Logo
ICANN
ICANN
Filtered Search

Are you sure you want to sign out from http://www.icann.org?

If you want to sign out from both http://www.icann.org and ICANN Account, click here.

Public Comment

Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.

Контент доступен только на следующих языках

  • English

Name: Fabien Betremieux
Date: 21 Nov 2022
Affiliation: Governmental Advisory Committee
Email: fabien.betremieux@icann.org
Original Public Comment: Registration Data Consensus Policy for gTLDs
Please provide your feedback:
Section 2 accurately reflects the policy recommendations; however, the following clarification(s) are suggested. (Please provide the suggested language change.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Please provide your feedback:
Section 3 does not accurately reflect the intent of the Registration Data Consensus Policy. (Please provide an explanation including Recommendations from the EPDP-TempSpec Phase 1 or Phase 2 Final Report where there are inconsistencies and the suggested change to make this section consistent.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Please provide your feedback:
Additional concern or issue identified in Section 5. (Please describe further.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Please provide your feedback:
Additional concern or issue identified in Section 6. (Please describe further.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Please provide your feedback:
Additional concern or issue identified in Section 7. (Please describe further.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Please provide your feedback:
Section 9 does not accurately reflect the intent of the Registration Data Consensus Policy. (Please provide an explanation including Recommendations from the EPDP-TempSpec Phase 1 or Phase 2 Final Report where there are inconsistencies and the suggested change to make this section consistent.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Please provide your feedback:
Section 10 does not accurately reflect the intent of the Registration Data Consensus Policy. (Please provide an explanation including Recommendations from the EPDP-TempSpec Phase 1 or Phase 2 Final Report where there are inconsistencies and the suggested change to make this section consistent.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Please provide your feedback:
Section 11 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 12 does not accurately reflect the intent of the Registration Data Consensus Policy. (Please provide an explanation including Recommendations from the EPDP-TempSpec Phase 1 or Phase 2 Final Report where there are inconsistencies and the suggested change to make this section consistent.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Thick Whois Transition Policy correct?

If no, please explain why the suggested changes are incorrect and provide any suggested changes.

For clarity, see text in full comment: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf

Attachment

gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf (151.96 KB)

Summary of Attachment


Summary of Submission

The GAC welcomes the implementation of the EPDP Team Phase 1 final recommendations and appreciates the efforts of the team members. The GAC highlights several public policy concerns with the proposed implementation including issues related to: the definition and proposed timelines to respond to urgent requests; the collection and publication of reseller data; the collection/publication of registration information related to legal entities; and the inclusion of qualifiers related to “commercial feasibility” in connection with redacted data. 

[For the full summary and contents of the GAC Comment, please refer to attachement or GAC website: https://gac.icann.org/statement/public/gac-comments-registration-data-consensus-policy-21nov22.pdf]