Marika and colleagues, thank you for these notes. Let me confirm what I thought I heard on Tuesday’s call regarding the initial possible requirements list to which our constituencies etc. will be asked to react as part of outreach #2. The most recent version I have received of this document in draft #3 which Lisa sent out last Saturday. I understand that (1) a draft #4 will be prepared and (2) as noted under your action item #4 below, staff will take a first cut at re-organizing the list to minimize duplication/overlap, etc. without removing any possible requirements from the list. So my questions are: (1) is the above correct, and (2) if so, what is the anticipated timeline to receive the reorganized draft #4? I ask because it seems most respectful of everyone’s limited time and bandwidth to defer responding to outreach #2 until reorganized draft #4 is in hand. At least that is what I am planning to propose to my constituency. Thank you in advance for either confirming what my notes say, or else correcting them if they are wrong, which is entirely possible! [image001] Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902 | met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com> Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP | www.msk.com<http://www.msk.com/> 1818 N Street NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 1:42 PM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & Action Items from Today's RDS PDP WG Meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 14 June 2016: These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/C4xlAw. 1) Roll Call / SOI • Roll call will be taken from Adobe Connect • Please remember to state your name before speaking and mute your microphones when not speaking. • Audio only: Steward Clark • Updates to SOI: Klaus Stoll (see SOI for details) 2) Brief update on Tasks 7 & 9: Outreach #1 and #2 • Outreach #1 - only one submission received so far, from SSAC. Status updates: RySG working on input which is expected to be submitted by the deadline. NCSG/NCUC: message has been distributed. GAC: is considering response to outreach message. Deadline for comments tomorrow. Hopes to submit input on time. ALAC: has submitted statement. • Outreach #2 - has been distributed. Input requested by / during Helsinki meeting. 3) Continue planning for Helsinki Cross-Community meeting • Remote participation will be available • Objective today to refine planning • Draft slide deck has been prepared and will be circulated with meeting notes (see attached). • Session is intended to be interactive - intro slides will be covered fairly quickly while allowing for questions / comments. • Possible show of hands could be used on overarching question, but only to take the temperature of the room • Ensure that overarching question is framed clearly, next-gen RDS is just a buzz word, need to make clear that it is basically a redesign or can existing system be modified. Question is directed at visitors in the room, to make it interactive. • Anyone encouraged to participate, but need to ensure that there is sufficient opportunity for non-WG members to contribute and speak up. • Duration of session will be 85 minutes as there will need to be a 5 minute break to allow switch over to next session. • Need to make sure that audience is brought along in the discussions and conversation. • Consider having EWG list of data or SAC054 available that lists the information that is required at each stage - may assist the audience in understanding what data is being referred to. May provide too much detail for one question and not for others. Could instead display an existing WHOIS record - similar to how this has been done for WG session in Marrakesh. • Need some volunteers to present possible requirements - need to pick out examples that represent the spectrum of the five questions and that come from different sources. Example to be prepared in advance of next week's meeting to be reviewed and discussed. Ideally volunteers are able to present in person, but it is not a requirement. Volunteers: Jim Galvin - if there are any elements to be presented from SAC054 or any other SSAC document. Data elements: Holly Raiche. User/Purposes: Jim Galvin. Privacy/Data protection: Kathy Kleiman. • Need to make sure not to mix up cross-community session with WG deliberations. Action item #1: staff to prepare intro slide that will be on the screen prior to the start of the meeting for review prior to next week's meeting. Action item #2: volunteers to come forward to develop an example requirement for the cross-community session (still missing are gated access and accuracy). Example to be shared ahead of next week's WG meeting for review and discussion by full WG. 4) Start on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations • See document shared during meeting (note revised version to be shared separately) • See section IV of charter • Formal consensus call not done until after public input has been received and reviewed. Initial report would describe level of agreement / disagreement sufficient to guide public input and facilitate the subsequent consensus process. • Consider including references to whether there is support or lack of support by SG/Cs. WG can decide how to describe agreement/disagreement. • Consider focusing on big three (privacy, data element and purposes) for first step? Work plan already foresees addressing these three first. Consider public comment on first three before moving on to next questions (accuracy and gated access). Followed by Initial Report on five questions and then addressing all questions (so three Initial Reports for public comment). Is it possible to consider data elements without considering gated access? Is it possible to consider these five questions separately or does it need to be considered as a package considering the interlinkage. • How to refine requirements list to address duplications / similar requirements as well as triage between phase 1, 2 and 3. Staff together with leadership team to take a first crack at this for review and approval by the WG, including grouping together possible requirements that look similar. Focus would be on organisation, not removing anything. Action item #3: share revised version of 'possible approach for consensus in deliberation of possible requirements for RDS PDP WG' to encourage input from WG members with aim to 'finalise' approach during next week's meeting. Action item #4: Staff with support of leadership team to take a first stab at organising the initial possible requirements list and proposed triage between phase 1, 2 and 3. 5) Confirm next meeting – Wednesday 22 June at 05.00 UTC Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the 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<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-e...>.
