May 2012 - Rt4-whois - lists.icann.org

Executive Summary - clean and checked
by Emily Taylor May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Hi all Alice, as agreed this morning, has gone through and produced a clean version of the Executive Summary. I have now reviewed this for sense, and attach a mark up showing the following: 1. correction of a few minor typos 2. Page 1: our work has taken 18 months, so I put that in instead of "year-long" 3. Page 5: recommendation 1 I changed "take" to "taking" in the last bullet point for sense. 4. Page 11: on the second bullet point (recommendation 10) I added that the contact details are "for the privacy/proxy service provider". This takes on a comment/suggestion made by Seth a few days ago in notes on the draft to say that the sense of this bullet point was not clear. 5. Page 11: I think we should put in a footnote to say that "thin" whois will be explained in the glossary (and check that it is!) 6. Page 13 (findings for IDNs): I have included Sarmad's proposed language described on this morning's call. That's all - it reads well, and I think we should be proud of it. There are more nit picky points that I wanted to make about certain recommendations, but have held back. We're done. If you would like to make your own comments, please do so as soon as possible today. Alice - please can you take in these tracked changes and now combine the Executive summary into the final document for publication. Alice - the final document should also include the new chapter on compliance (cleaned up - let me know if you'd like me to review this once you've taken in the edits), and replacement of Findings and Recommendations chapters with the new text from the Executive Summary. Kind regards Emily -- * * 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322 emily(a)emilytaylor.eu *www.etlaw.co.uk* Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713.

1 0

Note Pod Content - 2 May
by Alice Jansen May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Dear Review Team Members, Please find enclosed the note pod content of your conference call held on 2 May. Staff will draft a preliminary report for your consideration. Thanks, Kind regards Alice WHOIS REVIEW TEAM CONFERENCE CALL 2 MAY - 06:00 UTC ----------- WHOIS REVIEW TEAM MEMBERS Sarmad Hussain, James Bladel, Peter Nettlefold, Susan Kawaguchi, Seth Reiss, Emily Taylor, Michael Yakushev ICANN STAFF Olof Nordling, Alice Jansen, Denise Michel APOLOGIES Omar Kaminski, Kathy Kleiman ------------------------------------ AGENDA Tomorrow's call will be our last as a review team, and our task is to sign off the final report. If you are unable to make the call, please indicate your agreement or any comments on the executive summary and compliance chapter if you have not already done so.* 1. Executive summary - Sign off general text - Discuss outstanding proposals for amendments and reach conclusions - IDN recommendations - final text for approval. 2. Compliance chapter - Sign off general text 3. Full report (other chapters) - Report from Seth on edits (minimalist approach) - Sign off by RT 4. Steps to publication - Clean up tracked changes and combine into single document (Alice) - Final check for sense (Alice, Emily, Kathy) - Review Appendices and add new material as referenced (table showing public comments, additional Compliance documents referenced in the new chapter), and agree publication date for appendices (proposal - 11 May) 5. AOB and vote of thanks for ICANN staff support. ------------- * To date, received from Bill, Kathy, Peter and Susan. --------------------------------------------- NOTES 1. Executive Summary (ET) walks Team throught streams of edits. Susan and Peter to pinpoint most contentious issues Peter: legitimate James: non-malicious? Not causing harm. Catch non legalistic sentiment that legitimate brings. Susan: valid? Emily: endorsement Seth: many - out ; interest comma which many view as legitimate ADOPTED last paragraph James: context instead of environment environment adopted Seth: shouldn't discussed anything that is voluntary Language ok 2. IDNs Sarmad provided the Team with an overview of their activities and how they came to findings and recommendations Peter: Staff's recommendation is to explore work of IETF Agree on recommendations. Sarmad to send language to be adopted Susan: translation issue raised by Staff Executive summary Alice to reincorporate recommendation and to move it (page 10). put it as new recommendation 5 - move numbering down and change wording by broadening language out. ICANN should ensure that the requirements for accurate WHOIS data are widely and pro-actively communicated, including to current and prospective Registrants, and should use all means available to progress WHOIS accuracy including any internationalized WHOIS data as an organizational objective. As part of this effort, ICANN should ensure that its Registrant Rights and Responsibilities document is pro-actively and prominently circulated to all new and renewing registrants. Rec 8, 9 duplicates - accidentaly deleted ICANN should ensure... Reinstore original language in sections C & D. adopt the executive summary with changes discussed 3. Compliance chapter ADOPTED and thanks to Emily 4. Summary of comments inserted comments on chapters (mostly Steve Crocker's). 5.New Exec summary, new compliance, new findings and recs. proposal to sign-off. Draft report to be tidied up. Accept al comments and delete comment by the end of today - UTC. Alice to publish draft report within 24 hours. Get document out as soon as possible for recommendations. Work on appendices in the following week. 6. A.O.B Preliminary report adopted. 7. Thank you

1 0

Adobe room
by Alice Jansen May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Please join the Adobe room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/ -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann

1 0

Agenda - call on 2 May - 06:00 UTC
by Alice Jansen May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Dear Review Team Members, As you know, your next call is scheduled for Wednesday, 2 May at 06:00 UTC (time converter:http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+RT+-+2…) Please find enclosed the agenda, also available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+30+-+2+May+2012 Thanks, Kind regards Alice ----------- Tomorrow's call will be our last as a review team, and our task is to sign off the final report. If you are unable to make the call, please indicate your agreement or any comments on the executive summary and compliance chapter if you have not already done so.* 1. Executive summary - Sign off general text - Discuss outstanding proposals for amendments and reach conclusions - IDN recommendations - final text for approval. 2. Compliance chapter - Sign off general text 3. Full report (other chapters) - Report from Seth on edits (minimalist approach) - Sign off by RT 4. Steps to publication - Clean up tracked changes and combine into single document (Alice) - Final check for sense (Alice, Emily, Kathy) - Review Appendices and add new material as referenced (table showing public comments, additional Compliance documents referenced in the new chapter), and agree publication date for appendices (proposal - 11 May) 5. AOB and vote of thanks for ICANN staff support. ------------- * To date, received from Bill, Kathy, Peter and Susan. -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann

2 1

Executive Summary
by Susan Kawaguchi May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Thank you all for your hard work on the executive summary. I have made a few comments but for the most part I am in agreement with the current draft. Talk to you tonight. Susan Kawaguchi Domain Name Manager Facebook Legal Dept. Phone - 650 485-6064

5 6

REMINDER - Call today @ 06:00 UTC
by Alice Jansen May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Dear Review Team Members, Your next conference call is scheduled for: **Wednesday, 2 May 2012** 06:00 UTC Please check your local time at: http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+RT+-+2+May+-+06%… PASSWORD: 27318 followed by # Agenda: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreview/Call+30+-+2+May+2012 Adobe room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/ Audio-cast (silent observers): http://stream.icann.org:8000/whois.m3u Dial-in numbers: Please find below a table which encapsulates dial-in numbers for your countries of residence. Should you be traveling, please refer to the full list which is available at: http://www.adigo.com/icann/ Australia 1 800 009 820 1 800 036 775 Sydney T +61 290372962 Melbourne T +61 399996500 Brisbane T +61 731777546 Austria L - 0 800 295 858 M - 0 800 295 138 T - +43 720 882 638 Belgium L - 0800 79210 M – 0800 79218 T - +32 78 480 286 Brazil L - 0800 891 1597 M - 0800 891 1598 T - +55 613 717 2040 Canada 1 800 550 6865 T - +1 213 233 3193 France 0800 90 25 56 T - +33 170618347 Germany L - 0800 1016 120 G - M 0800 1016 124 Russia 8 10 8002 535 3011 T - +7 499 650 7835 United Kingdom 0800 032 6646 T - +44 207 099 0867 United States 1 800 550 6865 T - +1 213 233 3193 T – local toll number ; M – mobile preferred number ; L – landline preferred number Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require a dial-out for this call. Thank you, Very best regards Alice Alice E. Jansen -------------------------- ICANN Assistant, Organizational & Affirmation Reviews alice.jansen(a)icann.org<mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org> Direct Dial: +32.2.234.78.64 Mobile: +32.4.73.31.76.56 Office Fax: +32.2.234.78.48 Skype: alice_jansen_icann -------------------------- 6, Rond Point Schuman B-1040 Brussels, Belgium -- Alice Jansen Organizational Reviews Manager 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann

1 0

IRD protocol development at IETF
by Sarmad Hussain May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Dear All, A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Applications Area, with the following draft charter (see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/evaluation/weirds-charter.txt) and is provided for informational purposes only. Kindly note that current draft proposes way forward using RESTful framework for both names and numbers and also the timelines are Aug. 2013 for the completion of drafts. Regards, Sarmad Web Extensible Internet Registration Data Service (weirds) ---------------------------------------------------------- Status: Proposed Working Group Last updated: 2012-04-24 Chairs: TBD Applications Area Directors: Barry Leiba<barryleiba(a)computer.org> Pete Resnick<presnick(a)qualcomm.com> Mailing List: Address: weirds(a)ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/weirds/ Description of Working Group: Internet registries for both number resources and names have historically maintained a lookup service to permit public access to some portion of the registry database. Most registries offer the service via WHOIS (RFC 3912), with additional services being offered via world wide web pages, bulk downloads, and other services, such as RPSL (RFC 2622). WHOIS has never been internationalized. In the absence of formal specification, ad hoc solutions to signal internationalized registration data have been adopted and deployed. Providing a standards-based solution that scales well could minimize further proliferation of ad hoc solutions. WHOIS also has no data model: replies are basically just free-form text. This means that processing of WHOIS output amounts to "screen scraping", with specialized handlers for every service. While many of the domain name registries share a basic common output format, the addition of data elements changes the output and causes problems for parsers of the data. The WHOIS protocol does not offer any differential service; it cannot differentiate among clients to offer different subsets of information or to allow different access rates to it. Various attempts to solve the limitations of WHOIS have met with mixed success. The most recent of these was IRIS (RFC 3891). IRIS has not been a successful replacement for WHOIS. The primary technical reason for this appears to be the complexity of IRIS, the fact that it builds upon many available technologies that in the aggregate form a complex system. There may also exist non-technical reasons, but they lie in areas upon which the IETF does not pass judgement. In recent years, ARIN and RIPE NCC have fielded production RESTful web services to serve WHOIS data, and each has met with success. It is widely believed that this simpler re-use of Web technologies familiar to modern web developers has enabled this success. The purpose of this working group is to broaden the use of RESTful web services by achieving simple and common URI patterns and responses amenable to all number resource and domain name registries. This Working Group shall determine the general needs of such a service, and standardize a single data framework. That framework shall be used to encapsulate objects that could form part of an answer. The framework shall be for data to be delivered via a RESTful data service using HTTP (optionally using TLS), and may use standard features of HTTP to support differential service levels to different classes of user. The data shall have one mandatory format, though the working group may consider other optional formats. The overall effort will be broadly aligned with a subset of the Cross Registry Internet Service Protocol (CRISP) Requirements (RFC 3707), but with the explicit additional goals of producing a simple, easy-to-implement protocol, supporting internationalized registration data and, specifically for name registries, capturing the needs of internationalized domain names in the data model. As the number registries have more experience with these services and have found common ground, with their dissimilarities resulting in more complete working group input documents, the goals of the working group are to produce standards-track specifications for both number and name registries using the fashion and pattern of the number registry input documents, draft-newton-et-al-weirds-rir-query and draft-newton-et-al-weirds-rir-json-response, as an initial basis. Work to specify the query for domain name registration data will be based on draft-sheng-weirds-icann-rws-dnrd. The Working Group shall determine the general requirements of such a service, using draft-kucherawy-weirds-requirements as an input document, and standardize a single data framework. The working group will likely not seek publication of this draft. Should the Working Group reach a point where it determines that the problem of producing a grand unified specification for both numbers and names appears to be intractable, it will be permitted to divide the problem into separate tasks and amend its milestones accordingly. Milestones: Nov 2012 Draft specifying the common infrastructure document to the IESG for approval as a Proposed Standard. Feb 2013 Draft specifying the RESTful URL query format for RIRs to the IESG for approval as a Proposed Standard. Mar 2013 Draft specifying the format for responses to RIR queries to the IESG for approval as a Proposed Standard. Jul 2013 Draft specifying the RESTful URL query format for domain name registration data to the IESG for approval as a Proposed Standard. Aug 2013 Draft(s) specifying the format(s) for responses to domain name registration data queries to the IESG for approval as a Proposed Standard.

1 0

Re: [Rt4-whois] Executive Summary [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
by Kathy Kleiman May 2, 2012

May 2, 2012

Hi All, Before I head off, I want to share what you would already know: 1) I like the word legitimate. I think it reflects what we have all said, and agreed to on a recent call, that there privacy rights and legitimate privacy needs. I am sorry to see it go because I thought it kept the balance when we deleted specific privacy rights bullet point. 2) But much more strongly, I oppose the deletion of the phrase "to encourage proxy/privacy service providers to become accredited" from the following sentence: ==> "ICANN could, for example, use a mix of incentives and graduated sanctions to encourage proxy/privacy service providers to become accredited, and to ensure that registrars do not knowingly accept registrations from unaccredited providers." I think Peter drafted the original statement (I hope I credited it properly) and it captures well the consensus of the group -- what we all agreed upon together. Delete it, and it becomes a mandate requirement from the Review Team for accreditation, and we simply don't have consensus on that (and I would have to write a minority statement). (As I have shared -- after 10 years of work in the GNSO WHOIS arena -- We have done more to progress discussion on this issue than any group in 10 years. Make the standards voluntary at the start, and the ICANN Community has an incentive to make the voluntary standards balanced and fair, in hopes of the best practices becoming permanent. Make them mandatory upfront, and groups know they are competing for something that can be forced down other sides' throats and won't compromise. There's a history here... ) 3) I think it's too late for a new recommendation. It's a good bullet point, but I think it will delay our closure process to make it a full recommendation. It fits very well where it is... 4) Regarding the edits to the Full Report, will we all get a chance to see them and review them? I think it would be good.... Best and thanks, Kathy : > > My comments on the current draft of Recommendation 10: Data Access- > Privacy and Proxy Services > > Findings: Para 2: I agree with Peter to delete the word "legitimate". > > Recommendations: top of next page beginning with "ICANN could, for > example, use a mix of": I would delete the phrase "to encourage > proxy/privacy service providers to become accredited". Leaving the > phrase in suggests that ICANN could tolerate a community of > non-accredited proxy/privacy providers and I feel this is the wrong > message to send. > > Same page bullet two: I am still confused who is provide the full > details and if the details are of the service provider or the > beneficiary user. > > Last paragraph last bullet. I like Peter's comment "Clarifying the > issue of rights/responsibilities/liabilities should be an essential > part of the proxy/privacy discussion, with the goal being clear and > comprehensive guidance for the community." (I've tried to improve it a > little). Can we place this statement above as a recommendation > separate from the bullet points, perhaps as the second, third or > fourth paragraph under Recommendations. I sense that strengthening > this statement could address Susan's concerns as well. > > Seth > > *From:*rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org > [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Nettlefold, Peter > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 01, 2012 2:51 PM > *To:* rt4-whois(a)icann.org > *Subject:* Re: [Rt4-whois] Executive Summary [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] > > Hi all, > > In advance of tonight's call, I just wanted to note that there seem to > be two versions on v6 out there -- one I sent yesterday with 'v6 pn' > in the title, and more recent version sent by Susan with 'v6 Susan's > comments'. > > I'm not commenting on the content as such, but just noting the version > issue. > > Cheers, > > Peter > > *From:*rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org > <mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org> > [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Kleiman > *Sent:* Wednesday, 2 May 2012 9:53 AM > *To:* rt4-whois(a)icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org> > *Subject:* Re: [Rt4-whois] Executive Summary > > Hi All, > I am sorry that I will not be able to attend the meeting in a few > hours (it's at 2am my time). Thanks to everyone for all the discussion > and editing! I support the Executive Summary and IDN Comments. > > I wanted to share a particular support for the new proxy/privacy point > that Peter added. > > providing clear and unambiguous guidance on the rights and > responsibilities of registered name holders, and how those should be > managed in the privacy/proxy environment > > I'm happy to work with Alice on removing all the comments I > inserted... and regards to all! > Kathy > > : > > Thank you all for your hard work on the executive summary. I have > made a few comments but for the most part I am in agreement with the > current draft. > > Talk to you tonight. > > Susan Kawaguchi > > Domain Name Manager > > Facebook Legal Dept. > > Phone - 650 485-6064 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois(a)icann.org <mailto:Rt4-whois@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > > > -- > > > > > *-------------------------------------------------------------------------------* > NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s) > and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the > intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and > destroy all > copies of the original message. > > This message has been content scanned by the Axway MailGate. > MailGate uses policy enforcement to scan for known viruses, spam, > undesirable content and malicious code. For more information on Axway > products please visit www.axway.com <http://www.axway.com>. > > *-------------------------------------------------------------------------------* > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois --

1 0

IDN findings and recommendations
by Emily Taylor May 1, 2012

May 1, 2012

Dear all On behalf of the small group working on IDN recommendations, here are the amended recommendations, and findings (which are taken direct from the draft report findings). I believe that this wording now has consensus among the small group. The meaning is close to the original recommendations published for public comment, but the text is shorter. I hope we can sign these off as soon as possible, so please let me have any comments before our call tomorrow. Those unable to join - please indicate your views. If I don't hear back I'll assume that everyone is happy. Kind regards Emily *Findings:* * * Perhaps it should be no surprise that within this environment, policy and implementation have not kept pace with the real world. A significant example of this is Internationalised Domain Names (IDN), which have been available for registration at the second level for over a decade, and at the Top Level for more than a year. During this time, WHOIS policies were not amended to accommodate the obvious need to support non-ASCII character sets even though there was a recognition that Internationalisation is essential for the Internet’s development as a global resource. The NORC Study on Data Accuracy highlighted IDN contact data as a major cause of apparent inaccuracy. * * *Recommendations* *18. *ICANN Community should task a working group within 6 months of publication to determine the relevant internationalized domain name registration data requirements and evaluate the available solutions, especially those being successfully implemented by ccTLDs, at least for the adoption of IDN gTLDs, as already stipulated by the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook.The working group should aim for consistency of approach across the gTLD and – on a voluntary basis – the ccTLD space, and report within a year of being tasked.**** ** ** *19.* The final data model, including (any) requirements for the translation or transliteration of the registration data, should be incorporated in the relevant Registrar and Registry agreements within 6 months of adoption of the working group’s recommendations by the ICANN Board. If these recommendations are not finalized in time for the next revision of such agreements, explicit placeholders for this purpose should be put in place in the agreements for the new gTLD program at this time, and in the existing agreements when they come up for renewal.**** * * *20*. In addition, metrics should be developed to maintain and measure the accuracy of the internationalized registration data and corresponding data in ASCII, with clearly defined compliance methods and targets, as per the details in Recommendations 5-9 in this document.**** * * 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322 emily(a)emilytaylor.eu *www.etlaw.co.uk* Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 7630471. VAT No. 114487713.

1 0

Preliminary report for your approval - 9 Nov
by Alice Jansen May 1, 2012

May 1, 2012

Dear Review Team Members, Please find attached the preliminary report of your teleconference held on 9 November. Kindly note that this will be discussed during your upcoming conference call. In the meantime, please feel free to email editing suggestions/requirements. Thanks, Very best regards Alice -- Alice Jansen Assistant, Organizational Reviews 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt.5 B-1040 Brussels Belgium Direct dial: +32 2 234 78 64 Mobile: +32 4 73 31 76 56 Skype: alice_jansen_icann

1 4