[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [council] Next steps for the Whois Accuracy Implementation Advisory Group

[Tomslin Samme-Nlar]

FYI team.

I am keen to hear any thoughts on the questions posed below on the steps
for the Whois Accuracy Implementation Advisory Group.

@Stephanie E Perrin <stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca> looking to you for
some guidance as well being our WHOIS expert then.

Remain blessed,
Tomslin


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: DiBiase, Gregory via council <council at icann.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 02:28
Subject: [council] Next steps for the Whois Accuracy Implementation
Advisory Group
To: Council at icann.org <council at icann.org>


Dear Councilors,



During our April meeting
<https://icann.zoom.us/rec/play/m7OxKCA5oQ9K_waOhDVno3cyrjdqXBktXf0uHaIGJT6I2Eb0FFfQeqFoKB_c4ubaOu_TbhzPckCYh6hD.AbQmFxwkA4Jfe_VV?accessLevel=meeting&canPlayFromShare=true&from=share_recording_detail&startTime=1744318875000&componentName=rec-play&originRequestUrl=https%3A%2F%2Ficann.zoom.us%2Frec%2Fshare%2F1BdJrVMYICLOfeH4W7CEh-q9Udop0TZrUmaQ47ekzkZxRkwQ1GOzSHEEEIEUHhU.YVb3zS-ocr9VoJ41%3FstartTime%3D1744318875000>,
we discussed potential next steps for the Whois Accuracy Implementation
Advisory Group. Background and potential options are below (the meeting
recording
<https://icann.zoom.us/rec/play/B88W5Be-pDdOMPBXvuhFOa3rbb00kxbNYyjHRGk-meJ7eQHa18dj1Uh26qT8Go6S3hRnLZuyyOYit559.zDpaiZC8Ajs4webS?accessLevel=meeting&canPlayFromShare=true&from=share_recording_detail&startTime=1744318875000&componentName=rec-play&originRequestUrl=https%3A%2F%2Ficann.zoom.us%2Frec%2Fshare%2F1BdJrVMYICLOfeH4W7CEh-q9Udop0TZrUmaQ47ekzkZxRkwQ1GOzSHEEEIEUHhU.YVb3zS-ocr9VoJ41%3FstartTime%3D1744318875000>
includes additional). Please discuss with your SGs and provide
feedback by *Friday,
2 May.*



*What is this procedure?*



ICANN’s Procedure For Handling Registration Data Directory Services
Conflicts with Privacy Law
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rdds-conflicts-procedure-2024-02-21-en>
is a procedure that allows Contracted Parties to demonstrate when they are
prevented by local laws from fully complying with the provisions of ICANN
contracts regarding personal data in RDDS. After receiving a recommendation
from the 2003 Whois Task Force, the GNSO launched a PDP on this topic in
2005, and ICANN org implemented a procedure in 2006. The procedure was
updated in 2017 to include an alternative trigger.



*Why is the Council considering this now? *



Following the addition of the new alternative trigger to the procedure in
2017, the GNSO Council was set to review the procedure by launching a PDP.
However, because the EPDP on the Temporary Specification was engaged in
parallel work, the GNSO Council decided to pause the call for volunteers
until the EPDP Team delivered its report. Following the publication of the
Final Report, ICANN org and Contracted Parties agreed to prioritize their
work on the Data Processing Specification prior to revisiting the Conflicts
Procedure.



ICANN org published the Data Processing Specification
<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/data-processing-specification-requests-en#:~:text=The%20DPS%20is%3A,between%20%22independent%20controllers%22).>
(DPS) in January 2025. Now that the DPS is complete, the Council is
considering if/how it should proceed on reviewing the Conflicts Procedure.



*Questions to consider?*



As discussed during the Council meeting and brought up councilors, some of
the factors to consider in determining how to proceed include:



   - Do Contracted Parties (the parties who would use the procedure)
   believe this is an urgent need as no Contracted Parties have used the
   procedure in years?
   - Does the new Registration Data Policy, which becomes effective in
   August, obviate the need for a modification to the procedure?
   - Does the Council believe this should be a priority, which would
   require other work to be de-prioritized?



*Potential Options*



   1. *Defer/Leave procedure as is*
      - If Councilors (particularly Contracted Parties) do not believe this
      procedure needs an urgent modification, further work could be:
         1. *Deferred indefinitely* until the Community communicates a need
         to review (in other words, leave the procedure alone until
the Community
         informs Council it needs to be reviewed.)
         2. *Deferred for a finite amount of time* (1 year, 2 years, etc.)
         to revisit if updates may be needed
      2. *Proceed with original plan - ICANN org to draft modification in
   consultation with CPs*
      - If Councilors (particularly Contracted Parties) believe this work
      is urgent and important, the Council *could request ICANN org to
      draft a modification* to the procedure in consultation with
      Contracted Parties before sharing with the Council. (As noted
above, due to
      resource constraints, the Council would need to determine what
work can be
      de-prioritized in order to prioritize this work.)
   3. *Terminate/Retire procedure*
      - During the meeting, some councilors noted it may be worth
      terminating/retiring this procedure due to flaws. It is important to note
      that the termination/retirement of the procedure *would require
      further policy work* as this procedure is the product of GNSO policy
      recommendations. If the Council does not want to extend resources on this
      procedure at this time, it may be worth exploring Option 1.



*Deadline for Feedback?*



Please socialize with your respective SG/Cs and let the Council know how
you think it should proceed by *Friday, 2 May.*



Thanks,

Greg


_______________________________________________
council mailing list -- council at icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave at icann.org

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20250430/1d867576/attachment.htm>