The next  Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 28th January 2014 at 1500 UTC (07:00 PST, 10:00 EST, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET).

For other places see: 


Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled:


  1. Roll Call/Updates to SOI
  2. Finalization of Mind Map & Discussion of Work Plan
    • Discussion of Charter Questions to help inform development/finalization of Mind Map & Work Plan
  3. Next Steps/Next Meeting


Documents for Review:

Charter Questions Grouping (23 January)

PPSAI Work Plan Mind Map (28 January 2013)


MP3 Recording:

Transcript: TBC



Don Blumenthal - RySG

Luc Seufer - RrSG

Marie-Laure Lemineur - NPOC

Michele Neylon - RrSG

Volker Greimann - RrSG

Griffin Barnett – IPC

Justin Macy – CBUC

Kathy Kleiman – RySG

Jim Bikoff – IPC

Graeme Bunton – RrSG

Tatiana Khramstova - RrSG

Nic Steinbach – RrSG

David Heasley - IPC

James Bladel - RrSG

Susan Prosser – RrSG

Kiran Malancharuvil – IPC

David Cake - NCSG

Todd Williams – IPC

Valeriya Sherman – IPC

Alex Deacon – IPC

Steve Metalitz - IPC

Amr Elsadr - NCUC

Tobias Sattler – RrSG

Kristina Rosette - IPC

Gema Campillos – GAC

Carlton Samuels – ALAC

Paul McGrady – IPC

Darcy Southwell – RrSG

Ben Anderson – RrSG

Billy Watenpaugh – RrSG

Emily Emanual - BC



Statton Hammock – RySG

Holly Raiche – ALAC

Osvaldo Novoa  - ISPCP

Roy Balleste – NCUC

Stephanie Perrin – NCUC

Joe Catapano


ICANN staff:

Marika Konings

Mary Wong

Nathalie Peregrine


Adobe Connect Chat Transcript:

Marika Konings:Welcome to the PPSAI WG Meeting of 28 January 2014

  Paul McGrady:Good morning everyone from Frozen Chicago!

  Mike Zupke:Greetings, Paul.

  Bladel:@Paul, just a few hours west of's not so bad today.  We are already above zero!

  Michele Neylon:If you hear anything odd from my end it's because the building is being power washed

  Michele Neylon:it's like working in a car wash today

  Michele Neylon:

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Luc Seufer has joined

  Michele Neylon:in case anyone doesn't believe me :)

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Volker Greimann has joined

  Valeriya Sherman:David Heasley is also on the call

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Nic Steinbach has joined

  Nathalie  Peregrine:thank you Valeriya, noted

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Gema Campillos is also on the call

  Volker Greimann:I am on

  Gema Campillos:Hi everybody! I´m back! I understand the letters have already been sent out. GAC members have not received them yet. I´ll brief my colleagues about the WG when the letter arrives.

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Amr Elsadr is also on the call

  Amr Elsadr:dialling in now.

  Mary Wong 2:Thanks, Gema, for the note. We will follow up with our colleagues who support the GAC to ensure that the letter (sent to the GAC Chair) is distributed to members.

  Amr Elsadr:Hi. Just joined the call.

  Kathy Kleiman:I think we will wind up spending way too much time on definitions if we don't have an initial threshold questions...

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Kristina Rosette has joined the AC room

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Susan Prosser has joined the call

  Mary Wong 2:@James - would adding "registered" to III. (1) address your point?

  Bladel:Hi Mary.  I'm not sure.  We can talk about the "domain name used for" or the "content associated with a domain name" which is probably a website, but could be email (commercial or non-commercial) or an app, or something eelse.

  Mary Wong 2:@Michele, the SO/AC/SG/C responses may help the WG fine tune its work/questions further. You can also go back to them with additional questions/requests at some point if appropriate.

  Mary Wong 2:@James, thanks. Perhaps the group can consider adding another bullet point about this under III. (1) then?

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Carlton Samuels has joined the AC room

  Carlton Samuels:Hi everybody. My apologies for the late join

  Graeme Bunton:Akin to a conditional survey

  Bladel:Maybe doesn't need to be done formally, but should be kept in mind or "flagged" when found.

  Nathalie  Peregrine:David Cake has joinjed the call

  Marie-laure Lemineur:+1 Michele

  Amr Elsadr:@Michele: +1.

  Carlton Samuels:No audio to me on the A/C

  Michele Neylon:dial in :)

  Michele Neylon:also Don seems to be coming and going volume wise

  Carlton Samuels:Was about to try Skype to US TF :-)

  Mary Wong 2:@Michele, are you on AC audio or phone bridge? The latter tends to be clearer and more stable.

  Amr Elsadr:@Carlton. That's what I'm using. Working well.

  Graeme Bunton:Don sounds fine to me using the AC Audio

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Carlton, we can dial out to you if you would rather not dial in

  Kathy Kleiman:Ques 1 for III. Registration: Should the WG create categories of p/p customers – or continue to support the current system in which proxy/privacy services are available to companies, noncommercial organizations and individuals?

  Valeriya Sherman:How and when are we planning to use the results of the WG member survey?

  Michele Neylon:+1 Gema

  Michele Neylon:on the audio

  Michele Neylon:not on anything else :)

  Marika Konings:@Valeriya - the idea would be to include these together with feedback received from SG/C/AC/SOs as input for the WG to consider in relation to each of these charter questions.

  Mary Wong 2:All, FYI - the date by which we requested that SO/AC/SG/Cs send us their input is Friday 28 Feb.

  Luc Seufer:I think Carlton ihas dialed in.

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Carlton, I have muted your AC mic

  Carlton Samuels:No trouble. I'm finally in!!

  Kathy Kleiman:Welcome!

  Valeriya Sherman:Thanks @Marika and Mary.

  Mary Wong 2:@Steve, that is correct - the PDP Manual obligates every WG to seek SO/AC input as early as possible in its deliberations. It does not say you have to wait till they all come in before proceeding.

  Mary Wong 2:But one advantage of early input is of course that it can be helpful to the WG as it begins its work.

  Marika Konings:Identifying these sub-questions may also help the WG to identify whether there are any areas that require additional data or research.

  Marika Konings:as well as planning how to tackle its work (which should form the basis for the work plan)

  Graeme Bunton:sounds better

  Bladel:Much better!

  Susan Prosser:much better

  Marie-laure Lemineur:so have we reached an agreement re> Kathy' s question?

  Gema Campillos:I hear to you better, Don.

  Michele Neylon:I'll try to come back

  Nathalie  Peregrine:the line has been muted

  Gema Campillos:hear you, sorry

  Carlton Samuels:@Steve: +1 We move it along and add input from SOs/ACs as we go along. Early input - any input would be Very Helpful and will always help the conversations towards consensus

  Mary Wong 2:@Marie-Laure, we will add a footnote/reference to capture Kathy's, James' and Steve's input on that and have a revised document by the next meeting.

  Kathy Kleiman:Great, tx Steve!

  Kathy Kleiman:Right, agree with Steve.

  Kathy Kleiman:Perfect.

  Marie-laure Lemineur:@steve I agree..

  Kathy Kleiman:Steve: can you edit the text per the change - and we can add it as a formal ques in Section III?

  Carlton Samuels:@Steve: But before we say change, let's ask the questions that probe any disability or deleterious impact associated with status quo

  Bladel:How about this:  What is the threshold for determining that a "class" or "category" of user/user should be denied from accessing these services?

  Kathy Kleiman:James: but is there a threshold?

  Gema Campillos:I have some comments, but are not related to the categories issue. May I ask them now or bring them on the mailing list?

  Amr Elsadr:Wether categorzation of domain name registrants should be required of accredited service providers is the charter question, isn't it?

 Mary Wong 2:@Gema, do raise your hand so Don can see it and you can speak.

  Don Blumenthal:I see Gemas

  Don Blumenthal:'s question. Go ahead with what you want to raise

  Luc Seufer:I still have faith in ENUM!

  Kathy Kleiman:I think we have agreemend on the threshold question: and I would be happy to accept Steve's edits...

  Valeriya Sherman:It would make sense for us to review and incorporate input from the surveys of the WG members before we get input from SOs/ACs on Feb 28. Might help us clarify issues/definitions, identify sub-questions and move towards consensus. Thoughts?

  Mary Wong 2:@Amr, that was the point Steve made initially. As mentioned we will capture these discussions in the document by way of a footnote - it may be confusing to add so many suggestions on the same point as additional questions or bullet points.

  Kathy Kleiman:@Mary, the proposal is for a threshold question - a Ques. #1 in III. Registration.

  steve metalitz:@Kathy, how about something like this:  Currently, proxy/privacy services are available to companies, noncommercial organizations and individuals.  Should there be any change to this aspect of the current system in the new accreditation standards?

  Kathy Kleiman:There seems to be convergence on the language.

  Graeme Bunton:Good points James

  Carlton Samuels:@James: +1.  I agree we start at looking at the issue and impacts, decide which ones are bad for business, set a standard for accessing and suggest a pathway to access the services

  Amr Elsadr:@Mary: My understanding is as per Kathy's comment - changing the txt of the threshold question.

  Kathy Kleiman:@Steve: good wording!

  Mary Wong 2:@Kathy, I had thought Don had agreed to a footnote some time ago. However, if Steve and James and you agree on wording we can add this as a bullet point. indicating that it is a threshold question for III(1).

  Kathy Kleiman:@Mary: I think we can add it as a threshold question in III...

  Mary Wong 2:Or we can add it at the top as a threshold question.

  Mary Wong 2:Yes Kathy! :)

  Kathy Kleiman:Second option - tx :-)

  Amr Elsadr:@Kathy: +1 (to Mary's second option). It seems there is no objection as per Steve's last suggestion.

  Amr Elsadr:@Steve: Correct me if I'm mistaken please. :)

  Amr Elsadr:Are there laws regarding p/p services, or are they more focused on contact data being published on the actual website's content?

  Luc Seufer:@Amr not as far as know. Here, laws on hosting  uses deal with hosting requirements.

  Kathy Kleiman:@Marika - there seems to be some ambiguity of use of "reveal" and "publish" - should I point that out on the list?

  Amr Elsadr:@Luc: Thanks. That's my understanding as well, but I am not an expert. :)

  Mary Wong 2:@Kathy, that may be something for the Reveal sub group to discuss.

  Mary Wong 2:(if that is how the WG decides to proceed; hence it would be helpful to decide the approach sooner rathr than later).

  Graeme Bunton:INFINITY!

  Kathy Kleiman:Wow Alice in Wonderland!

  Mary Wong 2:And we have multiple screens too when supporting WG calls :)

  Luc Seufer:Inception? IPCand NC agreeing,  I knew I was dreaming

  Luc Seufer:;-)

  Amr Elsadr::)

  Marika Konings:@Kathy - as Mary said, developing definitions is probably something that will occur as part of the WG deliberations on these questions.

  Kathy Kleiman:@Marika and Mary, I think there is a place in the new bullets where the word "publish" is used in lieu of "reveal." big difference in implications so it is something i will share.

  Kathy Kleiman:... in upcoming comments.

  Paul McGrady:While it took some time, I thought today's discussion was extremely helpful.  Thank you all.

  Volker Greimann:yes, provided it is not at 7:30 in the morning

  Nathalie  Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the AC room

  Marie-laure Lemineur:I support the idea of a F2F meeting in Singapore

  Amr Elsadr:@Volker: +1

  Phil Marano:Very sorry to be so late, I had a meeting run long.

  Phil Marano:I'll listen to the recording when it is published.

  Mary Wong 2:Assuming the main schedule doesn't change much, Thursday morning is usually good.

  Mary Wong 2:That is what we used for the first meeting in Buenos Aires.

  Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: There is indeed a difference even in the basic grammar between 'publish' and 'reveal'.  In this context this is even of greater importance to respect the difference in meaning.

  Tobias Sattler:@Volker: +1

  Amr Elsadr:@Mary: There were some WG meetings at 07:30 in BA. They didn't attract as much participation as we would hope.

  Mary Wong 2:@Amr, same thing for evenings :(

  Bladel:Wait...isn't PIR a sponsor?

  Amr Elsadr:I know scheduling is not easy, but WG f2f is important.

  Tobias Sattler:Thank you

  Amr Elsadr:Thanks Don. Bye.

  Graeme Bunton:Thanks Don

  Justin Macy:Thanks!

  Kathy Kleiman:@ Carlton: I'll put out more details soon.

  Marie-laure Lemineur:tx Don and all

  Luc Seufer:Thanks, bye

  David Cake:thanks all

  Carlton Samuels:Thanks Don. Thanks all. Stimulating discussion

  Susan Prosser:thanks Don.

  • No labels