[NCSG-PC] Fwd: Re: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] ICANN Proposal to adjust scope of RDS-WHOIS2-RT

[Ayden Férdeline]

To start this conversation...

I am inclined to suggest Option A. I say this because the WHOIS 2 Review is supposed to be an independent review, and the Review Team (from what I gather) would like it to continue. And, given $360k has already been spent on two face-to-face meetings and a lunch (the catering bill was $15k in Johannesburg for 20 or so people for an informal 'kick off' - what did you spend that on? champagne?), and an initial report is not too far away, it seems better to finish this one off and not re-start it in a year's time. Plus, there's another 9 Reviews that have to be started...

Ayden

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 16 May 2018 2:48 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:

> we need to respond to this.  I can draft, once we discuss a bit.  Has implications...so we need to consider carefully, much as I would like to curtail this stupid review .....
>
> steph
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:	Re: [RDS-WHOIS2-RT] ICANN Proposal to adjust scope of RDS-WHOIS2-RT
> Date:	Wed, 16 May 2018 06:57:21 +0200
> From:	Erika Mann [<erika at erikamann.com>](mailto:erika at erikamann.com)
>
> To:	Alan Greenberg [<alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>](mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca)
>
> CC:	RDS-WHOIS2-RT [<rds-whois2-rt at icann.org>](mailto:rds-whois2-rt at icann.org)
>
> Hi Alan, hi All -
> There's a complete reasoning for these 3 options included here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/specific-reviews-short-term-options-timeline-14may18-en.pdf
>
> I'm traveling today with little time to think about these options. My understanding is that large part of our work, independently of the WHOIS model going to be selected in the future, is going to be relevant nonetheless. Insofar - currently! - I favor option a).
>
> Best,
> Erika
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 16, 2018, at 4:30 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>
>> I call your attention to a Public Comment (PC) launched yesterday asking for input on alternatives to alter the RDS-WHOIS2-RT Scope and plans (as well possible changes to the not yet started ATRT3) - https://www.icann.org/public-comments/specific-reviews-short-term-timeline-2018-05-14-en.
>>
>> I proposes three possible scenarios for our RT:
>>
>> a) Proceeds as planned;
>>
>> b) reduce scope to just an analysis of the WHOIS1-RT Recommendations;
>>
>> c) pause the review entirely for some as yet to be determined time.
>>
>> If recommended by the community, b) and c) would require our agreement. The implications of a community recommendation that we refused to agree with are not known. If there is a pause, it is not clear when the unpause would happen and to what extent it would be the same team moving forward.
>>
>> The PC ends on 06 July 2018 and the report on input received is due on 23 July 2018, a few days before we are currently planning to meet in Brussels to close-to-finalize our report.
>>
>> Although the PC was issues yesterday, neither I nor Susan and Cathrin had any prior knowledge of it and in fact we only heard of it today.
>>
>> We have initiated discussions with MSSI on exactly what this means and will get back when I have a better understanding.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RDS-WHOIS2-RT mailing list
>> RDS-WHOIS2-RT at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rds-whois2-rt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180524/e256ebfa/attachment.htm>