Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert Working Group for Directory Services ( new Whois)
Sorry for that. Jetlag. j. scott evans - head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. - 408.349.1385 - jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx ________________________________ From: "Smith, Bill" <bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: J. Scott Evans <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2013 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert Working Group for Directory Services ( new Whois) J. Scott, Could you send me the doc? I can't seem to locate the most current version. Thanks, Bill On Aug 5, 2013, at 3:25 PM, "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Dear All: > > >I have reviewed Bill's emails, his comments and those added by Stephane. I am >fine with Stephane's comments so long as we all feel this wouldn't be a >political bombshell (however realistic and practical it may be). > > >As for Bill's suggestion about "entities". I have attempted to suggest >language that I think assuage my concerns. Bill? > > >J. Scott > >j. scott evans - head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. - >408.349.1385 - jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx > > > > > >________________________________ > From: "Smith, Bill" <bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >To: "<stephvg@xxxxxxxxx>" <stephvg@xxxxxxxxx> >Cc: J. Scott Evans <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>; "Smith, Bill" ><bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; >"bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx list" <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx> >Sent: Monday, August 5, 2013 12:37 PM >Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert Working >Group for Directory Services ( new Whois) > > > >I have attached an updated version. I'm quite happy with Stephane's addition >but would ask J. Scott to offer alternative language for "entities" and to >look with Yahoo to get a better understanding of the complexity and difficulty >of operating a large-scale directory infrastructure, especially one that is by >its nature sensitive. > > >(see my comments within J Scott's comments) > > >Any move from a freely available public WHOIS system to one that is mediated >and subject to access controls requires careful consideration. Implementing a >secure, internet-scale, global directory for "accredited" security >professionals will be no small task. > > > > >On Aug 5, 2013, at 11:50 AM, <stephvg@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >I have added to J Scott's latest redraft a bit at the end about the >possibility of extending this work to the cc space. >> >> >>The wording is not perfect IMO, but hopefully the intent is clear. >> >> >>Thanks, >> >> >> >> >>Stéphane Van Gelder >>Chairman and Managing Director/Fondateur >>STEPHANE VAN GELDER CONSULTING >> >>T (FR): +33 (0)6 20 40 55 89 >>T (UK): +44 (0)7583 457053 >>Skype: SVANGELDER >>www.StephaneVanGelder.com >>---------------- >>Follow us on Twitter: @stephvg and "like" us >>on Facebook: www.facebook.com/DomainConsultant >> >>LinkedIn: fr.linkedin.com/in/domainconsultant/ >> >>Le 5 août 2013 à 18:58, "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit : >> >>Bill and team: >>> >>> >>>I have re-reviewed the draft with Bill's suggested revisions. I have >>>attached a redline showing my thoughts on top of Bill's suggested edits. >>> >>> >>>J. Scott >>> >>>j. scott evans - head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. - >>>408.349.1385 - jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>________________________________ >>> From: "Smith, Bill" <bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>To: "stephvg@xxxxxxxxx" <stephvg@xxxxxxxxx> >>>Cc: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx list" >>><bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx> >>>Sent: Monday, August 5, 2013 9:12 AM >>>Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert Working >>>Group for Directory Services ( new Whois) >>> >>> >>> >>>+1 >>> >>> >>>Attached is a marked up version of the document. I have attempted to replace >>>web and website with Internet and service (generally) and hope that my >>>changes read properly. I believe it important to make the distinction >>>between the web and Internet since the ARDS is used for much more than the >>>web. >>> >>> >>>I also included some comments and additions that I believe are necessary to >>>include. In particular, I disagree with the assertion that there is no >>>foundation for the belief that the scale of the ARDS make it vulnerable. >>>Internet entities are vulnerable regardless of size but as they grow, they >>>become increasingly attractive targets. ARDS will be attractive - or the >>>Registrar community has been disingenuous about the scale of SPAM, customer >>>loss, etc. that results from harvesting information via WHOIS. >>> >>> >>>I have also added text related to Gated Access and concerns related to data >>>aggregation and operation of such a critical resource necessarily dependent >>>on PII of security professionals. These individuals face very real risks >>>given the work they do, those they "oppose", and the penalties imposed for >>>crimes they uncover. >>> >>> >>>I hope we will consider the changes I have proposed. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>On Aug 3, 2013, at 3:51 PM, stephvg@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> >>>Thank you Steve, Laura, Susan, J Scott and Elisa for a well drafted document >>>that I believe is perfectly inline with business users interests as defined >>>by our charter. >>>> >>>> >>>>If I might make a suggestion, even though it's out of scope of the EWG's >>>>work, I would love to see something in our opening comments about the fact >>>>that if the RDS model is adopted (or another unified model for managing >>>>gTLD registration data), it would be extremely beneficial for Internet >>>>users worldwide if ccTLD registries were also willing to work towards the >>>>adoption of the same, single-format, model. >>>> >>>> >>>>I think it's useful for commentors to the EWG's draft report to make this >>>>point, even though ccTLD managers abide by their own national laws and ways >>>>of doing things, because we all have a lot to gain from a more effective >>>>and more uniform registration data database. >>>> >>>> >>>>Apart from that suggestion, I have no other comments. The draft seems spot >>>>on to me and is supported by SVG Consulting Ltd. >>>> >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>> >>>> >>>>Stéphane Van Gelder >>>>Chairman and Managing Director/Fondateur >>>>STEPHANE VAN GELDER CONSULTING >>>> >>>>T (FR): +33 (0)6 20 40 55 89 >>>>T (UK): +44 (0)7583 457053 >>>>Skype: SVANGELDER >>>>www.StephaneVanGelder.com >>>>---------------- >>>>Follow us on Twitter: @stephvg and "like" us >>>>on Facebook: www.facebook.com/DomainConsultant >>>> >>>>LinkedIn: fr.linkedin.com/in/domainconsultant/ >>>> >>>>Le 3 août 2013 à 17:53, Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit : >>>> >>>>It's time for the BC to comment on the draft model for Next Generation gTLD >>>>Directory Services. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The Expert Working Group (EWG) published its draft report here. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Public comment page is here and the EWG Wiki page is here. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Laura Covington prepared the attached draft of BC comments, with help from >>>>>Susan Kawaguchi, J Scott Evans, and Elisa Cooper. >>>>> >>>>>The comment period closes 12-Aug-2013, so please Reply All before 11-Aug >>>>>with edits or questions. >>>>> >>>>>--Steve DelBiancoVice chair for policy coordination >>>>>Business Constituency >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>><BC Comments - EWG Draft Model [v1].doc> >>>> >>> >>> >>><BC Comments - EWG Draft Model [v1] -JSE2.doc> >><BC Comments - EWG Draft Model [v1] -JSE2-SVG.doc> > > > Attachment:
BC Comments - EWG Draft Model [v1] -JSE3.doc
|