[NCSG-PC] Fwd: Re: Attendance and recording: GNSO Council Drafting Team Charter ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts Monday 18 December 2017 at 20:00 UTC

Stephanie Perrin stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Wed Jan 3 21:55:59 EET 2018


Hi folks,

I volunteered for the small drafting team at council who are working on 
the development of a new charter for an Implementation Advisory Group 
for the WHOIS conflicts with law.  I was on the IAG for the last trigger 
discussion, and submitted a dissenting opinion.  The DPAs declared this 
whole thing a nonsense, in their last comments on the procedure.  If you 
have any comments on this procedure that you wish me to convey, please 
let me know....next meeting is tomorrow.

Cheers Stephanie



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: Attendance and recording: GNSO Council Drafting Team 
Charter ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts Monday 18 December 
2017 at 20:00 UTC
Date: 	Wed, 3 Jan 2018 19:34:01 +0000
From: 	Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
To: 	Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>, Nathalie Peregrine 
<nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>, Heather Forrest 
<haforrestesq at gmail.com>, kdrazek at verisign.com <kdrazek at verisign.com>, 
icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>, Stephanie Perrin 
<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Michele Blacknight 
<michele at blacknight.com>, Pam Little <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>
CC: 	gnso-secs at icann.org <gnso-secs at icann.org>



Dear All,

Best wishes for 2018!

In preparation for tomorrow’s meeting, please find below as a reminder 
the notes & action items from the last meeting. Attached you will find 
the draft charter as originally circulated. If you already have any 
feedback / input from your respective groups that you would like to 
share ahead of the meeting, please share with this list.

Best regards,

Marika

*From: *Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>
*Date: *Monday, December 18, 2017 at 22:03
*To: *Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>, Heather Forrest 
<haforrestesq at gmail.com>, "kdrazek at verisign.com" <kdrazek at verisign.com>, 
icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>, Stephanie Perrin 
<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Michele Blacknight 
<michele at blacknight.com>, Pam Little <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>, 
Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
*Cc: *"gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: Attendance and recording: GNSO Council Drafting Team 
Charter ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts Monday 18 December 
2017 at 20:00 UTC

Dear All,

Further, please find some informal notes and actions items that staff 
collected during the course of the meeting. The recording of course is 
the authoritative record.

Best,

Steve

----------------------

*GNSO Council Drafting Team call to discuss the draft Charter concerning ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts on  Monday 18 18 December 2017 at 2000 UTC*




Notes/Action Items:

-- Heather to serve as facilitator/champion for this process, but in a neutral way.

-- Keith happy to hold pen and can rely on Marc Anderson for IAG context.

-- What's process for the draft charter? Staff role to develop? What's available now is the standard template with key questions flagged and possible options.  Should take care in drafting charter as it could serve as precedent for future review efforts.

-- The procedure is a matter of implementation No standard procedure for reviewing an implementation of GNSO adopted resolutions.

-- Look forward to getting input from Michele and Stephanie.

-- Discussion could begin on this call, help ensure that this effort does not repeat inability to reach conclusion the first go around.

-- Keep scope and timeline narrow

-- What's the current situation? What is the subsequent group expected to accomplish? 
*Marika Konings: 
*the procedure has been updated with a new trigger, per the recommendations of the previous IAG. 


-- The recommendations of the subsequent group would be in reference to an already implemented policy. The recommendations would be treated differently than a PDP then,.

-- Question: is the implementation, or suggested modifications, consistent with the underlying policy recommendations? Or is additional policy work needed?

-- Most focus has been on the trigger. Some review of the subsequent steps after triggering may be important.

-- This process will help provide guidance for the future to understand roles of community and staff.

-- How does GDPR fit into this exercise as it relates to Whois? The current trigger does seem to fit under GDPR, but is an unattractive option. 


     -- There is GDPR-specific relief (e.g., relief against compliance). Problem of the day.

     -- And there is relief related to ANY local privacy law, more generically. The trigger(s) being explored are not GDPR specific.

-- The scope of this review, is it just limited to focusing on Whois? It seems to be the case: 
*Marika Konings: 
*From the underlying policy recommendations: In order to facilitate reconciliation of any conflicts between local/national mandatory privacy laws or regulations and applicable provisions of the ICANN contract regarding the collection, display and distribution of personal data via Whois, ICANN should.......

-- The trigger of going to a national regulator does not seem to be working. Explore an additional trigger(s) to initiate waiver process.

-- Is there evidence of the trigger not working? Or are CP just unwilling to write to national regulators to ask if they are violating local law? It seems to require an admission of guilt to get the waiver.

-- There is some interest in reviewing the underlying the policy, which would require a different process. That might be what has caused this topic to linger on Council list.

-- Public comment provides possible issues with alternative trigger. Seems to imply that you must already be in violation to utilize waiver.

-- Could limit the scope of what is reviewed (e.g., the public comment and Akram letter). And also note that if policy issues are uncovered, that they would be resolved through another mechanism.

-- Whatever recommendations this IAG would put forth to Council, the Council would need to confirm that they are not inconsistent with underlying policy recommendations.

-- Could group also explore other ideas beyond previous IAG? Should avoid just repeating the outcomes of previous IAG.

-- How to narrow scope? Start with public comments?

*Keith Drazek: 
*(1) Review current implementation; (2) re-consider previous triggers not agreed to; (3) consider other possible triggers not previously considered; (4) review everything based on existing public comments.

-- Other areas of focus: objectives and goals, membership (seems like it should include those outside Council), chair selection (could follow from group composition), group formation, dependencies, and dissolution (also follow from group/review team composition), decision-making (also dependent).

-- Key questions are scope and composition. Take these to respective SG/Cs.

-- Agreement that composition is paramount and drives many other elements (chair, staff support). Will the group operate more like an IRT or WG? Who serves as the lead (e.g., staff or community)?

-- Hopefully table for January meeting (20 Jan document and motions deadline).

*ACTION: Take draft charter to respective SG/Cs and convene again in early January?*

*ACTION: Set up Doodle for early Jan or week of the 8th.*

*From: *Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
*Date: *Monday, December 18, 2017 at 12:55 PM
*To: *Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, "kdrazek at verisign.com" 
<kdrazek at verisign.com>, icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>, Stephanie 
Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Michele Blacknight 
<michele at blacknight.com>, Pam Little <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>, 
Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>
*Cc: *"gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org>
*Subject: *Attendance and recording: GNSO Council Drafting Team Charter 
ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts Monday 18 December 2017 at 
20:00 UTC

Dear all,

Please find below the AC recording, attendance and AC chat transcript of 
the GNSO Council Drafting Team call to discuss the draft Charter 
concerning ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts scheduled on 
Monday 18 December 2017 at 20:00 UTC

*AC Recording*: https://participate.icann.org/p2q6sp8ir36/ 
<https://participate.icann.org/p2q6sp8ir36/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=da98784bd396b38e57f1d982b189a0a8f647aa1f7e8f2c7c1c2566602aaf4d91>

*Attendance:* Pam Little, Keith Drazek, Heather Forrest, Paul McGrady,

*Apology:* Michele Neylon

*Staff:*Marika Konings, Steve Chan, Nathalie Peregrine

*AC Chat*:

   Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the GNSO Council Drafting 
Team call to discuss the draft Charter concerning ICANN Procedure for 
Handling Whois Conflicts on  Monday 18  December 2017 at 2000 UTC

   Nathalie Peregrine:Public Comment: Revised ICANN Procedure for 
Handling WHOIS Conflicts with Privacy Law: Process and Next Steps: 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2Dcomments_whois-2Dprivacy-2Dlaw-2D2017-2D05-2D03-2Den&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=5xenFICRdRkSUfvjRkSPDPi2nqmjNR9z40DOTbddJVM&s=adugQauUKQvuUEMdEec1VcDBdyG9osdhkqinwHG6ad0&e=

   Nathalie Peregrine:Letter from Akram Atallah to GNSO Council re the 
Revised ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts with Privacy Law: 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_correspondence_atallah-2Dto-2Dbladel-2Det-2Dal-2D01aug17-2Den.pdf&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=5xenFICRdRkSUfvjRkSPDPi2nqmjNR9z40DOTbddJVM&s=ynH32qa5Y9sFgNk_mo6bzIjPiNm0dL5Sc3B1RWP0UJo&e=

   Pam Little:Hi Everyone

   Marika Konings:Staff could put this into the form of a google doc and 
have you provide comments / edits on the different sections?

   Marika Konings:Note that an update on this topic has also been 
foreseen for Thursday's Council meeting that would allow you to flag 
certain items for Council input, which may help inform your subsequent 
deliberations and decision on some of the items outlined in the document.

   Pam Little:I will try to dial in by phone

   Pam Little:Please carry out for a moment

   Nathalie Peregrine:You need to activate your AC mic, by clicking on 
the telehpne icon at the top of the toolbar

   Nathalie Peregrine:this will also allow you to dial out to yourself 
should you prefer to connect via the phone.

   Marika Konings:the procedure has been updated with a new trigger, per 
the recommendations of the previous IAG.

   Marika Konings:my understanding is that the procedure is intended for 
individual registries / registrars, while the current discussion seems 
to deal with almost all contracted parties

   Marika Konings:I guess the question is also whether GDPR is 
considered a 'local law'?

   Keith Drazek:I'm in Adobe now. Apologies

   Heather Forrest:Great Keith - thanks

   Marika Konings:I believe the underlying policy only focuses on WHOIS

   Heather Forrest:I understood that we were dealing specifically with 
WHOIS conflicts?

   Keith Drazek:It's focused on WHOIS and conflicts with national 
privacy laws, correct?

   Marika Konings:From the underlying policy recommendations: In order 
to facilitate reconciliation of any conflicts between local/national 
mandatory privacy laws or regulations and applicable provisions of the 
ICANN contract regarding the collection, display and distribution of 
personal data via Whois, ICANN should.......

   Keith Drazek:Thanks Marika

   Marika Konings:so it is limited to WHOIS

   Keith Drazek:Yes

   Pam Little:That's what I thought too

   Marika Konings:For those interested in reviewing the original report 
that forms the basis for the procedure: 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_issues_tf-2Dfinal-2Drpt-2D25oct05.htm&d=DwICaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=5xenFICRdRkSUfvjRkSPDPi2nqmjNR9z40DOTbddJVM&s=FztMCfR9oT5btckkoo2gqrwFNOiZ9GJ3kDs5ChhSVhg&e=

   Paul McGrady:Got it.  Retracting my prior comment about how broad 
this is.

   Heather Forrest:Thanks, Marika, for that link to the original report. 
I intend to re-read that this week.

   Heather Forrest:+1 Keith re focus on trigger

   Heather Forrest:It's in drifting discussion away from the trigger 
that we've gotten bogged down on this in Council for the past year and a 
half or so... this is NOT about the underlying policy

   Pam Little:Thank you all for the comments and clarifications.

   Keith Drazek:Totally agree, this is not GDPR-specific at all.

   Marika Konings:If you review the report of public comments, you'll 
find some feedback on possible issues with the alternative trigger.

   Keith Drazek:I don't think we want to re-open the policy.

   Keith Drazek:The CPH thinks that the policy is solid, it's just the 
current implementation needs adjustment.

   Heather Forrest:@Marika - good suggestion to ask the group to work 
with the public comments

   Keith Drazek:Thanks Marika, very helpful.

   Keith Drazek:(1) Review current implementation; (2) re-consider 
previous triggers not agreed to; (3) consider other possible triggers 
not previously considered; (4) review everything based on existing 
public comments.

   Marika Konings:we may need to further emphasize in the charter that 
the trigger is just the first step in the procedure, there are quite a 
few steps that follow to make sure that everyone is clear on that.

   Keith Drazek:Agreed Heather re composition

   Marika Konings:note there are also a couple of options you may want 
to consider for composition / representation

   Keith Drazek:Thanks Marika, that's important for the 
precedent-setting nature of our work.

   Keith Drazek:@Marika, are those options in the document staff 
developed? Apologies for not knowing

   Heather Forrest:OK - let's focus our attention for charter on (1) 
scope/objective and (2) composition, and take input from our respective 
SG/Cs on these two key points

   Keith Drazek:Let's do early the week of the 8th

   Keith Drazek:+1 Paul

   Heather Forrest:I agree Keith - doc deadline should be around the 20th

   Marika Konings:is it helpful to put this in a google doc format to 
facilitate your input or you prefer to share feedback via email?

   Nathalie Peregrine:Doc deadline is the 20th jan.

   Marika Konings:makes sense :-)

   Nathalie Peregrine:Of course.

   Keith Drazek:Sounds like a plan. Thanks to staff for prepping the 
document that I need to review more carefully.

   Keith Drazek:Thanks Heather!

   Pam Little:Thanks everyone. Bye now

   Marika Konings:thanks all

   Heather Forrest:Thanks everyone

Kind regards,

Nathalie

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180103/185a78e2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WHOIS Procedure IAG - Draft Charter - 12 December 2017.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 124702 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180103/185a78e2/attachment.docx>


More information about the NCSG-PC mailing list