Proposed Agenda - Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team meeting #6 on Thursday 18 November at 14.00 UTC
Dear All, Please find below the proposed agenda of the next Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 18 November at 14.00 UTC. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika Registration Data Accuracy Scoping Team – Meeting #6 Thursday 18 November at 14.00 UTC 1. Welcome & Chair Updates (5 minutes) 1. Follow up questions to ICANN org regarding enforcement and Accuracy Reporting System (45 minutes) * Input received from scoping team to date: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1arlKdQkbRkE1LuurmDdd-PZP184_AdFm/edit * Scoping team input * Confirm deadline for submission of questions 1. Homework reminder: * Future explanation / aspirational definition of accuracy see template - https://docs.google.com/document/d/11msexuoqWSUsFj8ZjVvWF-XHpcMJntWH/edit) * Deadline: 2 December 2021 1. Confirm action items & next meeting (Thursday 25 November at 14.00 UTC)
Folks, Attached is a short note on purposes, requirements, etc. In my view, the work for this scoping group is to: - List the agreed upon purposes that registration data is supposed to serve. This is presumably just a matter of copying what's been previously decided, but I've heard some contradictory views, one of which is there are no acceptable third party uses of registration data. - Agree on definitions for the various levels of accuracy validation that might be applied to individual data elements. It will then be up to the PDP WG to set the specific accuracy requirements for individual data elements. The natural questions along the way are: - whether the requirements are sufficient to meet the intended purposes, - whether the actual practices achieve the requirements, and - whether discrepancies between requirements and practice are actually detected, and, if so, what remedial actions take place. See you all on the call tomorrow. Thanks, Steve
Hello all, It seems to me that listing the agreed-upon purposes that registration data is supposed to serve may not be part of our instructions, or if we do need to do so it would be in service of answering Instruction #3: “3. Effectiveness: The Scoping Team will, on the basis of its assessment under 1. and data resulting from 2., undertake an analysis of the accuracy levels measured to assess whether the contractual data accuracy obligations are effective at ensuring that Registered Name Holders provide “accurate and reliable” contact information.” I could see that we can’t assess if obligations are effective without having an understanding of what effective means, which could relate to the purpose for collecting registration data. That said, I don’t think these purposes are related to the work we need to do for Instructions #1 and #2, which have us assessing how accuracy is monitored, considering if there is a definition of accuracy (I think there is), and providing suggestions for how to measure accuracy. I think we’ll get through this work the most efficiently if we stick to the plan and follow the schedule we’ve already agreed on, which means starting with instructions 1 and 2. Looking forward to discussing! Thanks, -- Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E Policy & Privacy Manager Pronouns: she/they swyld@tucows.com +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392 From: Steve Crocker Sent: November 17, 2021 7:59 PM To: Marika Konings Cc: gnso-accuracy-st@icann.org Subject: [GNSO-Accuracy-ST] Purposes vs Requirements Folks, Attached is a short note on purposes, requirements, etc. In my view, the work for this scoping group is to: • List the agreed upon purposes that registration data is supposed to serve. This is presumably just a matter of copying what's been previously decided, but I've heard some contradictory views, one of which is there are no acceptable third party uses of registration data. • Agree on definitions for the various levels of accuracy validation that might be applied to individual data elements. It will then be up to the PDP WG to set the specific accuracy requirements for individual data elements. The natural questions along the way are: • whether the requirements are sufficient to meet the intended purposes, • whether the actual practices achieve the requirements, and • whether discrepancies between requirements and practice are actually detected, and, if so, what remedial actions take place. See you all on the call tomorrow. Thanks, Steve
Hello all, It seems to me that listing the agreed-upon purposes that registration data is supposed to serve may not be part of our instructions, or if we do need to do so it would be in service of answering Instruction #3: “3. Effectiveness: The Scoping Team will, on the basis of its assessment under 1. and data resulting from 2., undertake an analysis of the accuracy levels measured to assess whether the contractual data accuracy obligations are effective at ensuring that Registered Name Holders provide “accurate and reliable” contact information.” I could see that we can’t assess if obligations are effective without having an understanding of what effective means, which could relate to the purpose for collecting registration data. That said, I don’t think these purposes are related to the work we need to do for Instructions #1 and #2, which have us assessing how accuracy is monitored, considering if there is a definition of accuracy (I think there is), and providing suggestions for how to measure accuracy. I think we’ll get through this work the most efficiently if we stick to the plan and follow the schedule we’ve already agreed on, which means starting with instructions 1 and 2. Looking forward to discussing! Thanks, -- Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E Policy & Privacy Manager Pronouns: she/they swyld@tucows.com +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392 From: Steve Crocker Sent: November 17, 2021 7:59 PM To: Marika Konings Cc: gnso-accuracy-st@icann.org Subject: [GNSO-Accuracy-ST] Purposes vs Requirements Folks, Attached is a short note on purposes, requirements, etc. In my view, the work for this scoping group is to: • List the agreed upon purposes that registration data is supposed to serve. This is presumably just a matter of copying what's been previously decided, but I've heard some contradictory views, one of which is there are no acceptable third party uses of registration data. • Agree on definitions for the various levels of accuracy validation that might be applied to individual data elements. It will then be up to the PDP WG to set the specific accuracy requirements for individual data elements. The natural questions along the way are: • whether the requirements are sufficient to meet the intended purposes, • whether the actual practices achieve the requirements, and • whether discrepancies between requirements and practice are actually detected, and, if so, what remedial actions take place. See you all on the call tomorrow. Thanks, Steve
participants (3)
-
Marika Konings -
Sarah Wyld -
Steve Crocker