1 / 12

Update: Procedure and Policy Requests of Registrars

Update: Procedure and Policy Requests of Registrars. Mason Cole. Background. 2009: GNSO/ALAC RAA review and DT Community input: 83 discrete requests (plus “overlaps”) 2010: Final DT report First RrSG consultation with Law Enforcement. Background.

tasha-bullock
Download Presentation

Update: Procedure and Policy Requests of Registrars

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Update: Procedure and Policy Requests of Registrars Mason Cole

  2. Background 2009: GNSO/ALAC RAA review and DT Community input: 83 discrete requests (plus “overlaps”) 2010: Final DT report First RrSG consultation with Law Enforcement

  3. Background 2011: Extensive GAC / LEA consultation in Brussels RrSG publication of operational issues with LEA requests (SFO Meeting) 2011: Dakar Board resolution Negotiations open

  4. Sorting out the proposals High, medium, low priority LEA requests early focus of staff General emphasis on higher priority issues, recognizing compressed timeframe for negotiators Picket fence RAA vs PDP Predictable amendment process for registrars

  5. Negotiation process Staff and registrars appointed reps, legal advisers Five in-person meetings (LA, Washington), numerous other sessions by phone Multiple drafts of language, comparison charts Separate discussions with LEAs to clarify intended outcomes for proposals

  6. Challenges Complexity involved in even simple issues E.g., EU data/privacy laws Diversity in registrars Geographic locations (differing jurisdictional requirements) Multiple business models Requires consensus gathering in our own group

  7. Challenges Addressing things that affect only registrars – and the need for community collaboration Not always empowered to make decisions where the community will be affected without their input Several proposals are highly complex Will require shared input, burden and contribution of the community (First opportunity: Verification seminar Monday)

  8. The sessions Collaborative Good faith Contentious at times

  9. Timing Highest priority: Outcome that is able to be accommodated by registrars, staff, and community End result should be a quality agreement Moving with all available urgency, but not at the cost of a quality deliverable

  10. Steps from here Current: Reporting to community Collaboration on verification issue Conclude negotiations for issues in play Post agreement for community comment Open PDP for appropriate issues

  11. Thank You

  12. Questions

More Related