That's a good idea, Avri.
How would people be fixed for Monday, 24th at the same time?
Maria
------------------------------
*From:* Avri Doria [mailto:avri@xxxxxxx]
*Sent:* Monday, July 17, 2006 6:30 AM
*To:* Jordyn Buchanan
*Cc:* Maria Farrell; gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Denise Michel
*Subject:* Re: [gnso-dow123] Proposal to postpone Tuesday's WHOIS TF
meeting/conflict
Hi,
Any chance of doing the call on a different time schedule (i.e. earlier or
later) or a different day the same week, so that people can both attend the
hearing and the whois work can stay on schedule?
a.
On 17 jul 2006, at 02.34, Jordyn Buchanan wrote:
Hi all:
I don't have any problem pushing back Tuesday's call by a week, but I'm
reluctant to delay our overall schedule. Hence, I would propose delaying
Tuesday's call by a week until July 25 but keeping the following call on the
next week, August 2. After that, we will return to our every other week
schedule with the following call on August 16.
Jordyn
On 7/15/06, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I apologize for not noting a conflict that will impact several members
> of
> the WHOIS TF who are in Washington, D.C.
>
> There is a WHOIS hearing in the Financial Services subcommittee on
> Tuesday,
> at 10:00 a.m. I note from the witness list that it includes:
>
> John Kneuer, Assistant Secretary, NTIA
> Mark Rotenberg, EPIC
> Someone from BITS -- which is a financial services association
> Mark Bohannon, SSIA
>
> There may be other witnesses. I've just focused in on the details of the
> hearing.
>
> My apologies for being late to provide a notice on this conflict.
>
> I've been consumed with drafting on WIPO Broadcast Treaty language
> [unrelated to ICANN] and on the DoC NOI comments on the MOU -- and
> barely
> noticed anything else going on all week.
>
> But at least for me, I will be at the hearing, and I suspect that
> others,
> like Maggie, Kathie, Steve, may be as well. If this creates a major gap
> of
> representation, Jordyn, can we reschedule the call to the following
> Tuesday?
>
> Best regards, Marilyn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx]
> On
> Behalf Of Maria Farrell
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 10:30 AM
> To: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-dow123] FW: [council] Proposed WHOIS motion for 20 July
> 2006
>
> FYI
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On
> Behalf Of Maria Farrell
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 4:18 PM
> To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'Council GNSO'
> Subject: RE: [council] Proposed WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006
>
> Dear all,
>
> In response to Bruce's proposed motion on Whois, section (2);
>
> "(2) The ICANN staff will provide a summary of the other interpretations
> of
> the definition that have been expressed during the public comment
> period,
> and subsequently in correspondence from the public and Governments."
>
>
> Please find attached a table that summarises interpretations of the
> definition of the purpose of Whois ("Formulation 1"). This information
> is
> captured from the inputs received on this issue from March to June of
> this
> year.
>
> Not all input received explicitly interprets the definition. For this
> reason, a considerable number of inputs are not reflected in the
> summary.
>
> Best regards, Maria Farrell
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ]
> On
> Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 10:59 AM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] Proposed WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006
>
> Hello All,
>
> Below is a revised motion derived from the tabled motion discussed in
> Marrakech, and taking into account feedback I have received since.
>
> The main changes are in step (3), where I have attempted to link the
> language to current clauses in the registrar accreditation agreement,
> and
> included a requirement to consider privacy and law enforcement
> perspectives.
> I have also left out SSAC, as most of the focus in
> Marrakech was on Government input and additional public input. We will
> of course continue to liaise with the SSAC as we do with the ALAC. We
> have not yet heard any concerns from SSAC or ALAC with the current
> definition of the WHOIS service.
>
> I have also added a list of the relevant data elements.
>
> Comments/improvements welcome.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
>
>
> Proposed Motion on WHOIS
>
> The GNSO Council notes that the current WHOIS definition is related to
> the
> service that provides public access to some or all of the data
> collected,
> and is not a definition of the purpose of the data itself.
>
> In response to the extensive community and Government input on the
> definition of the purpose of WHOIS, the GNSO Council agrees to undertake
> the
> following steps:
>
> (1) Each Council member that voted in favour of the definition will
> provide
> a brief explanation of the reason for supporting the resolution and
> their
> understanding of its meaning.
>
> (2) The ICANN staff will provide a summary of the other interpretations
> of
> the definition that have been expressed during the public comment
> period,
> and subsequently in correspondence from the public and Governments.
>
> (3) The Council will undertake a dialogue with governments, via the GAC,
> to
> work towards developing a broadly understandable definition of the
> minimum
> purposes for which the current data required in the Registrar
> Accreditation
> Agreement (see clause 3.4 of
> http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm ), as listed
> below, is collected and retained. The dialogue should seek to balance
> privacy and law enforcement concerns with ICANN's mission and core
> values,
> and must take into account the views of law enforcement agencies, data
> protection authorities, the policies and rules of access to ccTLD data,
> and
> relevant national laws.
>
> Note that one of the purposes would be for the public display of some or
> all
> of the data as per the recent definition of the purpose of WHOIS.
> Note that Registrars are required (clause 3.7.7.4) to provide notice to
> each
> new or renewed Registered Name Holder stating the purposes for which any
> Personal Data collected from the applicant are intended, and the
> intended
> recipients or categories of recipients of the data (including the
> Registry
> Operator and others who will receive the data from Registry Operator).
>
>
> (4) The GNSO Council requests that the WHOIS task force continue with
> their
> work as specified in the terms of reference taking into account the
> recent
> input that has been provided and any further clarification as it becomes
> available from Council.
>
>
> (5) The GNSO Council will take the final report from the WHOIS task
> force
> that addresses all terms of reference and the outcomes of the dialogue
> with
> governments, and consider improving the wording of the WHOIS service
> definition so that it is broadly understandable.
>
>
>
> List of data that must be collected and retained by registrars:
> **************************************************************
>
> ***************************************************************
>
> The following is commonly referred to as the "WHOIS Data":
> **********************************************************
>
> (a) The name of the Registered Name;
>
> (b) The names of the primary nameserver and secondary nameserver(s) for
> the
> Registered Name;
>
> (c) The identity of Registrar (which may be provided through Registrar's
>
> website);
>
> (d) The original creation date of the registration;
>
> (e) The expiration date of the registration;
>
> (f) The name and postal address of the Registered Name Holder;
>
> (g) The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
> and
> (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the Registered
> Name; and
>
> (h) The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number,
> and
> (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for the
> Registered Name.
>
> In addition there is:
> *********************
>
> (i) The name and (where available) postal address, e-mail address, voice
> telephone number, and fax number of the billing contact;
>
> (j) In electronic form, the submission date and time, and the content,
> of
> all registration data (including updates) submitted in electronic form
> to
> the Registry Operator(s);
>
> (k) In electronic, paper, or microfilm form, all written communications
> constituting registration applications, confirmations, modifications, or
> terminations and related correspondence with Registered Name Holders,
> including registration contracts; and
>
> (l) In electronic form, records of the accounts of all Registered Name
> Holders with Registrar, including dates and amounts of all payments and
> refunds.
>
>
>
>
>
>