[At-Large] R: Implementing WHOIS Requirements per RAA 2013

Mon Aug 5 00:36:35 UTC 2013

Thank you Karl and Roberto for your comments

Roberto, the location of the ARDS is absolutely front and centre as an issue. Some of the immediate comments  I heard was to insist the database NOT be located in the US (followed by a long list of other undesirable locations).  I would imagine places like Geneva or Brussels (or Finland) would be more easily accepted.  But I think the better solution is to describe the venue in terms of strict and enforceable (and enforced) privacy laws. - set benchmark criteria at the least.

Other issues that were discussed on the day included enforcement - by whom (ICANN's compliance department has not covered itself with glory on this one), and defining who can have access to what data. 

Holly

On 05/08/2013, at 10:13 AM, Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> I can provide one point for thoughts, that ALAC might think to include in
> the feedback.
> During the presentation, and in the text of the report, there is a
> description of how to design access to data in a way that it will be
> dependent on the rights the accessing entity has.
> However, there is one entity that might gain full access to all data, and
> this is the government of the country where the database will be physically
> located.
> I had a chat with Michele on this, and he assured me that this is one point
> that came already out, and will be discussed to find an acceptable solution.
> I have no clue about the dynamics of the WG, I am sure, knowing Carlton,
> that our points have been expressed loudly, but maybe a little help from an
> official ALAC statement can help.
> Let's put it this way: other constituencies and stakeholder groups will not
> be shy in making statements that will push further their opinion and needs,
> beyond what was the acceptable consensus of the WG: why should ALAC avoid
> providing feedback? Michele is absolutely right when he calls for further
> input, he knows some will speak up anyway, it is fair if all do.
> Elaborating on the localization of the database, that we know is an issue,
> is there something we can suggest? We do not need to provide the technical
> solution, but can we spell out the requirements for making sure that no
> specific entity will be more equal than others?
> Cheers,
> Roberto
> 
> 
>> -----Messaggio originale-----
>> Da: at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-
>> bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] Per conto di Holly Raiche
>> Inviato: domenica 4 agosto 2013 23:08
>> A: At-Large Worldwide
>> Oggetto: Re: [At-Large] Implementing WHOIS Requirements per RAA 2013
>> 
>> Hi Carlton
>> 
>> Thanks for this.
>> 
>> My one concern about ALAC not developing its own input is that, at the
>> GNSO meeting Evan and I attended (and where Michele presented), he
>> specifically asked, indeed pleaded for feedback from everyone.
>> 
>> I am sure that you will be taking the views that we have discussed to the
>> EWG. But I think my question is whether it would not make sense to have
>> official ALAC input on this particular proposal.  It is different enough
> so that
>> ALAC statements in the past are not applicable to this proposal.   And, as
> the
>> discussion between Garth, you, Evan, Rinalia and I showed in Durban, there
>> are different views on the proposal within  ALAC.
>> 
>> For example, should we give the many reforms to the RAA a chance to work
>> first? Should compliance be left to the compliance area within ICANN or to
>> this new proposed ARDS?  And what happens to the RAA requirements on
>> verification if the ARDS takes over that function, as well as being the
>> gatekeeper for access to data.  It is a new road with much to commend it
> but,
>> as our discussions showed, some real reservations, and some real
>> differences even within ALAC.
>> 
>> I trust you to reflect those differences, but worry that you don't have
> official
>> ALAC statements to support what you are saying.
>> 
>> Just please keep us informed of ongoing discussions.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Holly
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 05/08/2013, at 6:23 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Holly:
>>> I should think not; this was an advisory and in any event, we have
>>> spoken often and endorsed the collection of the entire dataset as
>>> defined in the specs.
>>> 
>>> Regarding the EWG work, there was talk of placing an official ALAC
>>> response to invitation for comments.  Since I'm a member of the EWG,
>>> speaking aloud to myself might very well be considered just desserts
>>> in some quarters and as such not to be encouraged. So I will exempt
> myself
>> from that process.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> -Carlton
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ==============================
>>> Carlton A Samuels
>>> Mobile: 876-818-1799
>>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
>>> =============================
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Holly Raiche
>> <h.raiche at internode.on.net>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Carlton
>>>> 
>>>> It doesn't look like they are looking for any input from anyone -
>>>> except registrars. Am I right?
>>>> 
>>>> And a related question - is ALAC making a statement of the EWG
>>>> Initial Report.  I don't see anything on the policy page, but my
>>>> understanding was that they were looking for feedback?
>>>> 
>>>> Holly
>>>> On 02/08/2013, at 2:50 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> See the details here:
>>>>> http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-
>> 31jul13-en.h
>>>>> tm
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Carlton
>>>>> 
>>>>> ==============================
>>>>> Carlton A Samuels
>>>>> Mobile: 876-818-1799
>>>>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
>>>>> =============================
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> At-Large mailing list
>>>>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>>>>> 
>>>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> At-Large mailing list
>>>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>>>> 
>>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> At-Large mailing list
>>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>>> 
>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>> 
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> 
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org