[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
Rafik Dammak
rafik.dammak at gmail.com
Fri Jan 5 14:45:35 EET 2018
Hi Stephanie,
Thanks,
if I am not mistaking the drafting group is tasked to provide a charter for
a possible new IAG to handle the comments receive and see how to
accommodate that with the previous implementation. so I guess the focus
would be in term of the process here, the charter list 3 options. all are
open compared to the previous IAG iteration. however, I would be concerned
with CCWG and GNSO review models due to the question of representation from
SG/C compared to an open model. the 2 first models have appointed
representatives which may give a weight in term of decision-making. I have
less concerns with Chair selection models, while I won't support IRT one
with GDD manager as chair.
I don't see any specific concern with the mission and scope.
Best,
Rafik
2018-01-04 4:55 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>:
> 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> <marika.konings at icann.org>
> To: Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org> <steve.chan at icann.org>, Nathalie
> Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org> <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>,
> Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <haforrestesq at gmail.com>,
> kdrazek at verisign.com <kdrazek at verisign.com> <kdrazek at verisign.com>,
> icannlists <icannlists at winston.com> <icannlists at winston.com>, Stephanie
> Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Michele Blacknight
> <michele at blacknight.com> <michele at blacknight.com>, Pam Little
> <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com> <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>
> CC: gnso-secs at icann.org <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> <steve.chan at icann.org>
> *Date: *Monday, December 18, 2017 at 22:03
> *To: *Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
> <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com>
> <haforrestesq at gmail.com>, "kdrazek at verisign.com" <kdrazek at verisign.com>
> <kdrazek at verisign.com> <kdrazek at verisign.com>, icannlists
> <icannlists at winston.com> <icannlists at winston.com>, Stephanie Perrin
> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>,
> Michele Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com> <michele at blacknight.com>, Pam
> Little <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com> <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>, Marika
> Konings <marika.konings at icann.org> <marika.konings at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org> <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>
> <nathalie.peregrine at icann.org>
> *Date: *Monday, December 18, 2017 at 12:55 PM
> *To: *Heather Forrest <haforrestesq at gmail.com> <haforrestesq at gmail.com>,
> "kdrazek at verisign.com" <kdrazek at verisign.com> <kdrazek at verisign.com>
> <kdrazek at verisign.com>, icannlists <icannlists at winston.com>
> <icannlists at winston.com>, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.
> utoronto.ca> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, Michele Blacknight
> <michele at blacknight.com> <michele at blacknight.com>, Pam Little
> <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com> <pam.little at alibaba-inc.com>, Marika Konings
> <marika.konings at icann.org> <marika.konings at icann.org>, Steve Chan
> <steve.chan at icann.org> <steve.chan at icann.org>
> *Cc: *"gnso-secs at icann.org" <gnso-secs at icann.org> <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=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6
> sJms7xcl4I5cM&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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180105/28608989/attachment.htm>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list