Logo

Michelle DeSmyter's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Sue Schuler
26:07
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
Maxim Alzoba
27:19
1.30am as a finish line of the call is bit worse than 1am :)
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
29:38
What Jeff said, 100%
Maxim Alzoba
29:42
shock show full of new wild ideas it was, was it?
Maxim Alzoba
31:30
+1 for discussion s around redlines
Maxim Alzoba
32:46
we should be ready for Karla sending us not necessarily what we would agree in the process, as their redlines
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
33:34
yes… correct Jeff
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
33:38
that’s what I meant
Maxim Alzoba
34:19
please use two Google Docs
Maxim Alzoba
34:38
do not share our internal exchanges to them
Brian King (MarkMonitor)
34:38
Sounds good to me
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
35:10
Correct. In fact, If we could use a different sharing program, that may help us not confuse the two different versions
Maxim Alzoba
35:17
I mean we work on our copy, strip our internal notes and leave only agreed notes for ICANN
Jody Kolker (GoDaddy)
35:27
agreed owen.
Maxim Alzoba
35:42
and background colours - different
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
36:46
I think we can discuss the issue Donna brought up
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
36:57
about modification of the profile
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
38:25
several times yes
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
38:28
we just need to get started on the actual redlining… that will flush out lots of things that are interesting and important
Catherine Merdinger
40:47
Sounds good to me
Jody Kolker (GoDaddy)
40:49
agree.
Brian King (MarkMonitor)
40:59
yep
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
41:54
I think we will save much time by working « offline »
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
42:20
and, like Maxim and others on or close to CET, not looking forward to 30 more minutes :)
Donna Austin, Neustar
42:27
agreed
Donna Austin, Neustar
42:44
we could move it up 30 minutes rather than add 30 minutes
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
46:12
I think I made the point last time but will reiterate for the record: a Registry RRA modification is approved by the RrSG and is binding to any accredited Registrar, wether they are members of the SG or not, so the situation here would be similar and there is precedent for that?
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
46:27
@Rick - right! I think that is preferable than having any lightweight change process. I should have prefaced my comments by "If there is another process, …."
Maxim Alzoba
46:30
all text included as references in our contracts can be changed by ICANN at any moment
Maxim Alzoba
46:34
texts
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
47:17
@JC, that is not exactly correct.
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
47:34
ICANN and the RO cannot agree to make material operational changes outside of other processes
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
47:37
Nice compromise if we can get there @Rick
Maxim Alzoba
47:39
btw - given the history of 'strong' ICANN security, what do we do if bad hackers change texts on the ICANN site ;)?
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
49:03
@Jeff, agree on « material » but would an RDAP profile qualify as such?
Maxim Alzoba
49:16
it is better to understand if those slas are doable at all before the inclusion
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
49:19
Yes, it could
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
49:42
THat is what I asked during the last call and the techies said yes
Jody Kolker (GoDaddy)
49:43
+1 Maxim
Maxim Alzoba
54:07
what do we do if they add 'and the Registry must keep WEB version of the RDAP server using this profile'?
Maxim Alzoba
54:17
to the text of the profile?
Maxim Alzoba
54:42
there is a history of hiding legal items in tech documents
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
54:55
@Maxim, we haven't gotten to that issue yet (namely whether the profiles are available through a link under ICANN's control or whether they are actually appended to the agreement)
Maxim Alzoba
56:45
check URS technical requirements
Maxim Alzoba
56:57
with legal requirements hidden inside
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
57:13
So what I think I am hearing is that all changes to the Profile docs should be in response to Consensus Policies or Temporary Policies (which is in the contract)
Donna Austin, Neustar
58:11
Is RDAP Profile a defined term?
Maxim Alzoba
58:43
and it is called URS High Level Technical Requirements for Registries and Registrars, but see item 4.
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
59:13
it’s not defined the in Base RA at present
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:01:37
agree Jeff
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:02:09
@Rick - yes and no, because the Temp Spec is now a CP
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:02:15
And CPs do not need amendments
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:02:24
Jim and Rick is that something you could work on, re definitions.
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:03:16
yes
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:03:25
yes
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:04:03
thank you
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:04:12
Cool. I will look at the ramification of changing the terminology
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:04:20
throughout the Base RA
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:05:02
Changing RDDS to WHOIS Services that is
Maxim Alzoba
01:05:41
if the site of ICANN compromised... what happens?
Maxim Alzoba
01:07:16
if there is no punishment for non procedural change, it means nothing
Brian King (MarkMonitor)
01:07:24
@Maxim "archive.org"
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:07:31
if the link as a PDF document that is signed/dated would that overcome some of the problem?
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
01:07:32
Agree with @Jeff re Exhibit « or updated from time to time at <link> », to me it’s different than « <link> will always control »
Maxim Alzoba
01:07:34
and carbon copy does not help
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:07:54
I am a lawyer, and play one on stage
Maxim Alzoba
01:07:55
for this reason there is a thing called mutually executed paper
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:08:50
I think Karla sent an email to the list
Maxim Alzoba
01:09:25
@Brian , archive org is Just a third party to our agreements
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:10:53
Once the drafts are on our own Google Docs, then I would be more comfortable going in with redlines and comments
Sue Schuler
01:11:26
yep
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:11:32
+1 jeff - and ICANN can provide a red line version of a document in which they have incorporated our suggestions. right?
Maxim Alzoba
01:12:46
no
Brian King (MarkMonitor)
01:12:50
No one likes that
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:12:57
@James - no, a redline to the summary of changes first
Maxim Alzoba
01:13:18
goodnight all
Brian King (MarkMonitor)
01:13:47
That would be great, happy to redline and look at definitions as soon as that's up on our own doc. Thanks guys
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
01:14:10
Sounds like a plan Graeme
Maxim Alzoba
01:14:15
next week is a F2F for Councillors, will miss due to flight, most probably
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:14:20
Thanks Jeff....I mean Graeme
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:14:25
:)
Jeff Neuman (SubPro CoChair)
01:14:34
And thanks Donna
Catherine Merdinger
01:14:49
Thanks Graeme and Donna
Maxim Alzoba
01:14:49
bye all
J.C. Vignes (Uniregistry)
01:14:57
Thanks all!
Jody Kolker (GoDaddy)
01:15:00
thanks everyone.