Dear members of the RDRS SC, Hope you had a good time in Istanbul. Please find below the summary and action items of the RDRS working session at ICANN81. The next meeting is scheduled for 2 December at 17:30 UTC for 60 minutes. Kind regards, Feodora and Caitlin 2024-11-13 RDRS Standing Committee Work Session - ICANN81<https://community.icann.org/display/EOTSFGRD/2024-11-13+RDRS+Standing+Commit...> Action Item: RDRS SC members to provide observations and recommendations for the final report to the RDRS Workbook.<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XFK-RCT5Nv-KcNgX4eQunkUKgSI35Yc_nUZ6...> Action Item: Support Staff to include session discussion and recommendations to the RDRS Workbook.<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XFK-RCT5Nv-KcNgX4eQunkUKgSI35Yc_nUZ6...> Action Item: Support Staff to start populating the final report template with the observations made and provided by RDRS SC. 1. Welcome 2. Brief Overview of 1-year RDRS * Prep-Week Session LINK<https://icann81.sched.com/event/1nJkG/registration-data-request-service-rdrs...> for detailed background on RDRS 1. Discussion on Pilot’s Current Status and Defining Next Steps * What trends have been identified so far? * What has one year of RDRS taught us? The RDRS SC observations included: * Requests are lower than pre-GDPR levels, with many still routed directly to registrars. A significant proportion of requests pertain to domains using privacy/proxy services. * Authentication is not the primary issue; the challenge lies in balancing the requester’s need against registrant privacy rights. * Responses are costly in terms of time and resources. A significant number of requests remain incomplete or are rejected due to insufficient information. * Participants discussed the volume of requests processed through RDRS represents the overall demand but does not justify large-scale implementation like SSAD. * Participants suggested communication from registrars needs improvement, with clear explanations for rejections or additional requirements. * Participants pointed out that awareness remains low outside the ICANN community, with many law enforcement agencies and investigators unaware of the system. * Participants indicated that existing legacy systems remain heavily used, despite the RDRS pilot. Some suggested to add a link to RDRS into their RDDS. 1. Recommendations for the Final RDRS Pilot Report * Walkthrough of SG feedback from RDRS Workbook * Rrs presented their observations included in the workbook. * Participants suggested improving communication and feedback loops for requesters. * Participants suggested exploring the possibility of disclosing data directly through RDRS. * Participants suggested investigating linking legacy tools to RDRS for improved awareness and accessibility. * Participants suggested RDRS to remain voluntary but with technical updates to enhance efficiency. Avoid development of an SSAD due to economic and operational infeasibility. * Shift focus to a scalable and cost-effective RDRS. * Participants suggested reevaluating the need for authentication features and their associated data controller responsibilities. 1. AOB Feodora Hamza Policy Development Support Manager (GNSO) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +32 496 30 24 15 Email: feodora.hamza@icann.org<mailto:feodora.hamza@icann.org> Website: www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org>