[gnso-whoissurvey-dt] More draft questions for survey
Whois Survey Team, My apologies for tardiness in providing this response. I was asked to prepare draft questions in three areas. First, I was asked to prepare survey questions on topic R-11 (abuse point of contact). Please see my draft attached. I don't know whether the table format in the attached is feasible. If it is not, then I think it could be converted fairly easily to a longer list of questions, asking respondents to rate each option from 1-3 or 1-5. Second, I was asked to compile a list of "non-responses" that should be offered in the survey. In general, the two that should be offered on nearly all questions would be: ---- Don't know or don't understand the question --- No opinion There might be some questions for which the response "Not Applicable" should also be offered. Third, I was asked to prepare any questions on the missing topic R-7, which is internationalization (see pages 24-25 of the Inventory document). Here I offer three observations. Observation 1. The inventory document states that "staff will coordinate with the IRD WG to see that its recommendations are included in an updated inventory when those recommendations are made available." (page 24) I'd welcome input from staff on the status of such inclusion and how this should affect our survey. Observation 2. The IRD WG, in which I am a participant, issued an interim report in November 2010 and sought public comment on two preliminary recommendations and several optional models for internationalizing Whois registrant data. See http://gnso.icann.org/issues/ird/ird-wg-final-report-15nov10-en.pdf <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/ird/ird-wg-final-report-15nov10-en.pdf at pages ecomendationsseveral> , at pages 13-16 (models for internationalizing data), and 21-22 (preliminary recommendations). Almost all the comments (which are summarized at http://forum.icann.org/lists/ird-wg-report/msg00008.html) focused on the optional models, rather than on the preliminary recommendations. The preliminary recommendations are as follows. These might well be suitable for addressing in our survey, but I am unclear about their status. Preliminary Recommendation (1): The IRD-WG discussed a preliminary recommendation for a Whois service in the IDN environment: 1. WHOIS clients (both port 43 and web) must be able to accept a user query of domain name in either U-label or A-label format; 2. WHOIS clients must be able display result of queries in both U- and A-label for the domain names; and 3. Whois responses should include variants of an IDN label in the response as well. Preliminary Recommendation (2): The IRD-WG discussed the idea that the domain registration data elements should be considered separately, with specific recommendations for how each data element should be internationalized. The IRD-WG offers preliminary recommendations for the following data elements: 1. Whois services should return both A-label and U-label representation for the given IDN domains queried; 2. Whois services should return both A-label and U-label representations for nameserver names (to the extent that such information is available); 3. Whois services should always make sponsoring registrar information available in USASCII7; and 4. Whois services should always return the exact EPP27 status code for Registration Status Observation 3. The IRDWG posted a draft final report last October and is now finalizing its final report. The recommendations in this final report are entirely different from those in the interim report and (in my opinion ) not suitable for inclusion in this survey, as they are strictly procedural in nature. In draft form (and this draft has not been finally approved by the IRDWG), they are: Recommendation 1: ICANN staff should develop, in consultation with the community, a data model for domain registration data. The data model should specify the elements of the registration data, the data flow, and a formal data schema that incorporates the standards that the working group has agreed on for internationalizing various registration data elements. This data model should also include tagging information for language/scripts. Recommendation 2: The GNSO council and the SSAC should request a common Issue Report on translation and transliteration of contact information. The Issue Report should consider whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. It should also consider who should bear the burden and who is in the best position to address these issues. The Issue Report should consider policy questions raised in this document and should also recommend whether to start a policy development process (PDP). Recommendation 3: ICANN staff should work with the community to identify a DNRD Access Protocol that meets the needs of internationalization, including but not limited to the work products resulting from recommendations 1 and 2, and the requirements enumerated in this report. Based on these observations, I am not attaching any draft questions for item R-7. I'd be happy to reach out to the IRDWG (or perhaps this is better done on the staff level; I copy Julie Hedlund who staffs IRDWG) to try to get any guidance about whether the preliminary recommendations from the interim report are suitable for inclusion in our survey. Perhaps we can discuss this on our call tomorrow. Once again, my apologies that this response is overdue. Steve Metalitz ________________________________ From: owner-gnso-whoissurvey-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-whoissurvey-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Berry Cobb Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 6:34 PM To: gnso-whoissurvey-dt@xxxxxxxxx Subject: [gnso-whoissurvey-dt] v0.2 WSWG Survey Questions Draft WSWG, Attached is the v0.2 version of the WSWG Survey Questionnaire. The only change from the previous version is the inclusion of Avri's Requirement assignment. As a result of today's meeting, submitted questions require revision and we still require new questions from the other assignees. All questions should be submitted to Berry by 18 JAN 2012. I will add updates/new entries in to the master version. Thank you for your participation and we meet again on 23 JAN 2012. B Berry Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Tel: +1 720 839 5735 Skype ID: berry.cobb Attachment:
WSWG questions R-11 (4413806).DOC
|