My Apologies Peter, I called you by your surname in the last email. Kind regards, Chris From: "Chris Pelling" <chris@netearth.net> To: gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org Sent: Tuesday, 1 May, 2018 21:06:04 Subject: Re: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] PP LEA Framework: Remaining items for IRT feedback (requested deadline 8 May) Hi Roman, I am putting on the record that I support 1 business day, I certainly find it unacceptable for immediate as it simply is not workable. Also to take into consideration is if the actual law enforcement in the local jurisdiction of the registrar works that fast in the first place. Kind regards, Chris From: "Roman, Peter (CRM)" <Peter.Roman@usdoj.gov> To: gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org Sent: Tuesday, 1 May, 2018 20:54:20 Subject: Re: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] PP LEA Framework: Remaining items for IRT feedback (requested deadline 8 May) I’m going to request, as I did before, that the choice of response times in the version of the agreement put out for public comment not be a binary choice between 24 hours and one business day, because that implies that the PSWG wants the 24 hour response time. The PSWG wants an immediate response time, so if there is going to be a public debate, it should be between what the PSWG actually wants (immediate), what the providers want (one business day), and the compromise (24 hours). Peter Roman Senior Counsel Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section Criminal Division Department of Justice 1301 New York Ave., NW Washington, DC 20530 (202) 305-1323 peter.roman@usdoj.gov From: Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl [mailto:gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Amy Bivins Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2018 3:07 PM To: gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org Subject: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] PP LEA Framework: Remaining items for IRT feedback (requested deadline 8 May) Dear Colleagues, Upon reviewing your most recent feedback on the LEA Framework Specification, we have a couple of items left where there isn’t a clear consensus among the members of the IRT. Please review this list this week and share any additional feedback you have no later than next Tuesday, 8 May. We can discuss on our scheduled call next week, if needed. I’ve attached the most recent markup, showing in redline only the comments on the sections where there is some disagreement among members of the IRT. For reference, those sections and issues are: Section 3.3.1 (time period for responses to high-priority requests)—it appears likely we will not obtain consensus on this item Section 4.1.2: The proposed addition of “without limitations,” either here or moved to Section 4.1.4. Section 4.1.2.5.: The proposed addition of this section in its entirety. Section 4.1.6: The proposed addition of this section in its entirety, including whether this would be redundant or whether this should be incorporated elsewhere. Best, Amy Amy E. Bivins Registrar Services and Engagement Senior Manager Registrar Services and Industry Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Direct: +1 (202) 249-7551 Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 Email: amy.bivins@icann.org www.icann.org _______________________________________________ Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl mailing list Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl _______________________________________________ Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl mailing list Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl