[NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [Accred-Model] Version 1.6 of the Accreditation and Access Model

[farzaneh badii]

I know. I wonder when they will make that announcement..

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:44 AM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hold on, some announcement to be made today and so IPC/BC wont be our main
> concern
>
>
> Rafik
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 11:36 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I am of one mind. And this has always beeny approach. Any comment on this
>> from ncsg should be only a statement to the board warning them not to adopt
>> it and provide reasons and send a copy to wp29
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:30 AM Stephanie Perrin <
>> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> I am also of two minds... this is why I am trying to get a blog out on
>>> the matter, prior to Panama.  We need to explain a few of the fundamental
>>> facts about accreditation.  I thought I would try to do that in a very
>>> basic blog.  Given the actual number of requests for data that the
>>> registrars are receiving (and that the ccTLDs have been receiving prior to
>>> this whole GDPR thing) the volume may not support a tiered access
>>> model....so I think it is more important to comment to ICANN more broadly,
>>> not respond to them.  On the other hand....guess who ICANN listens to, we
>>> may therefore need to get a direct attack on the record.  We should discuss
>>> this in Panama in my view.
>>>
>>> cheers Steph
>>> On 2018-06-18 10:24, Dr. Tatiana Tropina wrote:
>>>
>>> Ayden,
>>>
>>> thank you. I am of two mind about this - I don't want us to legitimise
>>> it anyhow, but not tearing it apart and not resisting it might do us more
>>> good than bad. We might stand on the position that the model has to be
>>> developed by the community (and in this regard this model has a major
>>> procedural flow), however, it means that we have to insist on the Council
>>> that the work on the accreditation should start urgently. I am afraid not
>>> everyone on the council would share the same sentiment - IPC/BC apparently
>>> could say they have a model proposal and CPH might potentially argue that
>>> they have other priorities. May be CPH could be convinced when they take
>>> into account Akram's position.
>>>
>>> I think we have to argue procedure-wise first without going into the
>>> content of this proposal - otherwise by fighting about the content we just
>>> somehow legitimise it more. Walking a thin line here, because they might
>>> try to advance it and push it forward - but the point that the major parts
>>> of the community had no participation and no influence on the content might
>>> play a role in declining this process-wise.
>>>
>>> Would be happy to hear further thoughts....
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Tanya
>>>
>>> On 18/06/18 15:52, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
>>>
>>> Thoughts -- do we legitimise this process by commenting, tearing it
>>> apart, or just pay no attention to it? It is a very problematic
>>> proposal.... I hope it is not being taken seriously anywhere, but given
>>> Akram's comments quoted in Domain Incite last week (i.e. we will have an
>>> accreditation model very soon as the community wants it), maybe it is...
>>>
>>> - Ayden
>>>
>>>
>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>> On 18 June 2018 3:37 PM, Vayra, Fabricio (Perkins Coie)
>>> <FVayra at perkinscoie.com> <FVayra at perkinscoie.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Please see attached version 1.6 of the Accreditation and Access Model
>>> that includes tweaks to the second paragraph under the introduction in
>>> Annex I: Registration Directory Service Accreditation Authority (RDSAA).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks and we look forward to your further input.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Fabricio Vayra* *| **Perkins Coie LLP*
>>>
>>> *PARTNER*
>>>
>>> D. +1.202.654.6255
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Vayra, Fabricio (WDC)
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, June 16, 2018 1:29 AM
>>> *To:* 'accred-model at icann.org' <accred-model at icann.org>
>>> <accred-model at icann.org>
>>> *Subject:* Version 1.6 of the Accreditation and Access Model
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attached for discussion and additional comment is version 1.6 of the
>>> Accreditation and Access Model.  This, following further comment and input
>>> from many parts of the community, is a much richer and robust model.
>>> Notably, this version 1.6 contains new:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    - Annex D: Accreditation Approach for Intellectual Property Owners
>>>    and Agents
>>>    - Annex J: Lawful Bases for Access to WHOIS Data
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Many thanks to those who made constructive contributions to further
>>> developing this model.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you again for your input and support.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Fabricio Vayra* *| **Perkins Coie LLP*
>>>
>>> *PARTNER*
>>>
>>> D. +1.202.654.6255
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
>>> information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by
>>> reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without
>>> copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>> --
>> Farzaneh
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
> --
Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180618/82b274f1/attachment.htm>