<html>
<body>
I can only give you my opinion. I cannot say whether our position is
identical to that of SSAC, but I cannot see anything in that document
that I do not believe is in support of our needs. I do not think that we
have the bacndwidth to work from scratch at the moment, and in a timely
manner. Voicing support for this report was a quick action that I
believed we could take without compromising our position.<br><br>
I would be interested in understanding what we do not agree with and we
could certainly add those caveats if there was agreement.<br><br>
And thank you for jumping in! :-)<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 28/08/2018 05:09 AM, Joanna Kulesza wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Thank you Alan and Andrei for
the updates. <br><br>
Please excuse my newcomer confusion - not meaning to stir the pot here -
but I'm wondering how close At-Large's/ALAC's position is to that of the
SSAC? Do we agree with their report 100%? My initial thinking is that
representing users, we might want a somewhat more diversified approach
than that offered by the SSAC, ensuring full GDPR compliance (I'm happy
to elaborate if needed). Also, would it make sense to take on the
positions of other communities in our statement, if only for the sake of
future consensus building? As already briefly mentioned to Alan, I'm
happy to help with the drafting if needed. <br><br>
Best to all,<br>
Joanna Kulesza <br>
--------------------------------<br>
Joanna Kulesza, PhD<br>
assistant professor of international law and Internet governance <br>
Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Lodz<br>
Kopcinskiego Street 8/12, 90-232 Lodz, Poland<br>
publications:
<a href="https://unilodz.academia.edu/JoannaKulesza/">
https://unilodz.academia.edu/JoannaKulesza/</a><br>
website:
<a href="https://pl.linkedin.com/in/kuleszajoanna">
https://pl.linkedin.com/in/kuleszajoanna</a><br><br>
wt., 28 sie 2018 o 08:27 Alan Greenberg
<<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>
> napisał(a):
<dl>
<dd>As I mentioned on the ALAC call that has just completed, all EPDP
participant groups have been given the opportunity to provide "early
input" into the EPDP. <br>
<dd>So far, the SSAC and the NCSG has done so. Their input can be found
at
<a href="https://community.icann.org/x/Ag9pBQ">
https://community.icann.org/x/Ag9pBQ</a>.<br>
<dd>The SSAC's input consisted of their recent report SAC101. A copy is
attached for your convenience.<br>
<dd>I would like to suggest that the ALAC submit a statement saying that
we support SAC101, as it is in line with our stated position of trying to
ensure that security professionals and law enforcement have adequate
access to WHOIS/RDS data.<br>
<dd>I open the floor for discussion and will initiate a Consensus Call
later in the week.<br>
<dd>Alan
<dd>_______________________________________________
<dd>ALAC mailing list
<dd><a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org">
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a>
<dd>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" eudora="autourl">
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br>
<dd>At-Large Online:
<a href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org">http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a>
<dd>ALAC Working Wiki:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)">
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</a>
</dl></blockquote></body>
</html>