ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] Consensus-candidate charter draft

  • To: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx DT" <Gnso-thickwhois-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-thickwhois-dt] Consensus-candidate charter draft
  • From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 13:03:39 -0400

Having reviewed the clean draft and the more recent suggestions, I have a few questions/concerns:

All comments are with regard to Mission and Scope.

Under Accessibility. The text does not match the time. The text refers only to cost-effectiveness (a rather vague term as already mentioned) and not accessibility. I suggest replacing "cost-effective" with either "effective" or if we want to include the cost concept, "effective and cost-effective".

Under Data synchronization between Registry and Registrars, this titme does not quite match the text. Perhaps changing the word in the title to synchronization/migration will fix it.

Under Other implications, this implies that after the transition, the Registry will be have authority (2nd definition) over the Registrant data, and that is not the case. The "possibly" in Keith's comments may fix this.

In the (currently) last section, I think that How to conduct such a transition is out of scope and certainly not required. Te WG does need to be satisfied that such a transition is viable and might set a time limit for it, but the rest is implementation.

On Keith's suggestion to the section on Whois applications, it loses the question about whether applications need to be changed or not.


At 28/09/2012 11:06 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
hi all,

i'm attaching a new draft for you to review. it would be absolutely terrific if we could beat this draft up on the list and arrive at consensus on our next (and hopefully final) call next Thursday.

i'm shipping it without the redlining because the redline history is getting pretty busy. but it's all there if you'd like to review the changes in detail.

here's what's changing;

- i drove that last draft version of the "transition to authoritative" language in

- i added a footnote to clarify what we mean by "domains they sponsor"

- i've wandered through the draft and tried to get the capitalization right on the words registrar and registry

- i've summarily deleted a couple of Jeff's suggestions -- Jeff, there wasn't much appetite for them on the last call, so this is your chance to advocate/persuade if you feel really strongly (although i'll note that this is really your second chance since you had the opportunity to post to the list last week as well)

- i've restructured a few sentences to swing them into the active voice and made a few other (hopefully) cosmetic changes to the language.

let's try to really kick this draft hard so we can polish this off on the next call -- otherwise Marika tells me we'll miss the deadline for the Toronto agenda and i'll have to work off my schedule failure as the lowest-ranked roadie in her rock band. ;-)



- - - - - - - - -
phone    651-647-6109
fax              866-280-2356
web      <http://www.haven2.com>http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy