Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert Working Group for Directory Services ( new Whois)

[stephvg@xxxxxxxxx]

Thanks John.

I really am not looking to light a fuse.

I am looking to address a problem that repeatedly vexes Internet users. They 
just do not understand why they have to face such varying levels of WHOIS 
format, complexity and operation in their daily domain-owning lives. And they 
tend to own both cc and g domains regardless, according to their needs.

However as said before, I understand your concerns. Your suggestion to approach 
Byron discreetly may be a good "diplomatic" move. I would support.

I would also support Marilyn's suggestion to check where the rest of the CSG is 
on this issue.

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 6 août 2013 à 03:02, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx a écrit :

> Stephane,
>  
> As you know, I am not afraid to light a fuse, but make no mistake in my 
> judgement that this will be lighting a fuse.  Perhaps we can let Byron (new 
> chair of the ccNSO council know what we are up to.  I would be more than 
> happy to make the contact as he is Canadian and will likely take it politely 
> if not well.
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> Berard
>  
> --------- Original Message ---------
> Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert Working 
> Group for Directory Services ( new Whois)
> From: stephvg@xxxxxxxxx
> Date: 8/5/13 4:58 pm
> To: "Susan Kawaguchi" <susank@xxxxxx>
> Cc: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>, "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" 
> <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Smith, Bill" <bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Steve 
> DelBianco" <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx list" 
> <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> I understand the sentiments expressed by John and Susan.
>  
> However, I would think it a pity that the ICANN community as a whole once 
> again decides to shy away completely from any attempt at bringing some common 
> sense into the g and cc coexistence.
>  
> For me, at a time when so many ccs are either already behaving as gs or about 
> to manage some new gTLDs themselves, I think it is not unreasonable to 
> suggest that both namespaces look towards some way of finding a common 
> approach on registration data.
>  
> I also think that the BC, as the home of business in the ICANN ecosystem, 
> would be behaving in a responsible manner to its constituents by highlighting 
> this fact in this instance.
>  
> I believe the language I have suggested is soft enough not to appear 
> aggressive for cc managers.
>  
> So I would suggest we have a good opportunity here to get a common sense 
> message across.
>  
> 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 6 août 2013 à 00:58, Susan Kawaguchi <susank@xxxxxx> a écrit :
> 
> I agree with John, we have been very careful on the EWG to look at the ccTlds 
> and how they manage the domain name record data but our mandate did not 
> include looking at  ccTld registration data for this database.  I think we 
> already have a steep uphill climb for gTlds and we may want to leave the 
> ccTlds out of it for now.  
>  
>  
>  
> Susan Kawaguchi
> Domain Name Manager
> Facebook Legal Dept.
>  
> Phone - 650 485-6064
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Monday, August 5, 2013 3:52 PM
> To: "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Smith, Bill" 
> <bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "stephvg@xxxxxxxxx" <stephvg@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx list" 
> <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert 
> Working Group for Directory Services ( new Whois)
>  
> John:
> 
> Thanks for the comment.  That's just the kind of dialogue I am looking for 
> here.  Others?
> 
> J. Scott
> 
>  
>  
> j. scott evans -  head of global brand, domains & copyright - Yahoo! Inc. - 
> 408.349.1385 - jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx
>  
> From: "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: J. Scott Evans <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>; "Smith, Bill" 
> <bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; stephvg@xxxxxxxxx 
> Cc: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx list" 
> <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx> 
> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2013 3:37 PM
> Subject: RE: Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert 
> Working Group for Directory Services ( new Whois)
> 
> J. Scott, et. al.,
>  
> With regard to whether it will be a political bombshell or not, I cannot say, 
> but as the GNSO Council liaison to the ccNSO Council I have come to 
> appreciate the bright line they draw between the "g" and the "cc" name space. 
>  I suspect that even if Stephane's suggestion would not be the incendiary 
> device you foretell, it would be a distraction from the more urgent matter of 
> solving the directory services problem for the the gTLDs.  I would vote not 
> to include the language.
>  
> My two cents.
>  
> Berard
>  
> --------- Original Message ---------
> Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW BY 11-AUG: BC comments on Expert Working 
> Group for Directory Services ( new Whois)
> From: "J. Scott Evans" <jscottevans@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 8/5/13 3:25 pm
> To: "Smith, Bill" <bill.smith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, stephvg@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx list" 
> <bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 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 DelBianco
> Vice 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>
> 
>