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
<<mailto:marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>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:
<mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx>owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Maria Farrell
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 10:30 AM
To: <mailto:gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-dow123] FW: [council] Proposed WHOIS motion for 20 July 2006
FYI
-----Original Message-----
From:
<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>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:
<mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>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>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 <http://3.7.7.4>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.