Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Problem Statement
Dear All, Please find the attached the draft problem statement. I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy review and comments. Thanks Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * ----------------------------------------- ᐧ
Daniel, Thank you very much for kicking this off! At 2016-06-30 09:19:38 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Please find the attached the draft problem statement.
I think we need to have a few sentences documenting the constraints of the RDS WG: The RDS WG will not consider the questions of: 1. Whether publishing WHOIS-style data is necessary 2. What data registries will collect 3. How registry data is managed I do not like these constraints, but if they are there then it I think that it is important to document them so it is clear that these are off-charter. It would also be good to document where such limitations came from, but I don't know that. If these are NOT limits, then I think the problem statement should include these questions as high-priority topics to be addressed before anything else.
I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy review and comments.
I don't really mind using a Google document for this, but it might be nice to try to find an alternate way to jointly edit stuff. (My reason is that China hates Google. When I am working out of my company's offices in Beijing it is a pain in the ass to use any Google cloud stuff.) Cheers, -- Shane
Thanks Shane, Then I suggest we could use possible alternatives like the Etherpad http://etherpad.org since China does not like google. ᐧ Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * ----------------------------------------- On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Daniel,
Thank you very much for kicking this off!
At 2016-06-30 09:19:38 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Please find the attached the draft problem statement.
I think we need to have a few sentences documenting the constraints of the RDS WG:
The RDS WG will not consider the questions of:
1. Whether publishing WHOIS-style data is necessary 2. What data registries will collect 3. How registry data is managed
I do not like these constraints, but if they are there then it I think that it is important to document them so it is clear that these are off-charter.
It would also be good to document where such limitations came from, but I don't know that.
If these are NOT limits, then I think the problem statement should include these questions as high-priority topics to be addressed before anything else.
I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy review and comments.
I don't really mind using a Google document for this, but it might be nice to try to find an alternate way to jointly edit stuff. (My reason is that China hates Google. When I am working out of my company's offices in Beijing it is a pain in the ass to use any Google cloud stuff.)
Cheers,
-- Shane
Daniel, I've put up an Etherpad here: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0 I did a quick search to see if there was an ICANN Etherpad and didn't find one. If there is a better spot we can move there. I also made a note that since RDAP seems to be included as a sort of mandate that we should document that too, although I have no proposed text since I'm a bit uncertain if this is true or if it is to what extent. ;) Cheers, -- Shane At 2016-06-30 10:20:54 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Shane,
Then I suggest we could use possible alternatives like the Etherpad http://etherpad.org since China does not like google.
ᐧ
Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka
----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * -----------------------------------------
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Daniel,
Thank you very much for kicking this off!
At 2016-06-30 09:19:38 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Please find the attached the draft problem statement.
I think we need to have a few sentences documenting the constraints of the RDS WG:
The RDS WG will not consider the questions of:
1. Whether publishing WHOIS-style data is necessary 2. What data registries will collect 3. How registry data is managed
I do not like these constraints, but if they are there then it I think that it is important to document them so it is clear that these are off-charter.
It would also be good to document where such limitations came from, but I don't know that.
If these are NOT limits, then I think the problem statement should include these questions as high-priority topics to be addressed before anything else.
I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy review and comments.
I don't really mind using a Google document for this, but it might be nice to try to find an alternate way to jointly edit stuff. (My reason is that China hates Google. When I am working out of my company's offices in Beijing it is a pain in the ass to use any Google cloud stuff.)
Cheers,
-- Shane
Thanks Shane for putting it up. ᐧ Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * ----------------------------------------- On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Daniel,
I've put up an Etherpad here:
https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0
I did a quick search to see if there was an ICANN Etherpad and didn't find one. If there is a better spot we can move there.
I also made a note that since RDAP seems to be included as a sort of mandate that we should document that too, although I have no proposed text since I'm a bit uncertain if this is true or if it is to what extent. ;)
Cheers,
-- Shane
At 2016-06-30 10:20:54 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Shane,
Then I suggest we could use possible alternatives like the Etherpad http://etherpad.org since China does not like google.
ᐧ
Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka
----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * -----------------------------------------
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Daniel,
Thank you very much for kicking this off!
At 2016-06-30 09:19:38 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Please find the attached the draft problem statement.
I think we need to have a few sentences documenting the constraints of the RDS WG:
The RDS WG will not consider the questions of:
1. Whether publishing WHOIS-style data is necessary 2. What data registries will collect 3. How registry data is managed
I do not like these constraints, but if they are there then it I think that it is important to document them so it is clear that these are off-charter.
It would also be good to document where such limitations came from, but I don't know that.
If these are NOT limits, then I think the problem statement should include these questions as high-priority topics to be addressed before anything else.
I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy review and comments.
I don't really mind using a Google document for this, but it might be nice to try to find an alternate way to jointly edit stuff. (My reason is that China hates Google. When I am working out of my company's offices in Beijing it is a pain in the ass to use any Google cloud stuff.)
Cheers,
-- Shane
I dont think ICANN supports Etherpad, at least we always wind up doing our own in NCSG.... On 2016-06-30 4:01, DANIEL NANGHAKA wrote:
Thanks Shane for putting it up.
ᐧ
Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka
----------------------------------------- /"Working for Africa" /-----------------------------------------
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org <mailto:shane@time-travellers.org>> wrote:
Daniel,
I've put up an Etherpad here:
https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0
I did a quick search to see if there was an ICANN Etherpad and didn't find one. If there is a better spot we can move there.
I also made a note that since RDAP seems to be included as a sort of mandate that we should document that too, although I have no proposed text since I'm a bit uncertain if this is true or if it is to what extent. ;)
Cheers,
-- Shane
At 2016-06-30 10:20:54 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com <mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Thanks Shane, > > Then I suggest we could use possible alternatives like the Etherpad > http://etherpad.org since China does not like google. > > > ᐧ > > > Regards > Nanghaka Daniel K. > Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community > Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter > Mobile +256 772 898298 <tel:%2B256%20772%20898298> (Uganda) > Skype: daniel.nanghaka > > ----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * > ----------------------------------------- > > > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org <mailto:shane@time-travellers.org>> > wrote: > > > Daniel, > > > > Thank you very much for kicking this off! > > > > At 2016-06-30 09:19:38 +0300 > > DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com <mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > Please find the attached the draft problem statement. > > > > I think we need to have a few sentences documenting the constraints > > of the RDS WG: > > > > The RDS WG will not consider the questions of: > > > > 1. Whether publishing WHOIS-style data is necessary > > 2. What data registries will collect > > 3. How registry data is managed > > > > I do not like these constraints, but if they are there then it I think > > that it is important to document them so it is clear that these are > > off-charter. > > > > It would also be good to document where such limitations came from, but > > I don't know that. > > > > If these are NOT limits, then I think the problem statement should > > include these questions as high-priority topics to be addressed before > > anything else. > > > > > I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy > > > review and comments. > > > > I don't really mind using a Google document for this, but it might be > > nice to try to find an alternate way to jointly edit stuff. (My reason > > is that China hates Google. When I am working out of my company's > > offices in Beijing it is a pain in the ass to use any Google cloud > > stuff.) > > > > Cheers, > > > > -- > > Shane > >
_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt mailing list Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt
I’ve added comments and edits. From: gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of DANIEL NANGHAKA Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:02 AM To: Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> Cc: gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Thanks Shane for putting it up. [https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&type=zerocontent&guid=96a54b4e-4d35-457c-9abb-6770f522854c]ᐧ Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPOGxHaDhJMGZwN2c&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPWmQyTXJIdWtScmN2ZUxpRDBpZG8wZUd5ZkhBPQ][https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPeFAxdFF3Skk4b3M&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPK2MxMkFyME5BWS9hb0VQMFRmTVFTMlB2SENRPQ] [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPSF9OWXFHYkV3ZVk&r...] On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org<mailto:shane@time-travellers.org>> wrote: Daniel, I've put up an Etherpad here: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fetherpad.wikimedia.org%2fp%2fgnso-rds-pbstatement-0&data=01%7c01%7cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7ce971117da05f4f0953c108d3a0bcec0b%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=DqPUCMtNbqZDFraNOw7UAdHt64Zbh%2bU35VD%2b5Xc5Y1o%3d> I did a quick search to see if there was an ICANN Etherpad and didn't find one. If there is a better spot we can move there. I also made a note that since RDAP seems to be included as a sort of mandate that we should document that too, although I have no proposed text since I'm a bit uncertain if this is true or if it is to what extent. ;) Cheers, -- Shane At 2016-06-30 10:20:54 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com<mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks Shane,
Then I suggest we could use possible alternatives like the Etherpad http://etherpad.org<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fetherpad.org&data=01%7c01%7cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7ce971117da05f4f0953c108d3a0bcec0b%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=QKQfTJh9e7ld0VN%2bRIFwK4cfudOirXrCDcLQvBa0Qjg%3d> since China does not like google.
ᐧ
Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298<tel:%2B256%20772%20898298> (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka
----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * -----------------------------------------
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org<mailto:shane@time-travellers.org>> wrote:
Daniel,
Thank you very much for kicking this off!
At 2016-06-30 09:19:38 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com<mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>> wrote:
Please find the attached the draft problem statement.
I think we need to have a few sentences documenting the constraints of the RDS WG:
The RDS WG will not consider the questions of:
1. Whether publishing WHOIS-style data is necessary 2. What data registries will collect 3. How registry data is managed
I do not like these constraints, but if they are there then it I think that it is important to document them so it is clear that these are off-charter.
It would also be good to document where such limitations came from, but I don't know that.
If these are NOT limits, then I think the problem statement should include these questions as high-priority topics to be addressed before anything else.
I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy review and comments.
I don't really mind using a Google document for this, but it might be nice to try to find an alternate way to jointly edit stuff. (My reason is that China hates Google. When I am working out of my company's offices in Beijing it is a pain in the ass to use any Google cloud stuff.)
Cheers,
-- Shane
Dear all, A wiki area has already been set up where members of this WG can stage any drafts that it wishes to work on cooperatively: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw Staff can create a new page for you where this drafting team can post a document in progress which you all can edit on-line. Just let us know if you would like to do so. Best regards Lisa -----Original Message----- From: gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Shane Kerr Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 10:58 AM To: DANIEL NANGHAKA Cc: gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org Subject: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Daniel, I've put up an Etherpad here: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0 I did a quick search to see if there was an ICANN Etherpad and didn't find one. If there is a better spot we can move there. I also made a note that since RDAP seems to be included as a sort of mandate that we should document that too, although I have no proposed text since I'm a bit uncertain if this is true or if it is to what extent. ;) Cheers, -- Shane At 2016-06-30 10:20:54 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Shane,
Then I suggest we could use possible alternatives like the Etherpad http://etherpad.org since China does not like google.
ᐧ
Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka
----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * -----------------------------------------
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Shane Kerr <shane@time-travellers.org> wrote:
Daniel,
Thank you very much for kicking this off!
At 2016-06-30 09:19:38 +0300 DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com> wrote:
Please find the attached the draft problem statement.
I think we need to have a few sentences documenting the constraints of the RDS WG:
The RDS WG will not consider the questions of:
1. Whether publishing WHOIS-style data is necessary 2. What data registries will collect 3. How registry data is managed
I do not like these constraints, but if they are there then it I think that it is important to document them so it is clear that these are off-charter.
It would also be good to document where such limitations came from, but I don't know that.
If these are NOT limits, then I think the problem statement should include these questions as high-priority topics to be addressed before anything else.
I would also like to recommend probably we create a google doc for easy review and comments.
I don't really mind using a Google document for this, but it might be nice to try to find an alternate way to jointly edit stuff. (My reason is that China hates Google. When I am working out of my company's offices in Beijing it is a pain in the ass to use any Google cloud stuff.)
Cheers,
-- Shane
Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com> wrote:
Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- *"Working for Africa" * ----------------------------------------- ᐧ
I support creating a page in the ICANN wiki for our work. The fewer platforms I have to keep track of, the better. ;-) Marina A. Lewis (415) 290-1245 marina@dns-law.com<mailto:marina@dns-law.com> On Jun 30, 2016, at 11:18 AM, DANIEL NANGHAKA <dndannang@gmail.com<mailto:dndannang@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>> wrote: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPOGxHaDhJMGZwN2c&r...] [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPeFAxdFF3Skk4b3M&r...] [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPSF9OWXFHYkV3ZVk&r...] [https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&type=zerocontent&guid=a9452f30-16cd-4213-a8e1-1b91029a608d]? _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt mailing list Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt
I use ofice.com and office 365, of course ☺ but I am happy to use whatever system you all prefer. From: gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of DANIEL NANGHAKA Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:18 AM To: Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com> Cc: gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>> wrote: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fcommunity.icann.org%2fx%2fxxeOAw&data=01%7c01%7cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7ca19e4cec4057421a6f9b08d3a0bf3165%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=LvONyHGZ8yFDDp58gWoCfrENvft44CQeWJKuHZI8llA%3d> Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPOGxHaDhJMGZwN2c&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPWmQyTXJIdWtScmN2ZUxpRDBpZG8wZUd5ZkhBPQ][https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPeFAxdFF3Skk4b3M&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPK2MxMkFyME5BWS9hb0VQMFRmTVFTMlB2SENRPQ] [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPSF9OWXFHYkV3ZVk&r...] [https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&type=zerocontent&guid=a9452f30-16cd-4213-a8e1-1b91029a608d]ᐧ
Dear Problem Statement Drafting Team – A workspace page within the RDS PDP WG member wiki has now been created here: https://community.icann.org/x/rACbAw I have populated that page with a few initial links to your mailing list and etherpad, but you are free to revise and use that page in any manner you wish to collaborate with each other on this assignment. If you should have any trouble logging into the wiki or accessing the above link, just contact the GNSO secretariat (gnso-secs@icann.org) for wiki/mailing list support. Safe travels to you all – Lisa From: DANIEL NANGHAKA [mailto:dndannang@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:18 AM To: Lisa Phifer Cc: Shane Kerr; gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com> wrote: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- <https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPOGxHaDhJMGZwN2c&r...> <https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPeFAxdFF3Skk4b3M&r...> <https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPSF9OWXFHYkV3ZVk&r...> <https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&ty...> ᐧ
Not sure whether what i wrote arrived...here is my draft additions pasted below. Perhaps it would be useful if we asked ourselves a few questions first: 1. What do we mean by problem statement? In my view, the problem statement should ask the very basic questions. * What registration data needs to be collected, used, retained and disclosed in order to operate the DNS in a manner which ensures the security and stability of the Internet, and fair competition among provdiers, stakeholders, and contracted parties. * Who needs to have data, and under what circumstances should it be released to third party requestors?. * Who should bear the costs of data storage, and data sharing? * Which protocols that have been developed to process and manage data are useful and why? Which are not, and why? 2. How do we set the rules for the RDS, in a global multi-disciplinary setting? Do we strive for a high standard, or the lowest common denominator? On 2016-06-30 9:43, Lisa Phifer wrote:
Dear Problem Statement Drafting Team –
A workspace page within the RDS PDP WG member wiki has now been created here:
https://community.icann.org/x/rACbAw
I have populated that page with a few initial links to your mailing list and etherpad, but you are free to revise and use that page in any manner you wish to collaborate with each other on this assignment.
If you should have any trouble logging into the wiki or accessing the above link, just contact the GNSO secretariat (gnso-secs@icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>) for wiki/mailing list support.
Safe travels to you all –
Lisa
*From:*DANIEL NANGHAKA [mailto:dndannang@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:18 AM *To:* Lisa Phifer *Cc:* Shane Kerr; gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement)
Dear Lisa,
Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work.
Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights.
Shane and all - what do you think about this?
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com <mailto:lisa@corecom.com>> wrote:
https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw
Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda)
Skype: daniel.nanghaka
----------------------------------------- /"Working for Africa" /-----------------------------------------
ᐧ
_______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt mailing list Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt
Hi Stephanie, Thanks for continuing the dialogue here. To respond to your second question, my preference and suggestion would be to narrow the gulf between the two as best we can, but to aim to take ambitious but decisive action on the RDS when it comes to protecting registrant privacy. After all, I would not wish to strike a Faustian bargain just to reach consensus. As to your first question, I would like to preface my remarks with a caveat that I am no expert here, so it is possible (if not probable!) that I need to do further reading to understand the issues at hand. If I am on the wrong track, I am happy to be pointed in a different direction. Which protocols that have been developed to process and manage data are useful and why? Which are not, and why? My understanding is that we have only four options to consider: the Extensible Provisioning Protocol, the Internet Registry Information Service Protocol, the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP), and WHOIS. Of those, I believe only RDAP and WHOIS have been deployed. Unless we can persuade the technical community that none of these are fit for purpose and thus they must create something bespoke for us (and I do not know that we can make that argument), I do not think we have much choice but to use RDAP if we find that gated access to certain data is necessary. What registration data needs to be collected, used, retained and disclosed in order to operate the DNS in a manner which ensures the security and stability of the Internet, and fair competition among provdiers, stakeholders, and contracted parties. I am going to turn here to Rob Golding’s email yesterday to the main mailing list. He indicated that the only pieces of data which are critical to the operation of the DNS are: the domain name itself, the registrar (for a gTLD with a registry/registrar model), the domain name’s expiry date, and its status (registered / not registered). For it to be of functional use, there are two optional fields: nameservers, and the auth-code (Rob suggested the auth-code was imperative, but I believe it to be a value-added feature). As we can see, the RDS does not need to collect much information at all to function. My suggestion would be that the RDS only collect that registration data which is essential to the technical operation of the DNS. This is a best practice approach to the cross-border transfer of data that the OECD Working Party on Information Security and Privacy has endorsed: in its primary framework, the working party says that organisations should take care to ensure that only an absolute minimum amount of information is collected, is done so with the knowledge and consent of the data subject, is used only for the stated purpose, is retained only for as long as is necessary, and is safeguarded against unauthorised access. I realise I am jumping ahead of the work plan here, but I hope you do not mind me expressing my personal view on this topic in just one sentence: that there are already some parties who rely on the WHOIS system’s public records does not mean we must continue to collect, let alone publish in an open-access directory, this information. I consider any additional data to be registrar-registrant contract information. As such, it is up to the registrar to determine how they wish to store this data, and to whom they wish to release it, in accordance with local laws and the informed consent of their customers. Who needs to have data, and under what circumstances should it be released to third party requestors? The answer to this question depends on what data elements we are talking about, the physical location of the registrar, and the physical location of the registrant. Ultimately, I would like to see due process respected. The alternative could lead us down a dangerous path which threatens to destroy the many benefits that the Internet has brought about. Who should bear the costs of data storage, and data sharing? I do not have an opinion on this question at this time. Best wishes, Ayden On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 3:39 PM, Stephanie Perrin stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca wrote: Not sure whether what i wrote arrived...here is my draft additions pasted below. Perhaps it would be useful if we asked ourselves a few questions first: 1. What do we mean by problem statement? In my view, the problem statement should ask the very basic questions. * What registration data needs to be collected, used, retained and disclosed in order to operate the DNS in a manner which ensures the security and stability of the Internet, and fair competition among provdiers, stakeholders, and contracted parties. * Who needs to have data, and under what circumstances should it be released to third party requestors?. * Who should bear the costs of data storage, and data sharing? * Which protocols that have been developed to process and manage data are useful and why? Which are not, and why? 2. How do we set the rules for the RDS, in a global multi-disciplinary setting? Do we strive for a high standard, or the lowest common denominator? On 2016-06-30 9:43, Lisa Phifer wrote: Dear Problem Statement Drafting Team – A workspace page within the RDS PDP WG member wiki has now been created here: https://community.icann.org/x/rACbAw I have populated that page with a few initial links to your mailing list and etherpad, but you are free to revise and use that page in any manner you wish to collaborate with each other on this assignment. If you should have any trouble logging into the wiki or accessing the above link, just contact the GNSO secretariat ( gnso-secs@icann.org ) for wiki/mailing list support. Safe travels to you all – Lisa From: DANIEL NANGHAKA [ mailto:dndannang@gmail.com ] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:18 AM To: Lisa Phifer Cc: Shane Kerr; gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer < lisa@corecom.com > wrote: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- ᐧ _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt mailing list Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt Ayden Férdeline Statement of Interest
Thank everyone for continuing to work on this, lets try and get something more solid drafted into the Etherpad and be ready to give a 1st update on our amazing progress to the WG for next Tuesdays call. I would like us to at least agree on the principles of what the statement should look like to be in a position that we are showing progress. A reminder of the ether pad link https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0 Regards, James <https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0> From: <gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Date: Wednesday 6 July 2016 at 15:32 To: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>> Cc: "gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org>" <gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work Hi Stephanie, Thanks for continuing the dialogue here. To respond to your second question, my preference and suggestion would be to narrow the gulf between the two as best we can, but to aim to take ambitious but decisive action on the RDS when it comes to protecting registrant privacy. After all, I would not wish to strike a Faustian bargain just to reach consensus. As to your first question, I would like to preface my remarks with a caveat that I am no expert here, so it is possible (if not probable!) that I need to do further reading to understand the issues at hand. If I am on the wrong track, I am happy to be pointed in a different direction. Which protocols that have been developed to process and manage data are useful and why? Which are not, and why? My understanding is that we have only four options to consider: the Extensible Provisioning Protocol, the Internet Registry Information Service Protocol, the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP), and WHOIS. Of those, I believe only RDAP and WHOIS have been deployed. Unless we can persuade the technical community that none of these are fit for purpose and thus they must create something bespoke for us (and I do not know that we can make that argument), I do not think we have much choice but to use RDAP if we find that gated access to certain data is necessary. What registration data needs to be collected, used, retained and disclosed in order to operate the DNS in a manner which ensures the security and stability of the Internet, and fair competition among provdiers, stakeholders, and contracted parties. I am going to turn here to Rob Golding’s email yesterday to the main mailing list. He indicated that the only pieces of data which are critical to the operation of the DNS are: the domain name itself, the registrar (for a gTLD with a registry/registrar model), the domain name’s expiry date, and its status (registered / not registered). For it to be of functional use, there are two optional fields: nameservers, and the auth-code (Rob suggested the auth-code was imperative, but I believe it to be a value-added feature). As we can see, the RDS does not need to collect much information at all to function. My suggestion would be that the RDS only collect that registration data which is essential to the technical operation of the DNS. This is a best practice approach to the cross-border transfer of data that the OECD Working Party on Information Security and Privacy has endorsed: in its primary framework, the working party says that organisations should take care to ensure that only an absolute minimum amount of information is collected, is done so with the knowledge and consent of the data subject, is used only for the stated purpose, is retained only for as long as is necessary, and is safeguarded against unauthorised access. I realise I am jumping ahead of the work plan here, but I hope you do not mind me expressing my personal view on this topic in just one sentence: that there are already some parties who rely on the WHOIS system’s public records does not mean we must continue to collect, let alone publish in an open-access directory, this information. I consider any additional data to be registrar-registrant contract information. As such, it is up to the registrar to determine how they wish to store this data, and to whom they wish to release it, in accordance with local laws and the informed consent of their customers. Who needs to have data, and under what circumstances should it be released to third party requestors? The answer to this question depends on what data elements we are talking about, the physical location of the registrar, and the physical location of the registrant. Ultimately, I would like to see due process respected. The alternative could lead us down a dangerous path which threatens to destroy the many benefits that the Internet has brought about. Who should bear the costs of data storage, and data sharing? I do not have an opinion on this question at this time. Best wishes, Ayden On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 3:39 PM, Stephanie Perrin stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca> wrote: Not sure whether what i wrote arrived...here is my draft additions pasted below. Perhaps it would be useful if we asked ourselves a few questions first: 1. What do we mean by problem statement? In my view, the problem statement should ask the very basic questions. * What registration data needs to be collected, used, retained and disclosed in order to operate the DNS in a manner which ensures the security and stability of the Internet, and fair competition among provdiers, stakeholders, and contracted parties. * Who needs to have data, and under what circumstances should it be released to third party requestors?. * Who should bear the costs of data storage, and data sharing? * Which protocols that have been developed to process and manage data are useful and why? Which are not, and why? 2. How do we set the rules for the RDS, in a global multi-disciplinary setting? Do we strive for a high standard, or the lowest common denominator? On 2016-06-30 9:43, Lisa Phifer wrote: Dear Problem Statement Drafting Team – A workspace page within the RDS PDP WG member wiki has now been created here: <https://community.icann.org/x/rACbAw>https://community.icann.org/x/rACbAw I have populated that page with a few initial links to your mailing list and etherpad, but you are free to revise and use that page in any manner you wish to collaborate with each other on this assignment. If you should have any trouble logging into the wiki or accessing the above link, just contact the GNSO secretariat (gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>) for wiki/mailing list support. Safe travels to you all – Lisa From: DANIEL NANGHAKA [mailto:dndannang@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:18 AM To: Lisa Phifer Cc: Shane Kerr; gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>> wrote: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPOGxHaDhJMGZwN2c&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPWmQyTXJIdWtScmN2ZUxpRDBpZG8wZUd5ZkhBPQ][https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPeFAxdFF3Skk4b3M&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPK2MxMkFyME5BWS9hb0VQMFRmTVFTMlB2SENRPQ] [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPSF9OWXFHYkV3ZVk&r...] [https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&type=zerocontent&guid=a9452f30-16cd-4213-a8e1-1b91029a608d]ᐧ _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt mailing list Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt Ayden Férdeline Statement of Interest<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Ayden+Férdeline+SOI>
Thanks for this reminder, James. I've added two new paragraphs now to the Etherpad: The Internet is a powerful enabler of human rights. The freedoms fostered by the Internet to express ideas, connect and associate with others, and exercise our human creativity have had a transformative effect on the lives of over three billion people. This has transpired because users trust the Internet and the online services it delivers as being a secure and safe environment for commerce and communication. Key to building this trust in the Internet has been privacy. The OECD has labelled privacy an important enabler of one's autonomy, dignity, and freedom of expression. As such, at the core of the RDS must be a strong, privacy-by-design backbone, where only that data essential to the operation of the service is collected, and what little is collected is handled in a manner that is conducive to fostering trust in the Internet. Of course, the Internet cannot be an ungoverned Wild West. We need to strike the right balance between an Internet that supports fundamental freedoms and an Internet that recognises the legitimate interests that governments and private sector stakeholders have in stopping harmful activities. In this working group, we acknowledge the distinct requirements that each stakeholder group has for collecting data and the conditions under which it can be viewed, but we are also clear that the necessity, legitimacy, proportionality, and fairness of a situation must be determined before it can be justified offering an individual a lower level of protection. Conflicts between freedom of expression, privacy, and security need to be addressed fairly and pragmatically with an understanding that legal interoperability across national borders does not yet exist. While I need not tell you that this is not yet a problem statement, I hope these ideas can inform our thinking over the next few days as we work together to craft something suitable. Thanks! Best wishes, Ayden On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 2:45 PM, James Gannon james@cyberinvasion.net wrote: Thank everyone for continuing to work on this, lets try and get something more solid drafted into the Etherpad and be ready to give a 1st update on our amazing progress to the WG for next Tuesdays call. I would like us to at least agree on the principles of what the statement should look like to be in a position that we are showing progress. A reminder of the ether pad link https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/gnso-rds-pbstatement-0 Regards, James From: < gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org > on behalf of Ayden Férdeline < icann@ferdeline.com > Date: Wednesday 6 July 2016 at 15:32 To: Stephanie Perrin < stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca > Cc: " gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org " < gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org > Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work Hi Stephanie, Thanks for continuing the dialogue here. To respond to your second question, my preference and suggestion would be to narrow the gulf between the two as best we can, but to aim to take ambitious but decisive action on the RDS when it comes to protecting registrant privacy. After all, I would not wish to strike a Faustian bargain just to reach consensus. As to your first question, I would like to preface my remarks with a caveat that I am no expert here, so it is possible (if not probable!) that I need to do further reading to understand the issues at hand. If I am on the wrong track, I am happy to be pointed in a different direction. Which protocols that have been developed to process and manage data are useful and why? Which are not, and why? My understanding is that we have only four options to consider: the Extensible Provisioning Protocol, the Internet Registry Information Service Protocol, the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP), and WHOIS. Of those, I believe only RDAP and WHOIS have been deployed. Unless we can persuade the technical community that none of these are fit for purpose and thus they must create something bespoke for us (and I do not know that we can make that argument), I do not think we have much choice but to use RDAP if we find that gated access to certain data is necessary. What registration data needs to be collected, used, retained and disclosed in order to operate the DNS in a manner which ensures the security and stability of the Internet, and fair competition among provdiers, stakeholders, and contracted parties. I am going to turn here to Rob Golding’s email yesterday to the main mailing list. He indicated that the only pieces of data which are critical to the operation of the DNS are: the domain name itself, the registrar (for a gTLD with a registry/registrar model), the domain name’s expiry date, and its status (registered / not registered). For it to be of functional use, there are two optional fields: nameservers, and the auth-code (Rob suggested the auth-code was imperative, but I believe it to be a value-added feature). As we can see, the RDS does not need to collect much information at all to function. My suggestion would be that the RDS only collect that registration data which is essential to the technical operation of the DNS. This is a best practice approach to the cross-border transfer of data that the OECD Working Party on Information Security and Privacy has endorsed: in its primary framework, the working party says that organisations should take care to ensure that only an absolute minimum amount of information is collected, is done so with the knowledge and consent of the data subject, is used only for the stated purpose, is retained only for as long as is necessary, and is safeguarded against unauthorised access. I realise I am jumping ahead of the work plan here, but I hope you do not mind me expressing my personal view on this topic in just one sentence: that there are already some parties who rely on the WHOIS system’s public records does not mean we must continue to collect, let alone publish in an open-access directory, this information. I consider any additional data to be registrar-registrant contract information. As such, it is up to the registrar to determine how they wish to store this data, and to whom they wish to release it, in accordance with local laws and the informed consent of their customers. Who needs to have data, and under what circumstances should it be released to third party requestors? The answer to this question depends on what data elements we are talking about, the physical location of the registrar, and the physical location of the registrant. Ultimately, I would like to see due process respected. The alternative could lead us down a dangerous path which threatens to destroy the many benefits that the Internet has brought about. Who should bear the costs of data storage, and data sharing? I do not have an opinion on this question at this time. Best wishes, Ayden On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 3:39 PM, Stephanie Perrin stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca wrote: Not sure whether what i wrote arrived...here is my draft additions pasted below. Perhaps it would be useful if we asked ourselves a few questions first: 1. What do we mean by problem statement? In my view, the problem statement should ask the very basic questions. * What registration data needs to be collected, used, retained and disclosed in order to operate the DNS in a manner which ensures the security and stability of the Internet, and fair competition among provdiers, stakeholders, and contracted parties. * Who needs to have data, and under what circumstances should it be released to third party requestors?. * Who should bear the costs of data storage, and data sharing? * Which protocols that have been developed to process and manage data are useful and why? Which are not, and why? 2. How do we set the rules for the RDS, in a global multi-disciplinary setting? Do we strive for a high standard, or the lowest common denominator? On 2016-06-30 9:43, Lisa Phifer wrote: Dear Problem Statement Drafting Team – A workspace page within the RDS PDP WG member wiki has now been created here: https://community.icann.org/x/rACbAw I have populated that page with a few initial links to your mailing list and etherpad, but you are free to revise and use that page in any manner you wish to collaborate with each other on this assignment. If you should have any trouble logging into the wiki or accessing the above link, just contact the GNSO secretariat ( gnso-secs@icann.org ) for wiki/mailing list support. Safe travels to you all – Lisa From: DANIEL NANGHAKA [ mailto:dndannang@gmail.com ] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:18 AM To: Lisa Phifer Cc: Shane Kerr; gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer < lisa@corecom.com > wrote: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- ᐧ _______________________________________________ Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt mailing list Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt Ayden Férdeline Statement of Interest Ayden Férdeline Statement of Interest
Thanks Lisa, And thanks everyone who has been working on the draft already, fantastic to see some movement on this already! Just on a quick read let make sure we keep within the bounds of what a problem statement is and not let us try and start debating the issue within the problem statement, a good problem statement will always stay rally neutral and just defines what we are trying to do in a more concise manner than a larger issues paper such as the excellent document produced by staff. Anyone who hasn’t read the issues report really should before providing input to the problem statement: I’ve attached it to this email for some nice airplane literature while we are all flying home. Two other quick references to have a read of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_statement http://www.mit.edu/course/21/21.guide/prob-sta.htm Safe home to everyone travelling back from Helsinki! <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_statement> -James From: <gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>> Reply-To: "lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>" <lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>> Date: Thursday 30 June 2016 at 16:43 To: "gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org>" <gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Dear Problem Statement Drafting Team – A workspace page within the RDS PDP WG member wiki has now been created here: https://community.icann.org/x/rACbAw I have populated that page with a few initial links to your mailing list and etherpad, but you are free to revise and use that page in any manner you wish to collaborate with each other on this assignment. If you should have any trouble logging into the wiki or accessing the above link, just contact the GNSO secretariat (gnso-secs@icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>) for wiki/mailing list support. Safe travels to you all – Lisa From: DANIEL NANGHAKA [mailto:dndannang@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:18 AM To: Lisa Phifer Cc: Shane Kerr; gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-rds-pbstatement-dt] Etherpad for work (was: Problem Statement) Dear Lisa, Thanks for you communication. Then actually we could transfer to the Problem Statement to the wiki. we were looking for a collaborative platform where we can all edit and brainstorm and when google docs which China is not happy with came up. It was thought that etherpad can work. Otherwise I would not mind having a page created for the drafting team such that they can post. I also think that the members on this mailing list should have edit rights. Shane and all - what do you think about this? On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Lisa Phifer <lisa@corecom.com<mailto:lisa@corecom.com>> wrote: https://community.icann.org/x/xxeOAw Regards Nanghaka Daniel K. Executive Director - ILICIT Africa / Council Member - FOSSFA / Community Lead - ISOC Uganda Chapter Mobile +256 772 898298 (Uganda) Skype: daniel.nanghaka ----------------------------------------- "Working for Africa" ----------------------------------------- [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPOGxHaDhJMGZwN2c&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPWmQyTXJIdWtScmN2ZUxpRDBpZG8wZUd5ZkhBPQ][https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPeFAxdFF3Skk4b3M&revid=0BwH7MatcY6gPK2MxMkFyME5BWS9hb0VQMFRmTVFTMlB2SENRPQ] [https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0BwH7MatcY6gPSF9OWXFHYkV3ZVk&r...] [https://mailfoogae.appspot.com/t?sender=aZG5kYW5uYW5nQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ%3D%3D&type=zerocontent&guid=a9452f30-16cd-4213-a8e1-1b91029a608d]ᐧ
participants (8)
-
Ayden Férdeline -
DANIEL NANGHAKA -
James Gannon -
Lisa Phifer -
Marina Lewis -
Mark Svancarek -
Shane Kerr -
Stephanie Perrin