Re: [CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] URGENT: DRAFT ALAC Statement on the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report
Thanks Seun. Note that Rec #6 does allow you to specify that your contact information be disdplayed (on the registrar site only!) but no timeline when they must provide this option. If you are in general supporting the issuing of the statement, it would be helpful to put that on the record (no obligation obviously though!). On not accepting the report on the whole, this was debated on the last CPWG call and the consensus (but not unanimous) was that we not do that. Alan At 15/02/2019 04:59 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: Hello Alan, Thanks for sharing this which is good. A few minor editorials and comment: 1. "“that it would be difficult to argue that *that* processing to prevent DNS...." 2 "...Phase 2 will *be* address the deferred issues as..." 3. I am not sure why we say "we do not accept" certain issues yet we seem to end our statement by accepting the report. Since/if we have red-lines then we should clearly not accept the report as a whole. However if we can live with the report as indicated in the last paragraph then I suggest we modify the following: "To be specific, the results which we cannot accept are:...." So it doesn't contradict the acceptance stated in the last paragraph. That said, I agree with Gorge, that the element of choice/consent is being taken away from registrants in terms of what they want to provide and publish. It's election period in my country, my apologies as I won't be present at upcoming cpwg call Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 01:28 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: As discussed on the CPWG call yesterday, attached please find the draft statement to be attached to the report. I believe that it addresses all of the issues we discussed and for which there was general concern. As decided, we will support the overall report, but note that some of the particular recommendations do not have our support. Others we will support but nevertheless have concerns. The lack of focus on public interest issues puts into question whether Phase 2 will suitably address access and other issues. THIS STATEMENT MUST BE SUBMITTED BY THE END OF FRIDAY. Please make any comments with utmost urgency. Maureen tells me that she will issue a VERY SHORT Consensus Call tomorrow, to complete prior to the submission deadline. WORD and PDF formats are attached. Alan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
Hello Alan, Am fine with the statement moving forward I just feel it doesn't read well that we outrightly do not accept certain yet accept the package Cheers! Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 15:42 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca wrote:
Thanks Seun.
Note that Rec #6 does allow you to specify that your contact information be disdplayed (on the registrar site only!) but no timeline when they must provide this option.
If you are in general supporting the issuing of the statement, it would be helpful to put that on the record (no obligation obviously though!).
On not accepting the report on the whole, this was debated on the last CPWG call and the consensus (but not unanimous) was that we not do that.
Alan
At 15/02/2019 04:59 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
Hello Alan,
Thanks for sharing this which is good. A few minor editorials and comment:
1. "“that it would be difficult to argue that *that* processing to prevent DNS...."
2 "...Phase 2 will *be* address the deferred issues as..."
3. I am not sure why we say "we do not accept" certain issues yet we seem to end our statement by accepting the report. Since/if we have red-lines then we should clearly not accept the report as a whole. However if we can live with the report as indicated in the last paragraph then I suggest we modify the following:
"To be specific, the results which we cannot accept are:...." So it doesn't contradict the acceptance stated in the last paragraph.
That said, I agree with Gorge, that the element of choice/consent is being taken away from registrants in terms of what they want to provide and publish.
It's election period in my country, my apologies as I won't be present at upcoming cpwg call
Regards
Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 01:28 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca wrote: As discussed on the CPWG call yesterday, attached please find the draft statement to be attached to the report. I believe that it addresses all of the issues we discussed and for which there was general concern. As decided, we will support the overall report, but note that some of the particular recommendations do not have our support. Others we will support but nevertheless have concerns. The lack of focus on public interest issues puts into question whether Phase 2 will suitably address access and other issues. THIS STATEMENT MUST BE SUBMITTED BY THE END OF FRIDAY. Please make any comments with utmost urgency. Maureen tells me that she will issue a VERY SHORT Consensus Call tomorrow, to complete prior to the submission deadline. WORD and PDF formats are attached. Alan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
Perhaps the opinion of the ALAC/CPWG will change on today's call! Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On February 15, 2019 9:48:49 AM EST, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote: Hello Alan, Am fine with the statement moving forward I just feel it doesn't read well that we outrightly do not accept certain yet accept the package Cheers! Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 15:42 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: Thanks Seun. Note that Rec #6 does allow you to specify that your contact information be disdplayed (on the registrar site only!) but no timeline when they must provide this option. If you are in general supporting the issuing of the statement, it would be helpful to put that on the record (no obligation obviously though!). On not accepting the report on the whole, this was debated on the last CPWG call and the consensus (but not unanimous) was that we not do that. Alan At 15/02/2019 04:59 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: Hello Alan, Thanks for sharing this which is good. A few minor editorials and comment: 1. "“that it would be difficult to argue that *that* processing to prevent DNS...." 2 "...Phase 2 will *be* address the deferred issues as..." 3. I am not sure why we say "we do not accept" certain issues yet we seem to end our statement by accepting the report. Since/if we have red-lines then we should clearly not accept the report as a whole. However if we can live with the report as indicated in the last paragraph then I suggest we modify the following: "To be specific, the results which we cannot accept are:...." So it doesn't contradict the acceptance stated in the last paragraph. That said, I agree with Gorge, that the element of choice/consent is being taken away from registrants in terms of what they want to provide and publish. It's election period in my country, my apologies as I won't be present at upcoming cpwg call Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 01:28 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: As discussed on the CPWG call yesterday, attached please find the draft statement to be attached to the report. I believe that it addresses all of the issues we discussed and for which there was general concern. As decided, we will support the overall report, but note that some of the particular recommendations do not have our support. Others we will support but nevertheless have concerns. The lack of focus on public interest issues puts into question whether Phase 2 will suitably address access and other issues. THIS STATEMENT MUST BE SUBMITTED BY THE END OF FRIDAY. Please make any comments with utmost urgency. Maureen tells me that she will issue a VERY SHORT Consensus Call tomorrow, to complete prior to the submission deadline. WORD and PDF formats are attached. Alan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
+1. Statement Ok. On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:56 AM Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Perhaps the opinion of the ALAC/CPWG will change on today's call!
Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.
On February 15, 2019 9:48:49 AM EST, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Alan,
Am fine with the statement moving forward I just feel it doesn't read well that we outrightly do not accept certain yet accept the package
Cheers!
Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 15:42 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca wrote:
Thanks Seun.
Note that Rec #6 does allow you to specify that your contact information be disdplayed (on the registrar site only!) but no timeline when they must provide this option.
If you are in general supporting the issuing of the statement, it would be helpful to put that on the record (no obligation obviously though!).
On not accepting the report on the whole, this was debated on the last CPWG call and the consensus (but not unanimous) was that we not do that.
Alan
At 15/02/2019 04:59 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
Hello Alan,
Thanks for sharing this which is good. A few minor editorials and comment:
1. "“that it would be difficult to argue that *that* processing to prevent DNS...."
2 "...Phase 2 will *be* address the deferred issues as..."
3. I am not sure why we say "we do not accept" certain issues yet we seem to end our statement by accepting the report. Since/if we have red-lines then we should clearly not accept the report as a whole. However if we can live with the report as indicated in the last paragraph then I suggest we modify the following:
"To be specific, the results which we cannot accept are:...." So it doesn't contradict the acceptance stated in the last paragraph.
That said, I agree with Gorge, that the element of choice/consent is being taken away from registrants in terms of what they want to provide and publish.
It's election period in my country, my apologies as I won't be present at upcoming cpwg call
Regards
Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 01:28 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca wrote: As discussed on the CPWG call yesterday, attached please find the draft statement to be attached to the report. I believe that it addresses all of the issues we discussed and for which there was general concern. As decided, we will support the overall report, but note that some of the particular recommendations do not have our support. Others we will support but nevertheless have concerns. The lack of focus on public interest issues puts into question whether Phase 2 will suitably address access and other issues. THIS STATEMENT MUST BE SUBMITTED BY THE END OF FRIDAY. Please make any comments with utmost urgency. Maureen tells me that she will issue a VERY SHORT Consensus Call tomorrow, to complete prior to the submission deadline. WORD and PDF formats are attached. Alan _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
participants (3)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Javier Rua -
Seun Ojedeji