RE: [council] WHOIS study group report attached

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for this report Liz.  It was helpful for me to read the rationale 
provided by each side, but I found it difficult without going to other 
documents to readily understand study categories and study numbers.  I have a 
few questions and comments in that regard.
 
Am I correct in concluding that there are multiple studies under consideration 
for each category?  If that is the case, it would be helpful to have the 
individual studies identified in the report, possibly in an Annex.  That would 
also have made it easier to figure out what studies were being referenced when 
the study # was given.  It is my opinion that reports like this should be as 
self-contained as possible without making them too bulky; otherwise, it becomes 
extremely time consuming for those who did not directly participate to read and 
understand the material.
 
Am I correct that the numbers in the table in Annex 1 refer to priorities 1-7 
and that those who provided the priorities ranked the seven categories?  Was 
everyone asked to do the same thing in this regard?  I note that the RyC 
response is very different from the rest.and tough to correlate with the other 
data.
 
The purpose of my questions and comments are two-fold: 1) to make sure I 
understand the report; 2) to possibly identify ways that reports like this 
could be improved in the future. 
 
Chuck
 
 


________________________________

        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Liz Gasster
        Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:53 PM
        To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [council] WHOIS study group report attached
        
        

        Council members:

         

        Attached please find the final report of the WHOIS study group, which 
was convened by the Council on 27 March to examine the study recommendations 
suggested by the public (and later augmented with study suggestions recommended 
by the Government Advisory Committee), and to make a recommendation to the 
Council. 

         

        Also, in the course of discussions on further studies of WHOIS, study 
participants asked for more information on IRIS and specifically more 
information about what it would take to implement IRIS from both a technical 
and policy perspective.  Steve Crocker has provided an email response (also 
attached), and has also offered to participate in a Q & A or broader 
discussion, at which SSAC experts could have a dialogue with the GNSO Council 
and constituency representatives.  Staff would be happy to coordinate such a 
conversation at the Council's request.

         

        The WHOIS study group would be glad to answer questions about the 
report and our deliberation process.

         

        Thanks, Liz Gasster

         

        Study group participants:  

         

        Jordi Iparraguirre 

        Ken Stubbs 

        David Maher 

        Steve Metalitz  

        Lee Eulgen 

        Steve DelBianco 

        Tony Harris 

        Tim Ruiz 

        Paul Stahura 

        James Bladel 

        Stéphane Van Gelder 

        Norbert Klein 

        Robin Gross 

        Danny Younger

        Beau Brendler

        Wendy Seltzer

        Liz Gasster - staff