Re: [bc-gnso] for expedited review: BC comment on ICANN's Roadmap for a new WHOIS Protocol (SAC 051)

["Marilyn Cade " <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

It is great to see the draft. Thanks to Bill, and to you, Steve. 
I especially like the improvements on the "names" for the new protocol/service, 
etc. 


Also, Steve, members could propose small changes that can be incorporated, is 
that right? 

And then on reply, the BC can do more detailed comments. 

Can we add a statement that the new process of initial and reply rounds are 
helpful, but that the initial round is too short for corporations, businesses, 
and undoubtedly others. This was raised by various BC members in Costa Rica, 
and we need to find various places to make that statement.

Would you accept that as a "friendly" enhancement?


In my view, but not to address here, one additional problem is when ICANN 
counts the days during an ICANN meeting as part of one of the "allocated days", 
since we are all even more burdened during those times! 


Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:06:14 
To: <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [bc-gnso] for expedited review: BC comment on ICANN's Roadmap for a
 new WHOIS Protocol (SAC 051)

ICANN has an open public comment on a roadmap for development and adoption of a 
successor to the Whois protocol. The comment period and documents are described 
here 
<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/sac-051-draft-roadmap-18feb12-en.htm>
 . 













BC member Bill Smith (Paypal) circulated his initial thoughts on a BC comment 
back on 6-Mar.   At our Costa Rica meeting we discussed Bill's draft and asked 
for volunteers to refine into a BC submission.   Everyone's been pretty busy 
lately, so this task fell to me and I've only now turned to it. 


A 2-page draft BC comment is attached.  












These comments are due 8-Apr.   Bill's comments went to the BC list on 6-Mar, 
but the attached draft is presented to you with for expedited member review 
over the next 5 days.   










If any BC member objects to the BC filing the attached draft comment , please 
REPLY ALL and indicate your objection and reason.   If any member objections 
are noted before 8-Apr, we will extend the review period.   This would mean our 
comments are submitted late, but might still be considered. 


If no objections are noted we will post the attached draft to ICANN on the 
closing date of 8-Apr. 



Thanks again to Bill Smith for taking the lead on this. 




Steve DelBianco 
vice chair for policy coordination, BC