ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts]


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

Re: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts] First set of questions from the 'thick' Whois WG

  • To: "gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts] First set of questions from the 'thick' Whois WG
  • From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 07:48:06 -0700

It appears that some of you are having problems seeing the actual questions
at the bottom of the email. I've now also included them as an attachment.

Best regards,

Marika

From:  Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:  Wednesday 13 March 2013 14:56
To:  "gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts@xxxxxxxxx"
<gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject:  [gnso-thickwhoispdp-experts] First set of questions from the
'thick' Whois WG

Dear All,

Thank you again for participating in the 'thick' Whois Ad-Hoc Expert Panel.
Below you will find a first set of questions from the WG. Please feel free
to share your feedback / views with the mailing list and I will collate the
responses for the WG to review.

With best regards,

Marika

Authoritativeness Sub-Team
 
1.    The PIR Appendix U report), (posted as a reference document on our
wiki, see

https://community.icann.org/display/PDP/8.+Reference+Documents
<https://community.icann.org/display/PDP/8.+Reference+Documents> ), includes
the following regarding the transition in .org from thin to thick Whois in
2003: 

 
On page 29 (section 2.2.1), PIR was required to report on "discrepancies
between Whois data provided by the Registrar and the Whois data in the
Registry Operator's Whois database after the migration of the Registrar to
the thick EPP model."  The report indicates that there were no such
discrepancies. Does this mean that (to PIR's knowledge) there were no
differences between the Whois data held by registrars and that held by the
registry, at least through June 2004, when the report was filed?  If so this
could be a significant data point for our working group.  (For example, in
our "authoritativeness" subgroup this question of discrepancies between
registrar and registry Whois data has already been raised.)  Or does this
section of the report refer to something else?

 
Privacy and Data Protection Sub-Team
 
2.    It involves the PIR Appendix U report on the transition from thin to
thick Whois in .org (see https://community.icann.org/x/34dEAg). Part 3 of
the report (page 30) consists of a table on "Centralized Whois Complaints,"
and indicates that few such complaints were received during 2003 (the period
during which the transition to thick Whois for .org took place). According
to the table, only six of such complaints received by PIR during the year
were "relating to privacy issues." Is any detail available on these
complaints, or do the experts have any recollections regarding them?
Furthermore, this part of the report (and see also
http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/org/registry-agmt-appu-2
3oct02-en.htm 
<http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/org/registry-agmt-appu-
23oct02-en.htm> , which specifies what this report is to contain) was
apparently supposed to be submitted annually ("no later than one month after
each anniversary date after the Commencement-of-Service date").  I have not
been able to locate on the

ICANN site any such reports submitted later than June 2004.  Does anyone
know if this was done and if so where the reports can be found? (I
understand that Appendix U was eliminated in the revised .org registry
agreement that went into force in 2006, so this question targets the 2004-06
period.) 



Do you have expert knowledge on how the situation with privacy and data
retention and with trans border data movement may have changed during the
last decade? If so, can you detail the differences? If not, can you give us
references as to whom you believe would be able to give us expert advise on
any changed circumstances that may be important considerations today, that
were not a consideration then.


Attachment: Questions for Ad-Hoc Expert Panel - 13 March 2013.docx
Description: Microsoft Office

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy