[gnso-dataprotection-thickwhois] For our discussions

[Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal@xxxxxxx>]

Some suggestions as we get into the substance. Excuse the formality of the 
numbering but it helps organize my usual stream of consciousness approach. 
Please suggest any items that occur to you.

 1.  Keep the charter in mind as we go along. 
https://community.icann.org/display/PDP/3.+WG+Charter.
 2.  Post the phrase "scope creep" somewhere, if only mentally, as we address 
points.
 3.  On the other hand, one issue has come up that means we also need to be 
expansive. "The PDP Working Group is tasked to provide the GNSO Council with a 
policy recommendation regarding the use of ‘thick’ Whois by all gTLD 
Registries, both existing and future." I  know that there is an elephant in the 
room (no offense, Marc) but our work is about current thin registries and also 
what ICANN might require in future new gTLD efforts.
 4.  It's one thing to raise legal issues and point to opinions, but how much 
are we in a position to point to opinions as dispositive or reach our own 
conclusions?
 5.  As I get more deeply into the questions that have been  raised, I realize 
that my knowledge of daily tech operations with respect to Whois needs 
improvement. Any help appreciated. I expect to corner operations people at IETF 
in Orlando next week. Don't hesitate to suggest questions to ask them.
 6.  Which leads to the something for future consideration. I think we have to 
address Whois as it exists. Given current discussions about a new protocol, the 
equations could change but that won't happen, if it does, until after the WG's 
work is done. However, we could suggest issues that could arise if a new 
protocol offers more flexibility in what information can flow.

I'm sure that other items will come to mind as soon as I click Send but it's 
best to get something out with some time before the call. One additional thing 
to consider is the US time zone change this weekend and if it should or can 
affect the time of our calls.

Don