Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN Org response - redaction of city field
Hi Marika & Team – Thank you for all of the hard work this week. Will you be circulating notes of the outcomes of our deliberations? It will be helpful so we can share with our constituencies. Margie From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Friday, January 18, 2019 at 12:51 PM To: GNSO EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN Org response - redaction of city field Dear EPDP Team, Here is the ICANN Org response to the question why city field is redacted in the Temporary Specification: Regarding the EPDP Team’s question about why the City field is redacted in the Temp Spec, the Cookbook provides the following rationale: "The registrant’s state/province and country will be published, but the address fields that could be used to more specifically identify the registrant would not be included in the public WHOIS (e.g. street, city, postal code). This would enable non-accredited users to determine the registrant’s general location and likely jurisdiction but would generally not enable identification of the registrant”. The link to the Cookbook: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdpr-compliance-interim-model-08mar18-en.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_files_gdpr-2Dcompliance-2Dinterim-2Dmodel-2D08mar18-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=_4XWSt8rUHZPiRG6CoP4Fnk_CCk4p550lffeMi3E1z8&m=QO2LvqWH8YCXM7p1pMfWKqyNqTo9IjpUJ8rmCnn_TJY&s=0_QNILm_X7Kxmm3Gb-Lx0oX-62-wOJehuW7efBXn1sQ&e=>. The above quote is on page 26. The response will get posted on the relevant page on the wiki. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>.
Hi Margie, all, The notes and outcomes for day 1 and 2 were already sent at the end of each day. We expect that the notes and outcomes from today’s meeting will go out some time tomorrow. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika On 18 Jan 2019, at 19:20, Margie Milam <margiemilam@fb.com<mailto:margiemilam@fb.com>> wrote: Hi Marika & Team – Thank you for all of the hard work this week. Will you be circulating notes of the outcomes of our deliberations? It will be helpful so we can share with our constituencies. Margie From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Date: Friday, January 18, 2019 at 12:51 PM To: GNSO EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org>> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN Org response - redaction of city field Dear EPDP Team, Here is the ICANN Org response to the question why city field is redacted in the Temporary Specification: Regarding the EPDP Team’s question about why the City field is redacted in the Temp Spec, the Cookbook provides the following rationale: "The registrant’s state/province and country will be published, but the address fields that could be used to more specifically identify the registrant would not be included in the public WHOIS (e.g. street, city, postal code). This would enable non-accredited users to determine the registrant’s general location and likely jurisdiction but would generally not enable identification of the registrant”. The link to the Cookbook: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdpr-compliance-interim-model-08mar18-en.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_files_gdpr-2Dcompliance-2Dinterim-2Dmodel-2D08mar18-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=_4XWSt8rUHZPiRG6CoP4Fnk_CCk4p550lffeMi3E1z8&m=QO2LvqWH8YCXM7p1pMfWKqyNqTo9IjpUJ8rmCnn_TJY&s=0_QNILm_X7Kxmm3Gb-Lx0oX-62-wOJehuW7efBXn1sQ&e=>. The above quote is on page 26. The response will get posted on the relevant page on the wiki. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>.
Thank you Caitlin, Berry and Marika for the great support and work. Best Hadia ? ________________________________ From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Sent: 19 January 2019 02:33 To: Margie Milam Cc: GNSO EPDP Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] [Ext] Re: ICANN Org response - redaction of city field Hi Margie, all, The notes and outcomes for day 1 and 2 were already sent at the end of each day. We expect that the notes and outcomes from today's meeting will go out some time tomorrow. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika On 18 Jan 2019, at 19:20, Margie Milam <margiemilam@fb.com<mailto:margiemilam@fb.com>> wrote: Hi Marika & Team - Thank you for all of the hard work this week. Will you be circulating notes of the outcomes of our deliberations? It will be helpful so we can share with our constituencies. Margie From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Date: Friday, January 18, 2019 at 12:51 PM To: GNSO EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org>> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN Org response - redaction of city field Dear EPDP Team, Here is the ICANN Org response to the question why city field is redacted in the Temporary Specification: Regarding the EPDP Team's question about why the City field is redacted in the Temp Spec, the Cookbook provides the following rationale: "The registrant's state/province and country will be published, but the address fields that could be used to more specifically identify the registrant would not be included in the public WHOIS (e.g. street, city, postal code). This would enable non-accredited users to determine the registrant's general location and likely jurisdiction but would generally not enable identification of the registrant". The link to the Cookbook: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdpr-compliance-interim-model-08mar18-en.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_files_gdpr-2Dcompliance-2Dinterim-2Dmodel-2D08mar18-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=_4XWSt8rUHZPiRG6CoP4Fnk_CCk4p550lffeMi3E1z8&m=QO2LvqWH8YCXM7p1pMfWKqyNqTo9IjpUJ8rmCnn_TJY&s=0_QNILm_X7Kxmm3Gb-Lx0oX-62-wOJehuW7efBXn1sQ&e=>. The above quote is on page 26. The response will get posted on the relevant page on the wiki. Best regards, Caitlin, Berry and Marika Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support - GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...>.
Dear All I join Margie and echo her voice and appreciating very much your devotion and Gard works Kavouss Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message:
From: Margie Milam <margiemilam@fb.com> Date: 18 January 2019 at 19:20:30 GMT-5 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, GNSO EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN Org response - redaction of city field
Hi Marika & Team – Thank you for all of the hard work this week. Will you be circulating notes of the outcomes of our deliberations? It will be helpful so we can share with our constituencies.
Margie
From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Friday, January 18, 2019 at 12:51 PM To: GNSO EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-epdp-team] ICANN Org response - redaction of city field
Dear EPDP Team,
Here is the ICANN Org response to the question why city field is redacted in the Temporary Specification:
Regarding the EPDP Team’s question about why the City field is redacted in the Temp Spec, the Cookbook provides the following rationale: "The registrant’s state/province and country will be published, but the address fields that could be used to more specifically identify the registrant would not be included in the public WHOIS (e.g. street, city, postal code). This would enable non-accredited users to determine the registrant’s general location and likely jurisdiction but would generally not enable identification of the registrant”. The link to the Cookbook: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdpr-compliance-interim-model-08.... The above quote is on page 26.
The response will get posted on the relevant page on the wiki.
Best regards,
Caitlin, Berry and Marika
Marika Konings Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for 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
participants (4)
-
Arasteh -
Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi -
Margie Milam -
Marika Konings