The next GNSO Next-Gen RDS PDP Working Group teleconference will take place on Tuesday, 7 March at 17:00 UTC for 90 minutes. 

09:00 PST, 12:00 EST, 17:00 London, 18:00 CET 

For other times: http://tinyurl.com/hwqpv8c 


PROPOSED AGENDA: 

1. Roll call / SOI

2. Plans and prep for Copenhagen meetings: ICANN58-RDS-PDP-WG-Agendas-v2.pdf

    a) Update on WG's questions for DCs: RDSPDP-QuestionsForDataCommissioners-v8clean.pdf (draft reviewed during call) 

    b) RDS PDP WG F2F -- Saturday 11 March 2017 1:45-4:45 pm

    c) RDS PDP WG Wrap-Up -- Wednesday 15 March 2017 1:45-3:00 pm

    d) Cross-Community Discussion with DCs – Monday 13 March 3:15-4:45 pm

3. Continue deliberation on the Purpose charter question:

   Question 2.3: What should the over-arching purpose be of collecting, maintaining, and providing access to gTLD registration (thin) data?

    a) Review & discuss 28 February poll results: SummaryResults-Poll-on-Purpose-from-28FebCall.pdf

    b) Complete deliberation on this WG's draft statement of purpose: 28FebMeeting-Handout.pdf 

    c) Are there any elements missing from the statement of purpose?

4. Confirm action items and proposed decision points



Joining late: Andrew Sullivan
Dial outs: Stephanie Perrin

Apologies:  Alan Greenberg (tentative)

Mp3

Adobe Connect Recording

AC Chat

Transcript


Notes RDS PDP WG Meeting - 7 March 2017:

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 here.

1. Roll Call / SOI

  • Attendance will be taken from AC
  • Please remember to state your name before speaking and remember to mute your microphones when not speaking
  • Last meeting before ICANN58
  • Amr Elsadr has joined the staff support team for this PDP WG

2. Plans and prep for Copenhagen meetings: ICANN58-RDS-PDP-WG-Agendas-v2.pdf

a. Update on WG's questions for DCs: RDSPDP-QuestionsForDataCommissioners-v8clean.pdf

  • See proposed questions circulated on the PDP WG mailing list (https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/64072843/RDSPDP-QuestionsForDataCommissioners-v8clean.pdf)
  • Objective is to finalise list of questions for DPAs so that these can be sent in advance as well as the moderator and one of the GNSO rep on the panel who also happens to be a member of this WG (Jim Galvin).
  • Note that there is also an opportunity for audience Q & A so WG members should be encouraged to raise questions as well
  • Note that the questions have been organised in different categories (purpose, registration data elements, access to registration data for criminal investigation, personal privacy / human rights, jurisdiction, compliance with applicable laws, consumer protection)
  • Q3 - concerned about asking for legal opinion about violation (see last sentence).  Consider dropping the last sentence? However, it is important to get input on which data elements are considered PII. Delete last sentence from question 3.
  • Q4 - 'interact with the General Data Protection Regulation' is to be deleted. Consider deleting this question (see note from Tjabbe on the mailing list). Did question confuse registrant and registrar? Underlying intent was to ask about the potential conflict between GDPR and EU commerce directive. Who is considered a service provider under the EU commerce directive and how does that relate to the GDPR? If we're considering natural persons (i.e. not legal persons) operating as a service provider, the question could still make sense, although it is not clear to what extent the EU e-commerce directive regulates those kinds of situations. Update reference from registrars to registrants.
  • Q6 - consider adding civil offences, possibly as a separate question? Broaden question so it also covers civil offences and abuse in general. Also generalise the heading to read "access to registration data for criminal and abuse investigation".

Action item #1: Staff to work with leadership team to finalise list of questions as discussed and distribute accordingly –
COMPLETED, please see RDSPDP-QuestionsForDataCommissioners-7March2017.pdf

b. RDS PDP WG F2F -- Saturday 11 March 2017 1:45-4:45 pm

  • See proposed agenda shared. May need to be adjusted based on the progress made during today's meeting.

 c. RDS PDP WG Wrap-Up -- Wednesday 15 March 2017 1:45-3:00 pm

  •  See proposed agenda shared - may need to be adjusted pending on the discussion during Monday's cross-community session.

3. Continue deliberation on the Purpose charter question:

Question 2.3: What should the over-arching purpose be of collecting, maintaining, and providing access to gTLD registration (thin) data?

a. Review & discuss 28 February poll results: SummaryResults-Poll-on-Purpose-from-28FebCall.pdf

  • Based on the poll results, some proposed changes to the purpose statement
  • Several people observed that the goals that are currently in the purpose statement are not purposes, were intended to be goals for the purpose statement.
  • Proposal to not put goals in the purpose statement itself but rather identify those as goals for the WG in regards to developing a purpose statement. Will need to go back once purpose statement is finalised to confirm that goals have been met.

 WG Agreement #1: Update purpose statement by removing the goals and moving these into the same section of the key concepts document, to serve as guidance to the WG as the statement of purpose is completed.

  • 88% supported 1) A purpose of gTLD registration data is to provide info about the lifecycle of a domain name

 WG Agreement #2: A purpose of gTLD registration data is to provide info about the lifecycle of a domain name.

  •  71% supported 2) A purpose of RDS is to provide an authoritative source of info about, for example, domain contacts, domain names and name servers for gTLDs. Comments suggested a rewording: the purpose of an RDS is to facilitate the dissemination of authoritative source registration data. Consider adding "authorised" so it would read "authorised dissemination". Authorisation will be dependent on policy. Proposed rewording: disemmination of authoritative data in accordance with applicable policy?

Action item #2: Staff to poll on different alternative wordings suggested during today's meeting to assess support. Alternative wordings should address concerns expressed about "authoritative" and "provide" and how policy impacts this purpose. All WG members encouraged to respond to the poll.

  • Note that WG will come back to the purpose statement - is intended to be an iterative process.
  • Q7: 76% supported 3) A purpose of RDS is to identify domain contacts and facilitate communication with domain contacts associated with gTLDs
  • Possible rewording may be helpful? As close as possible to original intent of WHOIS. May need a current refresh?
  • Appropriate = based on approved policy
  • No change for now

WG Agreement #3:  A purpose of RDS is to identify domain contacts and facilitate communication with domain contacts associated with gTLDs [based on approved policy]

  • Q8: 88% supported 4) A purpose of gTLD registration data is to provide a record of domain name registrations

WG Agreement #4:  A purpose of gTLD registration data is to provide a record of domain name registrations

  • Q9: 76% supported 5) A purpose of RDS policy is to promote the accuracy of gTLD registration data
  • Proposal to change promote to facilitate. No objection - change promote to facilitate.

WG Agreement #5:  A purpose of RDS policy is to facilitate the accuracy of gTLD registration data

  • Q10: Bracketed Text - Just under two-thirds agreed including bracketed text as-is (that is, removing brackets). 
  • All but one "disagree" comment concerns "[based on approved policy]" 
  • Proposal to delete brackets from around bracketed text, leaving that text, in all cases except for "[based on approved policy]" which will remain for further discussion

WG Agreement #6: Remove brackets in purpose statement as there were no comments on other occurrences but leave those that state "[based on approved policy]".

b. Complete deliberation on this WG's draft statement of purpose: 28FebMeeting-Handout.pdf

c. Are there any elements missing from the statement of purpose?

Action item #3: All encouraged to review updated statement of purpose and identify whether there are any elements missing from the statement of purpose.

4. Confirm action items and proposed decision points

  • Action item #1: Staff to work with leadership team to finalise list of questions as discussed and distribute accordingly.
  • Action item #2: Staff to poll on different alternative wordings suggested during today's meeting to assess support. Alternative wordings should address concerns expressed about "authoritative" and "provide" and how policy impacts this purpose. All WG members encouraged to respond to the poll.
  • Action item #3: All encouraged to review updated statement of purpose and identify whether there are any elements missing from the statement of purpose.

  • WG Agreement #1: Update purpose statement by removing the goals and moving these into the same section of the key concepts document, to serve as guidance to the WG as the statement of purpose is completed.
  • WG Agreement #2: A purpose of gTLD registration data is to provide info about the lifecycle of a domain name.
  • WG Agreement #3:  A purpose of RDS is to identify domain contacts and facilitate communication with domain contacts associated with gTLDs [based on approved policy]
  • WG Agreement #4:  A purpose of gTLD registration data is to provide a record of domain name registrations
  • WG Agreement #5:  A purpose of RDS policy is to facilitate the accuracy of gTLD registration data
  • WG Agreement #6: Remove brackets in purpose statement as there were no comments on other occurrences but leave those that state "[based on approved policy]".


Materials:

  • No labels