Logo

Michelle DeSmyter's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Sue Schuler
20:04
Welcome to the meeting of the RA/RAA Amendment Discussion Group. Please announce your name before speaking for purposes of the transcript. Please mute your microphone when not speaking to help maintain sound quality. Thanks
Jeff Neuman
20:09
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iQ0QxIlOS_ObSyHdF0lguuZ_EYAa8-tU0iiiLaeH3eM/edit?usp=sharing
Owen Smigelski (Namecheap)
25:36
Sounds about accurate @Graeme
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
28:35
that looks fine
Donna Austin, Neustar
30:27
Right, we agreed with ICANN that there would be a rider on that.
Jody Kolker
30:58
+1 Jim.
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
33:37
It had to do with the Definition of the Profile…
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
33:39
The “RDAP Profile” shall be defined as the combination of the RDAP Response Profile version dated February 15, 2019 https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rdap-responseprofile-15feb19-en.pdf and the RDAP Technical Implementation Guide version dated February 15, 2019 https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rdaptechnical-implementation-guide-15feb19-en.pdf
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
38:50
those URLs will be in the agreement
Donna Austin, Neustar
57:09
@Jody, so what's the consequence of that for Ry and Rrs? more development time and money?
Jody Kolker
57:12
exactly - that's what I'm afraid of.
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:02:38
@Jim, I don't disagree. Were you and Rick pulling together a doc that is intended to explain the differences between WHOIS and RDAP from a functional perspective.
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:03:27
hmm, now that you mention it, i vaguely remember something like that. this was related to the discussion of how we want to set aside the web based WHOIS lookup right?
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:03:50
that and searchability I think
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:04:33
Rick and I wil have to get right on that for our own discussions. :-)
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:04:40
+1
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:07:01
I have to drop off in a few minutes, but I just wanted to flag that we have time on the ICANN 67 schedule for a meeting on Wednesday 09.00 to 10.15am with ICANN Staff. It would be good to understand from this group if we want to go ahead with that meeting with Staff or whether we want to use that time for a call without staff or whether we just want to drop it from the ICANN 67 schedule.
Graeme Bunton
01:07:34
I've got to drop as well. Thanks all!
Owen Smigelski (Namecheap)
01:11:45
Agree with Jeff on that point, but will need to ask the RrSG.
Jody Kolker
01:12:14
I also agree - but we need to inform all other registrars.
Zoe Bonython
01:18:12
RrSG won’t meet again before ICANN67
Zoe Bonython
01:18:59
There are 2 meetings on the schedule
Zoe Bonython
01:19:03
CPH only and with staff
Zoe Bonython
01:21:36
currently there is a CPH RA/RAA Amendment meeting at 13:45 - 15:15 (Cancun time) on the MondayAnd a CPH + staff RA/RAA Amendment meeting at 09:00 - 10:15 (Cancun time) on the Wednesday
Owen Smigelski (Namecheap)
01:25:49
I agree with Sam
Sam Demetriou
01:27:03
It could also just be the week after ICANN 67
Sam Demetriou
01:27:20
so March 17
Sam Demetriou
01:27:29
(Happy St Patrick’s Day???)
Sue Schuler
01:28:28
so no meeting next week?
Jeff Neuman
01:28:28
Lets give it a week from now to solidify this document within this group before we send it to the SGs
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:29:24
send a note the list with a deadline to “object”
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:29:40
if no objection then to SGs.
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:30:01
then ExComms schedule next meeting with us followed by a meeting with staff.
Sue Schuler
01:31:23
got it
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:32:36
bye all. thanks!