2016-10-19 Next Gen RDS PDP Working Group

Notes 19/10 – RDS PDP WG Meeting

These high-level notes are designed to help PDP WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki above. 

1) Roll call/SOI update

• Roll call will be taken from AC
• Please remember to update your SOI

2) Brief status updates:

    a) Code review - Review is underway, some new codes are being identified and will be added. Aim to complete this work by the next WG meeting.

    b) Triage effort - There are a number of outstanding documents that still need to be reviewed for possible requirements in order to ensure that the list is complete (IRD related documents, PPSAI and new EU Privacy Legislation).

3) Continue work on statement of purpose (see latest version dated 13 October, posted below)

• Progress made on previous calls to address comments on Specific Purposes, Items 1-3.
• Item 1 - Is it necessary to link to ICANN's Diagram of gTLD Lifecycle? No opposition to deleting that parenthetical citation.
• Item 2 - What is intent of the phrase "based on agreed policy"? That qualifier was added during last week's call to indicate that policy will further detail the information to be provided and who will have access to it.
• Items 2/3 - Is there a better term than "agreed" policy? Alternative "approved" - to be applied consistently throughout, but enclosed in brackets to reflect some disagreement.
• In addition, should "and applicable law" be added here? Note that there is already concern about procedure for handling conflicts between WHOIS policy and applicable law. RDS policy may result in changes to previously-approved policy and thus may not conflict with applicable law. See Goals for each Purpose (iii) - is that sufficient to reflect goal to avoid conflict by enabling compliance?
• Item 2 - Is there a better term than "provide" information, such as "manage" information? In last week's call it was observed that the RDS does not manage data.
• Items 2/3 - Is it helpful to add a footnote explaining that domain contacts includes more than admin and technical contacts ("all possible contacts" or "contacts related to the domain name, including those directly related to the domain name and also those involved in the registration system")
• Items 2/3 - Use parallel construction "A purpose of RDS is..."
• Item 4 - Addresses a purpose of gTLD registration data - does it indicate if a domain name IS registered, or HAS BEEN registered, or both? Will be determined by policies. Note that if a domain name isn't identified as registered in WHOIS today, that does not imply that the name is available (for example, variants, reserved names). Registries and Registrars use other mechanisms like EPP to check name availability. May not be useful to conflate these two. However people who are looking to register domain names do use WHOIS for this today - it is a real-world issue. Possible alt text for further consideration: "To provide a record of whether a domain name is registered, available for registration, or unavailable for registration"
• Item 5 - Can RDS actually be an authoritative source of data, or are Registrars the authoritative source? Is accuracy the job of the RDS or is that another system such as WHOIS ARS? Is requiring data to be accurate inconsistent with the way DNS works?

Action #1: Staff to circulate call results as redline. All WG members to review redline and submit any further feedback on-list before next WG call.

4) ICANN57 plans - F2F WG meeting is scheduled for Thursday morning at ICANN57; staff is working with leadership team to develop proposed agenda

5) Confirm next meeting date: Tuesday, 25 October 2016 at 16:00 UTC

DraftRDSStatementofPurposev8-Comments-upd13October2016-0001.docx and PDF