Dear All, Firstly, thank you Carlton. I have a few questions, namely: 1. Was the session recorded and are there transcripts or audiopods? 2. Who represented the GNSO and CCNSO into those meetings? 3. Were the experts currently conducting the 4 Whois Studies present in the meeting and did the discussions affect the current scope of their current studies? 4. Who from the OECD, EC was present in that meeting? 5. Which Law Enforcement Representatives attended and did they include Revenue Authorities and which countries were they from? 6. Who set the Agenda of the Discussions and was this available on the Wiki or ICANN website? 7. What was the outcome of the discussions? Thank you and kind regards, Sala On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com
wrote:
So here we are. What do we know? And, when did we know it?
Under the label 'Current Situation and Recent Developments' in the *RAA Negotiations Update* document, it says:
"six additional negotiating sessions, including two all-day in-person meetings held in Washington DC (one of which was attended by Governmental Advisory Committee members and representatives from the law enforcement representatives)...........the negotiations since Prague has largely focused on the key areas of Whois verification and data retention, which are part of 12 GAC/law enforcement recommendations."
In case you missed the significance, there is further contextualization:
"I n Prague, we highlighted four critical elements of the law enforcement recommendations: (1)verification / validation of Whois data; (2)enhanced collection of information related to registrants (data retention); (3)clarification of registrar responsibility regarding resellers and privacy/proxy services; and (4)creation of contacts for reports of domain name abuse.
The ALAC and At-Large have certainly not been mute on said 'critical elements'. And while the ALAC is also on record demanding transparent negotiations if only because of the pivotal role the RAA plays in consensus policy development, I personally do not have any the current information regarding At-Large/ALAC dispositions at these sessions. All things being equal, it appears the At-Large [and the ALAC] were treated like unloved country cousins on your father's side, thrice removed.
I'm pleased to hear negotiations have progressed in certain areas. See the Summary of Negotiations Status. Look closely at Item #10: Registrar Validation of Registrant Data. Apply the stoplight status here and contextualize what this means.
I have attached both documents for ease of access.
- Carlton Samuels [Chair, At-Large WHOIS WG]
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN News Alert <communications@icann.org> Date: Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:56 PM Subject: ICANN News Alert -- Update on Registrar Accreditation Agreement Amendments To: carlton.samuels@gmail.com
** [image: ICANN] <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert
http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-5-24sep12-en.htm ------------------------------ Update on Registrar Accreditation Agreement Amendments
24 September 2012
In advance of the ICANN meeting in Toronto, ICANN and the Registrars are posting two documents on the status of negotiations of amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA). Since Prague, significant progress has been made, though certain key issues remain open. There were six negotiation sessions, including a full day session with participants from the Governmental Advisory Committee and representatives of law enforcement. As reported earlier, there is agreement in many areas, including nearly all law enforcement recommendations. In the two remaining recommendations still under discussion, ICANN and the registrars are much closer to reaching a negotiated position on Whois verification and data retention.
On Whois verification, a framework for improving Whois accuracy has been developed, however, ICANN and the registrars still have not reached agreement on the number of fields that are to be verified.
On data retention, discussion among law enforcement representatives, registrars and ICANN indicates there is agreement in principle on a two-tiered retention schedule to account for differing data privacy obligations. More detail on each of these items, as well as status of negotiations on the other law enforcement requests, are provided in the documents posted today:
*RAA Negotiation Update< http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/negotiations-update-24sep12...
:* A memo providing detail on the negotiations since the Prague meeting and providing some questions for further community input.
*Summary Chart of Status of Negotiations< http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/negotiations-status-summary...
:* Detailed status of negotiation on each of the 12 law enforcement requests, noting the remaining items remaining for discussion. Key requests from Registrars and ICANN for additional terms in the RAA are also identified at the end of the chart.
Because the negotiations have been focused on these key areas, ICANN and the Registrars have not yet reached a fully negotiated agreement on all terms and provisions within the RAA. When available, a full draft will be posted for public comment. Until that time, ICANN and the Registrars welcome feedback on the discussion topics identified in the summary memo to help inform the community discussions in Toronto. Comments can be forwarded to the RAA Negotiations Status Wiki< https://community.icann.org/display/RAA/Negotiations+Between+ICANN+and+Regis...
.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851