Hi Stephanie,

Happy to volunteer.

Cheers,
Reema
--
*Reema Moussa*
She/Her/Hers
J.D. Candidate, Class of 2024
*USC Gould School of Law *


On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 3:44 PM Stephanie E Perrin <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> As discussed in our policy team meetings, the RDRS small team that advised
> on the creation of the new SSAD, otherwise known now as the Registration
> Data Request Service or RDRS, is now transitioning out (or ceasing to
> exist) and is being replaced by a Standing Committee.  I have agreed to
> stay on as a Standing Committee member, and this has been approved by the
> Policy Committee, but we still need folks to volunteer to shadow or perform
> as alternates in case I have to miss a meeting.  This is a great
> opportunity to learn about how the WHOIS has transitioned into this new
> service, and I would be happy to mentor/help anyone who cares to volunteer.
>
> I don't expect the workload to be too heavy, although I do have my fingers
> crossed as I say this.  Nothing about the WHOIS transition to data
> protection compliance has been as easy as it should have been......
>
> Relevant documentation is below....
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Stephanie Perrin
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: REMINDER| ACTION NEEDED | Call for volunteers -
> RDRS Standing Committee | Response needed by 10 November 2023
> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 13:45:21 +0000
> From: Terri Agnew <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: Stephanie Perrin <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>
> CC: Tomslin Samme-Nlar <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>,
> [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, Caitlitra n Tubergen
> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>,
> [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, Andrea
> Glandon <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, Marika
> Konings <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, Steve Chan
> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Hi Stephanie,
>
>
>
> Very good news, we have you noted and additional information will be sent
> shortly.
>
>
>
> Kindest regards,
>
>
>
> Terri
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Stephanie Perrin <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>
> *Date: *Friday, November 10, 2023 at 12:49 PM
> *To: *Terri Agnew <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
> *Cc: *Tomslin Samme-Nlar <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>,
> "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>, Caitlin Tubergen <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, Andrea Glandon
> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, Marika Konings
> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>, Steve Chan
> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: REMINDER| ACTION NEEDED | Call for volunteers - RDRS
> Standing Committee | Response needed by 10 November 2023
>
>
>
> Hi Terri,
>
> NCSG agrees that I should stay on this team.  We are still looking for
> alternates in case I can't make a meeting.
>
> Kind regards, Steph Perrin
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Nov 7, 2023, at 09:22, Terri Agnew <[log in to unmask]>
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> **REMINDER - Response needed by 10 November 2023
>
>
>
> Dear EPDP Phase 2 small team member,
>
>
>
> As you are aware, the GNSO Council recently approved the charter
> [gnso.icann.org]
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2023/draft/draft-rdrs-standing-committee-08sep23-en.pdf__;!!PtGJab4!_lc2hf8TT-LKJp0av5q_y3QWgPI1nzmy7Xrs8tgPRGtZ6rL-tBcnOm85X7vWkpDcZu58V3UP6O5BVhm-LtRM5JwE6A$>
> for the Registration Data Request Service (RDRS) Standing Committee, which
> will help inform the next steps on the SSAD policy recommendations. Once
> the RDRS goes live, currently foreseen for late November 2023, this small
> team will cease to exist, and any remaining activities will be taken over
> by the Standing Committee.
>
>
>
> While many of you have already indicated your willingness to continue,
> please formally confirm your interest to continue as a member of the
> Standing Committee *by responding to this message by 10 November at the
> latest*. Per the charter, you / your appointing group may also identify
> an alternate to take your place in case of absence. Such alternates are
> expected to have been part of the Standing Committee as observers to ensure
> that they are up to speed on the discussions.
>
>
>
> The charter also foresees that “On the suggestion of the Standing
> Committee, the Chair may invite external participants with specific
> expertise or knowledge to contribute to Standing Committee deliberations”.
> If there are any external participants that you want to recommend inviting,
> please share these recommendations, and they will be passed on to the Chair
> once selected.
>
>
>
> As a reminder, you will find hereunder the Standing Committee’s scope of
> work and expected deliverables.
>
>
>
> With best regards,
>
>
>
> GNSO Secretariat
>
>
>
> <image001.png>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Scope *
>
>
>
> The Standing Committee is tasked to review the data that will be produced
> by ICANN org on a monthly basis following the launch of the RDRS (see data
> points outlined here). The Scoping Team is expected to analyze the data and
> consider:
>
>
>
> Assignment #1.           Trends that can be identified over a
> month-by-month period;
>
> Assignment #2.           Possible technical updates* that should be
> considered to RDRS and/or related messaging and promotion (recognizing that
> the RDRS will only be running for a two-year period and limited
> resources may be  available to implement such updates);
>
> Assignment #3.           Specific lessons learned that should be factored
> into the consideration of how to proceed with the SSAD recommendations;
>
> Assignment #4.           Suggestions to the Council for a proposed
> recommendation(s) to the ICANN Board in relation to the consideration of
> the SSAD recommendations**.
>
>
>
> Although the monthly data reports are expected to be made available to the
> Council, it is not the expectation that the Standing Committee will provide
> a monthly analysis of this data to the Council as it may be necessary to
> review the data over a longer time period before certain conclusions can be
> drawn. As noted in the small team’s addendum: “Any conclusions and/or
> recommendations stemming from this review, would be provided to the GNSO
> Council for a decision on further steps. Although the reports are expected
> to be provided on a monthly basis, in line with the preliminary report, the
> small team anticipates that any conclusions and/or recommendations in
> relation to the SSAD recommendations would only be developed after 6-month
> intervals, up to a maximum of two years, at which point a decision has to
> be taken on how to proceed (if a decision has not been made before that
> time). To be clear, although further enhancements may be considered by
> ICANN org based on the actual experience with the Whois Disclosure System
> once it is operational, it is not the intent or objective of the 6-month
> intervals to focus on technical enhancements for the Whois Disclosure
> System".
>
>
>
> *Any requests to ICANN org for substantial updates requiring significant
> resources need to be reviewed and approved by the GNSO Council. If there is
> disagreement between the Standing Committee and ICANN org in relation to
> the technical updates requested, the Council liaison is expected to
> mediate, and escalate to the GNSO Council as deemed necessary.
>
>
>
> ** As noted in the small team’s preliminary report: “As part of the
> checkpoint review, it would also be discussed what happens with the SSAD
> proof of concept once the 2-year period ends. The small team noted that it
> would not be prudent to decide this at the outset as it will depend on the
> take up and use of the SSAD proof of concept. However, while decisions are
> taken and/or until a replacement solution is agreed, the small team can
> envision maintaining the proof of concept tool online, in existing or
> modified format, if it is proven useful enough, noting that there will be
> cost implications associated with such a decision. The small team does
> expect that before the 2-year period ends clarity is provided on the
> expected next steps in relation to the EPDP Phase 2 SSAD Recommendations
> which could include: 1) Approval of EPDP Phase 2 SSAD recommendations (in
> current or modified format) which would replace the SSAD proof of concept;
> 2) Determination that adoption of EPDP Phase 2 SSAD recommendations is not
> in the best interest of the ICANN community or ICANN and termination of
> SSAD proof of concept; 3) Modification of EPDP Phase 2 SSAD recommendations
> by GNSO Council informed by SSAD proof of concept findings; 4) A variation
> and/or combination of the above scenarios.”
>
>
>
> *Deliverables*
>
>
>
> The Standing Committee shall establish its expected meeting cadence
> following its first meeting and shall consider how and how often it expects
> to communicate to the Council in relation to assignments #1 and #2 before
> it ultimately shares its expected reporting cadence with the Council. In
> relation to assignments #3 and #4, the Standing Committee may communicate
> findings and recommendations to the Council on an ongoing basis, but the
> expectation is that towards the end of the two-year period for which the
> RDRS will run, the Standing Committee will compile its findings and
> recommendations in relation to assignments #3 and #4 in the form of a
> report. The Standing Committee should consult with the GNSO Council on
> whether this report should be published for public comment. The Chair is
> expected to provide regular updates to the GNSO Council on the status of
> work and timeline for implementation. This can be done in writing or
> through updates during Council meetings.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>