ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg]


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

[gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Recommendations for a Thick WHOIS new recommendation

  • To: "gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Recommendations for a Thick WHOIS new recommendation
  • From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 05:54:16 -0700

Forwarding on behalf of Amr as he is having issues posting to the list (we
are looking into this).

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Recommendations for a Thick WHOIS new
> recommendation
> Date: September 5, 2013 2:41:28 PM GMT+02:00
> To: gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> This email doesn't seem to have gotten through. Second attempt.
> 
> On Sep 5, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Steve,
>> 
>> The issue report posted at the link you provided does indeed mandate the
>> ensuing PDP WG to consider both the ongoing progress of any WHOIS-related
>> Working Groups, and answer any questions pertaining to privacy laws governing
>> transfer of personal data. However, as far as I can tell, this all seems to
>> be in the context of access to and accuracy of domain name registration data.
>> This will create a scope too narrow to include what I believe Avri is
>> suggesting, which should probably list these same two items in an issue
>> report more specific to the transition of WHOIS from "thin" to "thick".
>> 
>> This seems fitting to me, since we (as per the WG's initial report) lacked
>> the capacity to address this issue conclusively.
>> 
>> I appreciate any more thoughts you and others might have on this.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Amr
>> 
>> On Sep 3, 2013, at 4:03 PM, "Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Isn't this already covered by the Board-initiated PDP on Whois that will be
>>> launched once the EWG issues its final report, and as to which a preliminary
>>> issues report has already been published?
>>> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gtld-registration-data-15mar13-e
>>> n.htm
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 9:45 AM
>>> To: gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] Recommendations for a Thick WHOIS new
>>> recommendation
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> We have moved a lot of privacy issues into a heap called - 'to be worked on
>>> later'
>>> 
>>> I recommend that we include the following recommendation to deal with this
>>> myriad  of issues:
>>> 
>>> We recommend that the ICANN Board request a GNSO issues report to cover the
>>> issue of Privacy as related to WHOIS and other GNSO policies.
>>> 
>>> This recommendation would probably require some glue language in a few other
>>> spots in the final report.
>>> 
>>> The reason for requesting that the Board, as opposed to the GNSO, is the
>>> number of ICANN staff organizations, such as legal, that need to be folded
>>> into any such effort.  It would also give evidence of ICANN's concern about
>>> such issues in this time of great privacy anxiety.
>>> 
>>> thanks
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Avri Doria
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 



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



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy