Re: [gnso-dow123] Proposal to postpone Tuesday's WHOIS TF meeting/conflict

["Milton Mueller" <Mueller@xxxxxxx>]

Nope, July 19 doesn't work for me. 

>>> jordyn.buchanan@xxxxxxxxx 7/17/2006 12:12 PM >>>
I might suggest that we try something later this week instead of next
week,
since we know that Maggie (maybe others) will be away next week.

Maybe this Thursday, July 19--keeping our 10:30 AM EDT timeslot?

Jordyn

On 7/17/06, Maria Farrell <maria.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  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.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>