Agreed. Thank you again, Roger. I want to re-emphasize the following two (2) key points: * Please consolidate (T/T, IRD) into the current RDS PDP in order to 1) Garner registrar support and 2) Ensure a successful outcome * T/T Implementation Review will need a minimum of 9 months (if consolidation doesn't occur) Thank you, Jennifer Jennifer Gore Senior Policy Director Web.com 12808 Gran Bay Parkway, West | Jacksonville, FL 32258 Office: 904. 680-6919| Cell: 904. 401-4347 [cid:image003.png@01CFD6B5.902BADC0] -----Original Message----- From: gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Roger D Carney Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 11:47 AM To: gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] Proposal for Merging CL&D and Translation & Transliteration Implementation Good Morning, I think there were several conversations around this topic when we were in Buenos Aires. My biggest concern then and now is delay. I agree that there are several streams of WHOIS work being actively worked and it would be nice to consolidate but I don't think that these two international (T/T, IRD) work products are far enough along to incorporate into our Thick/CL&D work. Originally I thought that the T/T work could go through a fairly quick Implementation Review, but after several discussions during and after Buenos Aires it appears that there are several widely divergent mindsets on a couple of the recommendations, particularly recommendations 2 and 7 and how/if they relate to recommendation 1. I would estimate that this implementation review will need 9-12 months and possibly more. As far as the IRD, aren't these just proposals? Isn't there PDP and IRT work that needs to be completed? The Board resolution that you mention (https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10-en#1.e) seems to call out that the IRD work should be looked at in other WHOIS policy and specifically mentions the IRD work be used as an input into the RDS PDP that is currently ongoing. As much as I like the charge to consolidate the WHOIS efforts I think that incorporating either or both of these two (T/T, IRD) work products into the Thick/CL&D would create an unnecessary delay on the current Thick/CL&D schedule. To me, the more logical consolidation is wrapping these two items (T/T, IRD) into the currently ongoing RDS PDP. Thanks Roger -----Original Message----- From: gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of gtheo Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 6:39 AM To: Fabien Betremieux <fabien.betremieux@icann.org<mailto:fabien.betremieux@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] Proposal for Merging CL&D and Translation & Transliteration Implementation It might be something we want to try and combine some of these projects. Currently, there are too many ongoing WHOIS projects, finished and unfinished projects might indeed create overlap and overhead. That being said, the T/T recommendations might not be everyone's cup of tea and there might be a risk we get stuck, would that delay the WHOIS migration? How do we handle such scenarios? Furthermore do we currently have enough coverage member wise to handle this? Thank you, Theo Geurts Fabien Betremieux schreef op 2016-04-21 10:46 PM:
Dear IRT Members,
As you may be aware, the ICANN board has directed staff to develop an
implementation plan for the GNSO Recommendations on the Translation
and Transliteration (T/T) of Contact Information
(https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2015-09-28
-en#1.b [1]). More recently, the ICANN Board further directed staff to
incorporate the recommendations of the Internationalized Registration
Data (IRD) Working Group Final Report's into the T/T implementation
plan where appropriate
(https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10
-en#1.e)
Considering our overarching goal to minimize impact on affected
parties and to bundle related implementation where possible (per the
GDD's policy change calendar at:
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gdd-policy-change-calendar
-13may15-en.pdf), we are considering merging the implementation of the
T/T and IRD recommendations into the Consistent Labeling and Display
(CL&D) work stream of the Thick Whois Implementation.
We would like to gather your thoughts on this proposal while we are
similarly engaging with the T/T PDP Working Group chairs, and before
we request consideration of this proposal by the GNSO Council.
We've identified a number of synergies between CL&D, RDAP, T/T and IRD
that we believe will lower the marginal costs of implementation for
both affected parties and ICANN:
*
T/T Implementation will primarily affect RDDS output
* T/T Implementation will require new extensions to EPP (language tag
and T/T flag) as may be the case from CL&D (depending on the final
implementation proposal)
* T/T Implementation is recommended to be coordinated with the
roll-out of RDAP (which is already synchronized with implementation of
CL&D)
* The data model for the T/T implementation is relatively consistent
with the RDAP model and a "harmonization exercise" between the two was
recommended in the IRD Report
* Instead of creating and managing a specific IRT for the T/T
implementation, we could leverage the expertise we have gathered
already in the Thick Whois IRT
* Ultimately, contracted parties would be tasked with implementing a
single package of consensus policies rather than several discrete one
While we don't expect that such a merger would impact the transition
from thin to thick of .COM, .NET and .JOBS, we have estimated that it
would add at least 6 months to the timeline of the CL&D
implementation. Ultimately, we believe that this is a more time- and
resource-efficient option than recruiting a separate IRT for T/T and
carrying out a separate implementation.
Before we request that the GNSO Chairs include this proposal as an
item on their Consent Agenda for their meeting on 12 May, we would
like to gather your thoughts.
We would appreciate if you could share your thinking in relation to
the above proposal by next Thursday 28 April COB in your time zone.
Thank you for your consideration
Best Regards
--
Fabien Betremieux
Sr. Registry Services & Engagement Manager Global Domains Division,
ICANN
Links:
------
[1]
https://features.icann.org/gnso-council-recommendations-translation-an
d-transliteration-contact-information
_______________________________________________
Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list
Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
_______________________________________________ Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt _______________________________________________ Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
