At-Large Request for Input - Next-Generation RDS to replace WHOIS PDP Workspace

For information about this Public Comment, please click here 

FINAL VERSION TO BE SUBMITTED IF RATIFIED

Open

FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC

Question One

Are there any additional documents missing from the list 

Suggested Response:

No

Question Two:

Are the key inputs, as identified still relevant and up to date and if not, what input should the Working Group be considering 

Suggested Response:

The list of Key Inputs is a very long one and serious consideration of each of the documents by all members of the Working Group would be far too big a task for the Working Group to reach any conclusions in a realistic timeframe.

Without taking away from the importance of the documents, we suggest that the Working Group focus on more critical documents, including:

• The latest WHOIS Policy Review Team Final Report 2012

• SAC Reports 054, 055 and 058:

• 2013 RAA and 2014 New gTLD Registry Agreement

• Relevant RFCs

• The latest documents from the EU on data protection, particularly the latest Directive/Regulation

• The EWG Final Report, together with additional statements by EWG members

Question Three

Views on completeness of the Charter Questions (listed below)

Suggested Response: 

The WG must, at a minimum and by Full Consensus, address the following question:

• Should the domain name ecosystem capture, collect and curate personal data elements for a valid domain name registration transaction?

• Should ICANN compel the capture, collection and the curation of certain specific personal data elements of the domain name registration transaction?

Specifically, the Working Group should identify all data that ICANN requires to be collected. This data, together with other data, can potentially be of concern to individual users. With the increasing use of data analytics, a great deal of information about people can be gained by analysing data from a variety of sources in combination with other data.

Question Four

Any other information that should be considered 

Suggested Response

No

FIRST DRAFT SUBMITTED

Question One

Are there any additional documents missing from the list 

Suggested Response:

No

Question Two:

Are the key inputs, as identified still relevant and up to date and if not, what input should the Working Group be considering 

Suggested Response:

The list of Key Inputs is a very long one and serious consideration of each of the documents by all members of the Working Group would be far too big a task for the Working Group to reach any conclusions in a realistic timeframe.

Without taking away from the importance of the documents, we suggest that the Working Group focus on more critical documents, including:

• The latest WHOIS Policy Review Team Final Report 2012

• SAC Reports 054, 055 and 058:

• 2013 RAA and 2014 New gTLD Registry Agreement

• Relevant RFCs

• The latest documents from the EU on data protection, particularly the latest Directive/Regulation

• The EWG Final Report, together with additional statements by EWG members

Question Three

Views on completeness of the Charter Questions (listed below)

Suggested Response: 

The WG must at a minimum and by Full Consensus, address the following question: “Should the domain name ecosystem capture, collect and curate personal data elements for a valid domain name registration transaction and should ICANN compel the capture, collection and the curation of certain specific personal data elements of the domain name registration transaction. Specifically, the Working Group should identify all data that ICANN requires be collected that, together with other data can potentially be data  that is or concerns individuals. 

With the increasing use of data analytics, a great deal of information about people can be gained by analysing data from a variety of sources that, when merged with other data, provides a great deal of information about individuals.

Question Four

Any other information that should be considered 

Suggested Response

No