Proposed Agenda - EPDP Team Meeting #35
Dear All, Please find the proposed agenda for our next meeting below. Thank you. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- EPDP Meeting #35 Agenda Tuesday, 18 December 2018 Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes) Review of outstanding action items Other updates, if applicable Announce LC Members and introduce agenda for first meeting (EDPB questions) Review of commonly-asked Google Form questions Continue review of list of topics for further discussion Privacy/Proxy Services - how the P/P records appear in the public WHOIS Current Language in Temp Spec - Appendix A, Section 2.6: Notwithstanding Sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 of this Appendix, in the case of a domain name registration where a privacy/proxy service used (e.g. where data associated with a natural person is masked), Registrar MUST return in response to any query full WHOIS data, including the existing proxy/proxy pseudonymized email. Margie to introduce outstanding issue for discussion Proposed outcome: confirm requirement [BC/IPC support confirmation.] Discuss next steps Registrant Consent to Publication – option for registrants to request to have all of their RDS data published Current Language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3: As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should give the registrant the option to opt in to having their WHOIS Contact Data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC/an EPDP member of RrSG also support confirmation.] Consent by the Registrant to Publish and/or Disclose for technical contact Current language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3 contains this requirement: Registrar MAY provide the opportunity for the Admin/Tech and/or other contacts to provide Consent to publish additional contact information outlined in Section 2.4 of Appendix A. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should seek consent from those listed as additional contacts (admin/tech) to having their information as reflected in the Contact data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC support confirmation.] Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any
Dear Marika, Berry and Caitlin, Regarding last Thursday's meeting and the discussion about the impact analysis I am willing to volunteer for that. Best Hadia From: Gnso-epdp-team [mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Caitlin Tubergen Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 3:23 PM To: GNSO EPDP Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] Proposed Agenda - EPDP Team Meeting #35 Dear All, Please find the proposed agenda for our next meeting below. Thank you. Best regards, Marika, Berry, and Caitlin -- EPDP Meeting #35 Agenda Tuesday, 18 December 2018 1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes) * Review of outstanding action items * Other updates, if applicable * Announce LC Members and introduce agenda for first meeting (EDPB questions) * Review of commonly-asked Google Form questions 1. Continue review of list of topics for further discussion * Privacy/Proxy Services - how the P/P records appear in the public WHOIS * Current Language in Temp Spec - Appendix A, Section 2.6: Notwithstanding Sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 of this Appendix, in the case of a domain name registration where a privacy/proxy service used (e.g. where data associated with a natural person is masked), Registrar MUST return in response to any query full WHOIS data, including the existing proxy/proxy pseudonymized email. * Margie to introduce outstanding issue for discussion * Proposed outcome: confirm requirement [BC/IPC support confirmation.] * Discuss next steps * Registrant Consent to Publication – option for registrants to request to have all of their RDS data published * Current Language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3: As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder. * Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should give the registrant the option to opt in to having their WHOIS Contact Data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. * Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC/an EPDP member of RrSG also support confirmation.] * Consent by the Registrant to Publish and/or Disclose for technical contact * Current language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3 contains this requirement: Registrar MAY provide the opportunity for the Admin/Tech and/or other contacts to provide Consent to publish additional contact information outlined in Section 2.4 of Appendix A. * Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should seek consent from those listed as additional contacts (admin/tech) to having their information as reflected in the Contact data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. * Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC support confirmation.] 1. Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC * Confirm action items * Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any
Thank you. Am I getting this right? Facebook from BC is leading and introducing topics on each segment and issues and getting air time over and over and over again? This has been happening from the beginning of EPDP meetings. We have been sidetracked or discussed matters over and over because Facebook representative decided to put something on the agenda. We shall name todays meeting Facebook issues with the privacy of domain name registrants. Astonishing. On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:23 AM Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Please find the proposed agenda for our next meeting below.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
--
*EPDP Meeting #35 Agenda*
Tuesday, 18 December 2018
1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes)
1. Review of outstanding action items 2. Other updates, if applicable 3. Announce LC Members and introduce agenda for first meeting (EDPB questions) 4. Review of commonly-asked Google Form questions
1. Continue review of list of topics for further discussion
- *Privacy/Proxy Services *- how the P/P records appear in the public WHOIS - Current Language in Temp Spec - Appendix A, Section 2.6: *Notwithstanding Sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 of this Appendix, in the case of a domain name registration where a privacy/proxy service used (e.g. where data associated with a natural person is masked), Registrar MUST return in response to any query full WHOIS data, including the existing proxy/proxy pseudonymized email.* - Margie to introduce outstanding issue for discussion - Proposed outcome: confirm requirement [BC/IPC support confirmation.] - Discuss next steps
- *Registrant Consent to Publication* – option for registrants to request to have all of their RDS data published - Current Language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3: *As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder.* - Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should give the registrant the option to opt in to having their WHOIS Contact Data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. - Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC/an EPDP member of RrSG also support confirmation.]
- *Consent by the Registrant to Publish and/or Disclose for technical contact * - Current language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3 contains this requirement: *Registrar MAY provide the opportunity for the Admin/Tech and/or other contacts to provide Consent to publish additional contact information outlined in Section 2.4 of Appendix A.* - Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should seek consent from those listed as additional contacts (admin/tech) to having their information as reflected in the Contact data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. - Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC support confirmation.]
1. Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC 1. Confirm action items 2. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
-- Farzaneh
Dear All Thus type of coloured language is counter productive We need to listen to the song and nit be worried about the singer If the song is pleasant we continue to listen and if is disturbing g we put it off Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 18 Dec 2018, at 13:12, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you.
Am I getting this right? Facebook from BC is leading and introducing topics on each segment and issues and getting air time over and over and over again? This has been happening from the beginning of EPDP meetings. We have been sidetracked or discussed matters over and over because Facebook representative decided to put something on the agenda. We shall name todays meeting Facebook issues with the privacy of domain name registrants. Astonishing.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:23 AM Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Please find the proposed agenda for our next meeting below.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
--
EPDP Meeting #35 Agenda
Tuesday, 18 December 2018
Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes) Review of outstanding action items Other updates, if applicable Announce LC Members and introduce agenda for first meeting (EDPB questions) Review of commonly-asked Google Form questions
Continue review of list of topics for further discussion
Privacy/Proxy Services - how the P/P records appear in the public WHOIS Current Language in Temp Spec - Appendix A, Section 2.6: Notwithstanding Sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 of this Appendix, in the case of a domain name registration where a privacy/proxy service used (e.g. where data associated with a natural person is masked), Registrar MUST return in response to any query full WHOIS data, including the existing proxy/proxy pseudonymized email. Margie to introduce outstanding issue for discussion Proposed outcome: confirm requirement [BC/IPC support confirmation.] Discuss next steps
Registrant Consent to Publication – option for registrants to request to have all of their RDS data published Current Language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3: As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should give the registrant the option to opt in to having their WHOIS Contact Data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC/an EPDP member of RrSG also support confirmation.]
Consent by the Registrant to Publish and/or Disclose for technical contact Current language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3 contains this requirement: Registrar MAY provide the opportunity for the Admin/Tech and/or other contacts to provide Consent to publish additional contact information outlined in Section 2.4 of Appendix A. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should seek consent from those listed as additional contacts (admin/tech) to having their information as reflected in the Contact data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC support confirmation.] Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team -- Farzaneh
Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
Very poetic and pleasant of you Kavouss. But no. Unfortunately, this group has been singing Florence Jenkins version of Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen. Anyhow. no point in arguing. We shall listen on as we have been. On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 7:59 AM Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All Thus type of coloured language is counter productive We need to listen to the song and nit be worried about the singer If the song is pleasant we continue to listen and if is disturbing g we put it off Regards Kavouss
Sent from my iPhone
On 18 Dec 2018, at 13:12, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you.
Am I getting this right? Facebook from BC is leading and introducing topics on each segment and issues and getting air time over and over and over again? This has been happening from the beginning of EPDP meetings. We have been sidetracked or discussed matters over and over because Facebook representative decided to put something on the agenda. We shall name todays meeting Facebook issues with the privacy of domain name registrants. Astonishing.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:23 AM Caitlin Tubergen < caitlin.tubergen@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Please find the proposed agenda for our next meeting below.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
--
*EPDP Meeting #35 Agenda*
Tuesday, 18 December 2018
1. Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) 2. Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes)
1. Review of outstanding action items 2. Other updates, if applicable 3. Announce LC Members and introduce agenda for first meeting (EDPB questions) 4. Review of commonly-asked Google Form questions
1. Continue review of list of topics for further discussion
- *Privacy/Proxy Services *- how the P/P records appear in the public WHOIS - Current Language in Temp Spec - Appendix A, Section 2.6: *Notwithstanding Sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 of this Appendix, in the case of a domain name registration where a privacy/proxy service used (e.g. where data associated with a natural person is masked), Registrar MUST return in response to any query full WHOIS data, including the existing proxy/proxy pseudonymized email.* - Margie to introduce outstanding issue for discussion - Proposed outcome: confirm requirement [BC/IPC support confirmation.] - Discuss next steps
- *Registrant Consent to Publication* – option for registrants to request to have all of their RDS data published - Current Language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3: *As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder.* - Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should give the registrant the option to opt in to having their WHOIS Contact Data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. - Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC/an EPDP member of RrSG also support confirmation.]
- *Consent by the Registrant to Publish and/or Disclose for technical contact * - Current language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3 contains this requirement: *Registrar MAY provide the opportunity for the Admin/Tech and/or other contacts to provide Consent to publish additional contact information outlined in Section 2.4 of Appendix A.* - Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should seek consent from those listed as additional contacts (admin/tech) to having their information as reflected in the Contact data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. - Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC support confirmation.]
1. Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC 1. Confirm action items 2. Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
-- Farzaneh
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
Hi Farzaneh: After the publication of the initial report, the Support Team published a list of remaining issues and provided the EPDP with a timeframe to recommend additional, outstanding issues. The issues on the agenda for today were the only ones offered in response to the request. The issues might raise conflicting discussion but the process for how they got on the agenda should not be a surprise or controversial. Best regards, Kurt
On Dec 18, 2018, at 4:12 AM, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you.
Am I getting this right? Facebook from BC is leading and introducing topics on each segment and issues and getting air time over and over and over again? This has been happening from the beginning of EPDP meetings. We have been sidetracked or discussed matters over and over because Facebook representative decided to put something on the agenda. We shall name todays meeting Facebook issues with the privacy of domain name registrants. Astonishing.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:23 AM Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org <mailto:caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All,
Please find the proposed agenda for our next meeting below.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Marika, Berry, and Caitlin
--
EPDP Meeting #35 Agenda <> Tuesday, 18 December 2018
<> <>Roll Call & SOI Updates (5 minutes) Welcome and Updates from EPDP Team Chair (5 minutes) Review of outstanding action items Other updates, if applicable Announce LC Members and introduce agenda for first meeting (EDPB questions) Review of commonly-asked Google Form questions
Continue review of list of topics for further discussion
Privacy/Proxy Services - how the P/P records appear in the public WHOIS Current Language in Temp Spec - Appendix A, Section 2.6: Notwithstanding Sections 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 of this Appendix, in the case of a domain name registration where a privacy/proxy service used (e.g. where data associated with a natural person is masked), Registrar MUST return in response to any query full WHOIS data, including the existing proxy/proxy pseudonymized email. Margie to introduce outstanding issue for discussion Proposed outcome: confirm requirement [BC/IPC support confirmation.] Discuss next steps
Registrant Consent to Publication – option for registrants to request to have all of their RDS data published Current Language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3: As soon as commercially reasonable, Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the Registered Name Holder to provide its Consent to publish the additional contact information outlined in Section 2.3 of Appendix A for the Registered Name Holder. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should give the registrant the option to opt in to having their WHOIS Contact Data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC/an EPDP member of RrSG also support confirmation.]
Consent by the Registrant to Publish and/or Disclose for technical contact Current language in Temp Spec, Section 7.2.1/ Appendix C – Section 2.3 contains this requirement: Registrar MAY provide the opportunity for the Admin/Tech and/or other contacts to provide Consent to publish additional contact information outlined in Section 2.4 of Appendix A. Margie to introduce issue: Whether registrars should seek consent from those listed as additional contacts (admin/tech) to having their information as reflected in the Contact data be published rather than be redacted. This is an issue that would be available to both natural persons and legal persons. Proposed outcome: confirm this requirement [IPC/BC/SSAC support confirmation.] Wrap and confirm next meeting to be scheduled for Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 14.00 UTC Confirm action items Confirm questions for ICANN Org, if any
_______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org <mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team>-- Farzaneh _______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team
participants (5)
-
Arasteh -
Caitlin Tubergen -
farzaneh badii -
Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi -
Kurt Pritz