[gnso-vi-feb10] chat history from today's call

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

CLO: Hi all
Michele Neylon: lo
Alan Greenberg: CAN't we eliminate the polls while we review the proposal? And 
move the chat to where the agenda is?
Michael Zupke: I'll try to make the proposal window larger
David Olive: THanks Mike
Volker Greimann: looks good
Mike O'Connor: BAH!  i just lost the call.  back soon -- carry on
Mike O'Connor: Back on...
Volker Greimann: i hear sirens... who is taken away
CLO: :-)
Michele Neylon: Volker :)
Alan Greenberg: An un-named ICANN staffer said it should be out Friday 
(deadline was today, but that did not preclude it being released early).
Ron: We need to see what we are talking about, Mikey.
ken stubbs: were better off with mikes approach to the new dag.... more 
clarity.. les speculation
CLO: I was *only* going to confirm that on the 2nd meeting this week we will 
start with the VI section from DAG 4 in our Agenda... 
Berry Cobb: k, thanks Jeff!
CLO: Perhaps a smaill WT to explore this aspect of the work is required...
Jothan Frakes: sorry late, was at a mem. day service
Mike O'Connor: could folks please mute.  heavy breathing
Michele Neylon: I'm on mute on my end
Michele Neylon: heavy breathing ? must be the Frakes :)
Jothan Frakes: No I have been muted
Michele Neylon: Jothan - I was winding you up
Michele Neylon: *sigh*
Jothan Frakes: well I typically would charge people at least 2.49/min for that
Jothan Frakes: *kidding*
Michele Neylon: my aunt ran one of those numbers for astrology I think ... 
Volker Greimann: according to this proposal, as a co'ed or VI'ed 
registry/registrar, I am better off in the Bahamas then in the US or Europe due 
to different standards of  the national competition agencies
Michele Neylon: Volker - that's what I've been thinking as well
Volker Greimann: I also do not like the term: ''selection of registrars''
CLO: which is why we need some clear 'deffinitional terms'' to work with
Alan Greenberg: a competition authority can step in if the product or service 
is marketted in their jurisdiction, regardless of where the company is.
Michele Neylon: CLO - as in DAG4?
Michele Neylon: Alan - but they won't unless there's a perceived problem
Volker Greimann: regarding the audits, something similar applies. costs and 
standards differ between locations, and will in every case be a great financial 
burden on top of the annual fees they have to bear anyway
Alan Greenberg: no question - just pointing out tat where company is located is 
not the sole issue.
CLO: Gee you think:?   but also to pick up the points Alan made
Michele Neylon: I could probably kill someone with a paperclip, does that mean 
that paperclips are inherently dangerous?
Alan Greenberg: only in your hands I guess.  ;-)
Volker Greimann: the proposal proposes the use of the national agencies in the 
application process. So yes, European agencies may get involved later, but not 
in the application process
Jeffrey Eckhaus: Michele - as a ninja you would be excluded
Michele Neylon: Alan - thanks :) 
Michele Neylon: Jeff - after watching that Ninja film the other night ... 
Jothan Frakes: well I think we're looking for asbestos as opposed to paperclips 
michele
Berry Cobb: But isnt there still a police force that if you decide to kill 
someone with a paperclip that there is consequence?
Michele Neylon: Berry - yes, but that's th thing - it's a general police force 
for any murder / killing
CLO: and there the ''harm'' is clear
Michele Neylon: ie. it's not tasked with trying to work out how I could use a 
paperclip
Jothan Frakes: well sure we're looking for overt issues of harm of course
Volker Greimann: Michele, lets set up the NPA (''National Paperclip 
association'') against paperclip control
Jothan Frakes: but we can try to expose areas that could hold some 'harms'
Michele Neylon: Volker  - easier to do it in Ireland than in Germany I think :) 
Volker Greimann: sure
CLO: and establish some 'agreed/ assumued 'deffinitions'
Jothan Frakes: is we're doing market wide, I'll volunteer to participate on this
CLO: we need some 'working hypothesis' to ''measure'' the proposal(s) against/ 
with / to
CLO: helps with the mosaic / puzzel issues
CLO: Mike as not every one is in the room can you sumarise some chat points to 
the record please...
Jothan Frakes: yes, am muted, have a lot of background noise where I am at so 
have to be muted
Jothan Frakes: thank you cheryl
Michele Neylon: ROFL
Michele Neylon: poor CLO
Michele Neylon: //me bows
Jothan Frakes: amen
Jothan Frakes: I'll email you off list michael
Volker Greimann: good summary
Alan Greenberg: Asbestos as a fire retardant, or asbestos as a cause of lung 
cancer??
Jothan Frakes: well asbestos had harm that was not initially apparent
Jothan Frakes: it seemed like a good idea at the time
Michele Neylon: yes - but once it was identified people were able to deal with 
it
Jothan Frakes: but resulted in unpredicted harms
Jothan Frakes: but I think we really need to look for the really overt harms as 
an initial effort
Alan Greenberg: Living in the place which pretty well forbids many uses of 
asbestos but is one of the world's largest exporters of it to other places, I 
am sort of sensitive to it.
Volker Greimann: well, we will not be able to eliminate all possible harms
Volker Greimann: yes, make it go away...
Jothan Frakes: I kind of liked it
Volker Greimann: what we can do is limit potential dangers
Alan Greenberg: Also spent a summer many decades ago tabulating 
asbestos-related epidemiological data.
Berry Cobb: The BREATHER is still not muted......
Michele Neylon: I have a 27inch monitor - most things look small
Michele Neylon: on my laptop it's about the right size
CLO: Running a business  that includes safe and legal removasl management and 
control of the substance (along with LOTS of nasties) I DO understand the 
matters of risks deffinitions, and need for establishment of proceses...
Marika Konings: If you change your screen resolution, you might also be able to 
enlarge the Adobe Connect screen. Alternatively, there is also the 'full 
screen' option.
Volker Greimann: make the proposal scrollable, pls
CLO: We can't scroll in the proposal 
CLO: ta
Michael Zupke: Is it better?
Michele Neylon: working now
CLO: yep ta
Jothan Frakes: thx mr z
CLO: Alan G / Seb  can you speak to this from an ALAC POV as I REALLY can't 
speak at all atm - Sorry
Jothan Frakes: there is mild commonality
Volker Greimann: this proposal totally eliminates registrars from being rsps
Michele Neylon: personally I don;
Michele Neylon: don't 
Michele Neylon: like this proposal
Michele Neylon: the registrar reseller restriction would be practically 
impossible to ''police''
Volker Greimann: The last two topics have merit (Full rec 19 and equiv. access)
Volker Greimann: the first section is harmful to competition
Alan Greenberg: Past does not always predict future. Domain tasting was 
possible long before spoeple started doing it. Its time simply came...
Volker Greimann: ...and went again
Volker Greimann: if there is abuse, we can deal with it
Alan Greenberg: Went away after a VERY significant effort!
Volker Greimann: most abuse can be prevented by good sanctions and penalties
Ron: @ Alan +1; with magnitudes of new TLDs and games having more creative 
experience, that is not a recipe for success
Ron: games = gamers
Volker Greimann: don't think badly of all gamers... I like to roll my 
dodecahedrons from time to time ;-)
CLO: deffinition of gamingneeded ;-)
Ron: Apologies to for my blanket comment...
Volker Greimann: ^_^
Michele Neylon: Volker - xbox??
ken stubbs: cant buy harm #1
Alan Greenberg: We call them entrepreneurs in other environements. All depends 
on perception of those who didn't think of it first: admiration or scorn.
Jothan Frakes: we're living harm #1 currently...    :)
Jeffrey Eckhaus: Good Point Alan
Jothan Frakes: sure, well said Alan +1
CLO: I like the application of 'risk assessment' as a tool (of course I'm 
biased)
Sébastien: I just have a look to my mails and Jeff N send a mail wis a list of 
link about Harms
Sébastien: maybe useful to have a look
Jothan Frakes: Mikey, under predictors, access to registry and DNS resolution 
data should be bullets
Ron: @ Sebastien: Just had a look and agree they should be added to this list
Jothan Frakes: ken to clarify my point, it was directed at the narrow top level 
space
Jothan Frakes: that currently exists
Volker Greimann: Jeff+1
Jothan Frakes: sort of jeff
Jothan Frakes: you can't buy the whole of the nxd from verisign
CLO: Thus the needs for RISK ASSESSMENT
Jeffrey Eckhaus: Jothan - you do not know who to call ;_0\
Jeffrey Eckhaus: :-)
Jothan Frakes: well they offer services where you have to request specific 
domain's traffic, but not in whole
Jothan Frakes: but you may be right, perhaps there is a secret handshake person 
to talk to but I am not aware they sell the whole lot of the data
Alan Greenberg: Who do you call?  Ghost Busters!!
Jothan Frakes: I was tempted to say that alan, thanks for covering it
Sivasubramanian M: Is Alan saying that we should go more by evidence of harm 
rather than by defining and making a list of harms?
Alan Greenberg: Timing was off due to my being on speaker list!
Jothan Frakes: a cloud nobody wants to walk through :)
Volker Greimann: i agree that talking about harms is a good thing. that way we 
can address these issues and find actual solutions instead of band-aiding 
Alan Greenberg: Ron's appraoach is valid. I guess I was just trying say that we 
will not have a cmplete list, and should not assume that it can be.
Volker Greimann: not complete as in listing all specific harms, but complete 
enough in listing general categories and kinds of harms 
Sivasubramanian M: True, as you have said a truly exhaustive list can't be 
built, because we can't possibly predict all future patterns.
Volker Greimann: the 15% limit will do nothing to stop any of these harms
Jeffrey Eckhaus: Thank you for clarifying Palage. That was an important point I 
was trying to bring up 
Alan Greenberg: To put it bluntly, there will always be unethical people. 
Question is what do we do to not make it too easy for them.
Volker Greimann: all will remain just as possible and likely with 15% as with 
100%
Jeffrey Eckhaus: The 15% just keeps out a class of competition, not the bad 
actors
Volker Greimann: Jeff+1#
Jothan Frakes: sure, and the point might be made that the enforcement system 
has been baked in to handle 15%
Michele Neylon: Jeff - agreed - 15% is an arbitrary figure
Jothan Frakes: agreed
Volker Greimann: If all we do is be afraid of what kinds of abuse people might 
invent in the future, let's not open up the TLD market at all. Let's forget 
about the idea of new TLDS
Michele Neylon: Volker - exactly. CF my paperclip :)
Volker Greimann: that is the only surefire way to prevent all potential harms 
in this market
Alan Greenberg: @ Volket: Some people in this WG would agree that this is the 
path ICANN *should* follow!
Palage: +1 Volker
Jothan Frakes: Mikey can you add under predictors:
Palage: I liked the one comment in the Mexico City forum about malicious 
conduct within the DNS
Palage: It was along the lines of  childrens are exposed to drugs in schools, 
lets stop building new schools
Ron: @ Volker: You are misreading me, Volker.  I don't expect to get to 100% of 
no harm -- just want us to be mindful
Jothan Frakes: no restraint/protections  on 'check' / 'whois' / dns lookup data
Volker Greimann: when ICANN introduces new TLDs, there will be possibility of 
harm. no matter if CO is limited to 0% or 15%
Michele Neylon: I won't make the next call
CLO: Thanks all
Jothan Frakes: thanks all
Volker Greimann: good night