document was submitted to ICANN Staff, and sharing with this team for your reference.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>> J.
>> ----------------
>> James Bladel
>> GNSO Chair
> <GNSO Council feedback on RDS.pdf>_______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> 
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)