Dear All, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the Next-Gen RDS PDP Working group call held on Tuesday, 04 October 2016 at 16:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-nextgen-rds-04oct16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-nextgen-rds-13sep16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-nextgen-rds-06sep16-en.mp3> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives:http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/tA_4Aw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday, 04 October 2016 Michelle DeSmyter: Dear All, Welcome to the Next-Gen RDS PDP Working Group on Tuesday, 04 October 2016 at 16:00 UTC Michelle DeSmyter: Member page: https://community.icann.org/x/I4xlAw Chuck Gomes: Welcome all. Marika Konings: I hope I caught everything :-) Beth Allegretti: I'll volunteer to help Lisa Phifer: Thanks Beth! Beth Allegretti: No, just the coding Lisa Phifer: Those familiar with the new GDPR would be ideal to help Greg with this task Nathalie Coupet: When is it due, Chuck? Nathalie Coupet: I could volunteer after October 24 Ayden Férdeline: Sorry I'm late... I had to download a plugin to get AC to open today for some reason. Scott Hollenbeck (Verisign): Yes, it has. andrew sullivan: I do apologise for sending comments on this so late (i.e. just this morning). There was another small issue (cough IANA cough) that took up a little bit of time in the past couple weeks. Lisa Phifer: @Nathalie, have noted your willingness to help Greg after Oct 24 if needed Nathalie Coupet: Thank you, Lisa Alex Deacon: Hi All - apologies for being late. Benny Samuelsen / Nordreg AB: just me or are sound dropping on an off? Ayden Férdeline: I have the audio cutting out too Lisa Phifer: Note that this PDP was formed to address this board resolution: "Resolved (2015.04.26.10), the Board reaffirms its request for a Board-initiated GNSO policy development process to define the purpose of collecting, maintaining and providing access to gTLD registration data, and consider safeguards for protecting data, using the recommendations in the Final Report [PDF, 5.12 MB] as an input to, and, if appropriate, as the foundation for a new gTLD policy." andrew sullivan: re: Alan's question about "shared": that's just what us geeks call it :) EPP is a protocol for shared registration systems. Verisign's old RRP was another example. And even web-only systems are SRSs. But I'm not hung up on the jargon :) Alan Greenberg: Git it! Alan Greenberg: Ot Got it! Holly Raiche: What about: for the use and disclosure of data collected in accordance with ICANN requirements Alan Greenberg: Apparently I cannot type 2 and 3 character words without introducing typos. Lisa Phifer: Recall that Phase 1 defines requirements for a policy framework; it does not define a system. The policy framework is broader than system(s) that may be built to support those policies. Marina Lewis: Hi all...sorry to be joining late. Vicky Sheckler: apologies for joining late Lisa Phifer: RDDS is used by RAA, but the acryonym RDS was used in the board resolution and issue report that lead to this PDP Jim Galvin (Afilias): +1 andrew Lisa Phifer: Note that coexistence and migration are a charter question to be addressed Vicky Sheckler: while job may be complicated, we need to address all potential uses of the registrant data andrew sullivan: there are definitely uses of registrant data that are none of our business andrew sullivan: there is no way we can have an opinion on payment method collection, for instance andrew sullivan: I don't see how we can usefully direct anyone about that Vicky Sheckler: andrew - not sure i follow you. no, i don't see how we dictate payment method, but once collected, those details may be relevant for purposes we are discussing Lisa Phifer: @andrew, not footnote that narrows registration data elements - from WG call a few weeks ago Marina Lewis: Apologies, but I need to jump off for another call. Sara Bockey: Apologies for joining late andrew sullivan: Perhaps the goal for the statement is to guide the work of the WG in line with the charter? Lisa Phifer: If there is disagreement on the goal of the statement, do we need to resolve that disagreement to agree on the statement itself? andrew sullivan: @Lisa: I don't think so Scott Hollenbeck (Verisign): What Andrew just said... Lisa Phifer: Scope of this WG is limited to registration data associated with gTLDs (that is, not ccTLDs) Maxim Alzoba (FAITID): hello all Lisa Phifer: How about "pertain to registration data associated with gTLDs" Lisa Phifer: How about "Helps to clearly articulate a rationale (if any) for registration data" Alex Deacon: Don't frameworks exist alredy? i.e. the EU privacy laws and pending regulations? Lisa Phifer: @Alex, those regs are what the policy framework needs to enable compliance with Alex Deacon: I think the update "if there is one" does the trick, no?. So suggest we keep it..... Lisa Phifer: "the RDS" is the system that implements policy, whether that's a refinement of WHOIS or a next-gen system Vicky Sheckler: agree with alan andrew sullivan: I think there are things we have the whois for historically, and I don't believe that we can just delete this principle, though I am prepared to ack that there are lots of things in it that should be removed steve metalitz: +1 Alan. Hard to conceive of not having an RDS of some kind. andrew sullivan: and that's why I put the X andrew sullivan: particularly with the "if there is one" limit andrew sullivan: yes, opposed to deleting andrew sullivan: as asked :) Holly Raiche: Agree with Alan - Marc Anderson: Instead of "Helps to clearly articulate a rationale for an RDS, if there is one", I would change to "Helps to clearly articulate a rationale for a potential RDS" andrew sullivan: also ok with "potential" steve metalitz: Marc's language sounds good. Holly Raiche: Agree with Marc's language steve metalitz: Have my hand up just to note that former d and e should be considered as goals. As I mentioned before. We are now beyond that into the next section so will take down my hand. Lisa Phifer: @Steve - we need to circle back to your suggestion to move d) and e) to previous section on goals for each purpose Scott Hollenbeck (Verisign): Delete it - "to enable management" by who? I don't need it as a registrant. Alan Greenberg: ok, i can live with it. Marika Konings 2: @Steve - we can add d and e as proposed goals in the next iteration so the WG can review as it was flagged earlier on. steve metalitz: @ Marika, thanks Lisa Phifer: Meeting notes will capture this as well, Chuck Alex Deacon: Thanks Chuck. Marika Konings 2: No, all good :-) Lisa Phifer: no Marc Anderson: @Markia - amazing job with the notes and capturing everything was discussed. Thank you! andrew sullivan: +a lot on the list work. I find it helpful Susan Kawaguchi 2: thanks everyone Marika Konings 2: Thanks, Marc, but Lisa covered the notes in the AC room while I updated the document. I am not that good :-) Marc Anderson: Ah, then great job Marika and Lisa! andrew sullivan: bye all