Dear review team members,
While you review the final recommendations,
we would like to remind you to confirm the operational input
received (see attached) at the fourth face-to-face meeting was
addressed and incorporated in the final recommendations.
In addition, we would like to highlight two
items from final report recommendations that require your
review:
Common interface recommendations do
not seem to have taken into account the concerns around its
implementation:
“On recommendation 11.1 (common interface), based on the
review team’s suggested implementation, it appears that
the metrics and SLAs asked for in the recommendation are
intended for use by ICANN org as mechanisms to proactively
identify compliance issues. ICANN org would like to note
that there are multiple reasons queries could return blank
fields, or no results. It is not possible programmatically
to determine the causes of these results. Additionally,
per the Temporary Specification, gTLD registration data
results could differ between registry and registrar
outputs. Therefore, inconsistencies in registrar and
registry gTLD registration data outputs are not
necessarily compliance issues. ICANN org would also like
to inform the RDS-WHOIS2 review team that the existing
WHOIS look-up tool at whois.icann.org will be updated in
the coming months with a new tool built on RDAP. It is
possible and intended that the new tool would function in
such a way that no data would be collected by ICANN org.”
On
recommendation
BY.1, the implementation note reads:
Implementation:
The RDS-WHOIS2 Review Team believes that
this recommendation can be carried out by the ICANN
Community, following the process foreseen by the
current Bylaws Section 4.6(a)(v).
This section will need updating, as
the process associated with suggested Bylaws amendments is
documented in Article 25 of ICANN Bylaws (https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article25)
Kind regards,
Jean-Baptiste
Dear review team members,
Please also note the updated text on
prioritization of recommendations presented on plenary call by
Susan:
- High
priority – These recommendations will create the most
impact and the review team found the actions recommended
were critical to the WHOIS ecosystem. The actions required
may be complex and could involve in depth analysis and
action. Most involve community input which can be time
consuming so the Board may wish to focus on these first.
- Medium
priority – These recommendations are not quite
complex as the high priority but could involve time
consuming research and implementation. Most require actions
only by ICANN org so they should be implementable without
much community input.
- Low
priority – some of these recommendations are
dependent on other recommendations, call for limited actions
or are deferred until other actions have been completed.
Kind regards,
Jean-Baptiste
Dear review team members,
Following up on the action item identified
on today’s plenary call
#48 and Alan’s previous email,
review team members are kindly invited to indicate whether you
support the attached final recommendations.
Should there be any non-support of a
recommendation please explain your objection. Please reply
no later than 23:59 UTC on Thursday, 07 February 2019.
If you are NOT supporting any recommendation, early notice
will be appreciated.
Minority Statements to be sent no later
than Wednesday 13 February 2019 - 12:00 UTC
Please note that on today’s call, R5.1
priority level was assigned to High Priority. If you have any
comments or concerned, please submit them in reply to this
email.
Alan, Lili, Carlton, Susan, Dmitry and
Cathrin have confirmed support of all recommendations on
plenary call
#48.
Kind regards,
Jean-Baptiste