Final Issue Report on a Next-Generation gTLD Registration Directory Service to replace WHOIS and Motion
Hello All, Hope everyone traveled home safely from the Dublin meeting and you have had time to catch up. We agreed to defer this motion at the Dublin meeting due to concerns with the charter. Please share any comments / edits on the charter as soon as possible with the mailing list so that these can be discussed and hopefully addressed in a way that works for all ahead of the next meeting. I have also updated the motion to reflect the concerns that a call for volunteers within 10 days of approval of the motion would place a burden on the community. I have added language that states the call for volunteers should be initiated January 4th, 2016. (this is the first business day of 2016). Looking forward to your comments and edits. Best regards Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Legal Dept. Phone - 650 485-6064
The motion has been posted on the Motion Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+19+November+... Thank you. Glen De : owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] De la part de Susan Kawaguchi Envoyé : mercredi 4 novembre 2015 20:46 À : council@gnso.icann.org Objet : [council] Final Issue Report on a Next-Generation gTLD Registration Directory Service to replace WHOIS and Motion Hello All, Hope everyone traveled home safely from the Dublin meeting and you have had time to catch up. We agreed to defer this motion at the Dublin meeting due to concerns with the charter. Please share any comments / edits on the charter as soon as possible with the mailing list so that these can be discussed and hopefully addressed in a way that works for all ahead of the next meeting. I have also updated the motion to reflect the concerns that a call for volunteers within 10 days of approval of the motion would place a burden on the community. I have added language that states the call for volunteers should be initiated January 4th, 2016. (this is the first business day of 2016). Looking forward to your comments and edits. Best regards Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Legal Dept. Phone - 650 485-6064
Dear Susan, sorry for my delayed reaction. Some minor edits for clarity have been suggested for the motion (with track control) Otherwise I gladly second the motion for tomorrow session as well! Best regards Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________ email: crg@isoc-cr.org Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA
On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Susan Kawaguchi <susank@fb.com> wrote:
<Motion - next-generation RDS PDP WG Charter - 2 October 2015[1].docx>
Hi Susan, Carlos and all, On previous discussion of the proposed charter and motion, a concern was raised regarding the absence of a rights impact assessment as one of requirements listed as part of the phase 1 (and subsequent phases) considerations. This issue has been repetitively raised by Avri while she was on Council, and was also included in the NCSG input to the public comment period for the initial report. It was also included in the public comment report prepared by staff, but I am having trouble identifying where this was included in the proposed charter. My thoughts on this are that, similar to the “Benefit Analysis” and “Risk Assessment” requirements listed under phase 1 deliberations, a rights impact assessment be included to involve identification of a rights impact assessment requirements in phase 1 of the PDP, followed by a design in phase 2, and guidance on how to proceed in phase 3. I would appreciate us putting aside a few minutes to discuss this during today’s call. I would like to handle this by suggesting an amendment to the motion, specifically resolved clause 1, where along with approving the charter, a reference to a change in the charter be made to include a bullet under the phase 1 deliberations on page 69 saying something to this effect: “Rights Impact analysis: Have registrants rights that may be affected been analyzed and considered?” I’m not personally a fan of suggested amendments to motions at a late stage like this, but this isn’t a new topic. It’s been previously discussed on several occasions. Thanks. Amr
On Nov 18, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> wrote:
Dear Susan,
sorry for my delayed reaction. Some minor edits for clarity have been suggested for the motion (with track control) <Motion - next-generation RDS PDP WG Charter - edit 18 October 2015[1].docx>
Otherwise I gladly second the motion for tomorrow session as well!
Best regards
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________
email: crg@isoc-cr.org Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA
On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Susan Kawaguchi <susank@fb.com> wrote:
<Motion - next-generation RDS PDP WG Charter - 2 October 2015[1].docx>
Dear Amr, I´m aware of the discussion Nevertheless I think changes to the charter should be discussed once the whole Group is confirmed, if that is “proceduraly” possible, because This is not a GNSO initiated proposal It has been going back and forth between Board, GNSO and WG any change would be onside if it does not go back and forth the whole loop again I would support to take it as on of the first issues to be dealt with once the group has taken the driving wheel and they feel comfortable But I welcome the discussion Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________ email: crg@isoc-cr.org Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA
On Nov 19, 2015, at 8:43 AM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> wrote:
Hi Susan, Carlos and all,
On previous discussion of the proposed charter and motion, a concern was raised regarding the absence of a rights impact assessment as one of requirements listed as part of the phase 1 (and subsequent phases) considerations.
This issue has been repetitively raised by Avri while she was on Council, and was also included in the NCSG input to the public comment period for the initial report. It was also included in the public comment report prepared by staff, but I am having trouble identifying where this was included in the proposed charter.
My thoughts on this are that, similar to the “Benefit Analysis” and “Risk Assessment” requirements listed under phase 1 deliberations, a rights impact assessment be included to involve identification of a rights impact assessment requirements in phase 1 of the PDP, followed by a design in phase 2, and guidance on how to proceed in phase 3.
I would appreciate us putting aside a few minutes to discuss this during today’s call. I would like to handle this by suggesting an amendment to the motion, specifically resolved clause 1, where along with approving the charter, a reference to a change in the charter be made to include a bullet under the phase 1 deliberations on page 69 saying something to this effect:
“Rights Impact analysis: Have registrants rights that may be affected been analyzed and considered?”
I’m not personally a fan of suggested amendments to motions at a late stage like this, but this isn’t a new topic. It’s been previously discussed on several occasions.
Thanks.
Amr
On Nov 18, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> wrote:
Dear Susan,
sorry for my delayed reaction. Some minor edits for clarity have been suggested for the motion (with track control) <Motion - next-generation RDS PDP WG Charter - edit 18 October 2015[1].docx>
Otherwise I gladly second the motion for tomorrow session as well!
Best regards
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________
email: crg@isoc-cr.org Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA
On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Susan Kawaguchi <susank@fb.com> wrote:
<Motion - next-generation RDS PDP WG Charter - 2 October 2015[1].docx>
FWIW, the rights impact assessment was foreseen to be part of the existing risk and impact assessment issue by the GNSO-Board Process Working Group. As such, it is expected to be considered in the three phase and does not necessarily need to be created as a separate issue. In a PDP this complex, the Process WG tried to group tightly related items into issues, as it is anticipated that it would be more manageable if rights impacts were considered along with other kinds of impacts rather than separately. Best regards, Marika From: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez <crg@isoc-cr.org<mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org>> Date: Thursday 19 November 2015 08:48 To: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org<mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org>> Cc: Susan Kawaguchi <susank@fb.com<mailto:susank@fb.com>>, "council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>" <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] New generation gTLD Registration Directory Service to replace WHOIS and Motion Dear Amr, I´m aware of the discussion Nevertheless I think changes to the charter should be discussed once the whole Group is confirmed, if that is "proceduraly" possible, because * This is not a GNSO initiated proposal * It has been going back and forth between Board, GNSO and WG * any change would be onside if it does not go back and forth the whole loop again I would support to take it as on of the first issues to be dealt with once the group has taken the driving wheel and they feel comfortable But I welcome the discussion Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________ email: crg@isoc-cr.org<mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org> Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA On Nov 19, 2015, at 8:43 AM, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org<mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org>> wrote: Hi Susan, Carlos and all, On previous discussion of the proposed charter and motion, a concern was raised regarding the absence of a rights impact assessment as one of requirements listed as part of the phase 1 (and subsequent phases) considerations. This issue has been repetitively raised by Avri while she was on Council, and was also included in the NCSG input to the public comment period for the initial report. It was also included in the public comment report prepared by staff, but I am having trouble identifying where this was included in the proposed charter. My thoughts on this are that, similar to the "Benefit Analysis" and "Risk Assessment" requirements listed under phase 1 deliberations, a rights impact assessment be included to involve identification of a rights impact assessment requirements in phase 1 of the PDP, followed by a design in phase 2, and guidance on how to proceed in phase 3. I would appreciate us putting aside a few minutes to discuss this during today's call. I would like to handle this by suggesting an amendment to the motion, specifically resolved clause 1, where along with approving the charter, a reference to a change in the charter be made to include a bullet under the phase 1 deliberations on page 69 saying something to this effect: "Rights Impact analysis: Have registrants rights that may be affected been analyzed and considered?" I'm not personally a fan of suggested amendments to motions at a late stage like this, but this isn't a new topic. It's been previously discussed on several occasions. Thanks. Amr On Nov 18, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez <crg@isoc-cr.org<mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org>> wrote: Dear Susan, sorry for my delayed reaction. Some minor edits for clarity have been suggested for the motion (with track control) <Motion - next-generation RDS PDP WG Charter - edit 18 October 2015[1].docx> Otherwise I gladly second the motion for tomorrow session as well! Best regards Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________ email: crg@isoc-cr.org<mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org> Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Susan Kawaguchi <susank@fb.com<mailto:susank@fb.com>> wrote: <Motion - next-generation RDS PDP WG Charter - 2 October 2015[1].docx>
participants (5)
-
Amr Elsadr -
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez -
Glen de Saint Géry -
Marika Konings -
Susan Kawaguchi