[nc-transfer] FW: Priorities for the Transfer TF and discussion for today's call on work issues -- sorry for different type/color. computer problems!

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

Our first item of work today is to focus on the drafting team's report. Ross Rader has posted to the group -- please be prepared to walk through that on the call. We respect that much of the group will be reviewing it for the first time on the call, and that is what the walk through will focus on.... a walk through and discussion.

The second order of business will be to address work priorities and a recommendation to the NC from the TF  regarding our priorities. I have advised the NC and the chair that I will present the TF recommendations on the NC call tomorrow. 

 Recommendations of the TF: To be agreed upon by the TF. 

FOR DISCUSSION TODAY: TWO PROPOSALS: ONE FROM THE CHAIR, ONE FROM THE REGISTRY CONSTITUENCY. BOTH WILL BE TALKED THROUGH AND THEN A DISCUSSION ABOUT FEASIBILITY, practicality  OF RESOURCES TO CREATE NEW TFS, COMPLETE WORK WITHIN THIS TF, ETC. 

Proposed by the Chair: Unanimity exits within the TF that completing the Transfers work and finalization of recommendations is the first priority.  The TF also agrees that dealing with deletions is a priority. There is some disagreement within the TF about the most effective approach to dealing with policy development for Deletions.

Chair's overview: Work Plan Options: 
REVIEW OF PLAN FOR TRANSFERS:
Completing the work on Transfers 
FINALIZE THE DRAFT FROM THE SMALL TEAM THIS WEEK... CRITICAL!
Host two open calls in week of September 3 and 9. Post draft recommendations for public comment by week of Sept. 16th/earlier the better. . 
Three Week Comment Period which could include further "open calls" if TF believes beneficial. Close comments Oct. 8.
Incorporate input into final recommendations-complete drafting into final required form, with specific TF drafting assignments by section --to speed the production and offload the chair of all the drafting. :-)
Draft final report by  and post for comment for 7-10 days -- leave open during Shanghai. ? [Mike Palage has proposed a Transfer public forum at Shanghai/Stuart Lynn has promised to talk to us about that concept next week when the Shanghai planning is further developed.]
Participate in  public forum event on transfers in Shanghai and present draft final report to the GA, NC, and Board.
Make any changes from that last public comment/public forum and present final report in the required format to the 
NC for vote  Final vote by NC and transmittal to Board - early December.  

Second Priority of TF: deal with deletions policy recommendations: 

it is the view of the chair that there is broad concern about deletions practices and policy in the Transfer TF.  There is some disagreement about whether the TF should conclude the work on deletions.  Some in the TF believe that the expertise exists within the TF and that given the priority of addressing deletions, and the nexus to transfers [e.g. much of achievable workable transfer policy will depend on standard deletions policy, practices, and enforcement], that this TF should address deletions as their second priority work item.  Some believe that deletions were acknowledged as an appropriate referral to this TF by the Board, and that the NC forwarded this work to the Transfer TF, and acknowledged that in the NC transmittal. Some in the TF disagree that this TF should do any work on deletions, and strongly advocate that the TF advise the NC that they are unable to work on Transfers; stated reasons include that the TF as constituted lacks the qualifications, or knowledge, and time. 

Some in the TF note that their constituencies have dedicated time to this TF and are committed to concluding transfers and deletions in a time effective manner, with the priority being transfers. Some constituency reps are concerned that their constituencies would not be able to find additional resources to create a new TF and that the issue of standard deletions policy, in particular, would languish. The TF did note in their WLS recommendation that standard deletions policy is a priority. That received strong support from the TF as a singular item, regardless of any other areas where the TF was divided. 

> Option I:  Complete Transfers/ complete Deletions on different tracks as described below. Add in a technical working aspect to the current TF on deletions.
 

Follow our scheduled work plan for Transfers. Beginning mid September , reopen the discussion about deletions, and conduct a fast track effort focused on further documenting and identifying the issues related to deletions.  Use the "open call" methodology undertaken with WLS to get broad input from interested parties for a three week call series. Ask Staff for a short documentation of the overview presented on last week's call which would be input from the perspective of what is received by Staff as problems. Present an interim report in Shanghai and post it  for public comment for two weeks, following Shanghai.  This interim report will focus on the development of a standards deletion policy and try to identify the full scope of the exceptions, when a standard deletions policy wouldn't be applied, or an extension should be granted -- disputes, udrp, etc.  The public comment period would allow for further input.  It should be anticipated that standard deletions policy will require consensus policy and that there may be contract and technical changes. We should also ask for a small technical team to work in conjunction with the TF to provide input; that could be drawn from the Registry and Registrar constituencies with any other technical experts, such as someone from the IETF, if needed. 

Interim Report closes: December 6. Task Force considers input and begins development of final recommendations on deletions. Drafting of final recommendations - week of December 9-13. Posting for comments: 12/16. Open for 4 weeks, due to holidays. Conclude and present to NC early week January,2003.

Option 2: Registry Consistency Proposal:  presented by Jeff Neuman and Christine Russo.
See Jeff's posting of Friday.
  Jeff /Christine: please  present this recommendation and respond to questions.  

The task force will, as they have always done, discuss the work of the TF I've tried to offer some pros and cons but they are not absolute and are merely here for your consideration as we walk through the discussion. 

  Option I. Pros of this TF undertaking    Some degree of familiarity with the issues and concerns, and players. Task Force in place and working together. 

> We can document the range and scope of the deletions problems and address documentation and Standard deletions policy recommendation when
> the Transfer recommendation is out for comment. We would then return to focus on Transfers; present an interim report in Shanghai for deletions, conclude transfer recommendation first, and then return to deletions. This will result in a sort of serial process, using the existing resources. The issues are inter-related in many aspects, and the Transfer policy changes will require changes in deletions policy in order to be implemented.
> 
> Cons: It means a lot of continued work for the Task Force members and chair. Everyone will have to stay in place on the TF through the end of the year. And, remain committed to the work we have been doing, and still need to do.  We have a priority of dealing with Transfers first....
> 
Option II: 
> Pros: New players, new chair. Single focus. Relieves the present TF. 
> Cons: Transfer policy is  to some degree inter- dependent on the deletions policy being developed and implemented and enforced. Will require interaction and work across both task forces for coordination and congruence of recommendations. Will take time to find resources in user constituencies: BC, ISPCP, IPC,Non Commercial, GA
> to staff new TF.  I believe it could take 2-3 weeks merely to find new players to participate -- and starting up a new TF will compete for the limited staff >  support  which we now get from Dan.  
> 
> Additional Resource Approach to current TF: recommend a small group of staff/registrar/registry representatives to document and present to the present TF the range of identified issues regarding deletions. 
> Treat this as a further step of data gathering. Jeff has suggested that there are hundreds of issues.  I believe Dan Halloran's overview is much more in the ballpark....    This group would be drawn from Registry and Registrar constituencies/plus Dan Halloran to document their present views of deletions problems and current policy, if any. This group would augment the existing TF. 
DECISION TO BE MADE BY TF ABOUT RECOMMENDATION TO NC:  
  
Option 1:  Recognizing that the issues have a nexus with each other, and that the first priority is the work on Transfers, the Transfer TF recommends that the TF conclude the work on Transfers, and then deletions, as described above.

Option II: return the deletions issue to the NC, note that one constituency strongly opposes any discussion or work on deletions, for the reasons they state. Add any other expressions from other TF members. Recommend that the NC establish a different TF.
>