In agreement with Theo and Sara here regarding the recommendation. Thanks Eric On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Sara Bockey <sbockey@godaddy.com> wrote:
Agree with Theo, recommendation stands as previously proposed. Adding a couple of fields is much simpler than setting up separate deposits.
Sara
*sara bockey*
*sr. policy manager | **Go**Daddy™*
*sbockey@godaddy.com <sbockey@godaddy.com> 480-366-3616*
*skype: sbockey*
*This email message and any attachments hereto is intended for use only by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy of this message and its attachments.*
*From: *Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of theo geurts <gtheo@xs4all.nl> *Reply-To: *"gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org
*Date: *Sunday, May 20, 2018 at 11:27 AM *To: *"gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org" <gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl@icann.org>, Amy Bivins <amy.bivins@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Gdd-gnso-ppsai-impl] PP IRT question, no meeting Tues, fees info to be distributed shortly
Hi Amy,
I think that recommendation still stands. Flexibility is key here.
Thanks,
Theo
On 20-5-2018 19:46, Amy Bivins wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
This week’s PP IRT meeting will be canceled, as the issues on our to-do list this week can be addressed without a call.
*We have one question for you, below. Please consider this issue and provide your comments on this no later than 28 May.* I hope to be able to update you later this week on the status of the RrSG request (received by ICANN 4 May) to pause this IRT’s work (and the COA’s letter in opposition). I also expect to be able to send the fees-related documentation to you within the next couple of days.
*Background*
The IRT has recommended that, with respect to the data escrow specification, Privacy and Proxy service providers that are affiliated with an ICANN-accredited registrar should be able to meet their data escrow deposit obligations through the registrar (so the registrar would deposit the PP registration data and underlying customer data, similar to the process currently followed under the interim RAA specification).
In order to achieve this result, ICANN would need to make slight updates to the Registrar Data Escrow specification, to add two required data elements for the deposit (the privacy/proxy service provider ID and the domain ID).
*Question: *Is this an acceptable result (updating registrar data escrow specification for PP-affiliated registrars that wish to have combined data escrow deposits), or should ICANN revert to having a completely separate data escrow specification that all PPs must deposit under, regardless of whether the PP is affiliated with a registrar or not? Please note that, regardless of the answer to this question, there will be a separate PP data escrow specification for (a) third-party providers and (b) providers that work with more than 1 registrar.
Based on discussions thus far, we believe the intent was the former (updating the registrar specification) but we wanted to confirm before finalizing that proposed update to the registrar specification and distributing it to the designated data escrow agents to alert them to the proposed update.
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