<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">Hazy memory says yes,
I would have to go back and check. I think it was Metalitz.....</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">i agree with your
concerns....it will be hard to do this in 6 months, without
just saying yup they did what they said they would. It is not
clear to me that they did....</font></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">SP</font></font><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2017-02-20 19:05, Ayden Férdeline
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:UorZu7U_egFUN1txoDZP1f1kvzS3bJdgpy5aCSDsJ8diCFmj4Wuvq_eFbMLOwD7VJlV7hCtvZGDRFqnc23z83Kkt2o5G73y9OhHJIykNtpc=@ferdeline.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div>It is interesting
to read that the call may be re-opened yet again for volunteers
to serve on the
Review team; my understanding was that it had been re-opened
three times
already.<br>
<br>
I would prefer
that a comprehensive Review be undertaken, but I appreciate it
may not be the
best allocation of the community’s resources. For that reason,
I’m okay with a
condensed timeline as long as we are not glazing over important
issues that
should indeed be reviewed. That said, I'm not entirely clear on
what is in-scope as part of the compressed and comprehensive
Review options — it would be useful if Staff could prepare a
comparison table which clarifies what would be in-scope for each
option.<br>
<br>
What I don’t
want is for the Review team to be brought onboard for six months
and rushed to
reach or (re)affirm a pre-determined conclusion. I worry about
this when I see
sentences like, “The scope be limited to “post mortem” of
implementation
results of the previous WHOIS review recommendations.” That
sounds very
restrictive to me.<br>
<br>
I thought IPC or
someone else said a few months ago that a condensed Review would
not be in line
with the Bylaws. I can’t remember where I read or heard this (it
is also possible that I am
imagining it) – does anyone else remember this being raised?<br>
<br>
- Ayden<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="protonmail_quote">
<div>-------- Original Message --------<br>
</div>
<div>Subject: [NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] RDS Scope Guidance<br>
</div>
<div>Local Time: 20 February 2017 11:15 PM<br>
</div>
<div>UTC Time: 20 February 2017 23:15<br>
</div>
<div>From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca">stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca</a><br>
</div>
<div>To: ncsg-pc <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is"><ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is></a>, Kathy Kleiman
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kathy@kathykleiman.com"><kathy@kathykleiman.com></a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<p><span class="size" style="font-size:undefinedpx"><span
class="font" style="font-family:Lucida Grande">Please note
this is our last kick at this can. I really don't have
much guidance; I don't quite understand exactly what we
are going to study.....but I like the idea of 6 months.
Copying Kathy who co-chaired the last one, she is most
likely to be able to figure out if this will work....</span></span><br>
</p>
<p><span class="size" style="font-size:undefinedpx"><span
class="font" style="font-family:Lucida Grande">Stephanie</span></span><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-forward-container">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-------- Forwarded Message --------<br>
</div>
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0"
cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Subject:<br>
</th>
<td>[council] RDS Scope Guidance<br>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Date:<br>
</th>
<td>Mon, 20 Feb 2017 19:31:56 +0000<br>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">From:<br>
</th>
<td>James M. Bladel <a moz-do-not-send="true"
rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:jbladel@godaddy.com"><jbladel@godaddy.com></a><br>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">To:<br>
</th>
<td>GNSO Council List <a moz-do-not-send="true"
rel="noreferrer nofollow noopener"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"><council@gnso.icann.org></a><br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt">Councilors –</span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt"> </span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt">Attached, please find a draft RDS
Scope Guidance document, which consolidates the feedback
received from all SOs and ACs on
guidance/recommendations to limit the scope of the
upcoming RDS (WHOIS) review. Time is tight, so if you
have any comments or edits, please respond by <b>2000
UTC this Friday 24 FEB.</b></span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt"> </span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt">Once completed, the RDS Scope
Guidance document will be distributed to RDS Review Team
applicants, to confirm that they are still interested in
serving on this review team. There is also a proposal
to extend the call for applications until 7 MAR.</span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt"> </span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt">Thank you,</span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt"> </span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt">J.</span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt"> </span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="size"
style="font-size:11pt"> </span><br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>