Dear Peter, Attached you will find the recommendations on accuracy. Note that this document is available at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Draft+Recommendations These recommendations are also available in the latest version of the draft report (8 November 2011) which may be found at: https://community.icann.org/display/whoisreviewprivate/Draft+report Thanks, 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 From: "Nettlefold, Peter" <Peter.Nettlefold@dbcde.gov.au<mailto:Peter.Nettlefold@dbcde.gov.au>> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:56:50 -0800 To: Emily Taylor <emily@emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily@emilytaylor.eu>>, "rt4-whois@icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org>" <rt4-whois@icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Next steps [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Hello all, I was just working through the letter to compliance, and wanted to agree that this is very good, so thanks to all who have been involved in drafted that. In reading through it, I do have a couple of questions about some of the text around accuracy, and wanted to check some of the wording against the recommendations that we agreed in Dakar. However, I can’t seem to find those recommendations anywhere. I recall we worked through those on our last afternoon, and I thought we had agreed a complete (or near to complete) set of recommendations on accuracy (regular studies, 50% yearly improvements etc etc), but I just can’t seem to find them on the wiki or in any emails. Could someone please point me towards those? Cheers, Peter From: rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Emily Taylor Sent: Tuesday, 1 November 2011 5:24 AM To: rt4-whois@icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org> Subject: [Rt4-whois] Next steps Hi all As promised, I'll be working through my comments on the mega-huge draft this week, and circulating to the list. If anyone else feels moved to do this too, please do so, and we'll ask Alice to hold the pen and consolidate the draft s if there are different proposed edits (there are bound to be). My headline thoughts on the draft are: - It's very good in places - The narrative needs to come across more strongly, and having agreed our draft recommendations will help us with this, as will the executive summary. - There are some chunks of text which I'm struggling to know where to fit in (if at all). - Having had our discussion with Compliance, I'm minded to take out a lot of the detail on the compliance effort and append a detailed letter with suggested actions to the report, with conclusions and headline recommendations in the text. Lastly, before our next call, can we think about and circulate any recommendations which fell off the radar screen during the last meeting. The ones I can think of are: - Lutz had a suggestion about some sort of portal which aggregated all WHOIS data and provided reverse look up capability being run by a neutral source (ICANN?). I think this may have grown out of our Thick/Thin discussions, but am not sure. Lutz: would you be happy to draft out some first ideas on this one for us? - Sarmad: We have a placeholder for an IDN recommendation, and also for a brief bit of text for the report. Could you let us have this as soon as possible? Thanks Kind regards Emily -- [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/etclogo250x60.gif] 76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322 emily@emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily@emilytaylor.eu> www.etlaw.co.uk<http://www.etlaw.co.uk> Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------