[Public Comment Review] RDS/Whois2 review team draft report

[Mueller, Milton L]

I am just curious about this part of the comment:

“Having said that, we do therefore approve of the group continuing its work once it started, and did not agree with the ICANN Org proposal to the GNSO Council to stop or restrict this review.”

Now, I do not follow the intricacies of this WG closely, but if it’s true that the ePDP and temp spec obsolete much of what the RDS group did, why do we want it to continue? Do we not have enough work to do?

From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Rafik Dammak
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2018 6:37 AM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: [Public Comment Review] RDS/Whois2 review team draft report

Hi all,

We got a draft comment for NCSG on the RDS/Whois review team draft report: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ip83GbdtK2RSMEaNo8pt-sifqL-FtiKINfC0UvIYmjk/edit . You can find the report here https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rds-whois2-review-2018-09-04-en .

Please review the draft and add your comments (if you want to add an edit please do it under "suggestion mode"). We got a short timeframe to get this finalized.

Best Regards,

Rafik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181116/bb9241f6/attachment.htm>