Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka · Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: · Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f · Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review · Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw · Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken · Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses · Appreciate work of lead points of contact · Any questions from lead points of contacts? · Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki · Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations · Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations · Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. · No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. · Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. · Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report · Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. · See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. · Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. · Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. · Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. · Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting · Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples · See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. · Agenda for F2F WG meeting · To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B · No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July Marika Konings Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the 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.
Chuck (and colleagues), Sorry to have missed last night’s call. Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.” Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context? Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes. Steve Metalitz From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka • Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: • Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f • Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review • Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw • Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken • Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses • Appreciate work of lead points of contact • Any questions from lead points of contacts? • Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki • Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations • Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations • Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. • No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. • Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. • Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report • Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. • See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. • Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. • Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. • Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. • Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting • Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples • See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. • Agenda for F2F WG meeting • To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B • No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July 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...>.
I would go further and like to ask this language to be amended to international and national laws. Best, Volker Am 22.06.2016 um 16:03 schrieb Metalitz, Steven:
Chuck (and colleagues),
Sorry to have missed last night’s call.
Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.”
Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context?
Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes.
Steve Metalitz
**
*From:*gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Marika Konings *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Dear All,
Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest.
Best regards,
Marika
*Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka
·Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba
2. Outreach messages 1 & 2:
·Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f
·Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review
·Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw <https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw>
·Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken
·Currently 4 items that need draft responses
*Action item #1*: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki
*Action item #2*: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting
ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses
·Appreciate work of lead points of contact
·Any questions from lead points of contacts?
·Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki
·Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible.
3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations
·Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations
·Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all.
·No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions.
·Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions.
·Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report
·Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki.
·See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order.
·Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome.
·Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements.
·Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases.
·Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document).
*Action item #3*: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached).
4. Planning for Helsinki meeting
·Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples
·See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw <https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw> for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible.
·Agenda for F2F WG meeting
·To be updated to reflect current state of work
5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B
·No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July
*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-efforts.htm#newcomers>./
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
Please note Volker that it is just an example to facilitate understanding. It is not time to debate it. We will get to that point later. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Volker Greimann Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:36 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting I would go further and like to ask this language to be amended to international and national laws. Best, Volker Am 22.06.2016 um 16:03 schrieb Metalitz, Steven: Chuck (and colleagues), Sorry to have missed last night's call. Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a "possible requirement ....that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances" (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): "The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law." Could you provide an example of what you mean by "international law" in this context? Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes. Steve Metalitz From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today's meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 - your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting - 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka * Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: * Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f * Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review * Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw * Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken * Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses * Appreciate work of lead points of contact * Any questions from lead points of contacts? * Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki * Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations * Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations * Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. * No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. * Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. * Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report * Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. * See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. * Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. * Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. * Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. * Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting * Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples * See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. * Agenda for F2F WG meeting * To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B * No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July 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...>. _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net> Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net> www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems> www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems> CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM To: 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Chuck (and colleagues), Sorry to have missed last night’s call. Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.” Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context? Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes. Steve Metalitz From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka • Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: • Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f • Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review • Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw • Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken • Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses • Appreciate work of lead points of contact • Any questions from lead points of contacts? • Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki • Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations • Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations • Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. • No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. • Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. • Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report • Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. • See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. • Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. • Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. • Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. • Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting • Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples • See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. • Agenda for F2F WG meeting • To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B • No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July 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...>.
Thank you Chuck, that is a helpful explanation. But if the category of international treaties applicable to the RDS is a null set, I am not sure what we would be accomplishing by requiring compliance with them. [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: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:41 PM To: Metalitz, Steven; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM To: 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Chuck (and colleagues), Sorry to have missed last night’s call. Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.” Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context? Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes. Steve Metalitz From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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<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: Daniel Nanghaka • Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: • Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f • Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review • Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw<https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw> • Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken • Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses • Appreciate work of lead points of contact • Any questions from lead points of contacts? • Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki • Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations • Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations • Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. • No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. • Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. • Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report • Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. • See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. • Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. • Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. • Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. • Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting • Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples • See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw<https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw> for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. • Agenda for F2F WG meeting • To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B • No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July 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...>.
Chuck, Part of the issue here is the use (or abuse) of the term "international law." Traditionally, international law is the law of nations, i.e., the laws that govern relationships between nations, and multilateral (i.e., "inter-national") treaties and conventions. It seems like "international law" is being used here in some much broader and ill-defined way (or ways -- consistency is lacking). It needs to be much clearer what we all mean by "international law" before we consider any requirement to comply with "international law" (or some "applicable" subset). Greg On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com> wrote:
Thank you Chuck, that is a helpful explanation. But if the category of international treaties applicable to the RDS is a null set, I am not sure what we would be accomplishing by requiring compliance with them.
*[image: image001]*
*Steven J. Metalitz *| *Partner, through his professional corporation*
T: 202.355.7902 | 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:* Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:41 PM *To:* Metalitz, Steven; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them.
Chuck
*From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Metalitz, Steven *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM *To:* 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Chuck (and colleagues),
Sorry to have missed last night’s call.
Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.”
Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context?
Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes.
Steve Metalitz
*From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Marika Konings *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Dear All,
Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest.
Best regards,
Marika
*Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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 <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: Daniel Nanghaka
· Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba
2. Outreach messages 1 & 2:
· Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f
· Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review
· Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw
· Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken
· Currently 4 items that need draft responses
*Action item #1*: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki
*Action item #2*: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting
ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses
· Appreciate work of lead points of contact
· Any questions from lead points of contacts?
· Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki
· Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible.
3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations
· Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations
· Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all.
· No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions.
· Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions.
· Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report
· Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki.
· See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order.
· Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome.
· Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements.
· Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases.
· Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document).
*Action item #3*: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached).
4. Planning for Helsinki meeting
· Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples
· See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible.
· Agenda for F2F WG meeting
· To be updated to reflect current state of work
5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B
· No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July
*Marika Konings*
Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the 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 <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>.*
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
It was just an example Greg and apparently a bad one. Please ignore it. Chuck From: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:13 PM To: Metalitz, Steven Cc: Gomes, Chuck; Marika Konings; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Chuck, Part of the issue here is the use (or abuse) of the term "international law." Traditionally, international law is the law of nations, i.e., the laws that govern relationships between nations, and multilateral (i.e., "inter-national") treaties and conventions. It seems like "international law" is being used here in some much broader and ill-defined way (or ways -- consistency is lacking). It needs to be much clearer what we all mean by "international law" before we consider any requirement to comply with "international law" (or some "applicable" subset). Greg [https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif] On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Metalitz, Steven <met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com>> wrote: Thank you Chuck, that is a helpful explanation. But if the category of international treaties applicable to the RDS is a null set, I am not sure what we would be accomplishing by requiring compliance with them. [image001] Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902<tel: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: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:41 PM To: Metalitz, Steven; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM To: 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Chuck (and colleagues), Sorry to have missed last night’s call. Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.” Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context? Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes. Steve Metalitz From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka • Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: • Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f • Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review • Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw • Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken • Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses • Appreciate work of lead points of contact • Any questions from lead points of contacts? • Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki • Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations • Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations • Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. • No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. • Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. • Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report • Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. • See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. • Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. • Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. • Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. • Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting • Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples • See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. • Agenda for F2F WG meeting • To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B • No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July 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...>. _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
As I have said to others Steve, it was just an example to provide clarification. Feel free to ignore the example. Chuck From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 1:56 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Thank you Chuck, that is a helpful explanation. But if the category of international treaties applicable to the RDS is a null set, I am not sure what we would be accomplishing by requiring compliance with them. [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: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:41 PM To: Metalitz, Steven; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM To: 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Chuck (and colleagues), Sorry to have missed last night’s call. Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.” Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context? Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes. Steve Metalitz From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka • Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: • Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f • Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review • Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw • Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken • Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses • Appreciate work of lead points of contact • Any questions from lead points of contacts? • Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki • Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations • Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations • Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. • No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. • Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. • Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report • Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. • See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. • Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. • Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. • Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. • Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting • Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples • See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. • Agenda for F2F WG meeting • To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B • No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July 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...>.
My changes and comments to the proposed document are in the attachment. (Counterintuitively, the PDF version is the one with the title beginning "Microsoft Word") Greg On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
As I have said to others Steve, it was just an example to provide clarification. Feel free to ignore the example.
Chuck
*From:* Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 1:56 PM *To:* Gomes, Chuck; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
*Subject:* RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Thank you Chuck, that is a helpful explanation. But if the category of international treaties applicable to the RDS is a null set, I am not sure what we would be accomplishing by requiring compliance with them.
*[image: image001]*
*Steven J. Metalitz *| *Partner, through his professional corporation*
T: 202.355.7902 | 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:* Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com <cgomes@verisign.com>] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:41 PM *To:* Metalitz, Steven; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them.
Chuck
*From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Metalitz, Steven *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM *To:* 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Chuck (and colleagues),
Sorry to have missed last night’s call.
Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.”
Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context?
Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes.
Steve Metalitz
*From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Marika Konings *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Dear All,
Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest.
Best regards,
Marika
*Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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 <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: Daniel Nanghaka
· Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba
2. Outreach messages 1 & 2:
· Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f
· Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review
· Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw
· Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken
· Currently 4 items that need draft responses
*Action item #1*: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki
*Action item #2*: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting
ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses
· Appreciate work of lead points of contact
· Any questions from lead points of contacts?
· Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki
· Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible.
3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations
· Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations
· Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all.
· No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions.
· Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions.
· Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report
· Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki.
· See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order.
· Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome.
· Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements.
· Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases.
· Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document).
*Action item #3*: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached).
4. Planning for Helsinki meeting
· Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples
· See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible.
· Agenda for F2F WG meeting
· To be updated to reflect current state of work
5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B
· No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July
*Marika Konings*
Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the 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 <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>.*
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Thanks Greg. I responded to your comments and edits in the attached file. I have a question for you: Did you listen to the recording? Chuck From: Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 3:45 PM To: Gomes, Chuck Cc: Metalitz, Steven; Marika Konings; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting My changes and comments to the proposed document are in the attachment. (Counterintuitively, the PDF version is the one with the title beginning "Microsoft Word") Greg On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com<mailto:cgomes@verisign.com>> wrote: As I have said to others Steve, it was just an example to provide clarification. Feel free to ignore the example. Chuck From: Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com<mailto:met@msk.com>] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 1:56 PM To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Thank you Chuck, that is a helpful explanation. But if the category of international treaties applicable to the RDS is a null set, I am not sure what we would be accomplishing by requiring compliance with them. [image001] Steven J. Metalitz | Partner, through his professional corporation T: 202.355.7902<tel: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: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:41 PM To: Metalitz, Steven; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them. Chuck From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Metalitz, Steven Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM To: 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Chuck (and colleagues), Sorry to have missed last night’s call. Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.” Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context? Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes. Steve Metalitz From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting Dear All, Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest. Best regards, Marika Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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: Daniel Nanghaka • Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba 2. Outreach messages 1 & 2: • Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f • Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review • Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw • Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken • Currently 4 items that need draft responses Action item #1: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki Action item #2: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses • Appreciate work of lead points of contact • Any questions from lead points of contacts? • Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki • Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible. 3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations • Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations • Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all. • No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions. • Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions. • Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report • Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki. • See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order. • Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome. • Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements. • Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases. • Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document). Action item #3: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached). 4. Planning for Helsinki meeting • Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples • See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible. • Agenda for F2F WG meeting • To be updated to reflect current state of work 5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B • No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July 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...>. _______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Chuck, I did not listen to the recording, for the reasons cited in Kathy's email.... Greg On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
Thanks Greg. I responded to your comments and edits in the attached file.
I have a question for you: Did you listen to the recording?
Chuck
*From:* Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 3:45 PM *To:* Gomes, Chuck *Cc:* Metalitz, Steven; Marika Konings; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
*Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
My changes and comments to the proposed document are in the attachment.
(Counterintuitively, the PDF version is the one with the title beginning "Microsoft Word")
Greg
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@verisign.com> wrote:
As I have said to others Steve, it was just an example to provide clarification. Feel free to ignore the example.
Chuck
*From:* Metalitz, Steven [mailto:met@msk.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 1:56 PM *To:* Gomes, Chuck; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
*Subject:* RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Thank you Chuck, that is a helpful explanation. But if the category of international treaties applicable to the RDS is a null set, I am not sure what we would be accomplishing by requiring compliance with them.
*[image: image001]*
*Steven J. Metalitz *| *Partner, through his professional corporation*
T: 202.355.7902 | 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:* Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com <cgomes@verisign.com>] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 12:41 PM *To:* Metalitz, Steven; 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
My intent here Steve was very similar to what occurred with the new gTLD policy recommendations. I was trying to make a distinction between local or regional laws and international treaties. The GNSO recommended that international laws be applied for new gTLDs and not local or regional laws because of the global nature of the Internet. I don’t know whether there are any such laws that would be applicable to the RDS but if there are, I would presume that the RDS would need to compliant with them.
Chuck
*From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Metalitz, Steven *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 10:04 AM *To:* 'Marika Konings'; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Chuck (and colleagues),
Sorry to have missed last night’s call.
Question re one of the examples you proposed (in the document we have been asked to review) as a “possible requirement ….that would apply to the RDS in all circumstances” (item 3(b)(i)(2) of the document): “The RDS must be in compliance with applicable international law.”
Could you provide an example of what you mean by “international law” in this context?
Thanks, and apologies if this was asked and answered last night, but I did not see any mention of it in the notes.
Steve Metalitz
*From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Marika Konings *Sent:* Wednesday, June 22, 2016 2:15 AM *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Notes & action items from 22/6 RDS PDP WG meeting
Dear All,
Please find below the notes & action items from today’s meeting. You are requested to especially take note of the following action item #3 – your input on the attached document is requested by Friday 24 June at the latest.
Best regards,
Marika
*Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting – 22 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 <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: Daniel Nanghaka
· Updates to SOI: Maxim Alzoba
2. Outreach messages 1 & 2:
· Outreach message #1: Review of public comments received - task 7.e & f
· Refer to draft comment tool - comments received to date have been plugged into tool to facilitate WG review
· Comments received are posted: https://community.icann.org/x/pYxlAw
· Draft responses are being drafted for WG review as a starting point for recording review and actions taken
· Currently 4 items that need draft responses
*Action item #1*: Leadership team to prepare draft responses for 4 open items and share with WG prior to WG F2F meeting in Helsinki
*Action item #2*: Include public comment review tool review as part of the agenda for the WG F2F meeting
ii. Member cooperation in encouraging outreach #2 responses
· Appreciate work of lead points of contact
· Any questions from lead points of contacts?
· Responses have been requested to be submitted no later than the F2F WG meeting in Helsinki
· Note, additional requirements can still be submitted after the F2F WG meeting, but ideally these are received as soon as possible.
3. Continue discussion on Task 11: Method for reaching consensus in deliberations
· Last week initial discussion on work plan task 11 - to agree on how to reach consensus in deliberations
· Document shared on the screen has been updated following WG discussion. Hopefully this will address all the input received, noting that there was necessarily agreement amongst all.
· No addition of another Initial Report, but commence deliberations with big three (users/purposes, data elements, privacy). Not start with accuracy and gated access until after deliberations on first three. If WG believes outreach is useful after first three and before moving on to next two, WG can decide to do so whether it is formal or informal to test thinking before moving on to the next questions.
· Initial report to be published for public comment after completion of work on first five questions.
· Formal consensus call only after input on Initial Report
· Next step is to organise the possible requirements - to allow for tackling them in groups, prerequisites, dependencies, etc. Lisa and Susan have commenced this work - WG will have a chance to review and comment. Try to get first three done prior to Helsinki, but as this is a significant task, it may not be possible to complete this part of the work by Helsinki.
· See latest version shared during the call with triage in progress as of 21 June 2016. Note, no changes to any of the requirements, just re-organisation: triage - take requirements and indicate pre-requisites/dependencies and which phase it falls into (phases from process framework). Also trying to group possible duplicates and similar requirements so that these can possibly be deliberated on together. See initial grouping key on page 26 and 27 - in no particular order.
· Nothing is set in stone, this is a first attempt to organise the document. Any comments/input will be welcome.
· Advantage of table is that it will allow for sorting according to phase or other requirements.
· Consider adding a grouping for legal requirements? Note, there is currently one titled 'applicable law'. May be necessary to have sub-groupings in certain cases.
· Idea to start deliberations on something sooner than organisation of documents has been finished. See step 3b of document. WG asked to identify possible requirements that would apply to RDS in all circumstances (see examples identified in document).
*Action item #3*: share document with mailing list and request feedback by Friday 24 June at the latest (see attached).
4. Planning for Helsinki meeting
· Cross-community session incl. sharing of WG possible requirements examples
· See https://community.icann.org/x/iyCOAw for latest version of presentation. No additional examples received, so for now stick with examples identified in original presentation. If WG members want to come forward with other examples, they would need to identify those as soona s possible.
· Agenda for F2F WG meeting
· To be updated to reflect current state of work
5. Confirm next meeting - F2F meeting in Helsinki: Tuesday June 28, 2016 08:00 - 12.00 Hall B
· No meetings in the week after the Helsinki meeting, recommence on 12 July
*Marika Konings*
Senior Policy Director & Team Leader for the 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 <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>.*
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
participants (5)
-
Gomes, Chuck -
Greg Shatan -
Marika Konings -
Metalitz, Steven -
Volker Greimann