I support the path laid out by Alex.

I once more register dissatisfaction that the Phase 2 roadmap does not include the issue of geographic differentiation. This was clearly deferred to Phase 2 in Toronto (see the discussion ending on page 34 of the Friday 3rd transcript) and at an extensive discussion on 19 Feb (ending on page 52 of the transcript) saying that there would be a study and further discussion in phase 2.

Alan



At 29/03/2019 01:39 AM, Alex Deacon wrote:
Thanks Marika,

Here are the IPCs thoughts on your questions and how to best proceed with the Phase 2 work. 

Method

We believe the Phase 2 work should occur in two separate and concurrent work streams.


We also believe that the "legal small team" should continue to meet concurrent with the two work streams described above, with the focus of drafting questions to our legal resource specific to our phase 2 work and analyzing responses received (both existing and TBD). 

Additional thoughts
Prioritization

Legal Small Group Priorities


Work Stream One Priorities
Work Stream Two Priorities
Dependencies

Any large project with parallel work streams is subject to dependencies, however we believe it is important that the EPDP team avoid serializing its work and steer clear of (while still  recognizing) potential deadlocks in the process.

Specifically, we appreciate the important legal issues related to controllership, risk and liability and agree that these questions must be addressed in a way that results in a win-win situation whereby risks are diminished for contracted parties and authenticated/accredited users have reliable access to requests for non-public registration data.  As above, we believe that this important discussion happen in parallel with the work outlined in the work streams.
___________
Alex Deacon
Cole Valley Consulting
alex@colevalleyconsulting.com
+1.415.488.6009



On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:50 PM Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org > wrote:

Dear EPDP Team,

 

As a reminder, please share any input you may have on the phase 2 mind map (see attached) by Thursday 28 March. In addition, your input is requested on the following questions:

 
How should the team prioritize going forward?
What next steps should be taken in relations to the dependencies identified?
What should be the next steps in relation to the legal guidance to date?
What is the target date for publication of the Initial Report that the EPDP Team is aiming to work toward?
 

Please share any feedback you may have with the mailing list.

 

Best regards,

 

Caitlin, Berry and Marika

 

Marika Konings

Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation ffor Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Email: marika.konings@icann.org  

 

Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO

Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages.

 
_______________________________________________
Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team

_______________________________________________
Gnso-epdp-team mailing list
Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team