Your feedback on upcoming GNSO motions/actions

[Brenden Kuerbis]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>
>  2. Investigation by ICANN staff over details of the Inter-Registrar
> Transfer Policy (IRTP) - I don't currently see this as an issue over which
> NCUC has a contrary position, although some members may wish to review the
> Working Group's recommendations (see link below).
>
>
>
> The interesting issue here is the use of a new “whois” protocol known as
> IRIS. Be attentive to the privacy and security implications for users
>
>
>


A little more background (
http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2008/2/11/3517716.html).

SSAC has recommended that ICANN should work with all TLD registry operators
to develop a timeline and transition plan for migrating from the current
WHOIS service to CRISP/IRIS.

By default, the CRISP/IRIS protocol provides for granular assignment of
multiple types of access to data according to the policies of the operator.
If the right operator policies are in put in place, these capabilities could
make privacy advocates particularly supportive of its adoption.

But it is important to remember that operators are under contract, and
ICANN, under pressure from various interests, could override the possible
privacy-enhancement capabilities through GNSO developed policy.

Best,

B
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090324/1d505eb7/attachment.html>