Regarding relevant resources, I call attention to the RDS-WHOIS2 Specific Review Recommendation 5.1: The Accuracy Reporting System, which was instituted to address concerns regarding RDS (WHOIS) contact data accuracy, has demonstrated that there is still an accuracy concern and therefore such monitoring must continue. ICANN organization should continue to monitor accuracy and/or contactability through either the ARS or a comparable tool/methodology. Alan At 2021-10-05 11:48 AM, Caitlin Tubergen wrote:
Dear Accuracy Scoping Team Members,
Please find the notes and action items from todayâs meeting below.
Best regards,
Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
--
Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team Meeting ##1
Tuesday 5 October at 14.00 UTC
Action Items * All team members to review both (a) the <https://community.icann.org/x/QoFaCg>Council instructions and assignments and (b) the <https://community.icann.org/x/SoFaCg>Index of relevant resources in advance of the next meeting. * All team members to review and provide input on the questions identified in assignment background briefing #1 - 4 by the next meeting. * Michael P. to describe third party email address idea to scoping team over email list. * Support Staff to send a Doodle Poll to determine preferred time for standing meeting after next week. Support Staff to also review poll results to determine a possible meeting rotation schedule. * Welcome and introductions (30 minutes) * Each team member to introduce themselves and share objectives for this effort (results of survey to be shared in advance of the meeting) * Members were invited to share objectives. * See also, survey results * Consider how objectives align and how obstacles can be avoided. * Required documents for review by Scoping Team (10 minutes) * Council instructions and assignments (see <https://community.icann.org/x/QoFaCg>https://community.icann.org/x/QoFaCg) * Quite a bit of thought went into what the Scoping Team is expected to do and what it is expected to consider * Please ensure you read the instructions in their entirety * Index of relevant resources (see <https://community.icann.org/x/SoFaCg>https://community.icann.org/x/SoFaCg) * Support Staff pulled together a list of resources, dating back to 2003, relating to the history of Whois accuracy * The index highlights the relevant page references and status of documents * Several members have already begun doing homework by flagging missing documents. Please feel free to add additional documents if you believe there are missing documents. * For each of the four assignments identified in the Council instructions, Support Staff has created a background briefing. If you believe relevant information is missing, please add comments in the relevant Google docs. * The documents begin with a description of the assignment, and then the assignment is broken down in smaller pieces. Support staff endeavored to list the relevant information needed for the assignment. If you believe Support Staff missed anything, please point this out in the relevant document. * For each assignment breakdown, Support Staff identified specific questions. * The areas for requested input are highlighted in orange. * The bulk of work, for now, will be Assignments 1 and 2. * Support Staff plans to provide a detailed briefing on the background briefings during the next call. * Assignment Background briefings:
· Assignment #1 - <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/16mFQkzM4tTj84736J-tlZ8T7tFeiFwfx/edit__;!!PtGJab4!pZhkUTK4NeZFLS0ZpANDf6HYgZt4s0dAQsMJrF2di8O37askrPxZaPbScFYUnkqzmEX7C-QsCM4$>https://docs.google.com/document/d/16mFQkzM4tTj84736J-tlZ8T7tFeiFwfx/edit [docs.google.com]
· Assignment #4 - <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1Z8t-uH4gRqXytHOGnIkZ2qMSJctgR_kD/edit__;!!PtGJab4!pZhkUTK4NeZFLS0ZpANDf6HYgZt4s0dAQsMJrF2di8O37askrPxZaPbScFYUnkqzmEX7HmlI8rY$>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z8t-uH4gRqXytHOGnIkZ2qMSJctgR_kD/edit [docs.google.com] * Discuss proposed next steps (15 minutes) * Diversity and inclusiveness * The Scoping Team does not have any South American participants. If you know anyone, please think about reaching out to these individuals. It is important to factor in all viewpoints, and geographic diversity is important.
* What can the Team do to address this shortcoming in the composition of the group?
* 1. Potential use of alternates would anyone be opposed to the use of alternates? No objections from the group.
* 2. For the SSAD ODP, there is a dedicated email address for third parties to provide comments, basically, a form of âdrive-by participationâ. Because this is a scoping team, there will probably not be a public comment associated with the teamâs work. Would like to consider allowing a similar email address for this group.
* Feedback from Team: * Do not understand the proposal * Action: Michael P. to articulate proposal in writing to the list * Some organizations have a global representation and perhaps feedback from Latin America can be channeled through the members of this group. * Alternates from Latin American could be identified. * Similar to the SSAD ODP example, the idea would be to set up a link to an email address that interested third parties can send their suggestions to. The email address would be linked on the Scoping Teamâs wiki page. The list would be publicly archived. This aims at lowering the barrier for entry for those who may not have the time or the resources to fully participate but could submit comments or questions. * Support diversity of input; however, need to be very clear about what kind of input the team is looking for. To gather useful and actionable input, a targeted survey may be more useful than an email list.
* Meeting frequency / timing: proposal is to start with weekly plenary sessions to go through background briefings and develop work plan. Following that, try agile approach and have small teams make progress on work items. * For the first two of three meetings, consider a 90-minute timeframe to work on the project plan and initial scoping.
* Proposal to meet next Tuesday for 90 minutes
* Feedback: * Consider using small teams only if the full team doesnât work * May choose to rotate meeting times to be mindful of AP colleagues * All team members are expected to have reviewed the items under #2 by the next meeting. * All team members to provide input on the questions identified in assignment background briefing #1 - 4 by the next meeting walk through of assignment bbackground briefings and related questions will commence during next weekâs meeting. * Confirm action items & next meeting (Tuesday 12 October at 14.00 UTC) * All team members to review both (a) the <https://community.icann.org/x/QoFaCg>Council instructions and assignments and (b) the <https://community.icann.org/x/SoFaCg>Index of relevant resources in advance of the next meeting. * All team members to review and provide input on the questions identified in assignment background briefing #1 - 4 by the next meeting. * Michael P. to describe third party email address idea to scoping team over email list. * Support Staff to send a Doodle Poll to determine preferred time for standing meeting after next week. Support Staff to also review poll results to determine a possible meeting rotation schedule.
_______________________________________________ GNSO-Accuracy-ST mailing list GNSO-Accuracy-ST@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-accuracy-st
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.