[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] Recommendations Report on EPDP

Tue Apr 2 04:52:02 EEST 2019

Hi,

sharing the latest version of council report to board regarding EPDP phase
1 recommendations and final report, as it will considered for vote in the
next council meeting.

Best,

Rafik

---------- Forwarded message ---------
De : Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen at icann.org>
Date: mar. 2 avr. 2019 à 05:13
Subject: Re: [council] Recommendations Report on EPDP
To: Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se>, Marika Konings <
marika.konings at icann.org>
Cc: council at gnso.icann.org <council at gnso.icann.org>

Dear Councilors:

Thank you for the speedy and helpful feedback thus far.

Per Carlos’ suggestion, I have added a table of contents to the report. I
have also addressed some of the questions in the document.

@Pam: regarding your suggestion about the policy impact analysis, the EPDP
Team, in p. 77 of its report, noted the following:

*Per the EPDP Team’s Charter, the goal of this effort is to determine if
the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data should become an
ICANN Consensus Policy, as is or with modifications, while complying with
the GDPR and other relevant privacy and data protection law. As part of
this determination, the EPDP Team has considered the elements of the
Temporary Specification as outlined in the charter and answered the charter
questions. The EPDP Team has considered what subsidiary recommendations it
might make for future work by the GNSO which might be necessary to ensure
relevant Consensus Policies, including those related to registration data,
are reassessed to become consistent with applicable law (see relevant
recommendations). The EPDP Team recommends that as part of the
implementation process further consideration will be given to a set of
metrics to help inform the evaluation to measure success of these policy
recommendations.*

Accordingly, the metrics and effectiveness of the Policy will be items
covered in the implementation of the policy, and we will certainly flag
this for our colleagues in GDD. The impact analysis metrics would generally
be reviewed by the PDP WG in its Final Report; however, given the
externally-imposed deadline the EPDP Team was working under, this item was
moved to implementation.

Best regards,

Caitlin

*From: *council <council-bounces at gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Carlos Raul
Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se>
*Date: *Monday, April 1, 2019 at 7:49 AM
*To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
*Cc: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
*Subject: *Re: [council] Recommendations Report on EPDP

Thanks Marika,

1. If you can send me a table of contents as per my initial suggestion
yesterday, I'm happy to thelp with the logic of the document.

2. I can't help much with a trasnlation into standard english, but it would
really help us, English as a second or third language, to get to the core
and or purpose of the document and make a rational decision on the next
Coucnil meeting

3. Sorry, I was not there in 2004.

Cheers

---

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez

carlosraul at gutierrez.se

+506 8837 7176

Aparatado 1571-1000

COSTA RICA

El 2019-03-31 21:27, Marika Konings escribió:

Hi All,

To provide a little bit of background on the approach and style of this
report, it was one of the improvements that came out of the 2004 GNSO
review during which the PDP in its current format was conceived. At the
time not all Board materials were published so there was no real visibility
as to what information was being provided to the ICANN Board. As such, the
GNSO decided that in addition to the Board Paper that is prepared by Org,
the GNSO Council would accompany the approval of GNSO policy
recommendations with a GNSO Council recommendations report to the ICANN
Board which would include the information that the Board would typically
review in its assessment of GNSO policy recommendations. Hopefully this
background is helpful as you further consider updates / edits.

Best regards,

Marika

On 31 Mar 2019, at 21:11, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se>
wrote:

Hello Pam,

I certainly think that neither the chronological structure, nor the
recommendations-cum-recommendations style is appropriate for other people
than the insiders of the process.

Since I was not a direct participant I didn't dare to ask for more than a
table of contents and a clear statement of the purpose of the document.
Otherwise I don't think in this version is going to make the Council and
the PDP 3.0 very popular in the community. But I respect the voice of the
majority before making more marginal comments. In my view it needs a clear
structure and clear international standard english style, to which I can't
add much. The PDP members deserve better for their arduous work.

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez

carlosraul at gutierrez.se

+506 8837 7176

Aparatado 1571-1000

COSTA RICA

El 2019-03-31 18:13, Pam Little escribió:

Hi all,

I have added more comments and minor edits to the version Ayden circulated
earlier.

I admit this is the first time I read a GNSO Council Recommendations Report
to the Board and it strikes me that the report template might need to be
updated.

Specifically, what seem missing in this draft report are things like policy
goals, policy impact analysis and metrics to measure effectiveness of the
new policy. These were recommendations from the Data & Metrics Working
Group and the most recent GNSO Review, which were approved by the Council
and supposedly fully implemented but neither the EPDP Charter, the EPDP
Final Report nor this draft report cover these topics. I would have thought
these topic are essential for the Council and the Board when approving any
PDP/EPDP final recommendations.

I note there are relevant sections (such as 3 and 10) in the draft report
but, as currently drafted, Section 3 reads like a restatement of the
concerns or positions of certain SGs and Cs while Section 10 does not
contain substantive analysis:

*"3 (An analysis of how the issue(s) would affect each Constituency or
Stakeholder Group, including any financial impact on the Constituency or
Stakeholder Group) seems to be just a rehash of concerns or positions each
SG's/**C's*

....

*10. Impact/implementation considerations from ICANN staff *

The internal ICANN org implementation team has formed and has begun to
review the recommendations to analyze the implementation requirements.
ICANN org considers the scope of effort required for this implementation to
be significant and extensive. "

I welcome others' thoughts.

Kind regards,

Pam

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

Sender:Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>

Sent At:2019 Mar. 30 (Sat.) 21:43

Recipient:Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen at icann.org>

Cc:gnso-secs at icann.org <gnso-secs at icann.org>; council at gnso.icann.org <
council at gnso.icann.org>

Subject:Re: [council] Recommendations Report on EPDP

Hi Caitlin, all-

Please find attached some suggested edits to this document.

Thanks,

Ayden

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Saturday, March 30, 2019 12:07 AM, Caitlin Tubergen <
caitlin.tubergen at icann.org> wrote:

Dear Councilors:

Attached, please find the draft GNSO Council Report to the ICANN Board on
the EPDP recommendations for your consideration.

Following the customary practice, this report will be added to the Council's
18 April consent agenda, unless there are any comments or concerns with
this approach.

If you have any proposed edits or comments on the report, please kindly
submit them by the document deadline of *Monday,* *8 April 2018*.

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Caitlin

*--*

*Caitlin Tubergen*

Policy Senior Manager - GNSO

ICANN

_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council

_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council

_______________________________________________
council mailing list
council at gnso.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20190402/6ed1f253/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: EPDP - GNSO Council Recommendations Report to the Board_29Mar19 - AF edits + Pam_CT.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 140530 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20190402/6ed1f253/attachment.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4621 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20190402/6ed1f253/attachment.bin>