January 2022 - IRT.RegDataPolicy

IRT Task 185 Review RDDS Lookup Website Tutorial 20220215
by Dennis Chang 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

Dear IRT, Per your request, we are sharing this was the tutorial slides presented to you at the IRT meeting on 20220119. Thank you for your inputs for improvement. 185 Review RDDS Lookup Website Tutorial<https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1IWRkklTmF9iODvhYFfsUfGnUkk5OidaG/ed…> 20220215 As we’ve discussed, this will be maintained as a part of the Educational Material (EdMat) for our policy. -- Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Programs Director Phone: +1 213 293 7889 Sykpe: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> One World – One Internet

2 3

IRT Task 187 Review OneDoc Section 10.1.5 Registrant Country 20220215
by Dennis Chang 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

Dear IRT, Please review the new section regarding Registrant Country. 187 Review OneDoc Section 10.1.5 Registrant Country<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SVFkoI6RmrVVz--RrVLSOj1bmz1qLb7_JTuvt7A…> 20220215 Thank you for providing your inputs on the Registrant Country data element already. We’ve created a new section that clearly states the publication requirement for registrar and registry operator both. In responses to RDDS queries, (a) Registrar MUST Publish the following data elements and (b) Registry Operator MUST Publish the following data elements if transferred from the Registrar: I think this works well to clarify and aligns well with the recommendation. You’ll note the due date being 2 weeks from now but we’ll address it at our meeting on 2 February 2022. -- Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Programs Director Phone: +1 213 293 7889 Sykpe: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> One World – One Internet

1 0

IRT Task 186 Review Drafting Error #11: Name Server IP address collected by Registrar 20220215
by Dennis Chang 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

Dear IRT, Please review and comment. 186 Review Drafting Error #11: Name Server IP address collected by Registrar<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q9I2ZBTkiq8hFOZeWwdYAaiUge3JLFx7/edit> 20220215 This is designed to provide you with a clear rationale for the change proposed in IRT Task 178 we went over at our last meeting. 178 Review OneDoc Section 7.2.7 move to 7.5.3 Name Server IP Address<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SVFkoI6RmrVVz--RrVLSOj1bmz1qLb7_JTuvt7A…> 20220107 20220128 -- Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Programs Director Phone: +1 213 293 7889 Sykpe: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> One World – One Internet

1 0

IRT Notification: Response from GNSO Council regarding EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 12 to confirm and/or clarify the Board's assumptions - 21 January 2022
by Dennis Chang 31 Jan '22

31 Jan '22

Dear IRT, Please note that GNSO Council has responded to the Board letter regarding Recommendation 12 clarification. It’s added to the IRT wiki under Correspondence for your future reference. For us the implementation team, we need to wait till the final Board action/direction to us so we won’t yet discuss this but I think it’s good for all of us to be aware of the GNSO/Board actions regarding our policy. 1. Response<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/fouquart-to-botterman-…> from GNSO Council regarding EPDP Phase 1 Recommendation 12 to confirm and/or clarify the Board's assumptions<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/fouquart-to-botterman-…> - 21 January 2022 https://community.icann.org/display/RDPIRT/RegDataPolicy+Implementation+Res… -- Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Programs Director Phone: +1 213 293 7889 Sykpe: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> One World – One Internet

1 0

Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] IRT Task 179 Review OneDoc Section 9.1.3 change from Registrar and Registrar IANA ID 20220107 > 20220128
by Dennis Chang 20 Jan '22

20 Jan '22

Dear IRT, Thank you for you for supporting the IRT meeting yesterday. Indeed a good productive and helpful discussion. I always learn when I meet with you. This is a task that you asked for more time for so I’ve extended the due date. It is an important task as it could be perceived as a change from the Recommendation and I believe we need to provide an explanation when we publish for Public Comment. 179 Review OneDoc Section 9.1.3 change from Registrar and Registrar IANA ID<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SVFkoI6RmrVVz--RrVLSOj1bmz1qLb7_JTuvt7A…> 20220107 20220128 FYI. During the IRT meeting, Sarah helped us with the discussion reporting back from her technical team that they are already using the IANA ID for this so it would not be any change for them. I know others are using names rather than number. And that we heard from the Registrars that they are aware of multiple names being used for their own companies. Is this a change we should support? Thanks for your input. Dennis Chang From: "IRT.RegDataPolicy" <irt.regdatapolicy-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of "Dennis Chang via IRT.RegDataPolicy" <irt.regdatapolicy(a)icann.org> Reply-To: Dennis Chang <dennis.chang(a)icann.org> Date: Saturday, December 11, 2021 at 19:37 To: "Dennis Chang via IRT.RegDataPolicy" <irt.regdatapolicy(a)icann.org> Subject: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] IRT Task 179 Review OneDoc Section 9.1.3 change from Registrar and Registrar IANA ID 20220107 Dear IRT, We need your input on this data item in Section 9 for Escrow. 179 Review OneDoc Section 9.1.3 change from Registrar and Registrar IANA ID<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SVFkoI6RmrVVz--RrVLSOj1bmz1qLb7_JTuvt7A…> 20220107 While we had identified 9.1.3 as Registrar before, we believe that defining it as “Registrar IANA ID” would better fit the intent of the EPDP Team. We’ll introduce the topic and provide rationale for this at the IRT meeting. Please note that the due date has been assigned to January of next year to allow you to time to consult your technical team at home. -- Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Programs Director Phone: +1 213 293 7889 Sykpe: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> One World – One Internet

1 0

Post Call | Registration Data Policy IRT | Wednesday, 19 January 2022
by Andrea Glandon 20 Jan '22

20 Jan '22

Dear all, All recordings for the Registration Data Policy IRT call held on Wednesday, 19 January 2022 at 17:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/K4D3Cg> (attendance included). These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/hpaGBg>. Thank you. Kind regards, Andrea

1 0

IRT Task 184 Review RedDoc for Thick WHOIS Transition Policy for .COM, .NET and .JOBS 20220131
by Dennis Chang 17 Jan '22

17 Jan '22

Dear IRT, Please review and comment on the RedDoc for the Transition Policy. 184 Review RedDoc for Thick WHOIS Transition Policy for .COM, .NET and .JOBS<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BjPomDc-vRmyRorzoRtRs8qQzrn_1ZeU/edit> 20220131 This is an interesting case where we are effectively making this policy obsolete because we believe all requirements for registration data in this policy for the three gTLDs are already covered in our policy. We’ll add this to one of our February IRT meeting agenda for a detail discussion. -- Kind Regards, Dennis S. Chang GDD Programs Director Phone: +1 213 293 7889 Sykpe: dennisSchang www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org> One World – One Internet

2 2

Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Onedoc Section 10 Registrant Country
by Alex Deacon 14 Jan '22

14 Jan '22

Country should not be listed in 1.1.4.4. Unless the goal of ICANN org is to release a confusing, vague, inconsistent and thus ultimately unenforceable policy. Alex ___________ *Alex Deacon* Cole Valley Consulting alex(a)colevalleyconsulting.com +1.415.488.6009 On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 9:16 AM Sarah Wyld via IRT.RegDataPolicy < irt.regdatapolicy(a)icann.org> wrote: > Hello Team, > > > > Forwarding this google docs comment thread (below) for discussion. > > > > Re the Registrant Country, listed as 1.1.4.4 in the new Section 10. This > data element is not subject to redaction (as Dennis pointed out, section > 1.2.1 does not include it). > > > > I don’t understand why this element is found in 1.1.4 (“In responses to > RDDS queries and subject to the redaction requirements outlined in the > subsequent sections, (1) Registrar MUST Publish the following data elements > and (2) Registry MUST Publish the following data elements if transferred > from the Registrar:”). > > > > It seems to me that it belongs in 1.1.2 (“In responses to RDDS queries, > Registrar and Registry Operator MUST Publish the following data elements if > collected or generated:”) because the Registrar will always collect this > field but the Registry may not, and this field is not subject to redaction > requirements. > > > > I know this was on our agenda for Dec 15 but my notes about our homework > were that following that meeting we were supposed to review the section in > detail and come back with any concerns before January 7, which I did. I’m > not sure why the comment thread has been resolved in the OneDoc since > clearly two members of this IRT do have questions about it which have not > been resolved. > > > > I would like to understand the reasoning for putting this data element in > the ‘might be redacted’ section, when it is not permissible to redact this > data element. > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > -- > > *Sarah Wyld*, CIPP/E > > > > Policy & Privacy Manager > > Pronouns: she/they > > > > swyld(a)tucows.com > > +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392 > > > > > > *From: *Dennis Chang (Google Docs) <comments-noreply(a)docs.google.com> > *Sent: *January 12, 2022 1:40 PM > *To: *swyld(a)tucowsinc.com > *Subject: *IRT.OneDoc RegDat... - This field is not subject to redactio... > > > Dennis Chang replied to a comment in the following document > > IRT.OneDoc RegDataPolicy20201005 > <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SVFkoI6RmrVVz--RrVLSOj1bmz1qLb7_JTuvt7A…> > > > > Registrant Country > > Sarah Wyld > > This field is not subject to redaction, does it belong in 1.1.2 instead? > > Alex Deacon > > agree country should be in 1.1.2 > > > > Dennis ChangNew > > the section 10 needs to be read together. the registrant country is not > included in 1.2.1 as you'll note. therefore this data element needs to be > here. this was discussed at the IRT meeting 20211215. > > Open > <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SVFkoI6RmrVVz--RrVLSOj1bmz1qLb7_JTuvt7A…> > > > > > > Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA > > You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change > what Google Docs sends you. > <https://docs.google.com/document/u/103140320049987970298/docos/notify?ouid=…> > You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IRT.RegDataPolicy mailing list > IRT.RegDataPolicy(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/irt.regdatapolicy > > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your > personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance > with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and > the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can > visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or > configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or > disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

1 0

Onedoc Section 10 Registrant Country
by Sarah Wyld 13 Jan '22

13 Jan '22

Hello Team, Forwarding this google docs comment thread (below) for discussion. Re the Registrant Country, listed as 1.1.4.4 in the new Section 10. This data element is not subject to redaction (as Dennis pointed out, section 1.2.1 does not include it). I don’t understand why this element is found in 1.1.4 (“In responses to RDDS queries and subject to the redaction requirements outlined in the subsequent sections, (1) Registrar MUST Publish the following data elements and (2) Registry MUST Publish the following data elements if transferred from the Registrar:”). It seems to me that it belongs in 1.1.2 (“In responses to RDDS queries, Registrar and Registry Operator MUST Publish the following data elements if collected or generated:”) because the Registrar will always collect this field but the Registry may not, and this field is not subject to redaction requirements. I know this was on our agenda for Dec 15 but my notes about our homework were that following that meeting we were supposed to review the section in detail and come back with any concerns before January 7, which I did. I’m not sure why the comment thread has been resolved in the OneDoc since clearly two members of this IRT do have questions about it which have not been resolved. I would like to understand the reasoning for putting this data element in the ‘might be redacted’ section, when it is not permissible to redact this data element. Thank you, -- Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E Policy & Privacy Manager Pronouns: she/they swyld(a)tucows.com +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392 From: Dennis Chang (Google Docs) Sent: January 12, 2022 1:40 PM To: swyld(a)tucowsinc.com Subject: IRT.OneDoc RegDat... - This field is not subject to redactio... Dennis Chang replied to a comment in the following document IRT.OneDoc RegDataPolicy20201005 Registrant Country Sarah Wyld This field is not subject to redaction, does it belong in 1.1.2 instead? Alex Deacon agree country should be in 1.1.2 Dennis Chang New the section 10 needs to be read together. the registrant country is not included in 1.2.1 as you'll note. therefore this data element needs to be here. this was discussed at the IRT meeting 20211215. Open Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

1 0

Onedoc Section 10 Registrant Country
by Sarah Wyld 13 Jan '22

13 Jan '22

Hello Team, Forwarding this google docs comment thread (below) for discussion. Re the Registrant Country, listed as 1.1.4.4 in the new Section 10. This data element is not subject to redaction (as Dennis pointed out, section 1.2.1 does not include it). I don’t understand why this element is found in 1.1.4 (“In responses to RDDS queries and subject to the redaction requirements outlined in the subsequent sections, (1) Registrar MUST Publish the following data elements and (2) Registry MUST Publish the following data elements if transferred from the Registrar:”). It seems to me that it belongs in 1.1.2 (“In responses to RDDS queries, Registrar and Registry Operator MUST Publish the following data elements if collected or generated:”) because the Registrar will always collect this field but the Registry may not, and this field is not subject to redaction requirements. I know this was on our agenda for Dec 15 but my notes about our homework were that following that meeting we were supposed to review the section in detail and come back with any concerns before January 7, which I did. I’m not sure why the comment thread has been resolved in the OneDoc since clearly two members of this IRT do have questions about it which have not been resolved. I would like to understand the reasoning for putting this data element in the ‘might be redacted’ section, when it is not permissible to redact this data element. Thank you, -- Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E Policy & Privacy Manager Pronouns: she/they swyld(a)tucows.com +1.416 535 0123 Ext. 1392 From: Dennis Chang (Google Docs) Sent: January 12, 2022 1:40 PM To: swyld(a)tucowsinc.com Subject: IRT.OneDoc RegDat... - This field is not subject to redactio... Dennis Chang replied to a comment in the following document IRT.OneDoc RegDataPolicy20201005 Registrant Country Sarah Wyld This field is not subject to redaction, does it belong in 1.1.2 instead? Alex Deacon agree country should be in 1.1.2 Dennis Chang New the section 10 needs to be read together. the registrant country is not included in 1.2.1 as you'll note. therefore this data element needs to be here. this was discussed at the IRT meeting 20211215. Open Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

1 0