he next Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 16 December 2014 at 1500 UTC 07:00 PST, 10:00 EST, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/ksm6cdy
Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/ppsai/
MP3 Recording: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20141216-en.mp3
Meeting Transcript: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-ppsa-16dec14-en.pdf
Attendees:
Steve Metalitz - IPC
Graeme Bunton – RrSG
Frank Michlick – Individual
Justin Macy - BC
Susan Kawaguchi – BC
Kristina Rosette – IPC
Val Sherman – IPC
Theo Geurts - RrSG
Stephanie Perrin - NCSG
James Bladel – RrSG
Griffin Barnett – IPC
Alex Deacon – IPC
Kathy Kleiman – NCSG
Osvaldo Novoa – ISPCP
Phil Corwin – BC
Sarah Wyld – RrSG
Vicky Scheckler – IPC
Holly Raiche – ALAC
Christian Dawson-ISPCP
Carlton Samuels – ALAC
Michele Neylon – RrSG
Don Blumenthal – RySG
Phil Marano - IPC
Todd Williams – IPC
David Cake – NCSG
David Heasley - IPC
Darcy Southwell – RrSG
David Hughes - IPC
Apologies:
Lindsay Hamilton-Reid- RrSG
Richard Leaning – no SOI
Paul McGrady – IPC
Kiran Malancharuvil – IPC
Marika Konings
ICANN staff:
Mary Wong
Daniela Andela
Nathalie Peregrine
Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 16 December 2014:
Nathalie Peregrine:Welcome to the PPSAI WG Meeting of 16 December 2014
Osvaldo Novoa:Hello all
Kathy:Hi All -- on a completely different note, I wanted to share that my documentary (on the ENIAC Programmers) "played the White House" last Wednesday -- as part of the First Computer Science Film Festival :-)
Kathy:No Presidential participation -- but lots of students!
Theo Geurts:cool
Bladel::(
steve metalitz:Note that regrets also received from Paul McGrady
Nathalie Peregrine:noted, thanks
Kathy:We're not meeting next week, are we?
Nathalie Peregrine:Vicky Scheckler joined the AC room
Nathalie Peregrine:you all have scrolling rights now
Nathalie Peregrine:David Cake
Nathalie Peregrine:has joined the cal
Stephanie Perrin:& Kathy, Wow, congratulations!
Nathalie Peregrine:Graeme, i have now promoted you to presented, you can scroll now and all should see
Kristina Rosette:Apologies for being late. Needed a few minutes to decompress after my 2 hour commute!
Nathalie Peregrine:David Hughes is on the audio bridge
val sherman:Kathy - -that's great. Congrats!
Nathalie Peregrine:all have scrolling rights now
Kathy:@Kristina - 2 hours? It is bumper to bumper out there (DC)?
Kathy:Is it?
Kathy:@Mary - I like that clarification
Kristina Rosette:@Kathy. Yes. Water main break on 12th Street, flooded Metro Center, shut down orange-blue-silver lines (so everyone from VA drove) and then 12th closed between E &F.
Michele Neylon:oh lovely
Kathy:@Kristina - yikes!
Nathalie Peregrine:Apologies from Kiran Malancharuvil
Nathalie Peregrine:Don Blumenthal has joined the AC room
Nathalie Peregrine:Carlton Samuels has joined the call
Carlton Samuels:Morning all
Nathalie Peregrine:Please all MUTE phones and mics as we are getting an echo.
Nathalie Peregrine:If you are listening via the audio bridge, please mute your computer speakers.
Kristina Rosette:Could we flag this definition as a point on which we specifically seek community input (when the report goes out for public comment)?
Kathy:Let's try this: Persistent Failure of Delivery = a technical failure of delivery over a period of time after which the system stops trying to deliver?
Michele Neylon:Kristina +1
Michele Neylon:that would help
steve metalitz:+1 Kristina
val sherman:+1
Bladel:Sounds good. I think the key is for a provider to be aware that delivery failed or was abandoned due to excessive attempts.
Michele Neylon:I like community input
Don Blumenthal:I thought I was. I can hear but I guess that the mic isn't working.
Nathalie Peregrine:Don, can we dial out to you?
Holly Raiche:Agree with Kathy
steve metalitz:James' point is already in the text -- "that the provider becomes aware of."
Kathy:@Steve, agreed, but we should also include it with the def of technical failure since the def is really two parts: the technical failure + knowledge of it by P/P (I would put both in the new footnote)
Bladel:"Reasonable limits on repeated duplicate requests."
Don Blumenthal:My hand was up as a polite way to see if I got the mic to work. No luck.
steve metalitz:+1 James on reasonable limits
Bladel:There should probably be an "or" bweteen "repeated" and "duplicate"
Bladel:Apologies for that. Also, I'll need to drop at 9:30CST, so thanks folks.
Holly Raiche:Agree with Kathy on need to there being two parts - technical and knowledge of failure
Kathy:should/must -> public comment?
Todd Williams:+1 Steve
Kristina Rosette:+1 to steve
val sherman:+ 1 Steve
Michele Neylon:+1 Kathy
Darcy Southwell:+1 to Kathy
steve metalitz:"should" is not a minimum standard, it's a recommendation
Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the call
Nathalie Peregrine:trying to find course of echo
Graeme Bunton:Could you elaborate Kathy?
val sherman:How would these be enforceable if these were merely recommendations?
Kristina Rosette:@Val: They wouldn't be. That's the problem.
Michele Neylon:suggesting that we get input during a public comment period is not deferring
Michele Neylon:it's simply moving forward
val sherman:How would these standards be enforceable if they were mere recommendations?
Graeme Bunton:So, email or form failed, then Providers must use phone or physical mail to forward escalation?
Holly Raiche:I think it should be must - recognising that the requirement is to make the effort to contact and accepting that contact may not necessarily be made
val sherman:Sorry for duplicate comments -- also having issues with Adobe
Holly Raiche:@ Graeme - I don't think we have agreed on what method is to be used if email contact fails - maybe that is what we seek comment on
Michele Neylon:Holly - I'd prefer it were left open
Graeme Bunton:Was just pondering what other methods would be at our disposal
Michele Neylon:ie. if I want to ring them, send them a letter or drive to their house
Michele Neylon:I should be able to choose what method works best for me
Holly Raiche:@ Michael - I don't think we are trying to determine what method is used - that should be left open. The question is between saying an attempt must be made doing something differently to try to make contact
Graeme Bunton:no disagreement on provider selection, Michele
Holly Raiche:Provider selection isn't the issue - I see that as a given. The issue for Steve is whether or not an attempt should or must be made
Susan Kawaguchi:If the current process for de-accreditatin ofregistrars works well then I think we should not reinvent the wheel
steve metalitz:+1 Holly "provider selection" of the means of alternative relay is in the text already
Holly Raiche:@ Michele - apologies for the misspelling - it's 0250 here
Kathy:In general, I think there are points newly added in this doc that I would like some time to think about...
Kristina Rosette:+1 to Michele and Susan
Holly Raiche:Agree with Kathy - spend time on the next calll - next week??
val sherman:pick up?
Nathalie Peregrine:trying to find the noisy line
Michele Neylon:lol
Graeme Bunton:Hooray!
Stephanie Perrin:Sorry lost sound, hope we are returning to theseissues next week
steve metalitz:+1 on "general recommendation"
Nathalie Peregrine:AC audio is still running
Michele Neylon:I need to drop
Michele Neylon:have yet another call now
Carlton Samuels:Talk to all of you anon. Bye
